Home
Latest images
Register
Log inSeverus Snape
Page 14 of 19
Page 14 of 19 • 
1 ... 8 ... 13, 14, 15 ... 19
Posts 1651 to 1680
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:43 am
Steve Newton - Feb 11, 2008 2:31 pm (#1651 of 2617)
When I read this line "Apparently I underestimated you, Potter." I am reminded of an All In the Family. Meethead says to Archie "I underestimated you Arch. You're more ignorant than I thought."
Julia H. - Feb 11, 2008 2:52 pm (#1652 of 2617)
"None of the above outbursts about James sound like he was trying to make Harry lose respect for James. He was just making it very clear to Harry that he (Snape) did not think he was a hero or a saint, whatever Harry's own opinion might be." (Mona)
You may be right but even in this case, it does seem to be important for him to tell Harry his opinion. Even if he does not consciously want Harry to lose his respect for James, he seems to want to "balance" Harry's opinion and perhaps it is not only about how Harry judges James's character but also about making him see Snape's viewpoint a little bit as well. I think it is at least partly a kind of round-about way for Snape to try to win Harry's respect or understanding a little bit. It is not the right way but, unfortunately, Snape tends to approach Harry through his memories of James and it may, for the time being, replace the real "confession" that he makes only at his death. I don't think it is a conscious effort but still it is there. Since Snape is "investing" a lot of energy, thought etc. into things related to Harry (really, his life is about Harry at the time), I don't think it would be surprising if deep down Harry's opinion were important to him. (He would not admit it though.)
As for the detentions: they start why they start but it is clear that Snape is using the occasions - even at the "cost" of having to spend his Saturday mornings in Harry's company - to make Harry learn about the "less ideal" characteristics of James and Sirius. Part of the reason may be that Snape knows Harry blames him for Sirius's death and is hurt by this or (another reason), since Harry has seen his Worst Memory, he is now trying to show that James and Sirius had a way of bullying people in general as well. After all, Lupin intended to talk to Snape about the Occlumency classes - if he did, then Snape knows Harry told the two of them what he had seen and may know or at least suspect how they explained it to him. He may even suspect that Harry was upset and he can clearly guess that Lupin and Sirius told him things that would restore "hero James" for him and put the blame on Snape. So now he is trying to show him the other side of the coin. This would again suggest that Harry's opinion is important to Snape.
Wynnleaf mentioned (and I agreed) that Harry had various father figures: James, Sirius, DD (Lupin? - I don't think he was more than just an older friend) and also Snape in the role of the male authority figure who received Harry's negative attitudes to a father figure. Somewhere on the Sirius thread, I think someone mentioned that (it is told somewhere off-book) Harry's son James was James Sirius. If that is really so, then it seems, just as Harry named his only daughter after his mother, he named his sons after the various "father figures" he had: James, Sirius, Albus and ... Severus - which would suggest that, consciously or not, Harry came to realize that Snape's role in his life was similar to the role the other three played.
"I was just thinking of Snape's extraordinary ability to shut off emotions at will and compartmentalize his life. In spite of the prophecy, his history with Lily and his responsibility with Harry's life, he's perfectly fine making cracks about 'the Chosen One' in HBP." (Pesky)
He needs to be able to compartmentalize his life in order to not crack: he is going through pretty hard times. I think the "Chosen One" comments are outbursts of fury and they may even reflect Snape's bitterness about the fate DD has assigned to him. While Harry is becoming the symbol of everything good, he, who is fighting and risking his life for the same purpose, will have to accept a humiliating situation where he is regarded (hated and despised) as a murderer and a traitor - all for the very same goal Harry is fighting for.
Julia H. - Feb 11, 2008 3:44 pm (#1653 of 2617)
P.S. The "Chosen One" comments are also examples of how Snape's words tend to be at odds with his actions. He is making these comments while his whole life (with the exception of his words) is spent as atonement for what made Harry the Chosen One.
Julia H. - Feb 12, 2008 3:25 am (#1654 of 2617)
"Snape is such a jerk to Harry all the time, it's hard for me to see past it."
Oh, Zelmia, to try and "see past it" is something I find especially exciting.
mona amon - Feb 12, 2008 10:05 pm (#1655 of 2617)
In spite of the prophecy, his history with Lily and his responsibility with Harry's life, he's perfectly fine making cracks about 'the Chosen One' (Pesky)
Which, I hasten to point out, Harry would not have been had Snape not taken what he knew of the Prophecy to Voldemort in the first place. This makes his behaviour and attitude about Harry as "the Chosen One" all the more disgusting, in my opinion. (Zelmia)
While his behaviour doesn't disgust me (that's part of what makes him such an intriguing character for me- his unconcealed loathing of Harry on the one hand, and his willingness to sacrifice everything for him on the other) it's certainly strange, and makes me wonder if subconscious, unacknowledged guilt wasn't part of the reason he was so mean to Harry.
I think it is at least partly a kind of round-about way for Snape to try to win Harry's respect or understanding a little bit. It is not the right way but, unfortunately, Snape tends to approach Harry through his memories of James and it may, for the time being, replace the real "confession" that he makes only at his death. I don't think it is a conscious effort but still it is there. Since Snape is "investing" a lot of energy, thought etc. into things related to Harry (really, his life is about Harry at the time), I don't think it would be surprising if deep down Harry's opinion were important to him. (He would not admit it though.) (Julia)
But Julia, you are assuming (I think) that Snape sees Harry as he really is, fair-minded and basically emphathetic to Snape. But this is not the way he sees Harry. Snape sees Harry as a junior version of James, arrogant, breaking the rules, etc, so why do you feel he thinks Harry will respect him if he shows him what a jerk James was? Even after he catches Harry peeking into his memories, he seems to think Harry was happy to see him humiliated. Why would Snape think that Harry would sympathise with him rather than his father?
I feel the opposite may be true- deep down, Snape did not want Harry to respect him. Respect carries with it an obligation. If someone respects you, you have to feel that you have earned that respect. But Snape has this guilty secret, that he is the reason this boy has no parents, which he is either unwilling or unable to confess to Harry, so I suppose he finds it less complicated to just despise Harry and make sure he despises him back.
it is clear that Snape is using the occasions - even at the "cost" of having to spend his Saturday mornings in Harry's company - to make Harry learn about the "less ideal" characteristics of James and Sirius.
I don't think it was to learn about them so much as to 'get a jolt' everytime he sees James' and Sirius' names- a characteristically 'Snapey' way of making the already boring detentions even more unpleasant. I like Pesky's summary of it in post#1966-Boring work, the reminder of the father and godfather he has lost, missing out at Quidditch, missing good weather, missing Ginny(?), these are all ways in which Snape feels Harry would best be punished. And just maybe, he was indulging an unconscious desire to keep Harry with him for a while, since he now knows they'll soon be parted practically forever, and since Dumbledore has told him Harry will have to die. Otherwise it would have been easier for Snape to send Harry to Filch's office to do his detentions.
Julia H. - Feb 13, 2008 1:00 am (#1656 of 2617)
Great post, Mona. I had to spend some time thinking about your arguments.
"Snape sees Harry as a junior version of James, arrogant, breaking the rules, etc, so why do you feel he thinks Harry will respect him if he shows him what a jerk James was?"
I'm not sure he thinks that over consciously, I think it is more about his desire to show Harry something of what he feels rather than any realistic consideration of what Harry would do with the information. Besides, if we are talking about the HBP detentions, by this time Harry has already seen what a jerk James was in relation to Snape but showing him how James treated some other people as well may amount to saying: "Don't you think what happened after the DADA O.W.L. was somehow my fault, as Lupin and Sirius must have told you!" (Since in OOTP Lupin promised he would talk to Snape and since both Lupin and Sirius were rather worried that the occlumency lessons had stopped I find it likely that they did try to speak to him and I find it equally likely that the conversation ended in a shouting match or something similar, so Snape knew that Harry had discussed his worst memory with James's friends.) There may have been other motivations behind the type of detention he gave Harry but, as you say, "it would have been easier for Snape to send Harry to Filch's office to do his detentions", so he may have had a reason why he was sitting with him. If "he was indulging an unconscious desire to keep Harry with him for a while, since he now knows they'll soon be parted practically forever, and since Dumbledore has told him Harry will have to die", as you say (I like the idea), that should indicate deep in his heart Harry still meant something to him.
You are right that Snape sees Harry as "a junior version of James" but at the same I'm sure he never forgets that he is Lily's son (how could he?) and he may very well wish to win the respect of Lily's son - perhaps to make up for the one-time loss of Lily's respect. He is not doing it in the right way - why? Your theory about his guilt explains it perfectly: "makes me wonder if subconscious, unacknowledged guilt wasn't part of the reason he was so mean to Harry".
"But Snape has this guilty secret, that he is the reason this boy has no parents, which he is either unwilling or unable to confess to Harry, so I suppose he finds it less complicated to just despise Harry and make sure he despises him back."
Excellent. I also thought there was something like this but I did not know how to put it into words - you have done it perfectly. It would be quite horrible if Snape were to treat Harry as, for example, Lupin does, make Harry like him and then have him discover Snape's secret and lose faith in a lot of things. But my conclusion is if his guilt is the reason why he does not or cannot try to win Harry's respect in a sensible way, that means Harry's image as "James the junior" is just a good excuse for him to be mean to Harry and deep down he may just as well wish he could win his respect. Harry's protection is his purpose in life now and he is doing a very difficult job and it must be very difficult to live and "fight" every day without the smallest reward and next to impossible without at least wishing to be able to get at least some reward and in the case of Snape, with his history, people's respect is a very sensitive issue. As a result of his guilt, Snape in effect has to step into James's shoes with regard to Harry: when Harry loses his parents, Snape takes over certain parental duties, the duties of a protective parent (though it is just one aspect of parental duties, of course). So in a way, to some extent, Snape, who would have liked to be to Lily what in reality James became to her, has to replace James as Harry's father. But, as you say, he has to do it with this guilt on his conscience - a complicated situation and his feelings must be equally complicated.
Perhaps the best argument for Snape valuing Harry's opinion is the "Look at me" line. I don't think Snape would want Harry to see him and understand him suddenly just because he is dying if he secretly had not wished it before. He may have denied it earlier but he can deny it no more, so he pours all these memories in front of Harry (including the worst one, which Harry has already seen - so Snape may actually understand now that Harry did not find pleasure in seeing him humiliated, whatever he may have thought when he caught him watching in OOTP.)
Orion - Feb 13, 2008 4:14 am (#1657 of 2617)
No no no no no.
Guilt as the main motivating factor, yes. That's already been discussed at length in six long Snape threads. It's guilt which drives him mad, and which makes him loathe Harry through some complicated psychological mechanism, apart from Harry's looks and the fact that he is not his own son, but should have been. But "Look at me", IMO, doesn't mean that Snape suddenly wants to be seen by Harry. I mean, really seen, like he really is.
"Look at me" was only ever about Lily's eyes. (And the mouth-organ was only ever a mouth-organ...) Snape dies without the slightest inkling of any tender feelings towards Harry, and he has never, ever had any tendencies to want to be in Harry's company. He just knows that a detention for Harry is only real punishment if Harry has to be in his company, so he uses his own person as punishment. (Pretty twisted, if you ask me, but he is twisted!)
Julia H. - Feb 13, 2008 4:44 am (#1658 of 2617)
""Look at me" was only ever about Lily's eyes." (Orion)
We have to agree to differ. I think "Look at me" is about Lily's eyes and is about viewing the memories as information ("message") and is about seeing the real Snape as well. This is not "a mouth organ", the moment is too important for that. HP is literature and meanings should be complex, especially at important turning points in the plot. Besides, on the one hand, I don't think it is realistic to think that in his dying minutes Snape really wants to go down wizarding history as LV's right hand and, on the other hand, the memories he is giving Harry are much more than what is absolutely necessary just to deliver DD's message: a lot of them are about Snape as he really is. I never said he has "tender feelings" towards Harry but he may still want his respect and he may certainly want to have "the best of him" finally revealed to Harry, who already knows his dark side anyway. He may even want forgiveness, even if he is ever unable to apologize (and we get some explanation why). He is a human being, not a machine, and I cannot imagine that after everything he has gone through, the purpose of his struggles and troubles means nothing to him.
wynnleaf - Feb 13, 2008 1:27 pm (#1659 of 2617)
If Snape saw Harry only as a surrogate for James, he wouldn't be trying to protect him. Harry represents both James and Lily to Snape. He loathes Harry because Harry is James for Snape. But he protects Harry because Harry is also all that is left of Lily and what she loved and died for. But if Lily and died for James, I think it's pretty clear that Snape wouldn't be trying to protect James. Harry is not just a stand-in for James. He is that, but he is much more.
"Look at me," makes no sense if all that Snape sees in Harry is James. Why would he want to look at James or for James to look at him? It only makes sense if Snape also sees Lily in Harry. No, he doesn't see Lily's personality or character in Harry. In that regard he only sees James. But he does see Lily anyway, else he wouldn't focus practically his whole life on Harry.
Julia H. - Feb 13, 2008 1:51 pm (#1660 of 2617)
"Rowling herself said that Snape drew his last breath "loathing" Harry." (Zelmia)
Is it something I can still look up? If so, can you give me the reference? I'd like to read it, though to tell the truth, after being generally "shouted down" for saying that we know what Lily's and James's Patronuses (Patroni?) were because JKR tells us so in an interview, I decided I would not try to rely on her words outside the books very much when it is about facts. (As for interpretation, I have long thought that her opinion is only one of the many opinions and I stopped reading her interviews soon after DH precisely because I had the horrible impression that she, who created this magnificent, many-layered Snape-character, failed to understand the real depth of the character and tried to sort of "push him down" to the level of a much more ordinary character.)
"Like your man Heathcliff, Snape never saw Harry as anything other than a surrogate for James..."
I think I promised you not to make any more comparisons with Wuthering Heights, so I'm going to stick to HP now. Yes, Snape sees Harry as a surrogate for James and he loathes him (though I don't agree that he loathes him quite until his last breath) - but why? Why does he not see him as Lily's son? I agree with Mona that the primary barrier between Snape and Harry is Snape's feeling of guilt and remorse. Once this barrier is given, he can "choose" (as much as it is a choice) between seeing him as Lily's son and a constant reminder of his guilt and his loss or as James's son, who he can loathe and treat in a nasty way. In the first case he is bound to be driven totally mad - not just half-mad as in the second case - and may become unable to fulfill "his vow to protect and serve". So taking Harry for James's surrogate is secondary to his feeling of guilt and is a method of mental, psychological survival, which makes it possible for him to experience a feeling that he is used to and a feeling that he can handle: anger - in place of even more dangerous and damaging (weakening?) feelings (at least as far as he knows).
Having said that, I would also like to say that this strategy is in essence a way of self-deceit and the question is: just how far can he deceive himself (or the reader)? He perfectly knows that Harry is Lily's son and probably remembers it when Harry is in danger. But even if he does not, loathing Harry still means that he has very strong feelings about Harry and it has been pointed out in this thread that Snape's strong negative feelings in the surface (anger in the first place) may indicate more complex feelings beneath the surface. When he angrily shouts the M-word at Lily, he simultaneously experiences a variety of feelings; while he is saving DD's life, he is angry and again he probably experiences a variety of feelings but it is only his anger that surfaces. We can see him get angry when Harry seems to be in danger: He is angry in POA when he finds that Harry has left the castle while everybody believes that his life is in danger outside. He is angry in in OOTP when he discovers that Harry, instead of practising occlumency, keeps on dreaming about the ministry corridor and the angry and passionate way he talks to him reveals that he is really worried about him. (It is not simply having given a promise and keeping his word or obeying DD's orders: the original schedule for occlumency classes is once a week on Mondays but after the first lesson, when he realizes how far Harry has got into his LV-vision, he orders him to come back on Wednesday - a voluntary decision of Snape's own based on his own feeling of responsibility.)
Then in DH he gives himself completely away when he is told that Harry would have to die (danger!): in his reaction he refers to him as "Lily Potter's son" (these are his very words) and his words are unmistakably full of feelings: "Now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter". He may deny if afterwards, that does not change the fact that he has already given himself away: deep in his heart, he is perfectly aware that Harry is Lily's son and he is not quite as willing as one would think to give up the burden of responsibility for Harry's life. He may deny to the world and to himself that Harry means anything to him, denial and pretence only goes as far as the final moment, the "moment of truth", when he gives him his secrets, his memories, as much of himself as he has never given anyone else.
(This is the complete opposite of the general way of his life, which he lived surrounded with secrets and mystery, behind a wall of denial and exclusion. I like to see this moment - just like his last words - as symbolizing something greater, something even more important. Of course, that may very well be just my way of seeing: I also happen to find it symbolic that he is killed by a snake - I think it is, symbolically, "Slytherin's revenge" on a Slytherin-educated man who turned his back on Slytherin values and Slytherin goals, who, in fact, turned out to be a Gryffindor in disguise.)
Orion - Feb 13, 2008 2:01 pm (#1661 of 2617)
"Pig for slaughter" says, IMO, "I have ruined my life on your orders, old man, only that you can laugh in my face and tell me that it was in vain because the kid was meant to die anyway so that bloody Voldemort was brought down?"
I can happily be a Snapefan even though he loathes Harry to his dying breath. He hates everyone anyway. (Edited, typo)
Julia H. - Feb 13, 2008 2:06 pm (#1662 of 2617)
"I have ruined my life on your orders, old man, only that you can laugh in my face and tell me that it was in vain because the kid was meant to die anyway so that bloddy Voldemort was brought down?" (Orion)
Very interesting, Orion, but thinking that his life is ruined "in vain" if Harry dies does indicate that Harry is important to him. (Even if he loathes him - he is not a Harry-Potter-fan - Harry can still be important in various ways.)
wynnleaf - Feb 13, 2008 3:20 pm (#1663 of 2617)
This is from "The Final Chapter" Dateline television interview on July 29, 2007
Harry really sees the good in Snape ultimately. I wanted there to be redemption and I wanted there to be forgiveness. And Harry forgives, even knowing that until the end Snape loathed him unjustifiably. It's totally, totally unfair that he loathes him so much but anyway. (JKR)
"Until the end Snape loathed him..."
The problem is that it seems rather obvious to me that Snape's "loathing" is in no way simplistic. If all he felt toward Harry was loathing, he wouldn't have worked for so many years to protect him. As Julia points out, Snape's life was mostly focused on Harry, protecting him, etc. Loathing is surely not all that he felt toward Harry.
Thing is, people are complex. Snape is a fictional character, but one of the most complex I know of. To assume that because he loathed Harry, he had nothing but loathing for him is, in my opinion, making Snape's attitudes toward Harry far too simple.
tandaradei - Feb 13, 2008 4:39 pm (#1664 of 2617)
Snape loved Lily from a pre-pubescence on. One might say, he loved her even in the time before and after ardor. And James' love for her came strictly within the "I need a girl" stage. I don't know where to go with this, except to say that very probably, Snape thought of James' attractions for her as possibly being ... spoiled?
My new vision of Snape puts him pretty much in a sort of "amoral scientist" mode, where his attitude towards magic, for instance, has more to do with things like analysis and potency, rather than whether this or that branch of it is evil. This is very much like how the Elder Wand is described -- concerned more with potency than with what is right or wrong to do.
Snape's desire to be a potent wizard -- and his love for Lily, are to me also a bit mixed. Most likely one of Snape's initial attractions to Lily was from her obvious Magical potency ... and thus quite in tune with his overall aim for the same.
I'd think Snapes attitude towards Quidditch was ambivalent: on the one hand, he felt disdain for it because it held no meaning for magical potency (where can Quidditch improve one's magical potency? not at all); but also, that every witch and wizard positively adored it, making him miss out. Now, James and company were potent wizards and rivals; they excelled in quidditch and rules breaking; and they mocked what he seriously studied (dark arts).
I'm thinking Snape always had Lily on something of a pedestal; and that James ruined everything; and that the only result of all their lives that mattered in relation to Lily, eventually turned out to be Harry.
I'm thinking Snape always thought why, why why ... as to Harry being the only product of his Lily. And finally, when DD said Harry was basically being reared for slaughter, his nihilistic view of the whole matter only became compounded.
The one simple thing through all this was Snape's loyalty to Lily, begun from childhood.
Julia H. - Feb 14, 2008 6:16 am (#1665 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, thanks for the quote. Now at least I know that JKR wanted there to be redemption and forgiveness... Anyway, even if Harry knew how Snape loathed him till the end, he may have discovered that there were other feelings as well. (That's what "Albus Severus" suggests...)
"Snape's loyalty to Lily, begun from childhood" (tandaradei)
This one thing cannot be questioned or debated, I think.
In a way Harry is the Resurrection Stone to Snape. The second brother in the "Tale of the Three Brothers" does not love the stone, he may even loathe the idea that this is all that has been left to him but he loves what the stone represents to him: his only connection to his dead love.
"If Snape does see Lily in Harry, yet still chooses to treat Harry the way he does, then Lily took far too long to dump Snape, in my opinion." (Zelmia)
Well, he sees both Lily and James in him. I think in critical moments Harry is Lily's son to him (as we see in "The Prince's Tale"), otherwise just "his father all over again". (This is exactly how Snape is treated by other Order members: in critical moments he is their spy and they act upon the intelligence they get from him, otherwise he is just a turncoat DE and who knows what else.) The way he treats Harry: most of the time he makes him angry, sometimes afraid but never ever goes beyond that, never really harms him (unlike some other character does to someone in another book :-) that I will not mention now). He often treats Harry with (seeming?) contempt but his reaction to Harry calling him "coward" indicates that he is hurt by his words, so his opinion is important to him - the contempt may be more an act than reality.
"When he angrily shouts the M-word at Lily, he simultaneously experiences a variety of feelings - So we have chosen to believe, seeing as how Snape is not a robot. We don't actually know this."
We know he loves Lily, hates James, we know he is jealous (we see that in an earlier memory in DH), we know he is angry and we have a good reason to assume that he feels the humiliation and that he is quite desperate. I also think that he detests the idea of being saved at the cost of seeing Lily flirting with James (that could be a very straightforward interpretation of what he actually says) - it may seem otherwise to other readers, but the first few feelings, which are surely present, are already a variety of feelings.
"Well, he only actively worked to protect Harry for 3 years."
Hm... actively... He saves Harry's life in PS, watches him and Quirrell as well. By protecting the stone he also indirectly protects Harry (and of course the whole wizarding world). In CoS, it is not Harry who seems to be in immediate danger but the muggle-born students and Snape tries to protect the school as much as the other teachers do. In POA he becomes more active because Harry seems to be in danger and he tries to protect him from Sirius Black (it is not necessary but he does not know this). In the GoF-year he is preoccupied with the signs of LV returning, confirms his loyalty to DD and prepares for a very dangerous task in order to protect Harry (and by extension others). Of course, Harry needs his most active protection in the final three years.
"And during that time, he didn't really make any sacrifice that many others (Fred, George, Ron, Hermione, Moody, Lupin, Arthur, Bill and even Fleur) also wouldn't have made willingly"
Except that he was constantly there, constantly ready and watchful. And in the end he made the most sacrifice, I think, and it was as much on Harry's behalf as on DD's.
I never said he loved Harry, only that Harry was important enough to him to dedicate his life to his protection - not for a few heroic moments but all the time, any time. One is bound to learn to feel something more than only loathing (even if not necessarily love) if not before, then after all this sacrifice - if nothing else, it is the very sacrifice that makes the "prize" valuable.
mona amon - Feb 14, 2008 7:28 am (#1666 of 2617)
Thanks for your detailed response to my last post, Julia! It's really nice to get 'feedback'!
Thing is, people are complex. Snape is a fictional character, but one of the most complex I know of. To assume that because he loathed Harry, he had nothing but loathing for him is, in my opinion, making Snape's attitudes toward Harry far too simple. (Wynnleaf)
Well said, Wynnleaf! I suppose one could call it 'loathing', that curious mixture of anger, jealousy, guilt and resentment that Snape feels towards Harry, but there's certainly a lot more to it.
I had the horrible impression that she, who created this magnificent, many-layered Snape-character, failed to understand the real depth of the character and tried to sort of "push him down" to the level of a much more ordinary character. (Julia)
I do not think she fails to understand her character. Snape is just too complex for her to pin down in a sentence or two, especially when a question about him is suddenly sprung on her during an interview.
Then in DH he gives himself completely away when he is told that Harry would have to die (danger!): in his reaction he refers to him as "Lily Potter's son" (these are his very words) and his words are unmistakably full of feelings: "Now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter". He may deny if afterwards, that does not change the fact that he has already given himself away: (Julia)
Good point. His horrified reaction to Dumbledore's revelation shows what a long way he has come since that night on the windy hilltop when all he can do is stare blankly and uncomprehendingly when Dumbledore accuses him of not caring a jot about what happens to Lily's husband and child. At that time Harry's fate was a matter of complete indifference to him. But now he does care. He cares that his own efforts and sacrifices are somehow invalidated if Harry has to die anyway. But he also must feel something for Harry as a person. After all he has taught him, watched over him and protected him for almost five years and must have some feelings for Harry that are not pure simple loathing. It is characteristic of Snape that he should deny these feelings and pretend that he's doing it only for Lily's sake. I think I agree with Orion that he is twisted!
"Look at me" was only ever about Lily's eyes. (Orion)
I agree. The words mean different things to different people, but for me it's just Snape's black eyes looking into Lily's green ones, Harry and the rest of the world forgotten for one agonisingly brief moment. And it is poignant that in the end Snape asks this favour of the boy he 'loathes'.
And during that time, he didn't really make any sacrifice that many others (Fred, George, Ron, Hermione, Moody, Lupin, Arthur, Bill and even Fleur) also wouldn't have made willingly - and in some cases did - on Harry's behalf. (Zelmia)
Yes, a number of people help, protect and even sacrifice their lives for Harry, yet he calls Snape 'probably the bravest man I ever knew'. I'll be back after thinking about it some more!
Orion - Feb 14, 2008 7:48 am (#1667 of 2617)
"I had the horrible impression that she, who created this magnificent, many-layered Snape-character, failed to understand the real depth of the character and tried to sort of "push him down" to the level of a much more ordinary character. (Julia) Yes, that's how I feel, too. Rowling has no idea what the characters are getting up to behind her back! They are wriggling out of her control all the time. (I once had the feeling, when she gave one of her interviews again, "Pah, what does she know!") Maybe her subconscious creeps directly into her writing fingers and makes her give them actions or dialogue which would never have entered her mind otherwise.
Soul Search - Feb 14, 2008 8:04 am (#1668 of 2617)
"I had the horrible impression that she, ..." Julia, I agree wholeheartedly. Well stated. In her interviews she seems surprised that some readers like the Snape character and dwell on him endlessly. In some cases I sense she is embarrassed by questions about Snape.
In that "dwell on him endlessly" vein ... While Harry naming a child after Snape, and his comments on the train platform, suggest Harry has come to terms with Snape, finally giving him some respect, my thought is Snape would resent Albus Severus and not be pleased Harry had named a kid after him, no matter the respect it shows.
wynnleaf - Feb 14, 2008 9:28 am (#1669 of 2617)
I have long thought that her opinion is only one of the many opinions and I stopped reading her interviews soon after DH precisely because I had the horrible impression that she, who created this magnificent, many-layered Snape-character, failed to understand the real depth of the character and tried to sort of "push him down" to the level of a much more ordinary character. (Julia)
There is an assumption that many people make that an author completely understands and knows all there is to know about the characters they create.
When we read a book, we get certain clues about a character and we try to piece together the character's personality through the clues in the book. But, as we can see with Snape, there may be several explanations for those clues and they don't, necessarily, all add up to the same thing.
Is the writer the final authority about the character? Or is it the text of the book? If someone amazingly found a diary of Shakespeare, in which he told us that Hamlet was in fact mad, would that make all of the interpretations that Hamlet was not mad suddenly null and void? Personally, I don't think so. The character is bigger than that. The purpose or intent of the author is not all that there is. Characters very often end up with much more depth than their creators ever intended. For instance, I don't think Doyle ever expected Holmes to be interpreted with the depth that readers felt.
When JKR first started writing the series, she already had a picture in her head of Snape's backstory, motivations, etc. that would explain his actions when she "revealed all" in the last book. But in between, she continued to write Snape and the character kept developing. On the one hand, we know that she was informed in her writing of the character by what she already knew of the backstory, but on the other hand, she also seems to have allowed his character to get away from her a bit. When she got around to writing DH, she seems to have written a great deal of it from her ideas predetermined years before. Snape's character and backstory as revealed in DH seems almost as though she's explaining the Snape of PS/SS, but not necessarily the person we get to know through the rest of the series.
Many readers have commented that Snape's "voice" even "sounds" different in parts DH. Whether or not one feels that particular difference, it does seem to me that JKR wanted to finish off the series with the Snape that she originally envisioned 20 years before, but that is not exactly the character that was conveyed to readers over the intervening years and thousands of pages.
Another thing that I believe is important is that JKR acknowledges that many of her characters are based directly on real people, or perhaps combinations of real people. We know that Ron is based on a friend, Lockhart on a person she knew, Umbridge, Snape, Hermione is kind of based on JKR, and so forth. We can even see in JKR's recent interview comments that she retains that connection between some of her characters and the people that they were based on. You'll note that there's no disclaimer in JKR's books that the characters and plots are based on no real person or circumstances.
When a writer bases characters on real people, they may get a great deal of the surface characteristics just exactly right. It may only take really excellent observation skills to take the fictional character and make him/her seem very real by basing that character on observable characteristics of real people.
But then the writer may also attempt to create a lot of other plot points, backstory, etc., as well as the character's actions, which may or may not necessarily reflect what the real-life model's backstory, motivations, or what he/she was like. I think that JKR may have ended up in Snape with a character who, in her writing, is a very different person from her real-life model, yet JKR is still caught in the memory of the real person and judges Snape based on her feelings of a person from her past who, in fact, is someone else altogether. The primary reason I feel this way about her reaction to Snape in particular is because of her numerous comments over the years that the character was created "in revenge." As her most recent such comment was made last October, decades after knowing the real-life model(s) and after literally thousands of pages of writing, I tend to think she still emotionally thinks of Snape as a kind of stand-in for person(s) she really knew.
Orion - Feb 14, 2008 9:33 am (#1670 of 2617)
"Many readers have commented that Snape's "voice" even "sounds" different in parts DH. Whether or not one feels that particular difference, it does seem to me that JKR wanted to finish off the series with the Snape that she originally envisioned 20 years before, but that is not exactly the character that was conveyed to readers over the intervening years and thousands of pages." (wynnleaf)
That is intriguing, wynnleaf. Can you explain a little more? The only thing I remember about Snape's voice is the word "silky", which is mentioned several times. Very disappointing, that in DH the Toad also has a silky voice when "she", to stretch this pronoun to the max, questions the muggle-born witch in the Ministry.
mona amon - Feb 14, 2008 9:37 am (#1671 of 2617)
Wow, Wynnleaf, that was good!
Many readers have commented that Snape's "voice" even "sounds" different in parts DH.
Can you give us examples? I felt his behaviour was different because of the changed circumstances, but his'voice'?
PeskyPixie - Feb 14, 2008 9:49 am (#1672 of 2617)
I am intrigued as well. Wynnleaf, please show us the differences in Snape's voice in different parts of DH.
I think that JKR may have ended up in Snape with a character who, in her writing, is a very different person from her real-life model, yet JKR is still caught in the memory of the real person and judges Snape based on her feelings of a person from her past who, in fact, is someone else altogether. -wynnleaf
I think so, too.
Soul Search - Feb 14, 2008 10:25 am (#1673 of 2617)
Well stated, wynnleaf. I agree.
I am wondering now, though, if we would have found the "as intended" Snape character as interesting as the one that evolved over the five books between SS/PS and DH?
The development of the Snape character was a deception to the readers. He was generally presented as a dislikable sort, even almost as evil as Voldemort. We were supposed to hate him, then be shocked when his true character was revealed in "The Prince's Tale."
But, it didn't quite work out that way. Many readers, myself included, picked up on hints here and there so the startling revelation was expected.
Where did she go wrong? What hints caused us to suspect Snape wasn't all that evil? Dumbledore trusted Snape. For me, that was the strongest hint that all was not as it appeared.
Julia H. - Feb 14, 2008 11:08 am (#1674 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, it seems many of us expect another intriguing analysis from you regarding the various Snapes (voice and everything).
"Where did she go wrong? What hints caused us to suspect Snape wasn't all that evil?" (Soul Search)
I don't think she "went wrong" by giving us hints. Without the hints it would have been hard to believe the startling revelation in the end and where would the thrill of expectation and the thrill of going back and discover the hints that were always there only we never saw them have been? Dumbledore's trust was a great hint (especially with the surrounding mystery concerning the reason why), I agree, though she very cleverly balanced it by having Snape kill the one person who actually trusted him. (It was also amazing how easily Harry and everybody overlooked the instances when Snape happened to save Harry's life, but it was also very cleverly done, always introducing some "bad news" about Snape right after the "good news".) Another great hint was the very fact that she made Snape seem to be absolutely evil at the end of HBP, which was the last but one book. Though it was difficult to guess (I admit the hints were there) how Snape could come out of it good, plotwise, structurewise, JKR seemed to be preparing us for a great surprise.
mona amon - Feb 14, 2008 11:09 am (#1675 of 2617)
That would have been rather tricky, to make us despise and suspect him through six books and then do a complete volte-face in book seven. Good detective writers can carry off this sort of thing, but they never develop their characters much. So where did she go wrong? By making him too vivid and real. It wouldn't be true to nature for such a character to be so evil as to deceive all readers for six books and then turn out good in the end.
EDIT: cross posted with Julia!
Julia H. - Feb 14, 2008 11:36 am (#1676 of 2617)
"... for me it's just Snape's black eyes looking into Lily's green ones, Harry and the rest of the world forgotten for one agonisingly brief moment. (Mona)
That was beautiful, Mona.
PeskyPixie - Feb 14, 2008 11:52 am (#1677 of 2617)
***sighs*** Yes, mona, exquisite.
wynnleaf - Feb 14, 2008 12:02 pm (#1678 of 2617)
When I say that many felt Snape's "voice" and manner were different in DH, you first have to realize that personally I don't feel it's completely different, just not exactly the same as the other books, and because there are six other books, the small differences seem to stand out more.
In the first chapter of DH, Snape seems the same as always. Well, obviously he's with LV so we expect him to be talking like a faithful DE, but still, he seems just like the Snape we know.
However, when Snape comes in to see LV in The Elder Wand, he does a few things that we might not expect out of Snape. First he pleads with LV to let him go find Harry, even before LV has made any particular threatening move to Snape. That seems odd for Snape.
Then, he also seems kind of clueless about what's going on. Snape never seemed particularly clueless before. Well, of course he doesn't understand that Sirius is innocent at the end of POA, but he's fairly "quick on the uptake" in a conversation. He understands quite clearly that the kids and adults are trying to say that Sirius is innocent, he just doesn't believe them and thinks Lupin and Sirius are in cahoots and the kids are confunded. But generally in other books he picks up on undercurrents very quickly.
Yet in DH, he doesn't.
First, in spite of LV obviously looking for loads of info about wands and experimenting with them and even robbing DD's tomb, Snape acts in The Elder Wand as though he has no clue why LV would be concerned about his wand. He truly seems unaware that LV was after the Elder Wand. His continued efforts to talk LV into letting him find Harry, or to understand what LV is saying about the wand sound like someone fumbling for what to say. While one can rationalize that in this position Snape is fumbling for what to say, it's just never been something we've seen before -- Snape at a loss for what to say or how to say it. Snape struggling and unable to figure out what someone is saying to him.
Then we get to The Prince's Tale. Of course, we never knew what child-Snape would "sound" like. But one thing I know many fans never expected was a nickname like "Sev." Prior to DH, I saw many, many comments, especially among people writing fan fics, where people were certain that no matter what, Snape would never want to be called something so brief, informal and mundane sounding as "Sev." Of course, that makes those people wrong I guess. But were they really "wrong?" Or did the 6 books set up a person that seemed to be a certain sort of personality, only to have a slightly different person in DH?
We've discussed this previously, but in The Prince's Tale, we find adult Snape consistently calling DD "Dumbledore." I suppose this may have been meant to convey an informality between them. But the problem is that Snape in the past had always called DD "Headmaster" so it just didn't seem like Snape's typical "voice" to suddenly be calling him something else.
And then there's the "clueless Snape" of DH, who not only didn't seem to pick up on the idea that LV was searching for the Elder Wand, he didn't figure out that LV was creating horcruxes either. Well, yes, we can speculate that he did, but JKR didn't show that and the point I'm making is that the character she showed us in DH didn't feel right to many readers. So even though Snape was a very superior Dark Arts expert, he apparently didn't pick up on any of the clues that LV was after the Elder Wand, nor the resulting implications about the fact that LV must eventually realize that someone had disarmed DD. Further, the Dark Arts expert -- presumably much more knowledgeable than Slughorn -- didn't grasp at all that LV had horcruxes? He didn't ever think of that, even though we can be fairly sure that Snape learned a good deal about the diary from Lucius, saw that LV was trying to destroy the ring, knew that LV had a mental connection to both Harry and Nagini, etc? Even after DD told him about the piece of LV inside Harry, Snape still didn't put two and two together as regards the diary, Nagini, and DD destroying the Ring?
So I guess DH felt to me as though JKR was trying to rein in Snape. After making him the genius on potions and spell creation, Dark Arts, a healer of sorts, legilimency/occlumency expert, great duelist and super-spy, she wanted to make sure that even with all those attributes he couldn't figure out any of DD's or LV's secrets, and would be clueless and fumbling when he got killed.
To me, it didn't feel like a complete character "fit," but I did see many essays in the first months after DH where a lot of readers felt that the Snape of DH was almost a different character all together - and these were readers that had thought Snape on the good side, not those who had previously been convinced he was evil.
And since the later part of DH was written, according to JKR, basically from the original blueprint she'd always planned, it seems to me to make sense that the Snape in the first chapter would seem more like in voice and manner to the rest of the books, yet the Snape of The Elder Wand and The Prince's Tale to not exactly seem the same -- because at that point, I'm guessing she reverted back to her plans and outline from years ago.
wynnleaf - Feb 14, 2008 2:12 pm (#1679 of 2617)
Obviously I completely disagree that Snape believed the Trio and Lupin in POA. He had absolutely no reason to believe them. He's not stupid. Why should he believe three 13 year old kids and Lupin who had just admitted, in Snape's hearing, to having been deceiving DD all year? Why should he risk his life and the lives of the three kids that, in spite of no evidence supporting the assertion, Sirius is innocent. There's Ron with a seriously broken leg (now who did Snape think broke it?), Sirius (imprisoned for years as a murderer and even DD believed it) claiming what Snape considered attempted murder was deserved, and Lupin admitting to deceiving DD. And he should have naturally believed, after 12 years of believing Sirius a traitor, that he was innocent? I think the smart thing would be to assume Sirius and Lupin were lying and the kids were either confused or confunded.
Anyway, that's not the point in this case. If you believe that Snape actually did believe them, then that takes away, for you zelmia, even the one example I had of Snape not grasping the truth right off.
So back to DH, it does seem that Snape's cluelessness is not like his character in the rest of the series.
rambkowalczyk - Feb 14, 2008 3:08 pm (#1680 of 2617)
I am not so certain that Snape is clueless when talking to the Dark Lord. Preoccupied and obsessed with finding Harry, yes. Snape knows he has to give Harry the message to surrender before Voldemort and Harry meet. Snape at this point really doesn't care what Voldemort has to say about the Elder wand because all he knows is that the Elder Wand has to kill Harry (to follow Dumbledore's instruction).
Snape's last minutes--
When Harry gets in hearing range, Snape is telling V that "their resistance is crumbling" He then asks to find the boy. V does'nt answer directly but starts to talk about the wand. He asks "why doesn't it work for me?"
"My---my Lord?" said Snape blankly. "I do not understand. You--you have preformed extraordinary magic with that wand."
I interpret this to mean that Snape is so focused on getting the message to Harry that he can't focus on V conversation.
V answers Snape's objections and Harry notes Snape did not speak. Harry could not see his face: He wondered whether Snape sensed danger, was trying to find the right words to comfort his master.
V continues on "I thought long and hard, Severus... Do you know why I called you back from the battle?"
Harry saw Snape's profile: His eyes were fixed upon the coiling snake in its enchanted cage.
My guess is here Snape knows he's going to die but sees no need or the futility of letting Voldemort know this. He's perfectly willing to let the snake kill him after he tells Potter but knows V won't believe that so he says again begs to find the boy and return.
When Voldemort is explaining how Olivander told him about the twin cores Snape was not looking at Voldemort now. His dark eyes were still fixed upon the coiling serpent in its protective sphere.
At the very end Snape does raise his wand in protest but V swiped the air which caused the snake to roll toward Snape and kill him.
The book further describes Voldemort as becoming increasingly furious as he talks to Snape. My guess is that Snape understands Voldemort's moods and thinks that this is the best way to deflect them.
I understand that this cluelessness is given to show that JKR may have somehow deviated from her original portrayal of Snape and has allowed him to develop more than she expected. I agree with this idea. I just think that this scene like many is subject to many interpretations.
When I read this line "Apparently I underestimated you, Potter." I am reminded of an All In the Family. Meethead says to Archie "I underestimated you Arch. You're more ignorant than I thought."
Julia H. - Feb 11, 2008 2:52 pm (#1652 of 2617)
"None of the above outbursts about James sound like he was trying to make Harry lose respect for James. He was just making it very clear to Harry that he (Snape) did not think he was a hero or a saint, whatever Harry's own opinion might be." (Mona)
You may be right but even in this case, it does seem to be important for him to tell Harry his opinion. Even if he does not consciously want Harry to lose his respect for James, he seems to want to "balance" Harry's opinion and perhaps it is not only about how Harry judges James's character but also about making him see Snape's viewpoint a little bit as well. I think it is at least partly a kind of round-about way for Snape to try to win Harry's respect or understanding a little bit. It is not the right way but, unfortunately, Snape tends to approach Harry through his memories of James and it may, for the time being, replace the real "confession" that he makes only at his death. I don't think it is a conscious effort but still it is there. Since Snape is "investing" a lot of energy, thought etc. into things related to Harry (really, his life is about Harry at the time), I don't think it would be surprising if deep down Harry's opinion were important to him. (He would not admit it though.)
As for the detentions: they start why they start but it is clear that Snape is using the occasions - even at the "cost" of having to spend his Saturday mornings in Harry's company - to make Harry learn about the "less ideal" characteristics of James and Sirius. Part of the reason may be that Snape knows Harry blames him for Sirius's death and is hurt by this or (another reason), since Harry has seen his Worst Memory, he is now trying to show that James and Sirius had a way of bullying people in general as well. After all, Lupin intended to talk to Snape about the Occlumency classes - if he did, then Snape knows Harry told the two of them what he had seen and may know or at least suspect how they explained it to him. He may even suspect that Harry was upset and he can clearly guess that Lupin and Sirius told him things that would restore "hero James" for him and put the blame on Snape. So now he is trying to show him the other side of the coin. This would again suggest that Harry's opinion is important to Snape.
Wynnleaf mentioned (and I agreed) that Harry had various father figures: James, Sirius, DD (Lupin? - I don't think he was more than just an older friend) and also Snape in the role of the male authority figure who received Harry's negative attitudes to a father figure. Somewhere on the Sirius thread, I think someone mentioned that (it is told somewhere off-book) Harry's son James was James Sirius. If that is really so, then it seems, just as Harry named his only daughter after his mother, he named his sons after the various "father figures" he had: James, Sirius, Albus and ... Severus - which would suggest that, consciously or not, Harry came to realize that Snape's role in his life was similar to the role the other three played.
"I was just thinking of Snape's extraordinary ability to shut off emotions at will and compartmentalize his life. In spite of the prophecy, his history with Lily and his responsibility with Harry's life, he's perfectly fine making cracks about 'the Chosen One' in HBP." (Pesky)
He needs to be able to compartmentalize his life in order to not crack: he is going through pretty hard times. I think the "Chosen One" comments are outbursts of fury and they may even reflect Snape's bitterness about the fate DD has assigned to him. While Harry is becoming the symbol of everything good, he, who is fighting and risking his life for the same purpose, will have to accept a humiliating situation where he is regarded (hated and despised) as a murderer and a traitor - all for the very same goal Harry is fighting for.
Julia H. - Feb 11, 2008 3:44 pm (#1653 of 2617)
P.S. The "Chosen One" comments are also examples of how Snape's words tend to be at odds with his actions. He is making these comments while his whole life (with the exception of his words) is spent as atonement for what made Harry the Chosen One.
Julia H. - Feb 12, 2008 3:25 am (#1654 of 2617)
"Snape is such a jerk to Harry all the time, it's hard for me to see past it."
Oh, Zelmia, to try and "see past it" is something I find especially exciting.
mona amon - Feb 12, 2008 10:05 pm (#1655 of 2617)
In spite of the prophecy, his history with Lily and his responsibility with Harry's life, he's perfectly fine making cracks about 'the Chosen One' (Pesky)
Which, I hasten to point out, Harry would not have been had Snape not taken what he knew of the Prophecy to Voldemort in the first place. This makes his behaviour and attitude about Harry as "the Chosen One" all the more disgusting, in my opinion. (Zelmia)
While his behaviour doesn't disgust me (that's part of what makes him such an intriguing character for me- his unconcealed loathing of Harry on the one hand, and his willingness to sacrifice everything for him on the other) it's certainly strange, and makes me wonder if subconscious, unacknowledged guilt wasn't part of the reason he was so mean to Harry.
I think it is at least partly a kind of round-about way for Snape to try to win Harry's respect or understanding a little bit. It is not the right way but, unfortunately, Snape tends to approach Harry through his memories of James and it may, for the time being, replace the real "confession" that he makes only at his death. I don't think it is a conscious effort but still it is there. Since Snape is "investing" a lot of energy, thought etc. into things related to Harry (really, his life is about Harry at the time), I don't think it would be surprising if deep down Harry's opinion were important to him. (He would not admit it though.) (Julia)
But Julia, you are assuming (I think) that Snape sees Harry as he really is, fair-minded and basically emphathetic to Snape. But this is not the way he sees Harry. Snape sees Harry as a junior version of James, arrogant, breaking the rules, etc, so why do you feel he thinks Harry will respect him if he shows him what a jerk James was? Even after he catches Harry peeking into his memories, he seems to think Harry was happy to see him humiliated. Why would Snape think that Harry would sympathise with him rather than his father?
I feel the opposite may be true- deep down, Snape did not want Harry to respect him. Respect carries with it an obligation. If someone respects you, you have to feel that you have earned that respect. But Snape has this guilty secret, that he is the reason this boy has no parents, which he is either unwilling or unable to confess to Harry, so I suppose he finds it less complicated to just despise Harry and make sure he despises him back.
it is clear that Snape is using the occasions - even at the "cost" of having to spend his Saturday mornings in Harry's company - to make Harry learn about the "less ideal" characteristics of James and Sirius.
I don't think it was to learn about them so much as to 'get a jolt' everytime he sees James' and Sirius' names- a characteristically 'Snapey' way of making the already boring detentions even more unpleasant. I like Pesky's summary of it in post#1966-Boring work, the reminder of the father and godfather he has lost, missing out at Quidditch, missing good weather, missing Ginny(?), these are all ways in which Snape feels Harry would best be punished. And just maybe, he was indulging an unconscious desire to keep Harry with him for a while, since he now knows they'll soon be parted practically forever, and since Dumbledore has told him Harry will have to die. Otherwise it would have been easier for Snape to send Harry to Filch's office to do his detentions.
Julia H. - Feb 13, 2008 1:00 am (#1656 of 2617)
Great post, Mona. I had to spend some time thinking about your arguments.
"Snape sees Harry as a junior version of James, arrogant, breaking the rules, etc, so why do you feel he thinks Harry will respect him if he shows him what a jerk James was?"
I'm not sure he thinks that over consciously, I think it is more about his desire to show Harry something of what he feels rather than any realistic consideration of what Harry would do with the information. Besides, if we are talking about the HBP detentions, by this time Harry has already seen what a jerk James was in relation to Snape but showing him how James treated some other people as well may amount to saying: "Don't you think what happened after the DADA O.W.L. was somehow my fault, as Lupin and Sirius must have told you!" (Since in OOTP Lupin promised he would talk to Snape and since both Lupin and Sirius were rather worried that the occlumency lessons had stopped I find it likely that they did try to speak to him and I find it equally likely that the conversation ended in a shouting match or something similar, so Snape knew that Harry had discussed his worst memory with James's friends.) There may have been other motivations behind the type of detention he gave Harry but, as you say, "it would have been easier for Snape to send Harry to Filch's office to do his detentions", so he may have had a reason why he was sitting with him. If "he was indulging an unconscious desire to keep Harry with him for a while, since he now knows they'll soon be parted practically forever, and since Dumbledore has told him Harry will have to die", as you say (I like the idea), that should indicate deep in his heart Harry still meant something to him.
You are right that Snape sees Harry as "a junior version of James" but at the same I'm sure he never forgets that he is Lily's son (how could he?) and he may very well wish to win the respect of Lily's son - perhaps to make up for the one-time loss of Lily's respect. He is not doing it in the right way - why? Your theory about his guilt explains it perfectly: "makes me wonder if subconscious, unacknowledged guilt wasn't part of the reason he was so mean to Harry".
"But Snape has this guilty secret, that he is the reason this boy has no parents, which he is either unwilling or unable to confess to Harry, so I suppose he finds it less complicated to just despise Harry and make sure he despises him back."
Excellent. I also thought there was something like this but I did not know how to put it into words - you have done it perfectly. It would be quite horrible if Snape were to treat Harry as, for example, Lupin does, make Harry like him and then have him discover Snape's secret and lose faith in a lot of things. But my conclusion is if his guilt is the reason why he does not or cannot try to win Harry's respect in a sensible way, that means Harry's image as "James the junior" is just a good excuse for him to be mean to Harry and deep down he may just as well wish he could win his respect. Harry's protection is his purpose in life now and he is doing a very difficult job and it must be very difficult to live and "fight" every day without the smallest reward and next to impossible without at least wishing to be able to get at least some reward and in the case of Snape, with his history, people's respect is a very sensitive issue. As a result of his guilt, Snape in effect has to step into James's shoes with regard to Harry: when Harry loses his parents, Snape takes over certain parental duties, the duties of a protective parent (though it is just one aspect of parental duties, of course). So in a way, to some extent, Snape, who would have liked to be to Lily what in reality James became to her, has to replace James as Harry's father. But, as you say, he has to do it with this guilt on his conscience - a complicated situation and his feelings must be equally complicated.
Perhaps the best argument for Snape valuing Harry's opinion is the "Look at me" line. I don't think Snape would want Harry to see him and understand him suddenly just because he is dying if he secretly had not wished it before. He may have denied it earlier but he can deny it no more, so he pours all these memories in front of Harry (including the worst one, which Harry has already seen - so Snape may actually understand now that Harry did not find pleasure in seeing him humiliated, whatever he may have thought when he caught him watching in OOTP.)
Orion - Feb 13, 2008 4:14 am (#1657 of 2617)
No no no no no.
Guilt as the main motivating factor, yes. That's already been discussed at length in six long Snape threads. It's guilt which drives him mad, and which makes him loathe Harry through some complicated psychological mechanism, apart from Harry's looks and the fact that he is not his own son, but should have been. But "Look at me", IMO, doesn't mean that Snape suddenly wants to be seen by Harry. I mean, really seen, like he really is.
"Look at me" was only ever about Lily's eyes. (And the mouth-organ was only ever a mouth-organ...) Snape dies without the slightest inkling of any tender feelings towards Harry, and he has never, ever had any tendencies to want to be in Harry's company. He just knows that a detention for Harry is only real punishment if Harry has to be in his company, so he uses his own person as punishment. (Pretty twisted, if you ask me, but he is twisted!)
Julia H. - Feb 13, 2008 4:44 am (#1658 of 2617)
""Look at me" was only ever about Lily's eyes." (Orion)
We have to agree to differ. I think "Look at me" is about Lily's eyes and is about viewing the memories as information ("message") and is about seeing the real Snape as well. This is not "a mouth organ", the moment is too important for that. HP is literature and meanings should be complex, especially at important turning points in the plot. Besides, on the one hand, I don't think it is realistic to think that in his dying minutes Snape really wants to go down wizarding history as LV's right hand and, on the other hand, the memories he is giving Harry are much more than what is absolutely necessary just to deliver DD's message: a lot of them are about Snape as he really is. I never said he has "tender feelings" towards Harry but he may still want his respect and he may certainly want to have "the best of him" finally revealed to Harry, who already knows his dark side anyway. He may even want forgiveness, even if he is ever unable to apologize (and we get some explanation why). He is a human being, not a machine, and I cannot imagine that after everything he has gone through, the purpose of his struggles and troubles means nothing to him.
wynnleaf - Feb 13, 2008 1:27 pm (#1659 of 2617)
If Snape saw Harry only as a surrogate for James, he wouldn't be trying to protect him. Harry represents both James and Lily to Snape. He loathes Harry because Harry is James for Snape. But he protects Harry because Harry is also all that is left of Lily and what she loved and died for. But if Lily and died for James, I think it's pretty clear that Snape wouldn't be trying to protect James. Harry is not just a stand-in for James. He is that, but he is much more.
"Look at me," makes no sense if all that Snape sees in Harry is James. Why would he want to look at James or for James to look at him? It only makes sense if Snape also sees Lily in Harry. No, he doesn't see Lily's personality or character in Harry. In that regard he only sees James. But he does see Lily anyway, else he wouldn't focus practically his whole life on Harry.
Julia H. - Feb 13, 2008 1:51 pm (#1660 of 2617)
"Rowling herself said that Snape drew his last breath "loathing" Harry." (Zelmia)
Is it something I can still look up? If so, can you give me the reference? I'd like to read it, though to tell the truth, after being generally "shouted down" for saying that we know what Lily's and James's Patronuses (Patroni?) were because JKR tells us so in an interview, I decided I would not try to rely on her words outside the books very much when it is about facts. (As for interpretation, I have long thought that her opinion is only one of the many opinions and I stopped reading her interviews soon after DH precisely because I had the horrible impression that she, who created this magnificent, many-layered Snape-character, failed to understand the real depth of the character and tried to sort of "push him down" to the level of a much more ordinary character.)
"Like your man Heathcliff, Snape never saw Harry as anything other than a surrogate for James..."
I think I promised you not to make any more comparisons with Wuthering Heights, so I'm going to stick to HP now. Yes, Snape sees Harry as a surrogate for James and he loathes him (though I don't agree that he loathes him quite until his last breath) - but why? Why does he not see him as Lily's son? I agree with Mona that the primary barrier between Snape and Harry is Snape's feeling of guilt and remorse. Once this barrier is given, he can "choose" (as much as it is a choice) between seeing him as Lily's son and a constant reminder of his guilt and his loss or as James's son, who he can loathe and treat in a nasty way. In the first case he is bound to be driven totally mad - not just half-mad as in the second case - and may become unable to fulfill "his vow to protect and serve". So taking Harry for James's surrogate is secondary to his feeling of guilt and is a method of mental, psychological survival, which makes it possible for him to experience a feeling that he is used to and a feeling that he can handle: anger - in place of even more dangerous and damaging (weakening?) feelings (at least as far as he knows).
Having said that, I would also like to say that this strategy is in essence a way of self-deceit and the question is: just how far can he deceive himself (or the reader)? He perfectly knows that Harry is Lily's son and probably remembers it when Harry is in danger. But even if he does not, loathing Harry still means that he has very strong feelings about Harry and it has been pointed out in this thread that Snape's strong negative feelings in the surface (anger in the first place) may indicate more complex feelings beneath the surface. When he angrily shouts the M-word at Lily, he simultaneously experiences a variety of feelings; while he is saving DD's life, he is angry and again he probably experiences a variety of feelings but it is only his anger that surfaces. We can see him get angry when Harry seems to be in danger: He is angry in POA when he finds that Harry has left the castle while everybody believes that his life is in danger outside. He is angry in in OOTP when he discovers that Harry, instead of practising occlumency, keeps on dreaming about the ministry corridor and the angry and passionate way he talks to him reveals that he is really worried about him. (It is not simply having given a promise and keeping his word or obeying DD's orders: the original schedule for occlumency classes is once a week on Mondays but after the first lesson, when he realizes how far Harry has got into his LV-vision, he orders him to come back on Wednesday - a voluntary decision of Snape's own based on his own feeling of responsibility.)
Then in DH he gives himself completely away when he is told that Harry would have to die (danger!): in his reaction he refers to him as "Lily Potter's son" (these are his very words) and his words are unmistakably full of feelings: "Now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter". He may deny if afterwards, that does not change the fact that he has already given himself away: deep in his heart, he is perfectly aware that Harry is Lily's son and he is not quite as willing as one would think to give up the burden of responsibility for Harry's life. He may deny to the world and to himself that Harry means anything to him, denial and pretence only goes as far as the final moment, the "moment of truth", when he gives him his secrets, his memories, as much of himself as he has never given anyone else.
(This is the complete opposite of the general way of his life, which he lived surrounded with secrets and mystery, behind a wall of denial and exclusion. I like to see this moment - just like his last words - as symbolizing something greater, something even more important. Of course, that may very well be just my way of seeing: I also happen to find it symbolic that he is killed by a snake - I think it is, symbolically, "Slytherin's revenge" on a Slytherin-educated man who turned his back on Slytherin values and Slytherin goals, who, in fact, turned out to be a Gryffindor in disguise.)
Orion - Feb 13, 2008 2:01 pm (#1661 of 2617)
"Pig for slaughter" says, IMO, "I have ruined my life on your orders, old man, only that you can laugh in my face and tell me that it was in vain because the kid was meant to die anyway so that bloody Voldemort was brought down?"
I can happily be a Snapefan even though he loathes Harry to his dying breath. He hates everyone anyway. (Edited, typo)
Julia H. - Feb 13, 2008 2:06 pm (#1662 of 2617)
"I have ruined my life on your orders, old man, only that you can laugh in my face and tell me that it was in vain because the kid was meant to die anyway so that bloddy Voldemort was brought down?" (Orion)
Very interesting, Orion, but thinking that his life is ruined "in vain" if Harry dies does indicate that Harry is important to him. (Even if he loathes him - he is not a Harry-Potter-fan - Harry can still be important in various ways.)
wynnleaf - Feb 13, 2008 3:20 pm (#1663 of 2617)
This is from "The Final Chapter" Dateline television interview on July 29, 2007
Harry really sees the good in Snape ultimately. I wanted there to be redemption and I wanted there to be forgiveness. And Harry forgives, even knowing that until the end Snape loathed him unjustifiably. It's totally, totally unfair that he loathes him so much but anyway. (JKR)
"Until the end Snape loathed him..."
The problem is that it seems rather obvious to me that Snape's "loathing" is in no way simplistic. If all he felt toward Harry was loathing, he wouldn't have worked for so many years to protect him. As Julia points out, Snape's life was mostly focused on Harry, protecting him, etc. Loathing is surely not all that he felt toward Harry.
Thing is, people are complex. Snape is a fictional character, but one of the most complex I know of. To assume that because he loathed Harry, he had nothing but loathing for him is, in my opinion, making Snape's attitudes toward Harry far too simple.
tandaradei - Feb 13, 2008 4:39 pm (#1664 of 2617)
Snape loved Lily from a pre-pubescence on. One might say, he loved her even in the time before and after ardor. And James' love for her came strictly within the "I need a girl" stage. I don't know where to go with this, except to say that very probably, Snape thought of James' attractions for her as possibly being ... spoiled?
My new vision of Snape puts him pretty much in a sort of "amoral scientist" mode, where his attitude towards magic, for instance, has more to do with things like analysis and potency, rather than whether this or that branch of it is evil. This is very much like how the Elder Wand is described -- concerned more with potency than with what is right or wrong to do.
Snape's desire to be a potent wizard -- and his love for Lily, are to me also a bit mixed. Most likely one of Snape's initial attractions to Lily was from her obvious Magical potency ... and thus quite in tune with his overall aim for the same.
I'd think Snapes attitude towards Quidditch was ambivalent: on the one hand, he felt disdain for it because it held no meaning for magical potency (where can Quidditch improve one's magical potency? not at all); but also, that every witch and wizard positively adored it, making him miss out. Now, James and company were potent wizards and rivals; they excelled in quidditch and rules breaking; and they mocked what he seriously studied (dark arts).
I'm thinking Snape always had Lily on something of a pedestal; and that James ruined everything; and that the only result of all their lives that mattered in relation to Lily, eventually turned out to be Harry.
I'm thinking Snape always thought why, why why ... as to Harry being the only product of his Lily. And finally, when DD said Harry was basically being reared for slaughter, his nihilistic view of the whole matter only became compounded.
The one simple thing through all this was Snape's loyalty to Lily, begun from childhood.
Julia H. - Feb 14, 2008 6:16 am (#1665 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, thanks for the quote. Now at least I know that JKR wanted there to be redemption and forgiveness... Anyway, even if Harry knew how Snape loathed him till the end, he may have discovered that there were other feelings as well. (That's what "Albus Severus" suggests...)
"Snape's loyalty to Lily, begun from childhood" (tandaradei)
This one thing cannot be questioned or debated, I think.
In a way Harry is the Resurrection Stone to Snape. The second brother in the "Tale of the Three Brothers" does not love the stone, he may even loathe the idea that this is all that has been left to him but he loves what the stone represents to him: his only connection to his dead love.
"If Snape does see Lily in Harry, yet still chooses to treat Harry the way he does, then Lily took far too long to dump Snape, in my opinion." (Zelmia)
Well, he sees both Lily and James in him. I think in critical moments Harry is Lily's son to him (as we see in "The Prince's Tale"), otherwise just "his father all over again". (This is exactly how Snape is treated by other Order members: in critical moments he is their spy and they act upon the intelligence they get from him, otherwise he is just a turncoat DE and who knows what else.) The way he treats Harry: most of the time he makes him angry, sometimes afraid but never ever goes beyond that, never really harms him (unlike some other character does to someone in another book :-) that I will not mention now). He often treats Harry with (seeming?) contempt but his reaction to Harry calling him "coward" indicates that he is hurt by his words, so his opinion is important to him - the contempt may be more an act than reality.
"When he angrily shouts the M-word at Lily, he simultaneously experiences a variety of feelings - So we have chosen to believe, seeing as how Snape is not a robot. We don't actually know this."
We know he loves Lily, hates James, we know he is jealous (we see that in an earlier memory in DH), we know he is angry and we have a good reason to assume that he feels the humiliation and that he is quite desperate. I also think that he detests the idea of being saved at the cost of seeing Lily flirting with James (that could be a very straightforward interpretation of what he actually says) - it may seem otherwise to other readers, but the first few feelings, which are surely present, are already a variety of feelings.
"Well, he only actively worked to protect Harry for 3 years."
Hm... actively... He saves Harry's life in PS, watches him and Quirrell as well. By protecting the stone he also indirectly protects Harry (and of course the whole wizarding world). In CoS, it is not Harry who seems to be in immediate danger but the muggle-born students and Snape tries to protect the school as much as the other teachers do. In POA he becomes more active because Harry seems to be in danger and he tries to protect him from Sirius Black (it is not necessary but he does not know this). In the GoF-year he is preoccupied with the signs of LV returning, confirms his loyalty to DD and prepares for a very dangerous task in order to protect Harry (and by extension others). Of course, Harry needs his most active protection in the final three years.
"And during that time, he didn't really make any sacrifice that many others (Fred, George, Ron, Hermione, Moody, Lupin, Arthur, Bill and even Fleur) also wouldn't have made willingly"
Except that he was constantly there, constantly ready and watchful. And in the end he made the most sacrifice, I think, and it was as much on Harry's behalf as on DD's.
I never said he loved Harry, only that Harry was important enough to him to dedicate his life to his protection - not for a few heroic moments but all the time, any time. One is bound to learn to feel something more than only loathing (even if not necessarily love) if not before, then after all this sacrifice - if nothing else, it is the very sacrifice that makes the "prize" valuable.
mona amon - Feb 14, 2008 7:28 am (#1666 of 2617)
Thanks for your detailed response to my last post, Julia! It's really nice to get 'feedback'!
Thing is, people are complex. Snape is a fictional character, but one of the most complex I know of. To assume that because he loathed Harry, he had nothing but loathing for him is, in my opinion, making Snape's attitudes toward Harry far too simple. (Wynnleaf)
Well said, Wynnleaf! I suppose one could call it 'loathing', that curious mixture of anger, jealousy, guilt and resentment that Snape feels towards Harry, but there's certainly a lot more to it.
I had the horrible impression that she, who created this magnificent, many-layered Snape-character, failed to understand the real depth of the character and tried to sort of "push him down" to the level of a much more ordinary character. (Julia)
I do not think she fails to understand her character. Snape is just too complex for her to pin down in a sentence or two, especially when a question about him is suddenly sprung on her during an interview.
Then in DH he gives himself completely away when he is told that Harry would have to die (danger!): in his reaction he refers to him as "Lily Potter's son" (these are his very words) and his words are unmistakably full of feelings: "Now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter". He may deny if afterwards, that does not change the fact that he has already given himself away: (Julia)
Good point. His horrified reaction to Dumbledore's revelation shows what a long way he has come since that night on the windy hilltop when all he can do is stare blankly and uncomprehendingly when Dumbledore accuses him of not caring a jot about what happens to Lily's husband and child. At that time Harry's fate was a matter of complete indifference to him. But now he does care. He cares that his own efforts and sacrifices are somehow invalidated if Harry has to die anyway. But he also must feel something for Harry as a person. After all he has taught him, watched over him and protected him for almost five years and must have some feelings for Harry that are not pure simple loathing. It is characteristic of Snape that he should deny these feelings and pretend that he's doing it only for Lily's sake. I think I agree with Orion that he is twisted!
"Look at me" was only ever about Lily's eyes. (Orion)
I agree. The words mean different things to different people, but for me it's just Snape's black eyes looking into Lily's green ones, Harry and the rest of the world forgotten for one agonisingly brief moment. And it is poignant that in the end Snape asks this favour of the boy he 'loathes'.
And during that time, he didn't really make any sacrifice that many others (Fred, George, Ron, Hermione, Moody, Lupin, Arthur, Bill and even Fleur) also wouldn't have made willingly - and in some cases did - on Harry's behalf. (Zelmia)
Yes, a number of people help, protect and even sacrifice their lives for Harry, yet he calls Snape 'probably the bravest man I ever knew'. I'll be back after thinking about it some more!
Orion - Feb 14, 2008 7:48 am (#1667 of 2617)
"I had the horrible impression that she, who created this magnificent, many-layered Snape-character, failed to understand the real depth of the character and tried to sort of "push him down" to the level of a much more ordinary character. (Julia) Yes, that's how I feel, too. Rowling has no idea what the characters are getting up to behind her back! They are wriggling out of her control all the time. (I once had the feeling, when she gave one of her interviews again, "Pah, what does she know!") Maybe her subconscious creeps directly into her writing fingers and makes her give them actions or dialogue which would never have entered her mind otherwise.
Soul Search - Feb 14, 2008 8:04 am (#1668 of 2617)
"I had the horrible impression that she, ..." Julia, I agree wholeheartedly. Well stated. In her interviews she seems surprised that some readers like the Snape character and dwell on him endlessly. In some cases I sense she is embarrassed by questions about Snape.
In that "dwell on him endlessly" vein ... While Harry naming a child after Snape, and his comments on the train platform, suggest Harry has come to terms with Snape, finally giving him some respect, my thought is Snape would resent Albus Severus and not be pleased Harry had named a kid after him, no matter the respect it shows.
wynnleaf - Feb 14, 2008 9:28 am (#1669 of 2617)
I have long thought that her opinion is only one of the many opinions and I stopped reading her interviews soon after DH precisely because I had the horrible impression that she, who created this magnificent, many-layered Snape-character, failed to understand the real depth of the character and tried to sort of "push him down" to the level of a much more ordinary character. (Julia)
There is an assumption that many people make that an author completely understands and knows all there is to know about the characters they create.
When we read a book, we get certain clues about a character and we try to piece together the character's personality through the clues in the book. But, as we can see with Snape, there may be several explanations for those clues and they don't, necessarily, all add up to the same thing.
Is the writer the final authority about the character? Or is it the text of the book? If someone amazingly found a diary of Shakespeare, in which he told us that Hamlet was in fact mad, would that make all of the interpretations that Hamlet was not mad suddenly null and void? Personally, I don't think so. The character is bigger than that. The purpose or intent of the author is not all that there is. Characters very often end up with much more depth than their creators ever intended. For instance, I don't think Doyle ever expected Holmes to be interpreted with the depth that readers felt.
When JKR first started writing the series, she already had a picture in her head of Snape's backstory, motivations, etc. that would explain his actions when she "revealed all" in the last book. But in between, she continued to write Snape and the character kept developing. On the one hand, we know that she was informed in her writing of the character by what she already knew of the backstory, but on the other hand, she also seems to have allowed his character to get away from her a bit. When she got around to writing DH, she seems to have written a great deal of it from her ideas predetermined years before. Snape's character and backstory as revealed in DH seems almost as though she's explaining the Snape of PS/SS, but not necessarily the person we get to know through the rest of the series.
Many readers have commented that Snape's "voice" even "sounds" different in parts DH. Whether or not one feels that particular difference, it does seem to me that JKR wanted to finish off the series with the Snape that she originally envisioned 20 years before, but that is not exactly the character that was conveyed to readers over the intervening years and thousands of pages.
Another thing that I believe is important is that JKR acknowledges that many of her characters are based directly on real people, or perhaps combinations of real people. We know that Ron is based on a friend, Lockhart on a person she knew, Umbridge, Snape, Hermione is kind of based on JKR, and so forth. We can even see in JKR's recent interview comments that she retains that connection between some of her characters and the people that they were based on. You'll note that there's no disclaimer in JKR's books that the characters and plots are based on no real person or circumstances.
When a writer bases characters on real people, they may get a great deal of the surface characteristics just exactly right. It may only take really excellent observation skills to take the fictional character and make him/her seem very real by basing that character on observable characteristics of real people.
But then the writer may also attempt to create a lot of other plot points, backstory, etc., as well as the character's actions, which may or may not necessarily reflect what the real-life model's backstory, motivations, or what he/she was like. I think that JKR may have ended up in Snape with a character who, in her writing, is a very different person from her real-life model, yet JKR is still caught in the memory of the real person and judges Snape based on her feelings of a person from her past who, in fact, is someone else altogether. The primary reason I feel this way about her reaction to Snape in particular is because of her numerous comments over the years that the character was created "in revenge." As her most recent such comment was made last October, decades after knowing the real-life model(s) and after literally thousands of pages of writing, I tend to think she still emotionally thinks of Snape as a kind of stand-in for person(s) she really knew.
Orion - Feb 14, 2008 9:33 am (#1670 of 2617)
"Many readers have commented that Snape's "voice" even "sounds" different in parts DH. Whether or not one feels that particular difference, it does seem to me that JKR wanted to finish off the series with the Snape that she originally envisioned 20 years before, but that is not exactly the character that was conveyed to readers over the intervening years and thousands of pages." (wynnleaf)
That is intriguing, wynnleaf. Can you explain a little more? The only thing I remember about Snape's voice is the word "silky", which is mentioned several times. Very disappointing, that in DH the Toad also has a silky voice when "she", to stretch this pronoun to the max, questions the muggle-born witch in the Ministry.
mona amon - Feb 14, 2008 9:37 am (#1671 of 2617)
Wow, Wynnleaf, that was good!
Many readers have commented that Snape's "voice" even "sounds" different in parts DH.
Can you give us examples? I felt his behaviour was different because of the changed circumstances, but his'voice'?
PeskyPixie - Feb 14, 2008 9:49 am (#1672 of 2617)
I am intrigued as well. Wynnleaf, please show us the differences in Snape's voice in different parts of DH.
I think that JKR may have ended up in Snape with a character who, in her writing, is a very different person from her real-life model, yet JKR is still caught in the memory of the real person and judges Snape based on her feelings of a person from her past who, in fact, is someone else altogether. -wynnleaf
I think so, too.
Soul Search - Feb 14, 2008 10:25 am (#1673 of 2617)
Well stated, wynnleaf. I agree.
I am wondering now, though, if we would have found the "as intended" Snape character as interesting as the one that evolved over the five books between SS/PS and DH?
The development of the Snape character was a deception to the readers. He was generally presented as a dislikable sort, even almost as evil as Voldemort. We were supposed to hate him, then be shocked when his true character was revealed in "The Prince's Tale."
But, it didn't quite work out that way. Many readers, myself included, picked up on hints here and there so the startling revelation was expected.
Where did she go wrong? What hints caused us to suspect Snape wasn't all that evil? Dumbledore trusted Snape. For me, that was the strongest hint that all was not as it appeared.
Julia H. - Feb 14, 2008 11:08 am (#1674 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, it seems many of us expect another intriguing analysis from you regarding the various Snapes (voice and everything).
"Where did she go wrong? What hints caused us to suspect Snape wasn't all that evil?" (Soul Search)
I don't think she "went wrong" by giving us hints. Without the hints it would have been hard to believe the startling revelation in the end and where would the thrill of expectation and the thrill of going back and discover the hints that were always there only we never saw them have been? Dumbledore's trust was a great hint (especially with the surrounding mystery concerning the reason why), I agree, though she very cleverly balanced it by having Snape kill the one person who actually trusted him. (It was also amazing how easily Harry and everybody overlooked the instances when Snape happened to save Harry's life, but it was also very cleverly done, always introducing some "bad news" about Snape right after the "good news".) Another great hint was the very fact that she made Snape seem to be absolutely evil at the end of HBP, which was the last but one book. Though it was difficult to guess (I admit the hints were there) how Snape could come out of it good, plotwise, structurewise, JKR seemed to be preparing us for a great surprise.
mona amon - Feb 14, 2008 11:09 am (#1675 of 2617)
That would have been rather tricky, to make us despise and suspect him through six books and then do a complete volte-face in book seven. Good detective writers can carry off this sort of thing, but they never develop their characters much. So where did she go wrong? By making him too vivid and real. It wouldn't be true to nature for such a character to be so evil as to deceive all readers for six books and then turn out good in the end.
EDIT: cross posted with Julia!
Julia H. - Feb 14, 2008 11:36 am (#1676 of 2617)
"... for me it's just Snape's black eyes looking into Lily's green ones, Harry and the rest of the world forgotten for one agonisingly brief moment. (Mona)
That was beautiful, Mona.
PeskyPixie - Feb 14, 2008 11:52 am (#1677 of 2617)
***sighs*** Yes, mona, exquisite.
wynnleaf - Feb 14, 2008 12:02 pm (#1678 of 2617)
When I say that many felt Snape's "voice" and manner were different in DH, you first have to realize that personally I don't feel it's completely different, just not exactly the same as the other books, and because there are six other books, the small differences seem to stand out more.
In the first chapter of DH, Snape seems the same as always. Well, obviously he's with LV so we expect him to be talking like a faithful DE, but still, he seems just like the Snape we know.
However, when Snape comes in to see LV in The Elder Wand, he does a few things that we might not expect out of Snape. First he pleads with LV to let him go find Harry, even before LV has made any particular threatening move to Snape. That seems odd for Snape.
Then, he also seems kind of clueless about what's going on. Snape never seemed particularly clueless before. Well, of course he doesn't understand that Sirius is innocent at the end of POA, but he's fairly "quick on the uptake" in a conversation. He understands quite clearly that the kids and adults are trying to say that Sirius is innocent, he just doesn't believe them and thinks Lupin and Sirius are in cahoots and the kids are confunded. But generally in other books he picks up on undercurrents very quickly.
Yet in DH, he doesn't.
First, in spite of LV obviously looking for loads of info about wands and experimenting with them and even robbing DD's tomb, Snape acts in The Elder Wand as though he has no clue why LV would be concerned about his wand. He truly seems unaware that LV was after the Elder Wand. His continued efforts to talk LV into letting him find Harry, or to understand what LV is saying about the wand sound like someone fumbling for what to say. While one can rationalize that in this position Snape is fumbling for what to say, it's just never been something we've seen before -- Snape at a loss for what to say or how to say it. Snape struggling and unable to figure out what someone is saying to him.
Then we get to The Prince's Tale. Of course, we never knew what child-Snape would "sound" like. But one thing I know many fans never expected was a nickname like "Sev." Prior to DH, I saw many, many comments, especially among people writing fan fics, where people were certain that no matter what, Snape would never want to be called something so brief, informal and mundane sounding as "Sev." Of course, that makes those people wrong I guess. But were they really "wrong?" Or did the 6 books set up a person that seemed to be a certain sort of personality, only to have a slightly different person in DH?
We've discussed this previously, but in The Prince's Tale, we find adult Snape consistently calling DD "Dumbledore." I suppose this may have been meant to convey an informality between them. But the problem is that Snape in the past had always called DD "Headmaster" so it just didn't seem like Snape's typical "voice" to suddenly be calling him something else.
And then there's the "clueless Snape" of DH, who not only didn't seem to pick up on the idea that LV was searching for the Elder Wand, he didn't figure out that LV was creating horcruxes either. Well, yes, we can speculate that he did, but JKR didn't show that and the point I'm making is that the character she showed us in DH didn't feel right to many readers. So even though Snape was a very superior Dark Arts expert, he apparently didn't pick up on any of the clues that LV was after the Elder Wand, nor the resulting implications about the fact that LV must eventually realize that someone had disarmed DD. Further, the Dark Arts expert -- presumably much more knowledgeable than Slughorn -- didn't grasp at all that LV had horcruxes? He didn't ever think of that, even though we can be fairly sure that Snape learned a good deal about the diary from Lucius, saw that LV was trying to destroy the ring, knew that LV had a mental connection to both Harry and Nagini, etc? Even after DD told him about the piece of LV inside Harry, Snape still didn't put two and two together as regards the diary, Nagini, and DD destroying the Ring?
So I guess DH felt to me as though JKR was trying to rein in Snape. After making him the genius on potions and spell creation, Dark Arts, a healer of sorts, legilimency/occlumency expert, great duelist and super-spy, she wanted to make sure that even with all those attributes he couldn't figure out any of DD's or LV's secrets, and would be clueless and fumbling when he got killed.
To me, it didn't feel like a complete character "fit," but I did see many essays in the first months after DH where a lot of readers felt that the Snape of DH was almost a different character all together - and these were readers that had thought Snape on the good side, not those who had previously been convinced he was evil.
And since the later part of DH was written, according to JKR, basically from the original blueprint she'd always planned, it seems to me to make sense that the Snape in the first chapter would seem more like in voice and manner to the rest of the books, yet the Snape of The Elder Wand and The Prince's Tale to not exactly seem the same -- because at that point, I'm guessing she reverted back to her plans and outline from years ago.
wynnleaf - Feb 14, 2008 2:12 pm (#1679 of 2617)
Obviously I completely disagree that Snape believed the Trio and Lupin in POA. He had absolutely no reason to believe them. He's not stupid. Why should he believe three 13 year old kids and Lupin who had just admitted, in Snape's hearing, to having been deceiving DD all year? Why should he risk his life and the lives of the three kids that, in spite of no evidence supporting the assertion, Sirius is innocent. There's Ron with a seriously broken leg (now who did Snape think broke it?), Sirius (imprisoned for years as a murderer and even DD believed it) claiming what Snape considered attempted murder was deserved, and Lupin admitting to deceiving DD. And he should have naturally believed, after 12 years of believing Sirius a traitor, that he was innocent? I think the smart thing would be to assume Sirius and Lupin were lying and the kids were either confused or confunded.
Anyway, that's not the point in this case. If you believe that Snape actually did believe them, then that takes away, for you zelmia, even the one example I had of Snape not grasping the truth right off.
So back to DH, it does seem that Snape's cluelessness is not like his character in the rest of the series.
rambkowalczyk - Feb 14, 2008 3:08 pm (#1680 of 2617)
I am not so certain that Snape is clueless when talking to the Dark Lord. Preoccupied and obsessed with finding Harry, yes. Snape knows he has to give Harry the message to surrender before Voldemort and Harry meet. Snape at this point really doesn't care what Voldemort has to say about the Elder wand because all he knows is that the Elder Wand has to kill Harry (to follow Dumbledore's instruction).
Snape's last minutes--
When Harry gets in hearing range, Snape is telling V that "their resistance is crumbling" He then asks to find the boy. V does'nt answer directly but starts to talk about the wand. He asks "why doesn't it work for me?"
"My---my Lord?" said Snape blankly. "I do not understand. You--you have preformed extraordinary magic with that wand."
I interpret this to mean that Snape is so focused on getting the message to Harry that he can't focus on V conversation.
V answers Snape's objections and Harry notes Snape did not speak. Harry could not see his face: He wondered whether Snape sensed danger, was trying to find the right words to comfort his master.
V continues on "I thought long and hard, Severus... Do you know why I called you back from the battle?"
Harry saw Snape's profile: His eyes were fixed upon the coiling snake in its enchanted cage.
My guess is here Snape knows he's going to die but sees no need or the futility of letting Voldemort know this. He's perfectly willing to let the snake kill him after he tells Potter but knows V won't believe that so he says again begs to find the boy and return.
When Voldemort is explaining how Olivander told him about the twin cores Snape was not looking at Voldemort now. His dark eyes were still fixed upon the coiling serpent in its protective sphere.
At the very end Snape does raise his wand in protest but V swiped the air which caused the snake to roll toward Snape and kill him.
The book further describes Voldemort as becoming increasingly furious as he talks to Snape. My guess is that Snape understands Voldemort's moods and thinks that this is the best way to deflect them.
I understand that this cluelessness is given to show that JKR may have somehow deviated from her original portrayal of Snape and has allowed him to develop more than she expected. I agree with this idea. I just think that this scene like many is subject to many interpretations.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1681 to 1720
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:01 am
Steve Newton - Feb 14, 2008 3:10 pm (#1681 of 2617)
Snape is not clueless when he talks with Voldemort in the Shreiking Shack. He mentions at least 3 times that he wants to leave and he seems to know that there is much danger for him there.
Julia H. - Feb 14, 2008 3:29 pm (#1682 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, your analysis did live up to the expectations. I felt the change in Snape in DH but never tried to analyze what the difference was. I just assumed that it was learning his secrets, getting to know him a little bit that made me feel he was different but you are completely right in the second half of DH (present-day scenes) he does not act/react as he normally does. The scenes of The Prince's Tale can be explained (if we want to) by saying that the situations are either from his early years or are more private than any other scenes where we have seen him so far - with DD he is much more open, much more his real self than at a time when Harry (or even someone else) is present - but The Elder Wand presents a Snape we simply do not know. He cannot handle a dangerous situation, while in the previous books it was usually in times of danger or crisis that he was at his best. Thanks for the insightful post.
"If he had genuinely believed that everyone had simply been Confunded, I just can't see Snape having an all out tantrum about having Dumbledore over-rule him, at least not publicly like that." (Zelmia)
Why not? If he thought he was right (and he had no obvious reason to think Sirius was innocent) and still he was over-ruled, I would expect him to be really angry.
"Compare his reaction in PA to his reaction in CS, when Dumbledore over-rule's Snape's suggestion that Harry and Ron be expelled for the "flying car" incident. Snape is clearly angry and delighted at the very idea of Harry getting some sort of comeuppance. But tantrum?"
A very good comparison but my conclusion is just the opposite. I don't think Snape really expected Harry to be expelled. Sirius had not been expelled after the Prank, the rule-breaking behaviour of James never resulted in serious punishments and Snape knew very well that this time Dumbledore had a special reason to want to keep Harry at Hogwarts and to protect him. So it may have been nothing more than a serious warning to Harry on the one hand and, on the other hand, a kind of demonstration to DD that Harry was "his father all over again" ("but I know you won't punish him whatever he does"). He is not really disappointed, so no tantrum.
"In the latter half of the saga he does seem to mature a bit, along with Harry."
I agree with that. Greater responsibility and constant danger, the knowledge that he cannot make a mistake and also the knowledge that he is doing something useful and important are among the reasons.
Ramb, interesting alternative analysis. So he knows he is going to die only he does not care about anything else but his duty. Well, this would fit the character we know.
"Snape is not clueless when he talks with Voldemort in the Shreiking Shack. He mentions at least 3 times that he wants to leave and he seems to know that there is much danger for him there." (Steve)
He is not clueless as for the danger but he does not seem to be prepared or to know a way out and that is unusual.
haymoni - Feb 14, 2008 7:28 pm (#1683 of 2617)
I didn't get that Snape felt danger for himself there in the Shack.
I figured Snape would redeem himself at the end, so on my first read, I thought he needed to get Harry so he could tell him whatever The Big Snape Secret was.
After reading "The Prince's Tale", we learn that he had promised Dumbledore that if Voldy kept Nagini close at hand, he would tell Harry about the Voldy soul-bit attached to him.
Finally Harry was at Hogwarts and Snape could get to him and do as he promised. He had to get out of the Shack & get to Harry so he could tell Harry what was expected of him - that he had to die.
I think he was very surprised when Voldy sent Nagini after him.
wynnleaf - Feb 14, 2008 8:26 pm (#1684 of 2617)
Even if you think that Snape realized he was in danger in the Shack, he is still depicted as stumbling for the words to say and pleading with LV to let him search for Harry prior to LV even implying that there's danger. So even if you think he knew he was in danger, he's still very uncertain what to say or how to say it -- not particularly Snapish, in my opinion.
And he's still quite clueless over DD or LV's secrets, which just doesn't seem like the extremely talented guy who's an expert in the Dark Arts and was certainly around adult-LV a whole lot more than DD was. Yet even Slughorn knows about horcruxes. Are we supposed to believe Snape never heard of horcruxes? Or he imagines LV never heard of them? Or he just never thinks that maybe LV made some? Why wouldn't he think of that? After all, he knew that LV had found a way not die when the AK backfired and didn't kill him.
We supposed to accept clueless Snape, even after we've been shown brilliant and extremely knowledgeable Snape. Yes, I feel like JKR backtracked, or tried to rein in Snape after letting the character really grow in the first 6 books.
Julia H. - Feb 15, 2008 1:17 am (#1685 of 2617)
It is horrible to imagine what the scene may have been at the end of GoF (and that Snape had knowingly and voluntarily undertaken it), yet there he had been prepared, knew what to say and had something to offer to LV, something that was tempting to LV. In DH he realizes that Nagini is being protected so the time must have come but simply pleading with LV to let him go and find Harry Potter while LV clearly has something different on his mind is not the best of strategies. Snape may not mind dying: of course, he has known it all along that things may easily come to that one day and he must have long ago come to terms with the possibility of being killed by LV but he still has a task to accomplish, a task he clearly wants to accomplish, so he knows he needs to survive at least a little longer. Letting himself be killed just like that is less than what could be expected of him. (I hate that snake, Slytherin's revenge or not.) Of course, we can say that Snape is also human and may be tired and sad (especially after the scene with his colleagues) and running out of strength (just like Harry when he thinks he is about to die) but it is still true that in the earlier books Snape was usually at his best during a crisis.
mona amon - Feb 15, 2008 1:54 am (#1686 of 2617)
But one thing I know many fans never expected was a nickname like "Sev." Prior to DH, I saw many, many comments, especially among people writing fan fics, where people were certain that no matter what, Snape would never want to be called something so brief, informal and mundane sounding as "Sev." (Wynnleaf)
I wonder why they jumped to such conclusions about him. It's a name that only Lily calls him, and I'm sure he loved it because of that. Anyway, this is the guy who called himself The Half Blood Prince, which I found rather corny. Of course he's a teenager at the time.
We've discussed this previously, but in The Prince's Tale, we find adult Snape consistently calling DD "Dumbledore." I suppose this may have been meant to convey an informality between them. But the problem is that Snape in the past had always called DD "Headmaster" so it just didn't seem like Snape's typical "voice" to suddenly be calling him something else.
It did seem very strange (calling McGonagal 'Minerva' too). I guess he calls them 'headmaster' and "Professor McGonnagal' when there are students around, and by their names when they are are alone. That's more or less what our teachers used to do. Still, she probably shouldn't have sprung that on us only in the final book.
First, in spite of LV obviously looking for loads of info about wands and experimenting with them and even robbing DD's tomb, Snape acts in The Elder Wand as though he has no clue why LV would be concerned about his wand.
Snape wouldn't have known at all that LV robbed DD's tomb.
DH Chapter 6. This is a Voldy's eye view of it, which Harry experiences- 'the sun was barely visible over the horizon as he glided alongside Snape, up through the grounds toward the lake.
'I shall join you in the castle shortly,'he said in his high, cold voice. 'Leave me now.'
Snape bowed and set off back up the path, his black cloak billowing behid him. Harry walked slowly, waiting for Snape's figure to disappear. It would not do for Snape, or indeed anyone else, to see where he was going. But there were no lights in the castle windows, and he could conceal himself...and in a second he had cast upon himself a disillusionment charm that hid him even from his own eyes.'
No way that Snape could have seen what he was upto. Actually there's absolutely no way of telling, based on the information given in the text, whether he knew about the wand and was acting clueless, or whether he really was clueless.
And then there's the "clueless Snape" of DH, who not only didn't seem to pick up on the idea that LV was searching for the Elder Wand, he didn't figure out that LV was creating horcruxes either.
He may have suspected about the Horcruxes, but may also have suspected that Dumbledore knew about them and was not letting him in on the secret. And whatever he may feel about it, he's always shown to be consistently obedient to Dumbledore.
but The Elder Wand presents a Snape we simply do not know. He cannot handle a dangerous situation, while in the previous books it was usually in times of danger or crisis that he was at his best. (Julia)
But what could he have done? The mighty, invincible, unkillable Voldemort has decided to take his life, and he knows that he is no match for him. Same Snape. Totally different situation.
Now I was so busy nit-picking everyone's posts that I've forgotten what point I was trying to make!
EDIT: cross posted with Zelmia and Julia.
Orion - Feb 15, 2008 6:35 am (#1687 of 2617)
About names: "Minerva" seems to recall Charity Burbage's "Severus! Help me!" of the Chapter "The Dark Lord Ascending". Rowling might let Snape use the first name to make his pleading more intense.
Names are generally very important for Rowling: You can summon your house-elf if you say their name, there is a taboo on You-know-who's name, and Ron hears Hermione saying his name out of the Deluminator.
There is something else weird in the Shrieking Shack chapter: Why does Snape get LV's permission to go looking for Harry? If he really grasped that he was going to die, it made no sense because LV didn't have more of a clue where Harry was than Snape had. And it made no sense to calmly let oneself gotten bitten because a dead man is of no use whatsoever and Snape didn't have a clue that Harry was only a few meters away. The only sensible option would have been Disapparating very fast and looking for Harry.
The main reason why I don't think Harry is such a big hero after all: He didn't raise a finger to save Snape. Not one finger. Of course, he hates him, but someone as ultra-noble as Harry should have made the effort nonetheless. He can do it for Draco, too.
wynnleaf - Feb 15, 2008 7:16 am (#1688 of 2617)
Look, I know we can up with reasonable explanations for why always formal Snape is happy with "Sev" as a kid, why he calls DD "Dumbledore" rather than the ever-present "Headmaster" or "Professor" of the past, why he didn't make a push to figure out about the horcruxes, why he didn't know a thing about the Elder Wand or even guess, why he fumbles for what to say or do in the Shrieking Shack, etc.
Sure, we can explain it all away. But the problem isn't that we can't explain it, but that it's all different from the Snape we had presented to us in the past and therefore it has to be "explained."
Those are all small changes. Yet when an author writes a character in 6 books one way, and then makes numerous small differences in the character in the final book, it does tend to make many people feel as though the character isn't quite "right," or has been somehow changed for some inexplicable reason. I don't think JKR did that intentionally, but it definitely did have that effect on many readers.
So when I ask myself why JKR wrote Snape with all those slight changes, I don't think it was intentional, but I do think there was a feeling of wanting to rein in the character. And that, while possibly not a conscious desire of JKR's, was almost certainly an at least an unconscious wish. After all, she has never seemed comfortable with the degree of interest her readers have in Snape. And she clearly wasn't pleased with the initial response to the book that Snape had been a hero. It seemed to me that the first question about Snape's heroism not only startled, but also displeased JKR and it took some time and thought for her to accept that readers did see Snape that way and that she would need to address it accepting that.
Julia H. - Feb 15, 2008 8:32 am (#1689 of 2617)
"The only sensible option would have been Disapparating very fast and looking for Harry." (Orion)
Yes, that would have been an option but Snape never thinks about it. In my opinion Wynnleaf is right: we can explain these things (and it is fun doing so) but the real reason is that JKR is showing us a different character here - for whatever reason. She certainly needed to kill him off somehow and she did not want to give him a heroic death, so she presented this seemingly clueless character who could not think or did not care to think of any sensible escape plan. The problem is it is difficult to believe at this point.
"And she clearly wasn't pleased with the initial response to the book that Snape had been a hero. It seemed to me that the first question about Snape's heroism not only startled, but also displeased JKR and it took some time and thought for her to accept that readers did see Snape that way and that she would need to address it accepting that." (Wynnleaf)
I absolutely agree. That was my impression too. I was startled by her being startled.
"The main reason why I don't think Harry is such a big hero after all: He didn't raise a finger to save Snape. Not one finger. Of course, he hates him, but someone as ultra-noble as Harry should have made the effort nonetheless. He can do it for Draco, too." (Orion)
Yes, it would have been a noble thing to do, though all Harry may reasonably have thought at the moment was that DE's were killing each other in front of him, which he did not need to mind. (He does go out of his way, though, to save stupid Draco several times - I wonder why.)
Swedish Short-Snout - Feb 15, 2008 9:59 am (#1690 of 2617)
"The only sensible option would have been Disapparating very fast and looking for Harry." (Orion)
Voldemort might have put an Anti-Disapparition jinx on the Shack.
Steve Newton - Feb 15, 2008 10:31 am (#1691 of 2617)
If he had disapparated his cover would have been blown. To his credit he was sticking with the plan and, in my opinion, trying to talk his way out of a tough situation.
Soul Search - Feb 15, 2008 11:09 am (#1692 of 2617)
I have to agree with wynnleaf, and others, that the Snape we saw in the Shrieking Shack in Deathly Hallows was not the Snape we have come to know. The Snape of SS/PS countered Quirrell's broom curse and stepped in to referee the Quidditch match. The Snape of PoA was confident in the Shrieking Shack, even though his assumptions were wrong and intentions not exactly honorable. The only example of Snape being even a little unsure of himself that I can recall is when he confronted Dumbledore on the windy hilltop in "The Prince's Tale," and that was a much younger Snape than we ever came to know in SS through HBP.
I was struck by a comparison of Lucius Malfoy's manner and Snape's manner confronting Voldemort in the Shrieking Shack. Each had similar motives, get away from Voldemort and find Draco/Harry, and each became flustered (or something.) Malfoy had, at one time, also been very confident and sure of himself, although we did see his migration to something approaching a quivering idiot.
Were we, perhaps, supposed to recognize Voldemort's commanding effect on both these sure, confident characters? Was that why Malfoy came first; so we would compare him in Voldmeort's presense to Snape in a similar situation?
mona amon - Feb 15, 2008 12:47 pm (#1693 of 2617)
Were we, perhaps, supposed to recognize Voldemort's commanding effect on both these sure, confident characters? Was that why Malfoy came first; so we would compare him in Voldmeort's presense to Snape in a similar situation?
Good questions, Soul Search.
Sure, we can explain it all away. But the problem isn't that we can't explain it, but that it's all different from the Snape we had presented to us in the past and therefore it has to be "explained." (Wynnleaf)
Wynnleaf, I went through all the scenes where Snape is mentioned in DH (too few!), and I feel he is only different because of being in situations that are different from what we have encountered before. I actually couldn't find a single place where he is 'out of character'. The 'explaining' was to show that this wasn't a different Snape, but the same Snape reacting to a different situation.
Those are all small changes. Yet when an author writes a character in 6 books one way,..
He's not really written 'one way' in the previous books, unlike characters like Minerva and Hagrid. He's never called anyone 'idiot boy' before POA, he's never shown as gentle and caring (after a fashion) before Spinner's End. The raging, demented, spit flying out of his mouth Snape at the end of POA is quite different from the controlled, sardonic Snape of the previous two books. And who would have suspected, before book 6, that he used to call himself the Half Blood Prince?
We are shown a different aspect of him in each of these books, and yet another in DH, a more tragic and vulnerable side than what we have yet seen.
So when I ask myself why JKR wrote Snape with all those slight changes, I don't think it was intentional, but I do think there was a feeling of wanting to rein in the character. And that, while possibly not a conscious desire of JKR's, was almost certainly an at least an unconscious wish.
But he's not reined in at all. In the Sacking of Severus Snape chapter, he seems to be at a loss as to how to get Minerva to understand him, but then Dumbledore has left him in a pickle, with no living soul to believe a word that he says. But he does quite ok in the fight with Minerva, duelling champ Flitwick, Sprout and Slughorn, and makes quite a spectacular exit.
I think he does ok in the Shreiking Shack as well. He cannot fight Voldemort, and who has that power, apart from Dumbledore and Harry? But while he does not succeed in saving his life, he does manage, with a superhuman effort of will, to pass on his memories to Harry.
And she clearly wasn't pleased with the initial response to the book that Snape had been a hero.
I agree, but I think she just wasn't pleased that Snape seemed to be stealing Harry's thunder, nothing more.
EDIT: cross posted with Zelmia.
and even when we had similar ones, the cavalry always seem to arrive in the nick of time.
Nice one, Zelmia. I wanted to say something like that but didn't know how!
wynnleaf - Feb 15, 2008 1:21 pm (#1694 of 2617)
To you, perhaps. Not everyone sees Snape this way. (zelmia)
And nowhere do I say or even imply that everyone sees it this way. My point, which I repeated, is that many people do see the Snape of DH as different from the Snape they felt had been previously portrayed. Because it seems to me that the number of people I've known to comment on it are substantial, in relation to the overall commenting on DH, I think that means that there is something a bit different about Snape in DH, whether or not many people find it "out of character" or not.
For instance, you, zelmia, said initially, in response to my first long post on the differences of Snape in DH, "Excellent analysis, Wynnleaf! I completely agree with your fantastic points. I have to disagree (again) on one point though.." and proceeded to discuss your disagreement about Snape's actions in POA. But now you say that "I certainly don't see any inconsistencies." I don't see how these comments align. They seem contradictory to me. Even if you've now changed your mind and believe that there are no inconsistencies in the way the character was written in earlier books versus DH, you at least must have felt some sense of Snape being different in DH, else why in the world did you first answer me as you did?
In any case, even without zelmia's agreement, it does seem that there are 4 or 5 of the regular posters on this current discussion that felt Snape was different in DH from the other books. That, to me, is a substantial number. If a similar portion of general readers of the book felt the same way, then that's certainly enough to assume that there's something at least inadvertently different about the way JKR wrote Snape in the last book.
PeskyPixie - Feb 15, 2008 1:46 pm (#1695 of 2617)
Add my mom, my best friend and myself to the list of those who notice a difference in the portrayal of Snape in DH. While it's always interesting to read the fascinating explanations provided by different people, and they are very solid explanations, this DH-Snape just seems a bit different than Snape in other books. Note, while Snape doesn't make use of the term, 'idiot boy' prior to PoA, it's not out of character for him to use it. While he is tender towards Narcissa in HBP, we watch his transformation from trying to remain unfeeling to curtly offering his help. It's not too startling, though a surprising presentation of the softness he is capable of.
" ... I think [JKR] just wasn't pleased that Snape seemed to be stealing Harry's thunder, nothing more." -mona amon
I agree, but does this indicate that she does not understand why so many adult fans have taken to Snape (as a character)?
I feel that Snape's use of 'Minerva' in DH has a condescending undertone to it. Maybe it's part of his DE act throughout the school year? I don't have problems with teachers calling each other by their first names in private, but calling a former teacher by her first name just doesn't seem like a Snapish thing to do.
Does anyone else get the feeling that Snape is aware that Harry is standing in the hall in his Invisibility Cloak?
Soul Search - Feb 15, 2008 2:36 pm (#1696 of 2617)
"Does anyone else get the feeling that Snape is aware that Harry is standing in the hall in his Invisibility Cloak?"
If you mean the Shrieking Shack tunnel, that is a very interesting question, PeskyPixie.
Snape's manner would take on a whole different meaning if he knew Harry was nearby. His first priorty would be to protect Harry. Then figure out how he could pass on Dumbledore's message.
I know we have noted some prior hints that Snape could tell Harry was nearby, I just can't come up with details now.
Snape was rather quick with the memories he passed to Harry, like he was preparing them for him. Maybe that was why he couldn't handle Voldemort; his mind was focused on the memories.
Interesting idea.
Julia H. - Feb 15, 2008 4:28 pm (#1697 of 2617)
"I was struck by a comparison of Lucius Malfoy's manner and Snape's manner confronting Voldemort in the Shrieking Shack." (Soul Search)
Interesting comparison. Are we to understand that both are trying to convince Voldemort of something that is important to them because both are looking for a ... hm ... son they need to save (though in different senses)? Both seem to fail at the moment but in the end both sons are saved (although Lucius cannot get the credit for saving Draco). Yes, it seems the Dark Lord may only be addressed in a certain manner and of course all DE's (genuine and fake) know that. However, the similarities between Snape and Malfoy should not go too far. (Regular differences may also be interesting.) The Malfoys save their own necks, while Snape's neck is bitten by the snake. If there is any honour in that, it is NOT sharing the same fate as Lucius. (Lucius: the name may be a reference to Lucifer, which is connected to the diabolical nature of this man. However, Lucifer is also a "fallen angel". I thought this meant that Lucius had had the opportunity to make a different kind of career but he "fell" morally and became a DE. Now as I come to think of it: he seems to be falling even among DE's, doesn't he?) So Snape's death is much more honourable than Lucius's survival. Even though he cannot do anything against his fate, it still goes to his credit that in the last moments of his life, he manages to accomplish his last task: even during his agony he is able to grasp the opportunity and succeeds in giving Harry the information he needs. Earlier we saw that wizards used their wands to extract their memories, now Snape is doing it without using his wand - probably using will-power and concentration instead.
"Does anyone else get the feeling that Snape is aware that Harry is standing in the hall in his Invisibility Cloak?" (PeskyPixie)
I never got this feeling but if you or anyone else did, I would like to read about it more. It sounds like an exciting idea! (I'll have to think about it...)
("... calling a former teacher by her first name just doesn't seem like a Snapish thing to do": then I'm not Snapish because I do just that if we are colleagues now - it is not easy but it would be strange otherwise.)
wynnleaf - Feb 15, 2008 5:19 pm (#1698 of 2617)
I didn't get the memo that our discussions were adhering to "majority rules". I thought we were simply sharing our opinions. (zelmia)
Good grief. What's the point? Well, I'll try again.
Of course I don't mean "majority rules" and I imagine you know already know that. I mean that if a large portion of people feel that the character seemed quite different, then they probably weren't just deeply deluded. It probably has something to do with the fact that some of the things the character was written as doing or saying are a little different.
Now I don't think anybody is disagreeing that Snape does things differently in DH. No one is trying to say, "He was always called "Sev!" Didn't you notice?" or "He called DD "Dumbledore" lots of times in the past." No, we're in agreement that some things are different. The question is whether it adds up to a "feel" of a different character. For some people, it doesn't. But if a somewhat substantial portion of people think the character felt different, they probably feel that way because of the different things JKR wrote the character as doing, saying, etc. Anyway, that's what the people that are on this thread are saying when they say that they felt Snape seemed different.
Since I never said that it has to be one way or the other, I really have no clue where you picked up on this "majority rules" idea. Besides, any quick count would easily mean that the "no difference" folks would "win," so I see no reason for you to be offended. It would clearly be pointless for me to have attempted to try a "majority rules" argument, since I can, after all, count.
PeskyPixie - Feb 15, 2008 6:04 pm (#1699 of 2617)
"Does anyone else get the feeling that Snape is aware that Harry is standing in the hall in his Invisibility Cloak?" -PeskyPixie
I was actually referring to the halls of Hogwarts during Snape's brief conversation with McGonagall.
My aunt is now the principal of her school and a few of her staff members were once her students while she was a teacher. They don't call her by her first name as that would feel weird to them, so I stick by my original opinion that there really is no right or wrong to these things. I just had the impression that Snape calls McG 'Minerva' in DH to illustrate his authority.
mona amon - Feb 15, 2008 9:15 pm (#1700 of 2617)
Note, while Snape doesn't make use of the term, 'idiot boy' prior to PoA, it's not out of character for him to use it. While he is tender towards Narcissa in HBP, we watch his transformation from trying to remain unfeeling to curtly offering his help. It's not too startling, though a surprising presentation of the softness he is capable of. (Pesky)
Exactly. That's what I was trying to point out. Although he does different things or reacts a bit differently in different books, he is not 'out of character'. So what exactly gives you the feeling that he is out of character in DH when he does or says different things?
BTW, I made a bloomer- Snape calls Neville 'idiot boy' right back in their very first potions lesson in PS. How come no one noticed? But I think my other examples are ok.
The question is whether it adds up to a "feel" of a different character. For some people, it doesn't. But if a somewhat substantial portion of people think the character felt different, they probably feel that way because of the different things JKR wrote the character as doing, saying, etc. Anyway, that's what the people that are on this thread are saying when they say that they felt Snape seemed different. (Wynnleaf)
Wynnleaf, I'm only interested in why they feel he is 'not in character', as opposed to 'same character in a completely new set of circumstances'. I mean, he was definitely very different in this book, since we are shown facets of him that have never been revealed before. So what is it that makes some of us accept this new version and say 'oh, this is what he's really like' while others say 'but this is not the Snape that I know'.
Hmm...not sure I explained that properly.
"Does anyone else get the feeling that Snape is aware that Harry is standing in the hall in his Invisibility Cloak?" (Pesky)
I certainly did. He was aware that Voldemort expected Harry to arrive in Hogwarts, and just as Amycus feels that "She's [Alecto] gorn and sent for him, I felt me mark burn, and he thinks we got Potter", Snape also feels his mark burn and comes to the same conclusion. Also, he is described more than once as looking into the air around Minerva, as if he knew Harry was there.
The only sensible option would have been Disapparating very fast and looking for Harry. (Orion)
It would depend on whether he can disapparate faster than Voldemort can zap him, and I suppose he can't, and knows it. When Harry, Griphook and Dobby disapparate from Malfoy Manor, Bella is fast enough to get her knife through Dobby's chest. Harry and Hermione escape from Voldemort by disapparating, but they do so a second before he actually gets to them.
PeskyPixie - Feb 15, 2008 9:34 pm (#1701 of 2617)
BTW, I made a bloomer- Snape calls Neville 'idiot boy' right back in their very first potions lesson in PS. How come no one noticed? -mona amon
LOL, should have saved it for the Trivia thread!
Julia H. - Feb 16, 2008 12:03 pm (#1702 of 2617)
"I stick by my original opinion that there really is no right or wrong to these things." (PeskyPixie)
Of course, you are right and I'm sure you know what sounds polite or impolite in English better than I do. These things depend on cultural and linguistic differences as well.
"I was actually referring to the halls of Hogwarts during Snape's brief conversation with McGonagall." (Pixie)
Of course! I misunderstood you, I guess we were concentrating too hard on the Shrieking Shack but that is clearly not a hall. All right, there Snape knew Harry was somewhere nearby. In fact he had often sensed Harry's invisible presence before (tuned to Harry Potter?) but this time he got information via his mark as well. What I keep wondering is how he expected to find Harry by asking Minerva about his whereabouts. (I admit he was extremely good at duelling though.)
More about names: he was called 'Severus' by his colleagues and Slughorn referred to him as 'Severus' when he had already flown away. The latter especially struck me as surprising, precisely because that's how he had called him earlier and I would have thought after being so much disappointed in him, he would have changed this to something less familiar sounding. Or was it because at the moment he believed him dead? But I may be mistaken about the tone.
tandaradei - Feb 16, 2008 1:52 pm (#1703 of 2617)
This thread just moves too fast for me! Well, it seems the main current in this thread recently has to do with how the Snape persona appears to change throughout the series. I’m not at the level to analyze that too well yet; but here below are memories of my personal reactions to Snape throughout the series. Maybe that helps?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In the first two books I saw Snape as both a wicked and a minor character – basically, one of the negative teachers (maybe the “Dursley” substitute for the school story). By the end of Azkaban, I was a bit surprised by his apparent encroachment into a becoming an apparent major character, though certainly he seemed to me just as wicked. By the end of GOF I'd begun to think Snape as even a bit more major; and became somewhat conflicted as to his status, double-agent wise. About this time, in the various forums I’d attended, I’d come upon certain “Snape-o-philes,” whom I regarded for the time being as (erm) misinformed, and almost like many shippers in regards to accuracy. By the fifth installment (OoP) I actually thought of Snape as reverting back to, once again, a nasty minor character. [Side point here: I’d been getting the impression that the movie directors were following my vision as Snape being minor, too.] In HBP I was actually a bit put-off by the intensity of the first two vignette chapters, esp. emphasizing the Muggle Minister, and then Snape in Spinner's End; I thought I’d learned way too much about minor characters before getting back to Harry story.
Can you can guess how evil I thought Snape was by the end of HBP? But I now thought of him as a Voldy henchman, first class; and thus I also thought him now as a major character, maybe even rivaling Voldemort, since he’d received much more play-time throughout in comparison.
OK, THEN I got to DH and The Prince's Tale!!! I was floored; I was so stunned it momentarily derailed me from the actual flow of Harry’s predicaments. All the Snape-assumptions I'd built over the series – including Snape as a minor character – turned to ashes. And yet other things seemed to fall into place, especially when I considered how Snape in one memory chastised Dumbledore for planning Harry's death! It seemed that a bigger picture of both Snape and Dumbledore was possible, and different than I'd formulated; but IMO better because a fair amount of character motivations for both, and baggage, now appeared more natural in the plot sense.
In the Epilogue I admired Harry for his respectful mentions of Snape after that, and also wished JKR had had Harry insist that a portrait of Snape be installed at Hogwarts in the actual canon.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Well, I’ve reread the entire series since and have found a very different Snape; but more than that, I’ve found a changing Point of View (POV) – maybe necessary for that 7-year age span in the series. I’m now of the mind that JKR intentionally put HRH’s opinions and observations throughout as being as changeable as that year for their ages … sometimes focusing on things like alcohol awareness, as in OoP and later; but in earlier times more on “two-dimensional” conclusions in a “Hardy Boys” style, maybe more simplistic than should be assumed by us the audience.
The Snape et al that they viewed would indeed be different, depending on their age.
Julia H. - Feb 17, 2008 4:45 am (#1704 of 2617)
"OK, THEN I got to DH and The Prince's Tale!!! I was floored; I was so stunned it momentarily derailed me from the actual flow of Harry’s predicaments." (tandaradei)
I think you did exactly what the author wanted you to do. :-)
mona amon - Feb 17, 2008 8:26 am (#1705 of 2617)
I enjoyed your post, Tandaradei. I love hearing about peoples' differing reactions to Snape in each book.
By the fifth installment (OoP) I actually thought of Snape as reverting back to, once again, a nasty minor character.
Just the opposite for me! OOTP was the book that had me thinking 'Wow! This is one really complex and interesting character!" Though I did not become a 'Snape-o-phile', (or HP-phile for that matter), until HBP.
Julia H. - Feb 17, 2008 9:47 am (#1706 of 2617)
"Though I did not become a 'Snape-o-phile', (or HP-phile for that matter), until HBP." (Mona)
So you did not react to HBP-Snape as you were expected to... We were meant to think at the end of HBP that Snape was really evil - but it is interesting that it was during HBP that my mental picture of Snape started to resemble a former teacher of mine who I really, really liked. I still hardly know why. (It is all the more ironic since JKR based the character on a teacher she hated.)
wynnleaf - Feb 17, 2008 10:17 am (#1707 of 2617)
I find it fascinating the number of people I've met whose outlook on Snape was transformed, not for the worse, but far for the better after reading HBP. I think that the readers who were pretty convinced that he was still loyal to Dumbledore, suddenly saw his actions as dramatically brave and self-sacrificing even beyond the hints of his spying in earlier books, which is, I think, what made many of us suddenly far more supportive of the character, especially in the face of so many other readers assuming he was the Evil Traitor.
tandaradei - Feb 17, 2008 11:29 am (#1708 of 2617)
mona amon wrote:
...[cut]...Just the opposite for me! OOTP was the book that had me thinking 'Wow! This is one really complex and interesting character!" Though I did not become a 'Snape-o-phile', (or HP-phile for that matter), until HBP....[cut]...
hmmm....
Snape was more out in the open in OoP true; but by then I'd been watching the HP movies and really thought the directors were minimizing Snape. I thought two things then: (1) Why? Both the actor and character seemed to me just too potent to be minimized; and (2) the directors had some inside information from JKR. I wrongly assumed Snape was sort of being fazed out...
hehein the book;
Orion - Feb 17, 2008 1:30 pm (#1709 of 2617)
Teenage audience target group.
PeskyPixie - Feb 17, 2008 7:47 pm (#1710 of 2617)
LOL, of course! Lots of Won-Won and Lav-Lav!
"Of course, you are right and I'm sure you know what sounds polite or impolite in English better than I do. These things depend on cultural and linguistic differences as well. -Julia H.
I'm no authority as I'm not British and don't know what is normal for Snape's cultural/social background. My family is pretty traditional when it comes to 'respecting your elders', so it's always a bit weird when I hear kids calling adults, or adults calling older adults they knew as children, by their first names. But that's just me, speaking from my upbringing.
"More about names: he was called 'Severus' by his colleagues and Slughorn referred to him as 'Severus' when he had already flown away." -Julia H
What could he call him? Surely not Sev? Perhaps a scornful, "professor"?
I became a Snapeophile from his very first Potions class. I just had this feeling that there was so much complexity to this character and relevance to Harry's story that I was hooked!
mona amon - Feb 18, 2008 4:42 am (#1711 of 2617)
So you did not react to HBP-Snape as you were expected to... We were meant to think at the end of HBP that Snape was really evil - but it is interesting that it was during HBP that my mental picture of Snape started to resemble a former teacher of mine who I really, really liked. I still hardly know why. (Julia)
I never, never expected DD to die at the end of HBP (I never used to look up HP on the net till after I read this book, and hadn't heard any of the theories.)So I did get a shock when Snape makes his dramatic appearance on the tower, and, instead of saving the day as I expected him to, points his wand at DD and says 'Avada Kedavra'. But I never for a moment suspected him of being evil.
Actually my mistake was that I thought him much less evil than he actually turned out to be in DH!
Julia H. - Feb 18, 2008 5:58 am (#1712 of 2617)
"Actually my mistake was that I thought him much less evil than he actually turned out to be in DH!" (Mona)
Evil??? I don't understand what you mean.
mona amon - Feb 18, 2008 8:45 am (#1713 of 2617)
Julia, I meant during the time he was a DE, before he came back to the right side. There are degrees of evil, and Snape was revealed to be a lot more evil than I expected.
I imagined that he returned to Dumbledore because Voldemort was targetting the Potters, all of them, and not just Lily. That would have been rather noble. Wanting to save only Lily was just selfish. And not caring whether Voldemort killed James and baby Harry shows how callous he had become.
So in some ways I must have been almost as surprised by Snape in DH as the people who believed him to be loyal to Voldemort.
Soul Search - Feb 18, 2008 2:40 pm (#1714 of 2617)
(Snape) ... a truly appalling individual who, only by mere chance, happened to have been fortunate enough to have loved and been loved by someone ..."
zelmia, good description. I agree. And, I think this was JKR's intent for Snape. We read way too much into his character.
mona amon - Feb 19, 2008 12:26 am (#1715 of 2617)
In DH I found Snape to have been revealed as a truly appalling individual who, only by mere chance, happened to have been fortunate enough to have loved and been loved by someone compassionate and understanding enough to have been able to overlook his obvious shortcomings. (Zelmia)
Oh, I didn't mean that I found him appaling in DH. That's not likely to happen to an ardent Snape fan! I was just a bit surprised, as he turned out a little more evil than I expected during his DE days. But I realise now that my 'basically noble' version wouldn't really have worked. She had to make him dark, so that what was light in him could shine more brightly.
I agree with you that he was fortunate to have loved and been loved, but why is it mere chance, and not because of his innate capacity to feel that sort of love?
I now think of him as someone who started off as basically good, but with a morbid fascination for the dark arts (not necessarily a bad thing), which, together with being sorted into Slytherin and various other factors, results in his going down the path to Death Eaterdom. Once there he becomes further corrupted, until he gets the wake up call. And then he certainly proves himself worthy of redemption.
And, I think this was JKR's intent for Snape. We read way too much into his character. (Soul Search),
I don't think so at all. She never shows him as either torturer or murderer, or doing any other appaling acts. In interviews, she speaks of him as a tragic hero, flawed, but immensely brave and saved by his capacity to love.
In the books, he's the 'redemptive character' (hope I'm using the right word), the one who goes astray, but returns and works to atone for what he has done.
PeskyPixie - Feb 19, 2008 12:44 am (#1716 of 2617)
I agree with mona ... too tired to add anything else!
Julia H. - Feb 19, 2008 3:13 am (#1717 of 2617)
"Julia, I meant during the time he was a DE, before he came back to the right side." (Mona)
I see what you mean. I thought you were referring to the DH year and that is why I was surprised. Actually, it seems to me that I was exceptionally generous in my view of Snape's motivations when I was reading DH and I was not discussing it with anyone. I thought the main reason why he did not think about the danger of James and Harry was that his mind was too full of anxiety about Lily, the person he loved, to think about anything else. I think it was the fact that he was so emotionally cracked, even "looked a little mad", that he was so unlike the Snape I had seen before (and perhaps the fact that he certainly did not care about himself) that made me feel so. (To give a real life example as explanation: Once my mother had a serious reason to think that my husband and I may have been involved in a major train accident. She knew lots of people had died or got injured, still for a full hour, until I managed to call her and tell her that we were safe, she was trembling for TWO lives. Then she cried for relief and AFTER THAT she cried for all the mothers who could not get a similar telephone call that night. And she was a very good-hearted, caring person.) But I understand that from a strictly moral point of view Snape's motivations can be subject to ... discussion. In addition, though, I think he went to DD because for some reason he did not find it sufficient to have LV's promise to spare Lily. Why not? It would have been easy for him to be satisfied with that but he was not, he tried the hard way too, by turning to DD. Ironically, his request to LV turned out to be the most useful thing he could do for the Potters: that made it possible for Lily to save Harry.
In any case, I think that Snape was able to love, even though just one person, shows that the capacitiy for good was there in him all the time. You may call it luck that he met Lily, but does that mean that Lucius Malfoy (or Pettigrew) became a DE because he did not play in the same playground as Lily? As for me, I don't think it would have made the same difference to him. You may call it luck that DD was understanding and forgiving but that was about the only stroke of luck in his life. (I wonder if he took luck potion that day...) All the other good characters were much luckier because they were loved, appreciated, trusted by more people and generally in a better way than Snape was. Even some of the bad characters were luckier than him: Lucius Malfoy had a family and it seems they loved each other within the family, Pettigrew had friends who accepted him with his obvious faults and trusted him , even Tom Riddle, though he did not experience parental love, was generally appreciated, trusted and admired in school. Compared to them, Snape, who in his childhood "so conscpicuously lacked" "that indefinable air of having been well-cared for, even adored", got his stroke of luck relatively late in his life. Where was sympathetic DD or the Head of Slytherin House when Snape was a Hogwarts-student? Why was it so difficult for teachers to notice that there was a soul in Slytherin worth saving when Snape was not invisible at all: he was talented above average, was rather lonely, tended to be bullied and/or tended to get into fights with others, had a social background that set him apart from the rest of his house, and so on? Luck? I think being sorted into Slytherin may have meant that teachers gave you up as hopeless.
But back to DD's understanding and forgiveness. Snape certainly did not receive these "gifts" for free. Although DD may not have known what treasure he found when he decided to give a helping hand to a desperate and remorseful young man on the hilltop, Snape's promise of "anything" was - if kept - a great promise and Snape certainly kept his promise and DD made use of it as much as it was possible at all, for the rest of their lives.
Snape loved Lily and yes, that started his transformation but his ability to love and to change for the better must have been essential. He was also an inherently loyal person: loyal to Lily, loyal to DD, loyal to his own word of promise. Everybody in the books who shows any kind of transformation starts out loving one or two persons. DD did not become this great philanthropist before he realized how important his family was to him. (Then there is Regulus, Kreacher, Narcissa...) Even Harry: first he hated Voldemort because Voldemort had killed his parents. I know he was very young when he felt that but he is one of the persons with the highest sense of morality in the books and his rising to the high general level of love we see in DH is more believable because of the initial personal motivation. Snape's story shows how far love, unselfish, generous, faithful love for just one person can go. Later, Snape came to love DD, in fact, much more than DD cared for him and he learned to care for a number of other people - even if he did not feel the same ardent love for others (how could he have?) as he felt for Lily. He cared enough to do what he could to save others (whether he actually loved them or not) and to make a great, great self-sacrifice for others without personally hoping anything in return. All this cannot happen just "by accident". He needed someone to really see the good in him but all the rest was simply the good in him.
PeskyPixie - Feb 19, 2008 9:29 am (#1718 of 2617)
"...he would have gladly seen the infant Harry murdered if it would have meant Lily could be spared. That part of him never changed." -zelmia
I don't agree with the 'never changed' part; it just doesn't ring true with the horrified 'raised like a pig for slaughter' line. I know he claims that he doesn't want Harry dead due to his promise, but 'pig for slaughter' reveals more emotion than that. Besides, Snape grows to a point where he takes pride in the fact that he doesn't sit around and watch torture and murder if he is capable of saving that person without giving away his more important role of spy.
While I wholeheartedly agree that Snape is disgusting on the hilltop and still has a ways to go (for personal peace, as I feel his actions do redeem him of his past mistakes; note, this is only my opinion and I'm not forcing it on others) at the time of his death, I wouldn't say that his disregard for the death of an enemy's baby 'never changed' ... he was willing to risk his cover to save Lupin, so I hardly believe that the Snape we know in the timeframe of the series (especially in HBP and DH) would tolerate baby Harry being tossed to Nagini, regardless of his promise to Lily.
Steve Newton - Feb 19, 2008 9:57 am (#1719 of 2617)
I occurs to me that in the examples that we have been shown of conflict between the marauders and Snape that the wild card has been Sirius not James. In the worst memory it is Sirius that starts the confrontation and in the Lupin episode it is Sirius that seems to have set Snape up. Sirius is also with James on the train to Hogwarts but I am not yet up to this in the read a long so I can't say that I remember what happened. (I've only read it once.)
Years ago I took a group work class and it seems that Sirius is what you would call a covert leader. Despite his willingness to sacrifice for Harry he does not appear to have been wrapped too tight.
Julia H. - Feb 19, 2008 9:59 am (#1720 of 2617)
"I don't agree with the 'never changed' part..." (Pesky)
Nor do I. He obviously changed: that is the point about the character.
After writing about how loyal a person Snape was, I started to think it over how bitter it must have been for him to have his loyalties questioned and doubted all the time when (I think) being loyal by nature was really one of his most important and deepest characteristics. This tendency to be loyal, actually, may have been part of his teenage conflict with Lily: he loved her and wanted to be loyal to her but he also felt that he had to be loyal to his house and housemates (especially when they were being criticized from "outside"). Conflicting loyalties, loyalties misplaced. Quite probable.
"... he still had a bit further to go" (Zelmia)
Hm... I think he could have become as great a wizard as DD was if he had lived, so in this sense, yes, he could have gone on. (What would we think of DD if he had died at the age of 38?) As for Snape's transformation for the better: I really don't see what more he could have done to prove that he had changed. I know he was not kind and friendly and he never said "I love Harry Potter" but what he did (for Harry and for others) is much more important than that. He never SAID "I'm sorry" either (except to Lily but even that was in vain) but he DID very much to demonstrate how sorry he was. He was not a man of words very much at least when it came to really personal things but I don't see why the years of atonement, remorse, commitment and sacrifice cannot be as good as any kind of a gesture, behaviour pattern or word.
Snape is not clueless when he talks with Voldemort in the Shreiking Shack. He mentions at least 3 times that he wants to leave and he seems to know that there is much danger for him there.
Julia H. - Feb 14, 2008 3:29 pm (#1682 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, your analysis did live up to the expectations. I felt the change in Snape in DH but never tried to analyze what the difference was. I just assumed that it was learning his secrets, getting to know him a little bit that made me feel he was different but you are completely right in the second half of DH (present-day scenes) he does not act/react as he normally does. The scenes of The Prince's Tale can be explained (if we want to) by saying that the situations are either from his early years or are more private than any other scenes where we have seen him so far - with DD he is much more open, much more his real self than at a time when Harry (or even someone else) is present - but The Elder Wand presents a Snape we simply do not know. He cannot handle a dangerous situation, while in the previous books it was usually in times of danger or crisis that he was at his best. Thanks for the insightful post.
"If he had genuinely believed that everyone had simply been Confunded, I just can't see Snape having an all out tantrum about having Dumbledore over-rule him, at least not publicly like that." (Zelmia)
Why not? If he thought he was right (and he had no obvious reason to think Sirius was innocent) and still he was over-ruled, I would expect him to be really angry.
"Compare his reaction in PA to his reaction in CS, when Dumbledore over-rule's Snape's suggestion that Harry and Ron be expelled for the "flying car" incident. Snape is clearly angry and delighted at the very idea of Harry getting some sort of comeuppance. But tantrum?"
A very good comparison but my conclusion is just the opposite. I don't think Snape really expected Harry to be expelled. Sirius had not been expelled after the Prank, the rule-breaking behaviour of James never resulted in serious punishments and Snape knew very well that this time Dumbledore had a special reason to want to keep Harry at Hogwarts and to protect him. So it may have been nothing more than a serious warning to Harry on the one hand and, on the other hand, a kind of demonstration to DD that Harry was "his father all over again" ("but I know you won't punish him whatever he does"). He is not really disappointed, so no tantrum.
"In the latter half of the saga he does seem to mature a bit, along with Harry."
I agree with that. Greater responsibility and constant danger, the knowledge that he cannot make a mistake and also the knowledge that he is doing something useful and important are among the reasons.
Ramb, interesting alternative analysis. So he knows he is going to die only he does not care about anything else but his duty. Well, this would fit the character we know.
"Snape is not clueless when he talks with Voldemort in the Shreiking Shack. He mentions at least 3 times that he wants to leave and he seems to know that there is much danger for him there." (Steve)
He is not clueless as for the danger but he does not seem to be prepared or to know a way out and that is unusual.
haymoni - Feb 14, 2008 7:28 pm (#1683 of 2617)
I didn't get that Snape felt danger for himself there in the Shack.
I figured Snape would redeem himself at the end, so on my first read, I thought he needed to get Harry so he could tell him whatever The Big Snape Secret was.
After reading "The Prince's Tale", we learn that he had promised Dumbledore that if Voldy kept Nagini close at hand, he would tell Harry about the Voldy soul-bit attached to him.
Finally Harry was at Hogwarts and Snape could get to him and do as he promised. He had to get out of the Shack & get to Harry so he could tell Harry what was expected of him - that he had to die.
I think he was very surprised when Voldy sent Nagini after him.
wynnleaf - Feb 14, 2008 8:26 pm (#1684 of 2617)
Even if you think that Snape realized he was in danger in the Shack, he is still depicted as stumbling for the words to say and pleading with LV to let him search for Harry prior to LV even implying that there's danger. So even if you think he knew he was in danger, he's still very uncertain what to say or how to say it -- not particularly Snapish, in my opinion.
And he's still quite clueless over DD or LV's secrets, which just doesn't seem like the extremely talented guy who's an expert in the Dark Arts and was certainly around adult-LV a whole lot more than DD was. Yet even Slughorn knows about horcruxes. Are we supposed to believe Snape never heard of horcruxes? Or he imagines LV never heard of them? Or he just never thinks that maybe LV made some? Why wouldn't he think of that? After all, he knew that LV had found a way not die when the AK backfired and didn't kill him.
We supposed to accept clueless Snape, even after we've been shown brilliant and extremely knowledgeable Snape. Yes, I feel like JKR backtracked, or tried to rein in Snape after letting the character really grow in the first 6 books.
Julia H. - Feb 15, 2008 1:17 am (#1685 of 2617)
It is horrible to imagine what the scene may have been at the end of GoF (and that Snape had knowingly and voluntarily undertaken it), yet there he had been prepared, knew what to say and had something to offer to LV, something that was tempting to LV. In DH he realizes that Nagini is being protected so the time must have come but simply pleading with LV to let him go and find Harry Potter while LV clearly has something different on his mind is not the best of strategies. Snape may not mind dying: of course, he has known it all along that things may easily come to that one day and he must have long ago come to terms with the possibility of being killed by LV but he still has a task to accomplish, a task he clearly wants to accomplish, so he knows he needs to survive at least a little longer. Letting himself be killed just like that is less than what could be expected of him. (I hate that snake, Slytherin's revenge or not.) Of course, we can say that Snape is also human and may be tired and sad (especially after the scene with his colleagues) and running out of strength (just like Harry when he thinks he is about to die) but it is still true that in the earlier books Snape was usually at his best during a crisis.
mona amon - Feb 15, 2008 1:54 am (#1686 of 2617)
But one thing I know many fans never expected was a nickname like "Sev." Prior to DH, I saw many, many comments, especially among people writing fan fics, where people were certain that no matter what, Snape would never want to be called something so brief, informal and mundane sounding as "Sev." (Wynnleaf)
I wonder why they jumped to such conclusions about him. It's a name that only Lily calls him, and I'm sure he loved it because of that. Anyway, this is the guy who called himself The Half Blood Prince, which I found rather corny. Of course he's a teenager at the time.
We've discussed this previously, but in The Prince's Tale, we find adult Snape consistently calling DD "Dumbledore." I suppose this may have been meant to convey an informality between them. But the problem is that Snape in the past had always called DD "Headmaster" so it just didn't seem like Snape's typical "voice" to suddenly be calling him something else.
It did seem very strange (calling McGonagal 'Minerva' too). I guess he calls them 'headmaster' and "Professor McGonnagal' when there are students around, and by their names when they are are alone. That's more or less what our teachers used to do. Still, she probably shouldn't have sprung that on us only in the final book.
First, in spite of LV obviously looking for loads of info about wands and experimenting with them and even robbing DD's tomb, Snape acts in The Elder Wand as though he has no clue why LV would be concerned about his wand.
Snape wouldn't have known at all that LV robbed DD's tomb.
DH Chapter 6. This is a Voldy's eye view of it, which Harry experiences- 'the sun was barely visible over the horizon as he glided alongside Snape, up through the grounds toward the lake.
'I shall join you in the castle shortly,'he said in his high, cold voice. 'Leave me now.'
Snape bowed and set off back up the path, his black cloak billowing behid him. Harry walked slowly, waiting for Snape's figure to disappear. It would not do for Snape, or indeed anyone else, to see where he was going. But there were no lights in the castle windows, and he could conceal himself...and in a second he had cast upon himself a disillusionment charm that hid him even from his own eyes.'
No way that Snape could have seen what he was upto. Actually there's absolutely no way of telling, based on the information given in the text, whether he knew about the wand and was acting clueless, or whether he really was clueless.
And then there's the "clueless Snape" of DH, who not only didn't seem to pick up on the idea that LV was searching for the Elder Wand, he didn't figure out that LV was creating horcruxes either.
He may have suspected about the Horcruxes, but may also have suspected that Dumbledore knew about them and was not letting him in on the secret. And whatever he may feel about it, he's always shown to be consistently obedient to Dumbledore.
but The Elder Wand presents a Snape we simply do not know. He cannot handle a dangerous situation, while in the previous books it was usually in times of danger or crisis that he was at his best. (Julia)
But what could he have done? The mighty, invincible, unkillable Voldemort has decided to take his life, and he knows that he is no match for him. Same Snape. Totally different situation.
Now I was so busy nit-picking everyone's posts that I've forgotten what point I was trying to make!
EDIT: cross posted with Zelmia and Julia.
Orion - Feb 15, 2008 6:35 am (#1687 of 2617)
About names: "Minerva" seems to recall Charity Burbage's "Severus! Help me!" of the Chapter "The Dark Lord Ascending". Rowling might let Snape use the first name to make his pleading more intense.
Names are generally very important for Rowling: You can summon your house-elf if you say their name, there is a taboo on You-know-who's name, and Ron hears Hermione saying his name out of the Deluminator.
There is something else weird in the Shrieking Shack chapter: Why does Snape get LV's permission to go looking for Harry? If he really grasped that he was going to die, it made no sense because LV didn't have more of a clue where Harry was than Snape had. And it made no sense to calmly let oneself gotten bitten because a dead man is of no use whatsoever and Snape didn't have a clue that Harry was only a few meters away. The only sensible option would have been Disapparating very fast and looking for Harry.
The main reason why I don't think Harry is such a big hero after all: He didn't raise a finger to save Snape. Not one finger. Of course, he hates him, but someone as ultra-noble as Harry should have made the effort nonetheless. He can do it for Draco, too.
wynnleaf - Feb 15, 2008 7:16 am (#1688 of 2617)
Look, I know we can up with reasonable explanations for why always formal Snape is happy with "Sev" as a kid, why he calls DD "Dumbledore" rather than the ever-present "Headmaster" or "Professor" of the past, why he didn't make a push to figure out about the horcruxes, why he didn't know a thing about the Elder Wand or even guess, why he fumbles for what to say or do in the Shrieking Shack, etc.
Sure, we can explain it all away. But the problem isn't that we can't explain it, but that it's all different from the Snape we had presented to us in the past and therefore it has to be "explained."
Those are all small changes. Yet when an author writes a character in 6 books one way, and then makes numerous small differences in the character in the final book, it does tend to make many people feel as though the character isn't quite "right," or has been somehow changed for some inexplicable reason. I don't think JKR did that intentionally, but it definitely did have that effect on many readers.
So when I ask myself why JKR wrote Snape with all those slight changes, I don't think it was intentional, but I do think there was a feeling of wanting to rein in the character. And that, while possibly not a conscious desire of JKR's, was almost certainly an at least an unconscious wish. After all, she has never seemed comfortable with the degree of interest her readers have in Snape. And she clearly wasn't pleased with the initial response to the book that Snape had been a hero. It seemed to me that the first question about Snape's heroism not only startled, but also displeased JKR and it took some time and thought for her to accept that readers did see Snape that way and that she would need to address it accepting that.
Julia H. - Feb 15, 2008 8:32 am (#1689 of 2617)
"The only sensible option would have been Disapparating very fast and looking for Harry." (Orion)
Yes, that would have been an option but Snape never thinks about it. In my opinion Wynnleaf is right: we can explain these things (and it is fun doing so) but the real reason is that JKR is showing us a different character here - for whatever reason. She certainly needed to kill him off somehow and she did not want to give him a heroic death, so she presented this seemingly clueless character who could not think or did not care to think of any sensible escape plan. The problem is it is difficult to believe at this point.
"And she clearly wasn't pleased with the initial response to the book that Snape had been a hero. It seemed to me that the first question about Snape's heroism not only startled, but also displeased JKR and it took some time and thought for her to accept that readers did see Snape that way and that she would need to address it accepting that." (Wynnleaf)
I absolutely agree. That was my impression too. I was startled by her being startled.
"The main reason why I don't think Harry is such a big hero after all: He didn't raise a finger to save Snape. Not one finger. Of course, he hates him, but someone as ultra-noble as Harry should have made the effort nonetheless. He can do it for Draco, too." (Orion)
Yes, it would have been a noble thing to do, though all Harry may reasonably have thought at the moment was that DE's were killing each other in front of him, which he did not need to mind. (He does go out of his way, though, to save stupid Draco several times - I wonder why.)
Swedish Short-Snout - Feb 15, 2008 9:59 am (#1690 of 2617)
"The only sensible option would have been Disapparating very fast and looking for Harry." (Orion)
Voldemort might have put an Anti-Disapparition jinx on the Shack.
Steve Newton - Feb 15, 2008 10:31 am (#1691 of 2617)
If he had disapparated his cover would have been blown. To his credit he was sticking with the plan and, in my opinion, trying to talk his way out of a tough situation.
Soul Search - Feb 15, 2008 11:09 am (#1692 of 2617)
I have to agree with wynnleaf, and others, that the Snape we saw in the Shrieking Shack in Deathly Hallows was not the Snape we have come to know. The Snape of SS/PS countered Quirrell's broom curse and stepped in to referee the Quidditch match. The Snape of PoA was confident in the Shrieking Shack, even though his assumptions were wrong and intentions not exactly honorable. The only example of Snape being even a little unsure of himself that I can recall is when he confronted Dumbledore on the windy hilltop in "The Prince's Tale," and that was a much younger Snape than we ever came to know in SS through HBP.
I was struck by a comparison of Lucius Malfoy's manner and Snape's manner confronting Voldemort in the Shrieking Shack. Each had similar motives, get away from Voldemort and find Draco/Harry, and each became flustered (or something.) Malfoy had, at one time, also been very confident and sure of himself, although we did see his migration to something approaching a quivering idiot.
Were we, perhaps, supposed to recognize Voldemort's commanding effect on both these sure, confident characters? Was that why Malfoy came first; so we would compare him in Voldmeort's presense to Snape in a similar situation?
mona amon - Feb 15, 2008 12:47 pm (#1693 of 2617)
Were we, perhaps, supposed to recognize Voldemort's commanding effect on both these sure, confident characters? Was that why Malfoy came first; so we would compare him in Voldmeort's presense to Snape in a similar situation?
Good questions, Soul Search.
Sure, we can explain it all away. But the problem isn't that we can't explain it, but that it's all different from the Snape we had presented to us in the past and therefore it has to be "explained." (Wynnleaf)
Wynnleaf, I went through all the scenes where Snape is mentioned in DH (too few!), and I feel he is only different because of being in situations that are different from what we have encountered before. I actually couldn't find a single place where he is 'out of character'. The 'explaining' was to show that this wasn't a different Snape, but the same Snape reacting to a different situation.
Those are all small changes. Yet when an author writes a character in 6 books one way,..
He's not really written 'one way' in the previous books, unlike characters like Minerva and Hagrid. He's never called anyone 'idiot boy' before POA, he's never shown as gentle and caring (after a fashion) before Spinner's End. The raging, demented, spit flying out of his mouth Snape at the end of POA is quite different from the controlled, sardonic Snape of the previous two books. And who would have suspected, before book 6, that he used to call himself the Half Blood Prince?
We are shown a different aspect of him in each of these books, and yet another in DH, a more tragic and vulnerable side than what we have yet seen.
So when I ask myself why JKR wrote Snape with all those slight changes, I don't think it was intentional, but I do think there was a feeling of wanting to rein in the character. And that, while possibly not a conscious desire of JKR's, was almost certainly an at least an unconscious wish.
But he's not reined in at all. In the Sacking of Severus Snape chapter, he seems to be at a loss as to how to get Minerva to understand him, but then Dumbledore has left him in a pickle, with no living soul to believe a word that he says. But he does quite ok in the fight with Minerva, duelling champ Flitwick, Sprout and Slughorn, and makes quite a spectacular exit.
I think he does ok in the Shreiking Shack as well. He cannot fight Voldemort, and who has that power, apart from Dumbledore and Harry? But while he does not succeed in saving his life, he does manage, with a superhuman effort of will, to pass on his memories to Harry.
And she clearly wasn't pleased with the initial response to the book that Snape had been a hero.
I agree, but I think she just wasn't pleased that Snape seemed to be stealing Harry's thunder, nothing more.
EDIT: cross posted with Zelmia.
and even when we had similar ones, the cavalry always seem to arrive in the nick of time.
Nice one, Zelmia. I wanted to say something like that but didn't know how!
wynnleaf - Feb 15, 2008 1:21 pm (#1694 of 2617)
To you, perhaps. Not everyone sees Snape this way. (zelmia)
And nowhere do I say or even imply that everyone sees it this way. My point, which I repeated, is that many people do see the Snape of DH as different from the Snape they felt had been previously portrayed. Because it seems to me that the number of people I've known to comment on it are substantial, in relation to the overall commenting on DH, I think that means that there is something a bit different about Snape in DH, whether or not many people find it "out of character" or not.
For instance, you, zelmia, said initially, in response to my first long post on the differences of Snape in DH, "Excellent analysis, Wynnleaf! I completely agree with your fantastic points. I have to disagree (again) on one point though.." and proceeded to discuss your disagreement about Snape's actions in POA. But now you say that "I certainly don't see any inconsistencies." I don't see how these comments align. They seem contradictory to me. Even if you've now changed your mind and believe that there are no inconsistencies in the way the character was written in earlier books versus DH, you at least must have felt some sense of Snape being different in DH, else why in the world did you first answer me as you did?
In any case, even without zelmia's agreement, it does seem that there are 4 or 5 of the regular posters on this current discussion that felt Snape was different in DH from the other books. That, to me, is a substantial number. If a similar portion of general readers of the book felt the same way, then that's certainly enough to assume that there's something at least inadvertently different about the way JKR wrote Snape in the last book.
PeskyPixie - Feb 15, 2008 1:46 pm (#1695 of 2617)
Add my mom, my best friend and myself to the list of those who notice a difference in the portrayal of Snape in DH. While it's always interesting to read the fascinating explanations provided by different people, and they are very solid explanations, this DH-Snape just seems a bit different than Snape in other books. Note, while Snape doesn't make use of the term, 'idiot boy' prior to PoA, it's not out of character for him to use it. While he is tender towards Narcissa in HBP, we watch his transformation from trying to remain unfeeling to curtly offering his help. It's not too startling, though a surprising presentation of the softness he is capable of.
" ... I think [JKR] just wasn't pleased that Snape seemed to be stealing Harry's thunder, nothing more." -mona amon
I agree, but does this indicate that she does not understand why so many adult fans have taken to Snape (as a character)?
I feel that Snape's use of 'Minerva' in DH has a condescending undertone to it. Maybe it's part of his DE act throughout the school year? I don't have problems with teachers calling each other by their first names in private, but calling a former teacher by her first name just doesn't seem like a Snapish thing to do.
Does anyone else get the feeling that Snape is aware that Harry is standing in the hall in his Invisibility Cloak?
Soul Search - Feb 15, 2008 2:36 pm (#1696 of 2617)
"Does anyone else get the feeling that Snape is aware that Harry is standing in the hall in his Invisibility Cloak?"
If you mean the Shrieking Shack tunnel, that is a very interesting question, PeskyPixie.
Snape's manner would take on a whole different meaning if he knew Harry was nearby. His first priorty would be to protect Harry. Then figure out how he could pass on Dumbledore's message.
I know we have noted some prior hints that Snape could tell Harry was nearby, I just can't come up with details now.
Snape was rather quick with the memories he passed to Harry, like he was preparing them for him. Maybe that was why he couldn't handle Voldemort; his mind was focused on the memories.
Interesting idea.
Julia H. - Feb 15, 2008 4:28 pm (#1697 of 2617)
"I was struck by a comparison of Lucius Malfoy's manner and Snape's manner confronting Voldemort in the Shrieking Shack." (Soul Search)
Interesting comparison. Are we to understand that both are trying to convince Voldemort of something that is important to them because both are looking for a ... hm ... son they need to save (though in different senses)? Both seem to fail at the moment but in the end both sons are saved (although Lucius cannot get the credit for saving Draco). Yes, it seems the Dark Lord may only be addressed in a certain manner and of course all DE's (genuine and fake) know that. However, the similarities between Snape and Malfoy should not go too far. (Regular differences may also be interesting.) The Malfoys save their own necks, while Snape's neck is bitten by the snake. If there is any honour in that, it is NOT sharing the same fate as Lucius. (Lucius: the name may be a reference to Lucifer, which is connected to the diabolical nature of this man. However, Lucifer is also a "fallen angel". I thought this meant that Lucius had had the opportunity to make a different kind of career but he "fell" morally and became a DE. Now as I come to think of it: he seems to be falling even among DE's, doesn't he?) So Snape's death is much more honourable than Lucius's survival. Even though he cannot do anything against his fate, it still goes to his credit that in the last moments of his life, he manages to accomplish his last task: even during his agony he is able to grasp the opportunity and succeeds in giving Harry the information he needs. Earlier we saw that wizards used their wands to extract their memories, now Snape is doing it without using his wand - probably using will-power and concentration instead.
"Does anyone else get the feeling that Snape is aware that Harry is standing in the hall in his Invisibility Cloak?" (PeskyPixie)
I never got this feeling but if you or anyone else did, I would like to read about it more. It sounds like an exciting idea! (I'll have to think about it...)
("... calling a former teacher by her first name just doesn't seem like a Snapish thing to do": then I'm not Snapish because I do just that if we are colleagues now - it is not easy but it would be strange otherwise.)
wynnleaf - Feb 15, 2008 5:19 pm (#1698 of 2617)
I didn't get the memo that our discussions were adhering to "majority rules". I thought we were simply sharing our opinions. (zelmia)
Good grief. What's the point? Well, I'll try again.
Of course I don't mean "majority rules" and I imagine you know already know that. I mean that if a large portion of people feel that the character seemed quite different, then they probably weren't just deeply deluded. It probably has something to do with the fact that some of the things the character was written as doing or saying are a little different.
Now I don't think anybody is disagreeing that Snape does things differently in DH. No one is trying to say, "He was always called "Sev!" Didn't you notice?" or "He called DD "Dumbledore" lots of times in the past." No, we're in agreement that some things are different. The question is whether it adds up to a "feel" of a different character. For some people, it doesn't. But if a somewhat substantial portion of people think the character felt different, they probably feel that way because of the different things JKR wrote the character as doing, saying, etc. Anyway, that's what the people that are on this thread are saying when they say that they felt Snape seemed different.
Since I never said that it has to be one way or the other, I really have no clue where you picked up on this "majority rules" idea. Besides, any quick count would easily mean that the "no difference" folks would "win," so I see no reason for you to be offended. It would clearly be pointless for me to have attempted to try a "majority rules" argument, since I can, after all, count.
PeskyPixie - Feb 15, 2008 6:04 pm (#1699 of 2617)
"Does anyone else get the feeling that Snape is aware that Harry is standing in the hall in his Invisibility Cloak?" -PeskyPixie
I was actually referring to the halls of Hogwarts during Snape's brief conversation with McGonagall.
My aunt is now the principal of her school and a few of her staff members were once her students while she was a teacher. They don't call her by her first name as that would feel weird to them, so I stick by my original opinion that there really is no right or wrong to these things. I just had the impression that Snape calls McG 'Minerva' in DH to illustrate his authority.
mona amon - Feb 15, 2008 9:15 pm (#1700 of 2617)
Note, while Snape doesn't make use of the term, 'idiot boy' prior to PoA, it's not out of character for him to use it. While he is tender towards Narcissa in HBP, we watch his transformation from trying to remain unfeeling to curtly offering his help. It's not too startling, though a surprising presentation of the softness he is capable of. (Pesky)
Exactly. That's what I was trying to point out. Although he does different things or reacts a bit differently in different books, he is not 'out of character'. So what exactly gives you the feeling that he is out of character in DH when he does or says different things?
BTW, I made a bloomer- Snape calls Neville 'idiot boy' right back in their very first potions lesson in PS. How come no one noticed? But I think my other examples are ok.
The question is whether it adds up to a "feel" of a different character. For some people, it doesn't. But if a somewhat substantial portion of people think the character felt different, they probably feel that way because of the different things JKR wrote the character as doing, saying, etc. Anyway, that's what the people that are on this thread are saying when they say that they felt Snape seemed different. (Wynnleaf)
Wynnleaf, I'm only interested in why they feel he is 'not in character', as opposed to 'same character in a completely new set of circumstances'. I mean, he was definitely very different in this book, since we are shown facets of him that have never been revealed before. So what is it that makes some of us accept this new version and say 'oh, this is what he's really like' while others say 'but this is not the Snape that I know'.
Hmm...not sure I explained that properly.
"Does anyone else get the feeling that Snape is aware that Harry is standing in the hall in his Invisibility Cloak?" (Pesky)
I certainly did. He was aware that Voldemort expected Harry to arrive in Hogwarts, and just as Amycus feels that "She's [Alecto] gorn and sent for him, I felt me mark burn, and he thinks we got Potter", Snape also feels his mark burn and comes to the same conclusion. Also, he is described more than once as looking into the air around Minerva, as if he knew Harry was there.
The only sensible option would have been Disapparating very fast and looking for Harry. (Orion)
It would depend on whether he can disapparate faster than Voldemort can zap him, and I suppose he can't, and knows it. When Harry, Griphook and Dobby disapparate from Malfoy Manor, Bella is fast enough to get her knife through Dobby's chest. Harry and Hermione escape from Voldemort by disapparating, but they do so a second before he actually gets to them.
PeskyPixie - Feb 15, 2008 9:34 pm (#1701 of 2617)
BTW, I made a bloomer- Snape calls Neville 'idiot boy' right back in their very first potions lesson in PS. How come no one noticed? -mona amon
LOL, should have saved it for the Trivia thread!
Julia H. - Feb 16, 2008 12:03 pm (#1702 of 2617)
"I stick by my original opinion that there really is no right or wrong to these things." (PeskyPixie)
Of course, you are right and I'm sure you know what sounds polite or impolite in English better than I do. These things depend on cultural and linguistic differences as well.
"I was actually referring to the halls of Hogwarts during Snape's brief conversation with McGonagall." (Pixie)
Of course! I misunderstood you, I guess we were concentrating too hard on the Shrieking Shack but that is clearly not a hall. All right, there Snape knew Harry was somewhere nearby. In fact he had often sensed Harry's invisible presence before (tuned to Harry Potter?) but this time he got information via his mark as well. What I keep wondering is how he expected to find Harry by asking Minerva about his whereabouts. (I admit he was extremely good at duelling though.)
More about names: he was called 'Severus' by his colleagues and Slughorn referred to him as 'Severus' when he had already flown away. The latter especially struck me as surprising, precisely because that's how he had called him earlier and I would have thought after being so much disappointed in him, he would have changed this to something less familiar sounding. Or was it because at the moment he believed him dead? But I may be mistaken about the tone.
tandaradei - Feb 16, 2008 1:52 pm (#1703 of 2617)
This thread just moves too fast for me! Well, it seems the main current in this thread recently has to do with how the Snape persona appears to change throughout the series. I’m not at the level to analyze that too well yet; but here below are memories of my personal reactions to Snape throughout the series. Maybe that helps?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In the first two books I saw Snape as both a wicked and a minor character – basically, one of the negative teachers (maybe the “Dursley” substitute for the school story). By the end of Azkaban, I was a bit surprised by his apparent encroachment into a becoming an apparent major character, though certainly he seemed to me just as wicked. By the end of GOF I'd begun to think Snape as even a bit more major; and became somewhat conflicted as to his status, double-agent wise. About this time, in the various forums I’d attended, I’d come upon certain “Snape-o-philes,” whom I regarded for the time being as (erm) misinformed, and almost like many shippers in regards to accuracy. By the fifth installment (OoP) I actually thought of Snape as reverting back to, once again, a nasty minor character. [Side point here: I’d been getting the impression that the movie directors were following my vision as Snape being minor, too.] In HBP I was actually a bit put-off by the intensity of the first two vignette chapters, esp. emphasizing the Muggle Minister, and then Snape in Spinner's End; I thought I’d learned way too much about minor characters before getting back to Harry story.
Can you can guess how evil I thought Snape was by the end of HBP? But I now thought of him as a Voldy henchman, first class; and thus I also thought him now as a major character, maybe even rivaling Voldemort, since he’d received much more play-time throughout in comparison.
OK, THEN I got to DH and The Prince's Tale!!! I was floored; I was so stunned it momentarily derailed me from the actual flow of Harry’s predicaments. All the Snape-assumptions I'd built over the series – including Snape as a minor character – turned to ashes. And yet other things seemed to fall into place, especially when I considered how Snape in one memory chastised Dumbledore for planning Harry's death! It seemed that a bigger picture of both Snape and Dumbledore was possible, and different than I'd formulated; but IMO better because a fair amount of character motivations for both, and baggage, now appeared more natural in the plot sense.
In the Epilogue I admired Harry for his respectful mentions of Snape after that, and also wished JKR had had Harry insist that a portrait of Snape be installed at Hogwarts in the actual canon.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Well, I’ve reread the entire series since and have found a very different Snape; but more than that, I’ve found a changing Point of View (POV) – maybe necessary for that 7-year age span in the series. I’m now of the mind that JKR intentionally put HRH’s opinions and observations throughout as being as changeable as that year for their ages … sometimes focusing on things like alcohol awareness, as in OoP and later; but in earlier times more on “two-dimensional” conclusions in a “Hardy Boys” style, maybe more simplistic than should be assumed by us the audience.
The Snape et al that they viewed would indeed be different, depending on their age.
Julia H. - Feb 17, 2008 4:45 am (#1704 of 2617)
"OK, THEN I got to DH and The Prince's Tale!!! I was floored; I was so stunned it momentarily derailed me from the actual flow of Harry’s predicaments." (tandaradei)
I think you did exactly what the author wanted you to do. :-)
mona amon - Feb 17, 2008 8:26 am (#1705 of 2617)
I enjoyed your post, Tandaradei. I love hearing about peoples' differing reactions to Snape in each book.
By the fifth installment (OoP) I actually thought of Snape as reverting back to, once again, a nasty minor character.
Just the opposite for me! OOTP was the book that had me thinking 'Wow! This is one really complex and interesting character!" Though I did not become a 'Snape-o-phile', (or HP-phile for that matter), until HBP.
Julia H. - Feb 17, 2008 9:47 am (#1706 of 2617)
"Though I did not become a 'Snape-o-phile', (or HP-phile for that matter), until HBP." (Mona)
So you did not react to HBP-Snape as you were expected to... We were meant to think at the end of HBP that Snape was really evil - but it is interesting that it was during HBP that my mental picture of Snape started to resemble a former teacher of mine who I really, really liked. I still hardly know why. (It is all the more ironic since JKR based the character on a teacher she hated.)
wynnleaf - Feb 17, 2008 10:17 am (#1707 of 2617)
I find it fascinating the number of people I've met whose outlook on Snape was transformed, not for the worse, but far for the better after reading HBP. I think that the readers who were pretty convinced that he was still loyal to Dumbledore, suddenly saw his actions as dramatically brave and self-sacrificing even beyond the hints of his spying in earlier books, which is, I think, what made many of us suddenly far more supportive of the character, especially in the face of so many other readers assuming he was the Evil Traitor.
tandaradei - Feb 17, 2008 11:29 am (#1708 of 2617)
mona amon wrote:
...[cut]...Just the opposite for me! OOTP was the book that had me thinking 'Wow! This is one really complex and interesting character!" Though I did not become a 'Snape-o-phile', (or HP-phile for that matter), until HBP....[cut]...
hmmm....
Snape was more out in the open in OoP true; but by then I'd been watching the HP movies and really thought the directors were minimizing Snape. I thought two things then: (1) Why? Both the actor and character seemed to me just too potent to be minimized; and (2) the directors had some inside information from JKR. I wrongly assumed Snape was sort of being fazed out...
hehein the book;
Orion - Feb 17, 2008 1:30 pm (#1709 of 2617)
Teenage audience target group.
PeskyPixie - Feb 17, 2008 7:47 pm (#1710 of 2617)
LOL, of course! Lots of Won-Won and Lav-Lav!
"Of course, you are right and I'm sure you know what sounds polite or impolite in English better than I do. These things depend on cultural and linguistic differences as well. -Julia H.
I'm no authority as I'm not British and don't know what is normal for Snape's cultural/social background. My family is pretty traditional when it comes to 'respecting your elders', so it's always a bit weird when I hear kids calling adults, or adults calling older adults they knew as children, by their first names. But that's just me, speaking from my upbringing.
"More about names: he was called 'Severus' by his colleagues and Slughorn referred to him as 'Severus' when he had already flown away." -Julia H
What could he call him? Surely not Sev? Perhaps a scornful, "professor"?
I became a Snapeophile from his very first Potions class. I just had this feeling that there was so much complexity to this character and relevance to Harry's story that I was hooked!
mona amon - Feb 18, 2008 4:42 am (#1711 of 2617)
So you did not react to HBP-Snape as you were expected to... We were meant to think at the end of HBP that Snape was really evil - but it is interesting that it was during HBP that my mental picture of Snape started to resemble a former teacher of mine who I really, really liked. I still hardly know why. (Julia)
I never, never expected DD to die at the end of HBP (I never used to look up HP on the net till after I read this book, and hadn't heard any of the theories.)So I did get a shock when Snape makes his dramatic appearance on the tower, and, instead of saving the day as I expected him to, points his wand at DD and says 'Avada Kedavra'. But I never for a moment suspected him of being evil.
Actually my mistake was that I thought him much less evil than he actually turned out to be in DH!
Julia H. - Feb 18, 2008 5:58 am (#1712 of 2617)
"Actually my mistake was that I thought him much less evil than he actually turned out to be in DH!" (Mona)
Evil??? I don't understand what you mean.
mona amon - Feb 18, 2008 8:45 am (#1713 of 2617)
Julia, I meant during the time he was a DE, before he came back to the right side. There are degrees of evil, and Snape was revealed to be a lot more evil than I expected.
I imagined that he returned to Dumbledore because Voldemort was targetting the Potters, all of them, and not just Lily. That would have been rather noble. Wanting to save only Lily was just selfish. And not caring whether Voldemort killed James and baby Harry shows how callous he had become.
So in some ways I must have been almost as surprised by Snape in DH as the people who believed him to be loyal to Voldemort.
Soul Search - Feb 18, 2008 2:40 pm (#1714 of 2617)
(Snape) ... a truly appalling individual who, only by mere chance, happened to have been fortunate enough to have loved and been loved by someone ..."
zelmia, good description. I agree. And, I think this was JKR's intent for Snape. We read way too much into his character.
mona amon - Feb 19, 2008 12:26 am (#1715 of 2617)
In DH I found Snape to have been revealed as a truly appalling individual who, only by mere chance, happened to have been fortunate enough to have loved and been loved by someone compassionate and understanding enough to have been able to overlook his obvious shortcomings. (Zelmia)
Oh, I didn't mean that I found him appaling in DH. That's not likely to happen to an ardent Snape fan! I was just a bit surprised, as he turned out a little more evil than I expected during his DE days. But I realise now that my 'basically noble' version wouldn't really have worked. She had to make him dark, so that what was light in him could shine more brightly.
I agree with you that he was fortunate to have loved and been loved, but why is it mere chance, and not because of his innate capacity to feel that sort of love?
I now think of him as someone who started off as basically good, but with a morbid fascination for the dark arts (not necessarily a bad thing), which, together with being sorted into Slytherin and various other factors, results in his going down the path to Death Eaterdom. Once there he becomes further corrupted, until he gets the wake up call. And then he certainly proves himself worthy of redemption.
And, I think this was JKR's intent for Snape. We read way too much into his character. (Soul Search),
I don't think so at all. She never shows him as either torturer or murderer, or doing any other appaling acts. In interviews, she speaks of him as a tragic hero, flawed, but immensely brave and saved by his capacity to love.
In the books, he's the 'redemptive character' (hope I'm using the right word), the one who goes astray, but returns and works to atone for what he has done.
PeskyPixie - Feb 19, 2008 12:44 am (#1716 of 2617)
I agree with mona ... too tired to add anything else!
Julia H. - Feb 19, 2008 3:13 am (#1717 of 2617)
"Julia, I meant during the time he was a DE, before he came back to the right side." (Mona)
I see what you mean. I thought you were referring to the DH year and that is why I was surprised. Actually, it seems to me that I was exceptionally generous in my view of Snape's motivations when I was reading DH and I was not discussing it with anyone. I thought the main reason why he did not think about the danger of James and Harry was that his mind was too full of anxiety about Lily, the person he loved, to think about anything else. I think it was the fact that he was so emotionally cracked, even "looked a little mad", that he was so unlike the Snape I had seen before (and perhaps the fact that he certainly did not care about himself) that made me feel so. (To give a real life example as explanation: Once my mother had a serious reason to think that my husband and I may have been involved in a major train accident. She knew lots of people had died or got injured, still for a full hour, until I managed to call her and tell her that we were safe, she was trembling for TWO lives. Then she cried for relief and AFTER THAT she cried for all the mothers who could not get a similar telephone call that night. And she was a very good-hearted, caring person.) But I understand that from a strictly moral point of view Snape's motivations can be subject to ... discussion. In addition, though, I think he went to DD because for some reason he did not find it sufficient to have LV's promise to spare Lily. Why not? It would have been easy for him to be satisfied with that but he was not, he tried the hard way too, by turning to DD. Ironically, his request to LV turned out to be the most useful thing he could do for the Potters: that made it possible for Lily to save Harry.
In any case, I think that Snape was able to love, even though just one person, shows that the capacitiy for good was there in him all the time. You may call it luck that he met Lily, but does that mean that Lucius Malfoy (or Pettigrew) became a DE because he did not play in the same playground as Lily? As for me, I don't think it would have made the same difference to him. You may call it luck that DD was understanding and forgiving but that was about the only stroke of luck in his life. (I wonder if he took luck potion that day...) All the other good characters were much luckier because they were loved, appreciated, trusted by more people and generally in a better way than Snape was. Even some of the bad characters were luckier than him: Lucius Malfoy had a family and it seems they loved each other within the family, Pettigrew had friends who accepted him with his obvious faults and trusted him , even Tom Riddle, though he did not experience parental love, was generally appreciated, trusted and admired in school. Compared to them, Snape, who in his childhood "so conscpicuously lacked" "that indefinable air of having been well-cared for, even adored", got his stroke of luck relatively late in his life. Where was sympathetic DD or the Head of Slytherin House when Snape was a Hogwarts-student? Why was it so difficult for teachers to notice that there was a soul in Slytherin worth saving when Snape was not invisible at all: he was talented above average, was rather lonely, tended to be bullied and/or tended to get into fights with others, had a social background that set him apart from the rest of his house, and so on? Luck? I think being sorted into Slytherin may have meant that teachers gave you up as hopeless.
But back to DD's understanding and forgiveness. Snape certainly did not receive these "gifts" for free. Although DD may not have known what treasure he found when he decided to give a helping hand to a desperate and remorseful young man on the hilltop, Snape's promise of "anything" was - if kept - a great promise and Snape certainly kept his promise and DD made use of it as much as it was possible at all, for the rest of their lives.
Snape loved Lily and yes, that started his transformation but his ability to love and to change for the better must have been essential. He was also an inherently loyal person: loyal to Lily, loyal to DD, loyal to his own word of promise. Everybody in the books who shows any kind of transformation starts out loving one or two persons. DD did not become this great philanthropist before he realized how important his family was to him. (Then there is Regulus, Kreacher, Narcissa...) Even Harry: first he hated Voldemort because Voldemort had killed his parents. I know he was very young when he felt that but he is one of the persons with the highest sense of morality in the books and his rising to the high general level of love we see in DH is more believable because of the initial personal motivation. Snape's story shows how far love, unselfish, generous, faithful love for just one person can go. Later, Snape came to love DD, in fact, much more than DD cared for him and he learned to care for a number of other people - even if he did not feel the same ardent love for others (how could he have?) as he felt for Lily. He cared enough to do what he could to save others (whether he actually loved them or not) and to make a great, great self-sacrifice for others without personally hoping anything in return. All this cannot happen just "by accident". He needed someone to really see the good in him but all the rest was simply the good in him.
PeskyPixie - Feb 19, 2008 9:29 am (#1718 of 2617)
"...he would have gladly seen the infant Harry murdered if it would have meant Lily could be spared. That part of him never changed." -zelmia
I don't agree with the 'never changed' part; it just doesn't ring true with the horrified 'raised like a pig for slaughter' line. I know he claims that he doesn't want Harry dead due to his promise, but 'pig for slaughter' reveals more emotion than that. Besides, Snape grows to a point where he takes pride in the fact that he doesn't sit around and watch torture and murder if he is capable of saving that person without giving away his more important role of spy.
While I wholeheartedly agree that Snape is disgusting on the hilltop and still has a ways to go (for personal peace, as I feel his actions do redeem him of his past mistakes; note, this is only my opinion and I'm not forcing it on others) at the time of his death, I wouldn't say that his disregard for the death of an enemy's baby 'never changed' ... he was willing to risk his cover to save Lupin, so I hardly believe that the Snape we know in the timeframe of the series (especially in HBP and DH) would tolerate baby Harry being tossed to Nagini, regardless of his promise to Lily.
Steve Newton - Feb 19, 2008 9:57 am (#1719 of 2617)
I occurs to me that in the examples that we have been shown of conflict between the marauders and Snape that the wild card has been Sirius not James. In the worst memory it is Sirius that starts the confrontation and in the Lupin episode it is Sirius that seems to have set Snape up. Sirius is also with James on the train to Hogwarts but I am not yet up to this in the read a long so I can't say that I remember what happened. (I've only read it once.)
Years ago I took a group work class and it seems that Sirius is what you would call a covert leader. Despite his willingness to sacrifice for Harry he does not appear to have been wrapped too tight.
Julia H. - Feb 19, 2008 9:59 am (#1720 of 2617)
"I don't agree with the 'never changed' part..." (Pesky)
Nor do I. He obviously changed: that is the point about the character.
After writing about how loyal a person Snape was, I started to think it over how bitter it must have been for him to have his loyalties questioned and doubted all the time when (I think) being loyal by nature was really one of his most important and deepest characteristics. This tendency to be loyal, actually, may have been part of his teenage conflict with Lily: he loved her and wanted to be loyal to her but he also felt that he had to be loyal to his house and housemates (especially when they were being criticized from "outside"). Conflicting loyalties, loyalties misplaced. Quite probable.
"... he still had a bit further to go" (Zelmia)
Hm... I think he could have become as great a wizard as DD was if he had lived, so in this sense, yes, he could have gone on. (What would we think of DD if he had died at the age of 38?) As for Snape's transformation for the better: I really don't see what more he could have done to prove that he had changed. I know he was not kind and friendly and he never said "I love Harry Potter" but what he did (for Harry and for others) is much more important than that. He never SAID "I'm sorry" either (except to Lily but even that was in vain) but he DID very much to demonstrate how sorry he was. He was not a man of words very much at least when it came to really personal things but I don't see why the years of atonement, remorse, commitment and sacrifice cannot be as good as any kind of a gesture, behaviour pattern or word.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1721 to 1770
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:14 am
PeskyPixie - Feb 19, 2008 10:02 am (#1721 of 2617)
Steve, I'd love to carry your thoughts on Sirius to the Sirius thread (it's been too sleepy there for a while ) so they may be discussed with the entire focus on Sirius rather than have to try to bring it back to Snape all the time.
"He was not a man of words very much at least when it came to really personal things but I don't see why the years of atonement, remorse, commitment and sacrifice cannot be as good as any kind of a gesture, behaviour pattern or word." -Julia H.
I agree.
wynnleaf - Feb 19, 2008 7:40 pm (#1722 of 2617)
it is precisely that sort of highly romanticised view that I find I simply cannot agree with. (zelmia)
I'm uncertain why you call it "highly romanticised." What part is romanticized? Aren't we talking about a piece of fiction in the first place? It's "romanticizing" Snape to see him as redeemed? Even JKR said she wanted his character to be seen as redeemed.
And likening taunting someone to allowing Nagini to kill a baby? What? The two aren't anywhere in the same ballpark.
Nine year old Snape was unloveble? I don't really see anything about 9 year old Severus that didn't deserve the same love any other kid should have had. But he was "lucky" someone loved him? Wow. I guess Harry at 9 years old was just "unlucky." But to be more serious, in my opinion there are vanishingly few 9 year old kids who don't deserve to be loved. It's tragic when they have no one to love them, not "lucky" if someone loves them because, after all, they're unloveable, right?
Snape wasn't a unlovable "bloke" when he met Lily and they became friends. He was a little kid of 9. If Lily had met Lucius, I doubt if her acquaintanceship would have done him any good at all. If Lily had met Draco it probably wouldn't have helped him at all. Why? Because they had probably developed such prejudices and nasty attitudes already that no amount of friendship from a "mudblood" would have made any difference. They'd never even have talked to Lily, much less become friends.
It's not romanticizing Snape to realize that he must have developed a lot more motivation rather than just some one and only positive factor of a love for only one person in the world, Lily. Loving Lily just doesn't add up to trying to save Lupin's life, or Dumbledore's, or Katie Bell's, or risking his life to protect Draco, or giving up practically everything else that's important to him to defeat LV, follow DD's orders, and protect Harry.
PeskyPixie - Feb 20, 2008 12:24 am (#1723 of 2617)
By the way, do we really need to keep reminding ourselves that "we're talking about a work of fiction"? I don't think anyone here thinks we're discussing real people.
We're not????????!!!!!!!!!!!!
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 12:54 am (#1724 of 2617)
I guess I am the romantic one. That may be true - that's how it is. What I was trying to say (with Lucius and other things) is that I don't believe mere chance, luck, whatever that is totally independent of the personality can bring about a great transformation like Snape's. Zelmia will clearly disagree but I do think he became very good before he died even if he was not nice - but that may depend on what we consider important as regards change, character or goodness. I simply see his nastiness as a surface phenomenon (probably the trace of all he has been through in his life) and I like concentrating on what is revealed by his actions about the depth of his personality. This is more or less what I mean when I say his words contradict his actions and I also say his actions are more important. Of course he is a character with obvious faults but that makes him more alive, more believable, more human. So I disagree with the significance of the "chance" element and I think he got his "chance" because he was, so to speak, receptive to such a possibility. I also find him the least lucky character in the whole series, so if his change for the better was merely luck, then we can easily say other people were better because they were luckier. (Even if we say he was not a likable child - not that I agree - that was bad luck rather than his fault, was it not?) Some of the bad characters were luckier in their relationships and still did not go through the same change for the better (hence my reference to Malfoy and Pettigrew). It is probably my fault that - seeing that he did change and did become good - I tend to think that he was able to change because his character (unlike LV's, for example) had not gone too far in the wrong direction and because there was always something in him (like this tendency to be loyal, like the ability to love very much) that made it possible for him to start the process leading to his ultimate redemption.
Of course, I do not agree that he would have been glad to see Harry "tossed to Nagini" - he spent years protecting him and also other people and already in PS it becomes clear where the line is between his loathing Harry and his willingness to protect him. Good deeds themselves improve the personality - you cannot be indifferent to something or somebody you fight for or you save - or for something or somebody you have been fighting for or you have already saved.
I'm glad you have mentioned the betrayal thing in DH - I would like to come back to it.
mona amon - Feb 20, 2008 12:54 am (#1725 of 2617)
LOL! It's to Jo's credit that she created characters that we can feel so strongly about!
EDIT: oops, this post was supposed to come immediately after Pesky's post and not Julia's!
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 2:39 am (#1726 of 2617)
Snape's "betrayal" of the plan in DH. What was the point? Well, I think the point can truly be seen only with a brain like DD's (and that may have been Snape's approach to it). I think DD is in a way a politician or, to put it mildly, a great chess player, who likes planning several steps ahead and knows about things like compromise or calculated risk. He explains his reason to Snape like this: "You will have to give Voldemort the correct date of Harry's departure from his aunt and uncle's .... Not to do so will raise suspicion, when Voldemort believes you so well informed ...that ... ought to ensure Harry's safety ... I am counting upon you to remain in Lord Voldemort's good books as long as possible, or Hogwarts will be left to the mercy of the Carrows..."
Basically, DD here is willing to risk a few adult lives in order to ensure the relative safety of Hogwarts students (and staff) by Snape remaining LV's "right hand" and becoming headmaster - so he thinks ahead, not only of the immediate task of rescuing Harry. (He has a tendency to create complicated, multi-purpose plans.) At the same time he believes, his plan for rescuing Harry ought to be good even under these circumstances. Well, he is very nearly mistaken in this regard.
Making a cunning plan like this is one thing, carrying it out is quite another. The latter is Snape's task. What is Snape's situation at the moment? He has recently "killed" DD, he is completely isolated from the right side, "a basket dangling on Lord Voldemort's arm" and he knows his task is to promote the right side's cause as much as he can - and he also has to be able to remain sane under the circumstances, to be very careful (no mistakes are allowed in his job) and has to have a good and up-to-date understanding of the ever changing situation in order to know what should be the truly right (I mean practical, wise, forward taking) step for him to take. It is an extremely stressful, difficult situation. The only straw he can "grasp" (that may help to keep him above water) if he does not want to act totally alone is portrait-DD's instructions, advice or assessment of the situation.
A very important factor is Snape's unconditional loyalty to DD. He trusts him and thinks what he himself has to do, the best he can do is to keep following DD's orders. He also probably believes he has already done the worst thing that DD could ever have asked him to do (by killing DD). During the chase, however, he seems to be realizing something. His attempt to save Lupin, if successful, would have resulted in the loss of his cover as a spy - an all important thing - and still he acts on the moment's impulse to save someone's life. By this time Snape is a person who is used to saving others whenever he can but this time his action - from a strictly DD-like point of view - is irrational and is against DD's clear instructions. (DD explicitly told him to play his part convincingly if he had to take part in the chase.) I find it very important (as regards Snape's character) that here he follows his own conscience rather than DD's instructions. It seems to be a turning point for him.
Next, he is crying at 12 GP. I know the scene is there by mistake but I find it a brilliant mistake, which fits very well with the rest of Snape's story. He is at the empty headquarters of the Order after betraying Order members (with the results we know), crying. He may perhaps realize and by going there acknowledges that belonging to the Order was - in spite of everything - important to him. He accidentally finds Lily's letter, which, accidentally, is not only about Lily but also about DD having been friends with Grindelwald. So far, Snape has probably considered DD practically perfect and now he, just like Harry, is disappointed in him. He realizes that DD - upon his promise of "anything" - has finally made him do something he is not willing to take on his conscience. In a way, DD betrayed him, betrayed his trust and loyalty to him. Next, we see him at Hogwarts as he learns where Harry is. DD starts giving him instructions concerning the sword. He says "I know", he says: "don't worry ... I have a plan". He is still doing his duty, he is still doing what he has to do but he does not want DD to plan for him any more. He has got over his disappointment (though his manner still suggests that he is somewhat disillusioned with regard to DD), he understands he is alone and he has taken full responsibility for his own life and actions. He has grown up.
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 3:54 am (#1727 of 2617)
Just one more thought on the chance element: the idea tha Snape could change only because - by mere chance - he happened to be liked by Lily in their childhood - my view is that it was not Lily's love for him that changed him but his own love for Lily. An internal cause rather than an external one.
mona amon - Feb 20, 2008 5:05 am (#1728 of 2617)
An excellent analysis, Julia! I do not know if I agree with all the points, I'll have to think about it more, but it's really good all the same.
Just one more thought on the chance element: the idea tha Snape could change only because - by mere chance - he happened to be liked by Lily in their childhood - my view is that it was not Lily's love for him that changed him but his own love for Lily. An internal cause rather than an external one.
I agree that it was his own love for Lily rather than her love for him which changed him, although I think he was fortunate to have Lily's love, because how much more bitter his life would have been if he hadn't had her friendship for those five years. I mean, everyone's fortunate to get what love comes their way.
wynnleaf - Feb 20, 2008 5:36 am (#1729 of 2617)
I agree that it was not Lily's love which changed Snape. After all, he did his changing long after she had dropped the friendship. It was his love for her that changed him.
Why my objection to the idea that anyone is "romancing" anything about Snape? Why make the comment that these are fictional characters?
Because the whole HP series is, in that sense, romantic. In literary terms a romance is "An extended fictional prose narrative about improbable events involving characters that are quite different from ordinary people." Or, another way to look at it: "A long fictitious tale of heroes and extraordinary or mysterious events, usually set in a distant time or place." Or yet another definition that is often meant when used in the context zelmia wrote: "Not based on fact; imaginary or fictitious."
I don't think one can "romanticize" a fictional character from what is in many ways a "romantic" tale (think literary, not love story). JKR wrote Snape as a romantic character, in the literary sense, just as the entire series is a long fictitious tale with heroes and extraordinary and mysterious events, set in a "distant" place, and it's every bit imaginary and fictitious.
So to say that one person's view of Snape is romanticizing him presupposes that he isn't romantic, in the literary sense, to begin with, but in fact, he is.
As regards whether taunting Harry about James shows that Snape didn't really feel remorse about his actions -- that kind of presupposes the notion that people are not contradictory. In fact, mostly in real life people are quite capable of thinking and doing very contradictory things. One of the things that makes Snape so very 3-dimensional is that he is not just complex, but has that more realistic quality of doing things that are contradictory. He is very remorseful about what he did, therefore he dedicates his whole life to protecting Harry. If Lily had simply died in the muggle car wreck that the Dursley's claim, would Snape have dedicated his life to protecting Harry? Probably not. It's because he feels responsible for her death that he does it.
Is he remorseful about James death? Well, in the sense that by the time of the series he's willing so save even people he dislikes, I'd say in that by then he is remorseful over his actions. Is he sad James is dead? Ha! I doubt it. If James had been killed in the Dursley's imagined car wreck, I'm sure Snape would have been quite pleased. Is Snape sorry for Harry? No, he's not. At first he considers Harry kind of spoiled and arrogant, so he doesn't really see the effects of being orphaned. He had no personal experience of loving, caring parents, so he probably doesn't empathize with the tragedy of having no parents. He may, before OOTP, imagine that the Dursley's spoiled him. And he may feel negatively toward Harry in part because Lily died to save him. And he may dislike Harry for getting the fame of defeating LV, when really it was Lily's action that defeated him. But that doesn't mean Snape isn't very remorseful of his actions.
As to the notion that Snape killed the Potters, I really, really object to that. Yes, he has a responsibility for what he did, but he did not cause their deaths, Voldemort did. We discussed this once at length, even looking at many nationality's laws about murder and accessory to murder. 19 year old Snape brought the partial prophecy to Voldemort. At the time he brought it, Voldemort was not out searching for a Chosen One to kill. Snape did not tell LV to kill anyone, nor would he have had any true idea what LV would have done with the partial prophecy. The first half of the prophecy doesn't even make it clear that the person is a baby, so LV, for all teenage Snape could have known, might simply have needed to know to be wary of someone who would "approach" whose parents were also opposed to LV and who was born at the end of July. To then say Snape caused the deaths, as though he was the one that decided Voldemort should kill the object of the prophecy, or that he was the one to go after them, is placing even more blame on Snape than I think he deserves. His actions don't even technically qualify for accessory to murder.
Julia, I think your analysis of Snape's possible thoughts and feelings surrounding the time after DD's death quite fascinating. Personally, I tend to think he was willing to act on his own well before that, because we see him on several occasions in the series going against DD's orders due to his own beliefs or feelings about what he should do.
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 6:44 am (#1730 of 2617)
"I mean, everyone's fortunate to get what love comes their way." (Mona)
I can agree with that I only said that Snape was not a particularly fortunate person and it was not simply his luck that made him good - at least not any more than in the case of anyone else.
"Yes, he has a responsibility for what he did, but he did not cause their deaths..." (Wynnleaf)
I agree. He has a fully felt responsibility but it is not fair to make him out as the actual murderer - especially that he also did all he could to prevent the murder.
"...we see him on several occasions in the series going against DD's orders due to his own beliefs or feelings about what he should do. (Wynnleaf)
I don't mean he never does anything on his own before DD's death. Of course he does. But at the same time he goes to extremes following DD's orders in HBP and DH at least. It is during the chase, however, that he realizes his loyalty to DD (or to his promise) has got him into conflict with his own conscience and he has to take any further decisions in the knowledge that his internal moral guide may give him instructions different from those of his "external moral guide", DD, who he may have so far believed to be next to infallible. Before the last memory scene we never see him tell DD (politely though) to keep quiet and leave the planning to him. Yet, in the last memory scene this is exactly what he does.
mona amon - Feb 20, 2008 8:05 am (#1731 of 2617)
I can agree with that I only said that Snape was not a particularly fortunate person and it was not simply his luck that made him good - at least not any more than in the case of anyone else. (Julia)
Not a particularly fortunate person, and it didn't make him good, but he still was lucky to get Lily as a friend. I'm not saying he didn't deserve her as a friend, or that her friendship was somehow gratuitous. Let's say he was fortunate that he, with his capacity to love someone good and beautiful (as she is supposed to be), should not only meet someone like that but also be appreciated and understood by her. It doesn't happen very often when one of the parties is a greasy haired oddball and the other is the most popular girl of the year.
Lily was a strong non-Slytherin influence in his life, and that makes him more culpable (to use Jo's phrase in a different context) than his fellow slytherin aspiring Death-Eaters.
wynnleaf - Feb 20, 2008 8:43 am (#1732 of 2617)
I don't think the "lucky" or "fortunate" part isn't true, in the sense that Snape was fortunate to have a friend in Lily, at least for a time. Nor was he "lucky" to have her because kids like Snape shouldn't have a good friend like Lily. But where I draw a line would be in the notion that it was Lily that made Snape different from the other DE wanna'bes. Snape was already different, because otherwise he'd have had no interest in Lily. And his depth of concern and care for her was ultimately much greater and longer lasting than her's was for him. Yes, it was good for him that he met her and that she accepted him. Did Lily truly "like" or "love" him? JKR may say so in interviews, but I don't actually see love or even true liking displayed in the books.
Julia, I've seen other readers notice that in reading Lily's letter, Snape also read of her comments about Dumbledore. He certainly had access to the Prophet, but Lily's comment in the letter would have indicated that she was hearing similar things from Bathilda even at that time, before Bathilda was quite so old and vague, and that perhaps those Prophet articles had an element of truth. I wonder if he would have asked DD's portrait about it. Just as Harry went through a crisis of faith in Dumbledore's good intentions and veracity, I would not be surprised if Snape had done the same.
I imagine his "crisis," started when Dumbledore told him to kill him, and later even more when Dumbledore told him Harry had to die. We see Snape question DD over DD's concern about Snape's soul in the summer before Harry's 6th year. Then Snape seems to spend the year growing more concerned about DD's apparent lack of trust in him, or at least the fact that there are clearly many secrets he's not telling Snape. The outburst in the forest shows us that Snape was getting more upset over this, which is understandable when on top of everything else, he's just about to make this huge and dramatic personal sacrifice through killing Dumbledore. Then on top of all that existing concern about what DD is doing, Dumbledore tells Snape that Harry has to die. And Snape is truly appalled, because after all it was Dumbledore who had gotten Snape to spend all those years protecting Harry. That's been Snape's life, practically.
So in spite of all his doubts, he goes ahead and kills Dumbledore, only to find that DD's death brings out many hidden things about his past and then Snape discovers a letter from Lily raising further doubts about Dumbledore's real inner motivations.
So I guess what I'm getting at is that I think Snape's changing attitude toward Dumbledore occurs over two years, starting with the point when DD asked Snape to kill him. Snape remains loyal to Dumbledore's general plan and to the Order, but he definitely becomes his own man and chooses much of his own direction even while following through with DD's goals.
Interesting Dumbledore's "poor Severus" comment to Harry at Kings Cross Station. I didn't get the impression that DD had met with Snape's spirit.
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 10:29 am (#1733 of 2617)
"So I guess what I'm getting at is that I think Snape's changing attitude toward Dumbledore occurs over two years..." (Wynnleaf)
I think you are right, though I also think that he could (with doubts and stress etc.) accept things as long as it was himself who suffered from DD's extreme orders - even though he did suffer - but it was too much when he had to endanger others. But even if this change of attitude occurred over a longer period, there can be a certain point when his doubts and questions and the feelings concerning them culminate in a major realization that there is a line which even his loyalty to DD cannot make him cross and that he has to be, as you say, "his own man".
"I didn't get the impression that DD had met with Snape's spirit." (Wynnleaf)
Good question. Perhaps Harry met DD because he needed to talk to DD, while Snape had DD's portrait to talk to all the time so instead of DD, Snape may have wanted to meet Lily and I hope he did. (He died looking into "Lily's" green eyes, so perhaps his spirit woke up somewhere doing the same.)
PeskyPixie - Feb 20, 2008 12:56 pm (#1734 of 2617)
"Interesting Dumbledore's "poor Severus" comment to Harry at Kings Cross Station. I didn't get the impression that DD had met with Snape's spirit." -wynnleaf
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Don't do this to me, wynnleaf, not before my birthday!!!!!
At the time of 'King's Cross' Snape has just landed on the other side, and he meets with Lily first because he concentrates on her as he leaves the world. That doesn't mean he and Dumbledore won't have their private chats and stroll around the clouds in the future. ***sticks fingers into ears and hums My Favourite Things***
Seriously, I interpreted "Poor Severus" as Dumbledore's pity for Severus' life and the way it ended.
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 2:24 pm (#1735 of 2617)
"However, he was only "receptive to the possibility" because he saw Lily as worthy of his attention."
No, he LOVED Lily. "... a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature." That is a difference to me and it should be a difference in a saga where love is pronounced to be the power that defeats evil. It does not only happen between Harry and LV, it happens elsewhere too. For example, in Snape's soul.
"But without Lily, Snape would never have learned to love."
Or he would have met her in vain if he had not been able to love. Even JKR said about Snape: "he could love". By the way, Lily did not accept Snape "by chance", she accepted him because he opened her eyes to the world of magic.
Snape's part in the Potters' death: he did something wrong and it endangered the Potters but he also did all he could to save them, including risking his own life. He did it for Lily, nevertheless he did it. I think that balances things somewhat. If Pettigrew had not betrayed the Potters, Snape and DD could have saved them.
"... Dumbledore's association with Grindelwald that may have been the catalyst instead"
I actually meant it was part of it but the main idea was that he realized DD had ordered him to do something that was against his conscience when for a long time he had regarded DD as his guide to a better way of life. Then he was also confronted with the idea that Rita's accusations may have been at least partly true, which must have shaken him, as it shook Harry. Then he realized that his own conscience was (had become) a better guide after all than any other person. This is something I'd call a change but not a change that just happened overnight right then and nor did it only take DD's guidance but it took a lot of good, unselfish deeds and a serious dedication to the good even though he was not actually advertising it. I find his slow, painful way to redemption that was full of struggle, self-punishment and self-sacrifice (and which did start on the hilltop) more believable, serious, authentic and also deeper than any kind of "instant redemption" (and I don't even know how to imagine it) which could have spared him those nearly 20 years of gradual personal growth.
"At the time of 'King's Cross' Snape has just landed on the other side, and he meets with Lily first because he concentrates on her as he leaves the world. That doesn't mean he and Dumbledore won't have their private chats and stroll around the clouds in the future. ***sticks fingers into ears and hums My Favourite Things***" (Pesky)
(***Also humming***) "Let it be"
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 2:58 pm (#1736 of 2617)
I had the impression that he had admired Lily for a while even then - secretly - and had been planning to talk to her. I am not surprised that he did not choose Petunia - being a Muggle was not the worst part of her. Also, if Snape lived in a Muggle neighbourhood, where (locally) wizards were in absolute minority, and he lived with a Muggle father who did not like magic, it is quite understandable (and it has nothing to do with despising Muggles) that he was happy to see another child who was like him.
rambkowalczyk - Feb 20, 2008 7:14 pm (#1737 of 2617)
There are times when I wish the story was Severus Snape and the ...instead of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. I feel kind of cheated because it's difficult to add up the pieces of Snape's life and get a complete whole.
In book 7 we are introduced to Devoted Snape who through sheer faith does everything that Dumbledore asks him to. We see changes in his behavior. When he approaches Dumbledore at first he only wants to save Lily. He doesn't care about James and the baby. Dumbledore appeals to his better nature to get Severus to save James and Harry. My guess is that Snape may have had a brief fantasy of getting together with Lily after saving her life and Dumbledore through his disgust makes Snape realize that what he wants is wrong. Furthermore Snape agrees to spy for Dumbledore.
When James and Lily are killed, Snape further agrees to protect Harry. The major conflict is that Snape hates Harry. We the readers aren't given a reason. We suppose that it's because Harry looks too much like James that Snape thinks Harry has inherited James' arrogance. Maybe when he looks into Harry's eyes, Snape sees his guilt--guilt of giving the prophecy to Voldemort, guilt of using the Mudblood word to Lily. (He could have been angry with her flirting with James). Harry is a reminder of the life he can no longer have.
The fact is Harry is less like his father than Snape imagined. We see in Snape's memory that in first year Snape could not tell the difference between Harry and his father although it is clear that Dumbledore and McGonagall had no such problems. In COS, Snape sees the flying of the car to be the kind of thing James would have done and therefore recommends expulsion. In GOF, Snape tells Karkaroff not to blame Dumbledore because Potter has a habit of breaking the rules--unsaid of course just like his father.
Not until 5th year, do we see any signs of Snape questioning this assumption. This is when Snape does Legilimency and sees some of Harry's memories. Maybe then he realizes that Harry might not be who he thought he was. But old ways of thinking do not change easily especially when he catches Harry at the Pensieve.
Some people have argued that Snape may have wanted Harry to see those memories so that he could taunt him about his father. But I think not. Snape didn't want Harry to see those memories because he didn't want Voldermort to see those memories for those memories of Lily would prove him to be a traitor. I think Snape's anger at Harry is twofold, 1 Voldemort could read Harry's mind, and peeking at someone's memories is the type of arrogant thing James would have done.
The first half of book 6, there is little interaction of Harry with Snape. Harry is openly rude to Snape in class and doesn't fight nonverbally with Snape again reinforcing to Snape that Harry is like his father. In the Prince's tale Dumbledore says The boy will soon have spent more time in detention than out. Snape replies He is his father over again-- Dumbledore interrupts In looks perhaps, but his deepest nature is more like his mother's.
Does this conversation which I think happens in March change Snape's mind? And if it does even slightly does it revert back when Harry confronts him after killing Dumbledore? Certainly after killing Dumbledore Snape's soul is in a precarious position. Yet he does refrain from hurting Harry though he is clearly furious at alot of things at this time.
When does Snape stop loathing Harry? Does he do it sometime in book 7? I am not sure if I agree with JKR that Snape hates Harry up till the end. I mean if he can change his opinion about Lupin to the point where he goes out of his way (and some say disobeying Dumbledore's orders) isn't it possible that he no longer hates Harry?
wynnleaf - Feb 20, 2008 8:36 pm (#1738 of 2617)
When does Snape stop loathing Harry? Does he do it sometime in book 7? I am not sure if I agree with JKR that Snape hates Harry up till the end. (ramb)
I'm not certain, but I think the word that JKR uses in describing Snape's feelings toward Harry is "loathe," and not "hate." I'm not sure if this is intentional, but there is a difference in the meaning of the words.
I thought about it for the first time this afternoon when my 3rd grader asked me what "loathe" meant (a little synchronicity there). So we looked it up. The main word to define "loathe" was "abhor," so we looked up that and found, unhelpfully, "loathe" but also "dislike greatly" or even "intense dislike." I found "hate" as a synonym, but not as a defining aspect of "loathe," so I checked out the word "hate," and found a few words defining it that I never found for "loathe." Hate seems to include "hostility" and "animosity" more often than not.
While "loathe" and "hate" are both about intense dislike, "hate" seems to include a strong sense of enmity, which is why you've got "hostility" and "animosity" in there as well.
So for Snape to "loathe" Harry, he need only dislike him and abhor him. If he "hated" Harry, it would include a kind of enmity, that is, Snape wouldn't just dislike Harry with intensity, he would actively wish him ill. And that we do not see. That's why, in my opinion, it makes sense for Snape to loathe Harry yet protect him, because loathing is not necessarily the same as hating.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 4:08 am (#1739 of 2617)
Very good points Ramb.
"Maybe then he realizes that Harry might not be who he thought he was."
I also have the feeling that during the Occlumency classes there was a chance of Snape getting closer to Harry. Harry's memories certainly contradict Snape's general notion of him. In the first lesson, after asking who the dog had belonged to, Snape's lips "curl" (a default reaction, which he perhaps regrets the next moment)then he praises Harry and not just in a word or two but in several sentences and also in a manner that may be intended to be soothing. Harry, however, hates the situation (and Snape) so much that he does not notice the slight change at all and reacts angrily, so Snape also reverts to his usual manner. But the fact that Snape is so angry when he sees that Harry is not getting any better at occlumency indicates that he is really worried (in the same way as he is angry with DD when DD's life is in danger). It is also interesting that during the lessons Snape explains quite a lot to Harry about the situation. DD has clearly forbidden Order members to tell Harry the truth and we see at the beginning of the book that Sirius does not agree (and he is right) and he does tell Harry a few things. Snape, however, tells him perhaps even more (I think it underlines the fact that Snape and Sirius have a common goal: trying to protect Harry) - perhaps as much as he can without openly disobeying DD. The fact that they actually talk is in itself an achievement. The Worst Memory, however, puts an abrupt end to the lessons. Snape sees Harry again as James, his old "wound" reopens, while Harry's picture of his father is shaken. At the end of the book he blames Snape for Sirius's death - I think it is partly because he is trying to avoid having to blame himself and also because by accusing Snape of something very bad, he is able to somehow justify his father's behaviour (not a logical thing but it makes Harry's emotional life easier).
"Certainly after killing Dumbledore Snape's soul is in a precarious position. Yet he does refrain from hurting Harry though he is clearly furious at alot of things at this time."
Harry is in danger at that moment and Snape knows this. I think whatever happens, whatever Snape feels, Snape would not physically hurt Harry and Harry's protection in times of immediate danger is always his first priority - a learned reflex or something like this.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 5:48 am (#1740 of 2617)
"... isn't it possible that he no longer hates Harry? (Ramb)
I tend to think that loathing is not the only feeling he has for Harry. I would also like to know how not seeing Harry in the DH year affects him. Does the distance change anything? Perhaps what he hates or loathes is something (or lots of things) connected to Harry. His own guilt, James's memory, the loss of "the life he can no longer have". What he should do is to detach Harry as a person from these things and I think he can do it for brief moments, whenever he is saving him, and it seems he manages to detach Harry from the things he still loathes in the final moment when Harry suddenly means nothing else to him but access to Lily .
rambkowalczyk - Feb 21, 2008 7:01 am (#1741 of 2617)
I never contemplated the distinction between hating and loathing and question whether JKR uses the dictionary as much as her fans do. Also in my mind loathing is a much stronger feeling than hate. On the other hand this distinction may be relevant.
As wynnleaf pointed out, Snape absolutely abhors James not only for bullying, breaking the rules with little consequence, but also because when all was said and done, James got the girl. This feeling of loathing is unfairly transferred to Harry, yet as Quirrel says he did not wish him dead.
I would also like to know how not seeing Harry in the DH year affects him. Does the distance change anything? Julie H
It does seem that when not in Harry's presence, Snape is not reminded of James and might be able to look at Harry more objectively. I also agree that Snape's reason's to loathe Harry can be multi-facited -- not just his resemblance to James. It would just be a pity if Snape died with these negative emotions as he was definately changing for the better.
mona amon - Feb 21, 2008 8:17 am (#1742 of 2617)
When does Snape stop loathing Harry? Does he do it sometime in book 7? I am not sure if I agree with JKR that Snape hates Harry up till the end. (Ramb)
Does the distance change anything? (Julia)
Whether it is hatred or loathing, it is such a strong emotion that I'm certain Snape felt a void when Harry was no longer around to be loathed during that lonely year.
I like to imagine that he let go of his hatred that night in the Forest of Dean, seeing him again after so many months of not knowing what was happening to this boy he had sworn to protect, and watching him follow his patronus so trustingly.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 8:57 am (#1743 of 2617)
Mona, this is a very beautiful thought again. I like it.
mona amon - Feb 21, 2008 9:28 am (#1744 of 2617)
Thanks Julia!
Orion - Feb 21, 2008 11:55 am (#1745 of 2617)
"Whether it is hatred or loathing, it is such a strong emotion that I'm certain Snape felt a void when Harry was no longer around to be loathed during that lonely year." (mona amon) That might be true! I have two cats who are united in sincere mutual loathing. But when they are alone at night, they huddle together. They would probably miss bullying each other if they couldn't do it any more.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 12:12 pm (#1746 of 2617)
Another insightful comment, Orion, as always.
Orion - Feb 21, 2008 12:25 pm (#1747 of 2617)
???
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 12:27 pm (#1748 of 2617)
I mean the comparison with the cats. It's funny and a kind of ... deep. :-) A new angle?
wynnleaf - Feb 21, 2008 12:31 pm (#1749 of 2617)
I have two cats who are united in sincere mutual loathing. But when they are alone at night, they huddle together. They would probably miss bullying each other if they couldn't do it any more. (Orion)
It is true that in real life sometimes people that have a long standing relationship of active dislike -- active in the sense of sniping at each other, thwarting the other's desires, etc. -- can develop a kind of dependence on each other and even a type of empathy. I think we see Harry start to form this for Snape in OOTP, but suppressed it later for understandable (if not legitimate) reasons. It continued to develop unknowingly for Harry through his "relationship" with the writer of the HBP notes, and I think those things prepared the way for Harry to very quickly accept the new perspective on Snape that he got in The Prince's Tale.
I agree that Snape probably began to see a different side of Harry in the OOTP occlumency lessons. During the year of HBP, Dumbledore reminded Snape that he thought Harry was much more like Lily than James, but it would have probably been shortly after that when Harry used Sectumsempra and Snape learned about Harry's use of the HBP potions book, so Snape's opinions, if they had been changing, may have reverted to the "James" comparison. Did Snape ever truly change in his view of Harry? I don't think we know, in spite of JKR's assertion that he continued to loathe Harry to the end.
A problem with the loathing to the end notion, for me at least, is that when the dying Snape looks into Harry's eyes for Lily, I feel that he must have seen Lily there in the past or why, in this extremity, was he so willing to find her there? It's not like he hadn't looked into Harry's eyes many, many times in the past. I guess I feel that his looking for Lily in Harry's eyes at the end means he probably felt some sort of changing of his opinion about Harry prior to that. Of course, I'm sure Snape would have claimed to loathe Harry to the end, whatever the truth was.
Orion - Feb 21, 2008 12:45 pm (#1750 of 2617)
Oh, you weren't being sarcastic, Julia.
When Snape "curls" his lips, how can you be so sure that Rowling wants to show us that he smiles in a sympathetic way? When I read it, but I'm no native speaker of course, I understood: malice. "Who did the dog belong to?", that sounded cruel. Like "I have seen you on that tree, sonny...", as if he trampled Harry in the mud.
wynnleaf - Feb 21, 2008 1:20 pm (#1751 of 2617)
I understood: malice. "Who did the dog belong to?", that sounded cruel. (Orion)
Of course, you could be correct. But prior to starting the lessons, Snape had been, well, civil for Snape. Compare it to the manner in which he talks to Dumbledore in private. This isn't much different in tone. He really talks to Harry fairly well at that point (for Snape, I mean). He tells Harry a lot more than most any other adults do and he actually explains more than typical (about as much as Lupin explains the patronus at any rate). And immediately after Harry answered Snape about whose dog it was, Snape says:
‘Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been,’ said Snape, raising his wand once more. ‘You managed to stop me eventually, though you wasted time and energy shouting. You must remain focused. Repel me with your brain and you will not need to resort to your wand.’
Since Snape practically never compliments anyone, including Draco, that's practically high praise. In any case, it doesn't seem that Snape was in a malicious state of mind at the time.
Then they try again and Harry's mind goes to some very stressful subjects including scenes of Lily (tough on Snape probably) and the dead Cedric (probably also tough on Snape given his reaction to Ginny being taken in COS). So then they're both stressed and getting more angry every second, with Snape telling Harry repeatedly to clear his mind (yeah right), and get rid of emotion (like Snape was getting rid of his?).
And then the next try Harry sees some of the abusive behavior of the Dursleys, but then he sees the Dept. of Mysteries and his "I KNOW, I KNOW" seems to make Snape pull out of the legilimency to find out what exactly Harry knew. Snape is trying to analyse what Harry reveals about his knowledge of that hallway and door, but Snape is not angry particularly at Harry at that point. It's only when Harry uses Voldemort's name that Snape gets angry again -- we never are told exactly why Snape insists on not saying that, but I suspect there's something about saying it that's akin to the problems with saying it in DH. Anyway, Snape then goes back to giving somewhat stern, but otherwise uninflamatory directions and then the meeting is over.
I don't think, reviewing how Snape's reactions shift throughout that teaching session, that Snape was in a malicious frame of mind at that particular time. Therefore I don't think his comment about the dog is due to malice toward Harry. Remember though that with his memories of Petunia, he probably still dislikes the memory of her and looks down on her. Views of Petunia, Vernon and the rest of the family probably fit exactly the sort of people he'd have expected Petunia to end up with as a family (idiots, he'd probably assume), and I suspect that in retrospect (after DH revelations) the curl of his lip was more of a sneer at the Dursleys.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 2:17 pm (#1752 of 2617)
Orion, you actually thought I was being sarcastic! No, not at all! I like your sense of humour very much. It was just that I found Mona's comment totally touching and then you showed me that it was also humorous.
As for "Snape's lips curling": I did not interpret it as kind either but I thought he checked himself soon enough and immediately afterwards he tried to say something kind and soothing. Now I think Wynnleaf is probably right:
"I suspect that in retrospect (after DH revelations) the curl of his lip was more of a sneer at the Dursleys."
Of course, he knew Petunia! That's a great connection.
"It's only when Harry uses Voldemort's name that Snape gets angry again -- we never are told exactly why Snape insists on not saying that, but I suspect there's something about saying it that's akin to the problems with saying it in DH." (Wynnleaf)
To me it seems it has something to do with the Dark Mark. Perhaps there is a jinx attached to it so that those who have the mark cannot or must not use any other name but "the Dark Lord" with reference to LV. But there must be something more behind it if Snape insists that Harry should not use the name either. Snape may know or suspect something about the possible dangers of using the name. Perhaps the reason is precisely Harry's connection to LV's mind. I mean the Dark Mark is a connection between DE's and LV and it seems to be related to Snape not using the name (he touches his forearm when they discuss this), so he might think since Harry also has a special (though different) direct connection to LV, the name may not be totally safe for him.
Orion - Feb 21, 2008 2:21 pm (#1753 of 2617)
Names again - like summoning house-elfs, or Ron with the Deluminator. Another catch! We should make a list. Names are fascinating anyway, aren't they?
Julia, I'm so glad you weren't being sarcastic. If one's used to Zelmia, one expects anything.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 2:29 pm (#1754 of 2617)
"Names are fascinating anyway, aren't they?" (Orion)
Absolutely. I wonder why there is no "Names thread" here. (Or is there?)
(It is perhaps off-thread but isn't it interesting how LV changes his names? First he hates the name "Tom Marvolo Riddle", so he changes it to "Lord Voldemort" but then this name becomes taboo. One can't help feeling he does not like to be called anything.)
Potteraholic - Feb 21, 2008 2:46 pm (#1755 of 2617)
"I like to imagine that he let go of his hatred that night in the Forest of Dean, seeing him again after so many months of not knowing what was happening to this boy he had sworn to protect, and watching him follow his patronus so trustingly." mona amon
Like Julia H., I too, liked how you worded this idea, mona. I'm a lurker on this thread -- the last time I posted anything was way back in August 2007 -- but when I read these words, mona, I got a bit teary-eyed. So I had to post!
wynnleaf - Feb 21, 2008 6:35 pm (#1756 of 2617)
I would add that, in revealing his Patronus - though Harry did not yet realise this - Snape was really opening up to Harry for the very first time. (zelmia)
It was Snape's plan to use the doe patronus to lure Harry toward the sword. But in deciding to use the doe, Snape must have felt very strongly that the doe would be something that Harry would feel tempted enough to follow out into the dark forest. It seems to me that it's likely Snape knew that Harry would recognize the doe as having to do with Lily and would automatically trust it.
And that's interesting in itself. Snape determined on a plan that was dependent on Harry being drawn to anything related to Lily.
mona amon - Feb 21, 2008 9:56 pm (#1757 of 2617)
-- but when I read these words, mona, I got a bit teary-eyed. So I had to post! (Potteraholic)
Aww, thanks, PAH! You are making me blush!
Lol, I never suspected you of being a lurker on this thread!
Orion, you actually thought I was being sarcastic! No, not at all! I like your sense of humour very much. It was just that I found Mona's comment totally touching and then you showed me that it was also humorous. (Julia)
Ha! Two different interpretations! You are both right. I was laughing at Snape, as I often do, but I also felt for his loneliness.
To me it seems it has something to do with the Dark Mark. Perhaps there is a jinx attached to it so that those who have the mark cannot or must not use any other name but "the Dark Lord" with reference to LV. (Julia)
I do not think there was an actual jinx. It only shows how much Snape feared Voldemort. And it upsets him to see the feared name being used so casually by Harry. Dumbledore with his impeccable manners, always refers to him politely as Lord Voldemort.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 10:13 pm (#1758 of 2617)
"It only shows how much Snape feared Voldemort." (Mona)
But he is brave enough to deceive him and to "utter lies in his presence" regularly, to fight against him, to prevent him from achieving his major goal of killing Harry. When the use of the name is discussed, Snape involuntarily rubs his forearm (or something similar) as if he was checking that it was not signalling anything (?). Of course, it could be something psychological only (not necessarily a jinx, though LV did jinx his name later) - like not being able to get rid of his past.
The Doe:
Yes, Snape needs to open up by producing the Patronus, which symbolizes his secret and so many things he has tried to hide. The Patronus also reveals Snape's light side - or perhaps not only reveals it but lets his light side come to the surface, "come to light". It is his own decision and it is important that he chooses to do this in order to help Harry. He has already given up so much while fulfilling his vow that it is good to see that now he is making a "sacrifice" - by giving up his secrecy - that is good for him as well.
"Harry stared at the creature, filled with wonder, not at her strangeness, but at her inexplicable familiarity."
Perhaps this is why Harry later knows that the Doe was also his mother's Patronus: it looks familiar, he may have seen it as a baby. Of course, Snape cannot know that, still he trusts that Harry will trust the Doe. Does Snape realize that Lily represents a bond between them? If he does, the "Look at me" scene is only one short step away.
It is interesting that Ron's catharsis comes immediately afterwards but it also seems that the appearance of the Doe is a turning point in Harry's Quest. For quite a while he has been losing support and resources until he is left alone with Hermione, gets almost captured by LV and loses (temporarily) faith in DD. Desperate situation. The Patronus/Snape is the first to come and help. Then Ron comes back, the locket is destroyed and after that Harry gets help from various sources: Dobby, Aberforth, Griphook, Bill and Fleur (even Xeno, as regards information) and so on until he is joined by a whole army of people on the light side.
mona amon - Feb 22, 2008 3:02 am (#1759 of 2617)
But bravery doesn't mean the absense of fear. If Snape is very much afraid of Voldemort, and yet faces him and does whatever he has to do, that only makes him all the more brave. I think it was important to show us that he was afraid, so we could better appreciate his bravery.
It is during these Occlumency Lessons that a more human and vulnerable side of Snape is revealed for the first time, to be developed later in DH. He is agitated, unnerved, worried. And he reveals (to Harry of all people) that he is afraid of Voldemort.
"Professor Dumbledore says his name,' said Harry quietly.
'Dumbledore is an extremely powerful wizard,' Snape muttered. 'While he may feel secure enough to use the name...the rest of us...' He rubbed his left forearm, apparently unconsciouly, on the spot where Harry knew the Dark Mark was burned into his skin.'
It is interesting that Ron's catharsis comes immediately afterwards but it also seems that the appearance of the Doe is a turning point in Harry's Quest. For quite a while he has been losing support and resources until he is left alone with Hermione, gets almost captured by LV and loses (temporarily) faith in DD.
Good points. You forgot the breaking of his wand. That really makes him hit rock bottom.
Julia H. - Feb 22, 2008 3:15 am (#1760 of 2617)
I think I can agree with that, Mona.
Julia H. - Feb 25, 2008 4:01 am (#1761 of 2617)
Thanks to the Silver Doe, we seem to have reached a generally acceptable agreement on the question of redemption...
PeskyPixie - Mar 1, 2008 8:53 pm (#1762 of 2617)
I feel that Snape fears Voldemort. Also, since he has experience as a Death Eater, Snape has the added bonus of knowing exactly how terrible the Dark Lord can be. (I think it fair to assume that Dumbledore's knowledge of Voldemort's anger at Lucius being 'terrible to behold' comes from Snape?) I agree with Mona that his willingness to face something he fears exemplifies his bravery.
The moment in OotP (Occlumency) when he rubs his forearm, "apparently unconsciously, on the spot where Harry knew the Dark Mark was burned into his skin", Severus is completely vulnerable; he has unintentionally(?) let down his guard and in this one small, 'unconscious' gesture we catch a small glimpse of how he may feel about his own past and the choices he made in his youth.
Julia H. - Mar 2, 2008 5:14 am (#1763 of 2617)
Snape definitely knows what he is facing. (I agree that "terrible to behold" comes right from Snape, even the words may be Snape's own words.) It is really touching at the end of GoF when he tells Dumbledore that he is ready to do what Dumbledore wants him to do ("I am.") and he is paler than usual and then leaves without another word. At vital moments, when he says something very important, Snape, who can otherwise speak quite eloquently, never uses more than one or two (maybe three) words: "Anything." "I am." "Always." "Look at me." When he promises to kill Dumbledore, he only nods. These are probably the moments when his feelings are too deep for him to put them into words.
The "off-guard" moments, one of which Pesky mentions, are few and precious because the reader can catch a rare glimpse into Snape's soul. (It seems even Harry is touched by this unconscious revelation for a brief moment.) I agree that to Snape the Dark Mark is a physical manifestation of his feelings about the choices of his youth, his regret and shame that he ever let that mark be burned into his skin. It is also a symbol of the fact that he can never entirely free himself of his past: the consequences are always there, the feelings of remorse and loss are always there, the lingering doubt about his character is always there and then there is also his dangerous task of spying on Voldemort, of spending time among DE's, acting a person he could have become had he not changed his life.
In GoF it becomes quite clear how he feels about his Dark Mark. He unconsciously touches it and then becomes angry when fake-Moody cryptically taunts him about it and later he does not want to look at Karkarov's mark when Karkarov comes to discuss it with him. (In both cases Harry is present but Snape discovers it only later, so it is not because of Harry.) However, he does discuss the Dark Mark with Dumbledore in order to warn him about the Dark Lord's returning to power. At the end of the book, when Fudge does not want to believe Voldemort's return, Snape makes a sudden decision and reveals his mark in an attempt to convince Fudge. This is in sharp contrast with his previous reactions to the topic of the Dark Mark. The minister probably knows about Snape's past but in that room there are a lot of people present, including students (Harry etc.). Not every one of them will have heard about Snape's past (and there may be quite a few people there who did not know that DE's had the mark burned into their arms - Fudge does not seem to have known), still Snape does not only face his own Dark Mark (and by extension his dark past), but he also decides to reveal it in front of all these people because he thinks it is important to make the minister understand and believe the truth about Voldemort. I think this is another moment of bravery of a certain type and a moment that shows Snape's determination to do anything in order to fight Voldemort.
Orion - Mar 2, 2008 10:01 am (#1764 of 2617)
Oh, the Snapists are back from the Sirius thread, with bag and baggage, tent and backpack. You look exhausted after the long trip, does anyone want a drink?
PeskyPixie - Mar 2, 2008 10:59 am (#1765 of 2617)
Blood-red, elf-made wine please, Orion (the honorary Snaper)!
At the end of the book, when Fudge does not want to believe Voldemort's return, Snape makes a sudden decision and reveals his mark in an attempt to convince Fudge. -Julia
Oh, yes. This was the first (and most sound) event which confirmed my suspicion of Snape's allegiance to Dumbledore. I could not find any way to spin it around and explain it as some sort of subtle strategy for the Death Eaters.
Julia H. - Mar 2, 2008 11:06 am (#1766 of 2617)
Isn't it nice to have someone waiting for us with drinks? (The wine will do, yes, please.)
Snape's allegiance to Dumbledore is quite well established in GoF (only to make readers doubt it later). There is Dumbledore's mysterious reason to trust him, the Foe Glass, in which he is watching himself for a while (perhaps contemplating this newly emerged Snape who has finalized his allegiance and is ready to start a new fight), and finally the scene where the tasks are distributed.
Orion - Mar 2, 2008 12:26 pm (#1767 of 2617)
Archivist's note: This post is blank as it contained only an emoticon ~ Mona
rambkowalczyk - Mar 2, 2008 2:51 pm (#1768 of 2617)
Snape's allegiance to Dumbledore is quite well established in GoF (only to make readers doubt it later).
I agree. But then again, hindsight is always 20 20 vision. There were a number of people who felt for sure Snape was not Dumbledore's man through and through until they read book 7.
wine looks good!
mona amon - Mar 2, 2008 8:07 pm (#1769 of 2617)
LOL, thanks Orion!
The moment in OotP (Occlumency) when he rubs his forearm, "apparently unconsciously, on the spot where Harry knew the Dark Mark was burned into his skin", Severus is completely vulnerable; he has unintentionally(?) let down his guard and in this one small, 'unconscious' gesture we catch a small glimpse of how he may feel about his own past and the choices he made in his youth. (Pesky)
I think he makes this unconscious gesture three times in the series, in the above mentioned occlumency lesson, in the conversation with Minerva just before fleeing Hogwarts in DH, and in GOF, when the fake Moody does something to make it hurt. (What does he do to him, BTW? I never really understood that part.)
I love it when Snape lets down his guard, it happens so rarely. The part in CoS where he grips the chair very hard when he hears that a student has been taken by the monster springs to mind.
There are also the pensieve memories with Dumbledore. Its only when he is alone with Dumbledore that he can truly be himself, because Dumbledore is the only person from whom he has nothing to hide.
Julia H. - Mar 3, 2008 7:13 am (#1770 of 2617)
"What does he do to him, BTW? I never really understood that part." (Mona)
I have never really realized that fake-Moody may have been doing something to make Snape's arm hurt. Snape does react as if the mark started to hurt at that moment but there is no indication that fake-Moody does something besides speaking and reminding him of his Dark Mark. Of course, there are non-verbal spells and other things but I think it may be simply psychology. Or it is possible that the mark hurts anyway as it is getting stronger in those days and fake-Moody reminds Snape of this pain - maybe in order to check that the mark is signalling something (I guess he has no mark while he is Moody-shaped) - and then laughs contentedly. Psychologically it is also understandable: Snape has lived a Voldemort-free decade and then a few more nearly Voldemort-free years and now he knows that the Dark Lord's power is returning because the mark is becoming stronger. He also knows that soon he will have to face his own past again so he is clearly nervous and at the moment he is standing face-to-face with an auror (or so he thinks), who has already searched his room and who is taunting him about his past and its symbol, his dark mark. Facing his past is not only facing Voldemort (which is a lot in itself) but facing suspicion and distrust as well in the new situation.
I also love the moments when Snape lets down his guard and I agree that it is with Dumbledore alone that he can be truly himself. Also, there is perhaps only one moment when we see him totally alone and this is the scene in Sirius's room - and then again he is completely vulnerable.
(Good wine, Orion.)
Steve, I'd love to carry your thoughts on Sirius to the Sirius thread (it's been too sleepy there for a while ) so they may be discussed with the entire focus on Sirius rather than have to try to bring it back to Snape all the time.
"He was not a man of words very much at least when it came to really personal things but I don't see why the years of atonement, remorse, commitment and sacrifice cannot be as good as any kind of a gesture, behaviour pattern or word." -Julia H.
I agree.
wynnleaf - Feb 19, 2008 7:40 pm (#1722 of 2617)
it is precisely that sort of highly romanticised view that I find I simply cannot agree with. (zelmia)
I'm uncertain why you call it "highly romanticised." What part is romanticized? Aren't we talking about a piece of fiction in the first place? It's "romanticizing" Snape to see him as redeemed? Even JKR said she wanted his character to be seen as redeemed.
And likening taunting someone to allowing Nagini to kill a baby? What? The two aren't anywhere in the same ballpark.
Nine year old Snape was unloveble? I don't really see anything about 9 year old Severus that didn't deserve the same love any other kid should have had. But he was "lucky" someone loved him? Wow. I guess Harry at 9 years old was just "unlucky." But to be more serious, in my opinion there are vanishingly few 9 year old kids who don't deserve to be loved. It's tragic when they have no one to love them, not "lucky" if someone loves them because, after all, they're unloveable, right?
Snape wasn't a unlovable "bloke" when he met Lily and they became friends. He was a little kid of 9. If Lily had met Lucius, I doubt if her acquaintanceship would have done him any good at all. If Lily had met Draco it probably wouldn't have helped him at all. Why? Because they had probably developed such prejudices and nasty attitudes already that no amount of friendship from a "mudblood" would have made any difference. They'd never even have talked to Lily, much less become friends.
It's not romanticizing Snape to realize that he must have developed a lot more motivation rather than just some one and only positive factor of a love for only one person in the world, Lily. Loving Lily just doesn't add up to trying to save Lupin's life, or Dumbledore's, or Katie Bell's, or risking his life to protect Draco, or giving up practically everything else that's important to him to defeat LV, follow DD's orders, and protect Harry.
PeskyPixie - Feb 20, 2008 12:24 am (#1723 of 2617)
By the way, do we really need to keep reminding ourselves that "we're talking about a work of fiction"? I don't think anyone here thinks we're discussing real people.
We're not????????!!!!!!!!!!!!
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 12:54 am (#1724 of 2617)
I guess I am the romantic one. That may be true - that's how it is. What I was trying to say (with Lucius and other things) is that I don't believe mere chance, luck, whatever that is totally independent of the personality can bring about a great transformation like Snape's. Zelmia will clearly disagree but I do think he became very good before he died even if he was not nice - but that may depend on what we consider important as regards change, character or goodness. I simply see his nastiness as a surface phenomenon (probably the trace of all he has been through in his life) and I like concentrating on what is revealed by his actions about the depth of his personality. This is more or less what I mean when I say his words contradict his actions and I also say his actions are more important. Of course he is a character with obvious faults but that makes him more alive, more believable, more human. So I disagree with the significance of the "chance" element and I think he got his "chance" because he was, so to speak, receptive to such a possibility. I also find him the least lucky character in the whole series, so if his change for the better was merely luck, then we can easily say other people were better because they were luckier. (Even if we say he was not a likable child - not that I agree - that was bad luck rather than his fault, was it not?) Some of the bad characters were luckier in their relationships and still did not go through the same change for the better (hence my reference to Malfoy and Pettigrew). It is probably my fault that - seeing that he did change and did become good - I tend to think that he was able to change because his character (unlike LV's, for example) had not gone too far in the wrong direction and because there was always something in him (like this tendency to be loyal, like the ability to love very much) that made it possible for him to start the process leading to his ultimate redemption.
Of course, I do not agree that he would have been glad to see Harry "tossed to Nagini" - he spent years protecting him and also other people and already in PS it becomes clear where the line is between his loathing Harry and his willingness to protect him. Good deeds themselves improve the personality - you cannot be indifferent to something or somebody you fight for or you save - or for something or somebody you have been fighting for or you have already saved.
I'm glad you have mentioned the betrayal thing in DH - I would like to come back to it.
mona amon - Feb 20, 2008 12:54 am (#1725 of 2617)
LOL! It's to Jo's credit that she created characters that we can feel so strongly about!
EDIT: oops, this post was supposed to come immediately after Pesky's post and not Julia's!
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 2:39 am (#1726 of 2617)
Snape's "betrayal" of the plan in DH. What was the point? Well, I think the point can truly be seen only with a brain like DD's (and that may have been Snape's approach to it). I think DD is in a way a politician or, to put it mildly, a great chess player, who likes planning several steps ahead and knows about things like compromise or calculated risk. He explains his reason to Snape like this: "You will have to give Voldemort the correct date of Harry's departure from his aunt and uncle's .... Not to do so will raise suspicion, when Voldemort believes you so well informed ...that ... ought to ensure Harry's safety ... I am counting upon you to remain in Lord Voldemort's good books as long as possible, or Hogwarts will be left to the mercy of the Carrows..."
Basically, DD here is willing to risk a few adult lives in order to ensure the relative safety of Hogwarts students (and staff) by Snape remaining LV's "right hand" and becoming headmaster - so he thinks ahead, not only of the immediate task of rescuing Harry. (He has a tendency to create complicated, multi-purpose plans.) At the same time he believes, his plan for rescuing Harry ought to be good even under these circumstances. Well, he is very nearly mistaken in this regard.
Making a cunning plan like this is one thing, carrying it out is quite another. The latter is Snape's task. What is Snape's situation at the moment? He has recently "killed" DD, he is completely isolated from the right side, "a basket dangling on Lord Voldemort's arm" and he knows his task is to promote the right side's cause as much as he can - and he also has to be able to remain sane under the circumstances, to be very careful (no mistakes are allowed in his job) and has to have a good and up-to-date understanding of the ever changing situation in order to know what should be the truly right (I mean practical, wise, forward taking) step for him to take. It is an extremely stressful, difficult situation. The only straw he can "grasp" (that may help to keep him above water) if he does not want to act totally alone is portrait-DD's instructions, advice or assessment of the situation.
A very important factor is Snape's unconditional loyalty to DD. He trusts him and thinks what he himself has to do, the best he can do is to keep following DD's orders. He also probably believes he has already done the worst thing that DD could ever have asked him to do (by killing DD). During the chase, however, he seems to be realizing something. His attempt to save Lupin, if successful, would have resulted in the loss of his cover as a spy - an all important thing - and still he acts on the moment's impulse to save someone's life. By this time Snape is a person who is used to saving others whenever he can but this time his action - from a strictly DD-like point of view - is irrational and is against DD's clear instructions. (DD explicitly told him to play his part convincingly if he had to take part in the chase.) I find it very important (as regards Snape's character) that here he follows his own conscience rather than DD's instructions. It seems to be a turning point for him.
Next, he is crying at 12 GP. I know the scene is there by mistake but I find it a brilliant mistake, which fits very well with the rest of Snape's story. He is at the empty headquarters of the Order after betraying Order members (with the results we know), crying. He may perhaps realize and by going there acknowledges that belonging to the Order was - in spite of everything - important to him. He accidentally finds Lily's letter, which, accidentally, is not only about Lily but also about DD having been friends with Grindelwald. So far, Snape has probably considered DD practically perfect and now he, just like Harry, is disappointed in him. He realizes that DD - upon his promise of "anything" - has finally made him do something he is not willing to take on his conscience. In a way, DD betrayed him, betrayed his trust and loyalty to him. Next, we see him at Hogwarts as he learns where Harry is. DD starts giving him instructions concerning the sword. He says "I know", he says: "don't worry ... I have a plan". He is still doing his duty, he is still doing what he has to do but he does not want DD to plan for him any more. He has got over his disappointment (though his manner still suggests that he is somewhat disillusioned with regard to DD), he understands he is alone and he has taken full responsibility for his own life and actions. He has grown up.
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 3:54 am (#1727 of 2617)
Just one more thought on the chance element: the idea tha Snape could change only because - by mere chance - he happened to be liked by Lily in their childhood - my view is that it was not Lily's love for him that changed him but his own love for Lily. An internal cause rather than an external one.
mona amon - Feb 20, 2008 5:05 am (#1728 of 2617)
An excellent analysis, Julia! I do not know if I agree with all the points, I'll have to think about it more, but it's really good all the same.
Just one more thought on the chance element: the idea tha Snape could change only because - by mere chance - he happened to be liked by Lily in their childhood - my view is that it was not Lily's love for him that changed him but his own love for Lily. An internal cause rather than an external one.
I agree that it was his own love for Lily rather than her love for him which changed him, although I think he was fortunate to have Lily's love, because how much more bitter his life would have been if he hadn't had her friendship for those five years. I mean, everyone's fortunate to get what love comes their way.
wynnleaf - Feb 20, 2008 5:36 am (#1729 of 2617)
I agree that it was not Lily's love which changed Snape. After all, he did his changing long after she had dropped the friendship. It was his love for her that changed him.
Why my objection to the idea that anyone is "romancing" anything about Snape? Why make the comment that these are fictional characters?
Because the whole HP series is, in that sense, romantic. In literary terms a romance is "An extended fictional prose narrative about improbable events involving characters that are quite different from ordinary people." Or, another way to look at it: "A long fictitious tale of heroes and extraordinary or mysterious events, usually set in a distant time or place." Or yet another definition that is often meant when used in the context zelmia wrote: "Not based on fact; imaginary or fictitious."
I don't think one can "romanticize" a fictional character from what is in many ways a "romantic" tale (think literary, not love story). JKR wrote Snape as a romantic character, in the literary sense, just as the entire series is a long fictitious tale with heroes and extraordinary and mysterious events, set in a "distant" place, and it's every bit imaginary and fictitious.
So to say that one person's view of Snape is romanticizing him presupposes that he isn't romantic, in the literary sense, to begin with, but in fact, he is.
As regards whether taunting Harry about James shows that Snape didn't really feel remorse about his actions -- that kind of presupposes the notion that people are not contradictory. In fact, mostly in real life people are quite capable of thinking and doing very contradictory things. One of the things that makes Snape so very 3-dimensional is that he is not just complex, but has that more realistic quality of doing things that are contradictory. He is very remorseful about what he did, therefore he dedicates his whole life to protecting Harry. If Lily had simply died in the muggle car wreck that the Dursley's claim, would Snape have dedicated his life to protecting Harry? Probably not. It's because he feels responsible for her death that he does it.
Is he remorseful about James death? Well, in the sense that by the time of the series he's willing so save even people he dislikes, I'd say in that by then he is remorseful over his actions. Is he sad James is dead? Ha! I doubt it. If James had been killed in the Dursley's imagined car wreck, I'm sure Snape would have been quite pleased. Is Snape sorry for Harry? No, he's not. At first he considers Harry kind of spoiled and arrogant, so he doesn't really see the effects of being orphaned. He had no personal experience of loving, caring parents, so he probably doesn't empathize with the tragedy of having no parents. He may, before OOTP, imagine that the Dursley's spoiled him. And he may feel negatively toward Harry in part because Lily died to save him. And he may dislike Harry for getting the fame of defeating LV, when really it was Lily's action that defeated him. But that doesn't mean Snape isn't very remorseful of his actions.
As to the notion that Snape killed the Potters, I really, really object to that. Yes, he has a responsibility for what he did, but he did not cause their deaths, Voldemort did. We discussed this once at length, even looking at many nationality's laws about murder and accessory to murder. 19 year old Snape brought the partial prophecy to Voldemort. At the time he brought it, Voldemort was not out searching for a Chosen One to kill. Snape did not tell LV to kill anyone, nor would he have had any true idea what LV would have done with the partial prophecy. The first half of the prophecy doesn't even make it clear that the person is a baby, so LV, for all teenage Snape could have known, might simply have needed to know to be wary of someone who would "approach" whose parents were also opposed to LV and who was born at the end of July. To then say Snape caused the deaths, as though he was the one that decided Voldemort should kill the object of the prophecy, or that he was the one to go after them, is placing even more blame on Snape than I think he deserves. His actions don't even technically qualify for accessory to murder.
Julia, I think your analysis of Snape's possible thoughts and feelings surrounding the time after DD's death quite fascinating. Personally, I tend to think he was willing to act on his own well before that, because we see him on several occasions in the series going against DD's orders due to his own beliefs or feelings about what he should do.
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 6:44 am (#1730 of 2617)
"I mean, everyone's fortunate to get what love comes their way." (Mona)
I can agree with that I only said that Snape was not a particularly fortunate person and it was not simply his luck that made him good - at least not any more than in the case of anyone else.
"Yes, he has a responsibility for what he did, but he did not cause their deaths..." (Wynnleaf)
I agree. He has a fully felt responsibility but it is not fair to make him out as the actual murderer - especially that he also did all he could to prevent the murder.
"...we see him on several occasions in the series going against DD's orders due to his own beliefs or feelings about what he should do. (Wynnleaf)
I don't mean he never does anything on his own before DD's death. Of course he does. But at the same time he goes to extremes following DD's orders in HBP and DH at least. It is during the chase, however, that he realizes his loyalty to DD (or to his promise) has got him into conflict with his own conscience and he has to take any further decisions in the knowledge that his internal moral guide may give him instructions different from those of his "external moral guide", DD, who he may have so far believed to be next to infallible. Before the last memory scene we never see him tell DD (politely though) to keep quiet and leave the planning to him. Yet, in the last memory scene this is exactly what he does.
mona amon - Feb 20, 2008 8:05 am (#1731 of 2617)
I can agree with that I only said that Snape was not a particularly fortunate person and it was not simply his luck that made him good - at least not any more than in the case of anyone else. (Julia)
Not a particularly fortunate person, and it didn't make him good, but he still was lucky to get Lily as a friend. I'm not saying he didn't deserve her as a friend, or that her friendship was somehow gratuitous. Let's say he was fortunate that he, with his capacity to love someone good and beautiful (as she is supposed to be), should not only meet someone like that but also be appreciated and understood by her. It doesn't happen very often when one of the parties is a greasy haired oddball and the other is the most popular girl of the year.
Lily was a strong non-Slytherin influence in his life, and that makes him more culpable (to use Jo's phrase in a different context) than his fellow slytherin aspiring Death-Eaters.
wynnleaf - Feb 20, 2008 8:43 am (#1732 of 2617)
I don't think the "lucky" or "fortunate" part isn't true, in the sense that Snape was fortunate to have a friend in Lily, at least for a time. Nor was he "lucky" to have her because kids like Snape shouldn't have a good friend like Lily. But where I draw a line would be in the notion that it was Lily that made Snape different from the other DE wanna'bes. Snape was already different, because otherwise he'd have had no interest in Lily. And his depth of concern and care for her was ultimately much greater and longer lasting than her's was for him. Yes, it was good for him that he met her and that she accepted him. Did Lily truly "like" or "love" him? JKR may say so in interviews, but I don't actually see love or even true liking displayed in the books.
Julia, I've seen other readers notice that in reading Lily's letter, Snape also read of her comments about Dumbledore. He certainly had access to the Prophet, but Lily's comment in the letter would have indicated that she was hearing similar things from Bathilda even at that time, before Bathilda was quite so old and vague, and that perhaps those Prophet articles had an element of truth. I wonder if he would have asked DD's portrait about it. Just as Harry went through a crisis of faith in Dumbledore's good intentions and veracity, I would not be surprised if Snape had done the same.
I imagine his "crisis," started when Dumbledore told him to kill him, and later even more when Dumbledore told him Harry had to die. We see Snape question DD over DD's concern about Snape's soul in the summer before Harry's 6th year. Then Snape seems to spend the year growing more concerned about DD's apparent lack of trust in him, or at least the fact that there are clearly many secrets he's not telling Snape. The outburst in the forest shows us that Snape was getting more upset over this, which is understandable when on top of everything else, he's just about to make this huge and dramatic personal sacrifice through killing Dumbledore. Then on top of all that existing concern about what DD is doing, Dumbledore tells Snape that Harry has to die. And Snape is truly appalled, because after all it was Dumbledore who had gotten Snape to spend all those years protecting Harry. That's been Snape's life, practically.
So in spite of all his doubts, he goes ahead and kills Dumbledore, only to find that DD's death brings out many hidden things about his past and then Snape discovers a letter from Lily raising further doubts about Dumbledore's real inner motivations.
So I guess what I'm getting at is that I think Snape's changing attitude toward Dumbledore occurs over two years, starting with the point when DD asked Snape to kill him. Snape remains loyal to Dumbledore's general plan and to the Order, but he definitely becomes his own man and chooses much of his own direction even while following through with DD's goals.
Interesting Dumbledore's "poor Severus" comment to Harry at Kings Cross Station. I didn't get the impression that DD had met with Snape's spirit.
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 10:29 am (#1733 of 2617)
"So I guess what I'm getting at is that I think Snape's changing attitude toward Dumbledore occurs over two years..." (Wynnleaf)
I think you are right, though I also think that he could (with doubts and stress etc.) accept things as long as it was himself who suffered from DD's extreme orders - even though he did suffer - but it was too much when he had to endanger others. But even if this change of attitude occurred over a longer period, there can be a certain point when his doubts and questions and the feelings concerning them culminate in a major realization that there is a line which even his loyalty to DD cannot make him cross and that he has to be, as you say, "his own man".
"I didn't get the impression that DD had met with Snape's spirit." (Wynnleaf)
Good question. Perhaps Harry met DD because he needed to talk to DD, while Snape had DD's portrait to talk to all the time so instead of DD, Snape may have wanted to meet Lily and I hope he did. (He died looking into "Lily's" green eyes, so perhaps his spirit woke up somewhere doing the same.)
PeskyPixie - Feb 20, 2008 12:56 pm (#1734 of 2617)
"Interesting Dumbledore's "poor Severus" comment to Harry at Kings Cross Station. I didn't get the impression that DD had met with Snape's spirit." -wynnleaf
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Don't do this to me, wynnleaf, not before my birthday!!!!!
At the time of 'King's Cross' Snape has just landed on the other side, and he meets with Lily first because he concentrates on her as he leaves the world. That doesn't mean he and Dumbledore won't have their private chats and stroll around the clouds in the future. ***sticks fingers into ears and hums My Favourite Things***
Seriously, I interpreted "Poor Severus" as Dumbledore's pity for Severus' life and the way it ended.
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 2:24 pm (#1735 of 2617)
"However, he was only "receptive to the possibility" because he saw Lily as worthy of his attention."
No, he LOVED Lily. "... a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature." That is a difference to me and it should be a difference in a saga where love is pronounced to be the power that defeats evil. It does not only happen between Harry and LV, it happens elsewhere too. For example, in Snape's soul.
"But without Lily, Snape would never have learned to love."
Or he would have met her in vain if he had not been able to love. Even JKR said about Snape: "he could love". By the way, Lily did not accept Snape "by chance", she accepted him because he opened her eyes to the world of magic.
Snape's part in the Potters' death: he did something wrong and it endangered the Potters but he also did all he could to save them, including risking his own life. He did it for Lily, nevertheless he did it. I think that balances things somewhat. If Pettigrew had not betrayed the Potters, Snape and DD could have saved them.
"... Dumbledore's association with Grindelwald that may have been the catalyst instead"
I actually meant it was part of it but the main idea was that he realized DD had ordered him to do something that was against his conscience when for a long time he had regarded DD as his guide to a better way of life. Then he was also confronted with the idea that Rita's accusations may have been at least partly true, which must have shaken him, as it shook Harry. Then he realized that his own conscience was (had become) a better guide after all than any other person. This is something I'd call a change but not a change that just happened overnight right then and nor did it only take DD's guidance but it took a lot of good, unselfish deeds and a serious dedication to the good even though he was not actually advertising it. I find his slow, painful way to redemption that was full of struggle, self-punishment and self-sacrifice (and which did start on the hilltop) more believable, serious, authentic and also deeper than any kind of "instant redemption" (and I don't even know how to imagine it) which could have spared him those nearly 20 years of gradual personal growth.
"At the time of 'King's Cross' Snape has just landed on the other side, and he meets with Lily first because he concentrates on her as he leaves the world. That doesn't mean he and Dumbledore won't have their private chats and stroll around the clouds in the future. ***sticks fingers into ears and hums My Favourite Things***" (Pesky)
(***Also humming***) "Let it be"
Julia H. - Feb 20, 2008 2:58 pm (#1736 of 2617)
I had the impression that he had admired Lily for a while even then - secretly - and had been planning to talk to her. I am not surprised that he did not choose Petunia - being a Muggle was not the worst part of her. Also, if Snape lived in a Muggle neighbourhood, where (locally) wizards were in absolute minority, and he lived with a Muggle father who did not like magic, it is quite understandable (and it has nothing to do with despising Muggles) that he was happy to see another child who was like him.
rambkowalczyk - Feb 20, 2008 7:14 pm (#1737 of 2617)
There are times when I wish the story was Severus Snape and the ...instead of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. I feel kind of cheated because it's difficult to add up the pieces of Snape's life and get a complete whole.
In book 7 we are introduced to Devoted Snape who through sheer faith does everything that Dumbledore asks him to. We see changes in his behavior. When he approaches Dumbledore at first he only wants to save Lily. He doesn't care about James and the baby. Dumbledore appeals to his better nature to get Severus to save James and Harry. My guess is that Snape may have had a brief fantasy of getting together with Lily after saving her life and Dumbledore through his disgust makes Snape realize that what he wants is wrong. Furthermore Snape agrees to spy for Dumbledore.
When James and Lily are killed, Snape further agrees to protect Harry. The major conflict is that Snape hates Harry. We the readers aren't given a reason. We suppose that it's because Harry looks too much like James that Snape thinks Harry has inherited James' arrogance. Maybe when he looks into Harry's eyes, Snape sees his guilt--guilt of giving the prophecy to Voldemort, guilt of using the Mudblood word to Lily. (He could have been angry with her flirting with James). Harry is a reminder of the life he can no longer have.
The fact is Harry is less like his father than Snape imagined. We see in Snape's memory that in first year Snape could not tell the difference between Harry and his father although it is clear that Dumbledore and McGonagall had no such problems. In COS, Snape sees the flying of the car to be the kind of thing James would have done and therefore recommends expulsion. In GOF, Snape tells Karkaroff not to blame Dumbledore because Potter has a habit of breaking the rules--unsaid of course just like his father.
Not until 5th year, do we see any signs of Snape questioning this assumption. This is when Snape does Legilimency and sees some of Harry's memories. Maybe then he realizes that Harry might not be who he thought he was. But old ways of thinking do not change easily especially when he catches Harry at the Pensieve.
Some people have argued that Snape may have wanted Harry to see those memories so that he could taunt him about his father. But I think not. Snape didn't want Harry to see those memories because he didn't want Voldermort to see those memories for those memories of Lily would prove him to be a traitor. I think Snape's anger at Harry is twofold, 1 Voldemort could read Harry's mind, and peeking at someone's memories is the type of arrogant thing James would have done.
The first half of book 6, there is little interaction of Harry with Snape. Harry is openly rude to Snape in class and doesn't fight nonverbally with Snape again reinforcing to Snape that Harry is like his father. In the Prince's tale Dumbledore says The boy will soon have spent more time in detention than out. Snape replies He is his father over again-- Dumbledore interrupts In looks perhaps, but his deepest nature is more like his mother's.
Does this conversation which I think happens in March change Snape's mind? And if it does even slightly does it revert back when Harry confronts him after killing Dumbledore? Certainly after killing Dumbledore Snape's soul is in a precarious position. Yet he does refrain from hurting Harry though he is clearly furious at alot of things at this time.
When does Snape stop loathing Harry? Does he do it sometime in book 7? I am not sure if I agree with JKR that Snape hates Harry up till the end. I mean if he can change his opinion about Lupin to the point where he goes out of his way (and some say disobeying Dumbledore's orders) isn't it possible that he no longer hates Harry?
wynnleaf - Feb 20, 2008 8:36 pm (#1738 of 2617)
When does Snape stop loathing Harry? Does he do it sometime in book 7? I am not sure if I agree with JKR that Snape hates Harry up till the end. (ramb)
I'm not certain, but I think the word that JKR uses in describing Snape's feelings toward Harry is "loathe," and not "hate." I'm not sure if this is intentional, but there is a difference in the meaning of the words.
I thought about it for the first time this afternoon when my 3rd grader asked me what "loathe" meant (a little synchronicity there). So we looked it up. The main word to define "loathe" was "abhor," so we looked up that and found, unhelpfully, "loathe" but also "dislike greatly" or even "intense dislike." I found "hate" as a synonym, but not as a defining aspect of "loathe," so I checked out the word "hate," and found a few words defining it that I never found for "loathe." Hate seems to include "hostility" and "animosity" more often than not.
While "loathe" and "hate" are both about intense dislike, "hate" seems to include a strong sense of enmity, which is why you've got "hostility" and "animosity" in there as well.
So for Snape to "loathe" Harry, he need only dislike him and abhor him. If he "hated" Harry, it would include a kind of enmity, that is, Snape wouldn't just dislike Harry with intensity, he would actively wish him ill. And that we do not see. That's why, in my opinion, it makes sense for Snape to loathe Harry yet protect him, because loathing is not necessarily the same as hating.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 4:08 am (#1739 of 2617)
Very good points Ramb.
"Maybe then he realizes that Harry might not be who he thought he was."
I also have the feeling that during the Occlumency classes there was a chance of Snape getting closer to Harry. Harry's memories certainly contradict Snape's general notion of him. In the first lesson, after asking who the dog had belonged to, Snape's lips "curl" (a default reaction, which he perhaps regrets the next moment)then he praises Harry and not just in a word or two but in several sentences and also in a manner that may be intended to be soothing. Harry, however, hates the situation (and Snape) so much that he does not notice the slight change at all and reacts angrily, so Snape also reverts to his usual manner. But the fact that Snape is so angry when he sees that Harry is not getting any better at occlumency indicates that he is really worried (in the same way as he is angry with DD when DD's life is in danger). It is also interesting that during the lessons Snape explains quite a lot to Harry about the situation. DD has clearly forbidden Order members to tell Harry the truth and we see at the beginning of the book that Sirius does not agree (and he is right) and he does tell Harry a few things. Snape, however, tells him perhaps even more (I think it underlines the fact that Snape and Sirius have a common goal: trying to protect Harry) - perhaps as much as he can without openly disobeying DD. The fact that they actually talk is in itself an achievement. The Worst Memory, however, puts an abrupt end to the lessons. Snape sees Harry again as James, his old "wound" reopens, while Harry's picture of his father is shaken. At the end of the book he blames Snape for Sirius's death - I think it is partly because he is trying to avoid having to blame himself and also because by accusing Snape of something very bad, he is able to somehow justify his father's behaviour (not a logical thing but it makes Harry's emotional life easier).
"Certainly after killing Dumbledore Snape's soul is in a precarious position. Yet he does refrain from hurting Harry though he is clearly furious at alot of things at this time."
Harry is in danger at that moment and Snape knows this. I think whatever happens, whatever Snape feels, Snape would not physically hurt Harry and Harry's protection in times of immediate danger is always his first priority - a learned reflex or something like this.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 5:48 am (#1740 of 2617)
"... isn't it possible that he no longer hates Harry? (Ramb)
I tend to think that loathing is not the only feeling he has for Harry. I would also like to know how not seeing Harry in the DH year affects him. Does the distance change anything? Perhaps what he hates or loathes is something (or lots of things) connected to Harry. His own guilt, James's memory, the loss of "the life he can no longer have". What he should do is to detach Harry as a person from these things and I think he can do it for brief moments, whenever he is saving him, and it seems he manages to detach Harry from the things he still loathes in the final moment when Harry suddenly means nothing else to him but access to Lily .
rambkowalczyk - Feb 21, 2008 7:01 am (#1741 of 2617)
I never contemplated the distinction between hating and loathing and question whether JKR uses the dictionary as much as her fans do. Also in my mind loathing is a much stronger feeling than hate. On the other hand this distinction may be relevant.
As wynnleaf pointed out, Snape absolutely abhors James not only for bullying, breaking the rules with little consequence, but also because when all was said and done, James got the girl. This feeling of loathing is unfairly transferred to Harry, yet as Quirrel says he did not wish him dead.
I would also like to know how not seeing Harry in the DH year affects him. Does the distance change anything? Julie H
It does seem that when not in Harry's presence, Snape is not reminded of James and might be able to look at Harry more objectively. I also agree that Snape's reason's to loathe Harry can be multi-facited -- not just his resemblance to James. It would just be a pity if Snape died with these negative emotions as he was definately changing for the better.
mona amon - Feb 21, 2008 8:17 am (#1742 of 2617)
When does Snape stop loathing Harry? Does he do it sometime in book 7? I am not sure if I agree with JKR that Snape hates Harry up till the end. (Ramb)
Does the distance change anything? (Julia)
Whether it is hatred or loathing, it is such a strong emotion that I'm certain Snape felt a void when Harry was no longer around to be loathed during that lonely year.
I like to imagine that he let go of his hatred that night in the Forest of Dean, seeing him again after so many months of not knowing what was happening to this boy he had sworn to protect, and watching him follow his patronus so trustingly.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 8:57 am (#1743 of 2617)
Mona, this is a very beautiful thought again. I like it.
mona amon - Feb 21, 2008 9:28 am (#1744 of 2617)
Thanks Julia!
Orion - Feb 21, 2008 11:55 am (#1745 of 2617)
"Whether it is hatred or loathing, it is such a strong emotion that I'm certain Snape felt a void when Harry was no longer around to be loathed during that lonely year." (mona amon) That might be true! I have two cats who are united in sincere mutual loathing. But when they are alone at night, they huddle together. They would probably miss bullying each other if they couldn't do it any more.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 12:12 pm (#1746 of 2617)
Another insightful comment, Orion, as always.
Orion - Feb 21, 2008 12:25 pm (#1747 of 2617)
???
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 12:27 pm (#1748 of 2617)
I mean the comparison with the cats. It's funny and a kind of ... deep. :-) A new angle?
wynnleaf - Feb 21, 2008 12:31 pm (#1749 of 2617)
I have two cats who are united in sincere mutual loathing. But when they are alone at night, they huddle together. They would probably miss bullying each other if they couldn't do it any more. (Orion)
It is true that in real life sometimes people that have a long standing relationship of active dislike -- active in the sense of sniping at each other, thwarting the other's desires, etc. -- can develop a kind of dependence on each other and even a type of empathy. I think we see Harry start to form this for Snape in OOTP, but suppressed it later for understandable (if not legitimate) reasons. It continued to develop unknowingly for Harry through his "relationship" with the writer of the HBP notes, and I think those things prepared the way for Harry to very quickly accept the new perspective on Snape that he got in The Prince's Tale.
I agree that Snape probably began to see a different side of Harry in the OOTP occlumency lessons. During the year of HBP, Dumbledore reminded Snape that he thought Harry was much more like Lily than James, but it would have probably been shortly after that when Harry used Sectumsempra and Snape learned about Harry's use of the HBP potions book, so Snape's opinions, if they had been changing, may have reverted to the "James" comparison. Did Snape ever truly change in his view of Harry? I don't think we know, in spite of JKR's assertion that he continued to loathe Harry to the end.
A problem with the loathing to the end notion, for me at least, is that when the dying Snape looks into Harry's eyes for Lily, I feel that he must have seen Lily there in the past or why, in this extremity, was he so willing to find her there? It's not like he hadn't looked into Harry's eyes many, many times in the past. I guess I feel that his looking for Lily in Harry's eyes at the end means he probably felt some sort of changing of his opinion about Harry prior to that. Of course, I'm sure Snape would have claimed to loathe Harry to the end, whatever the truth was.
Orion - Feb 21, 2008 12:45 pm (#1750 of 2617)
Oh, you weren't being sarcastic, Julia.
When Snape "curls" his lips, how can you be so sure that Rowling wants to show us that he smiles in a sympathetic way? When I read it, but I'm no native speaker of course, I understood: malice. "Who did the dog belong to?", that sounded cruel. Like "I have seen you on that tree, sonny...", as if he trampled Harry in the mud.
wynnleaf - Feb 21, 2008 1:20 pm (#1751 of 2617)
I understood: malice. "Who did the dog belong to?", that sounded cruel. (Orion)
Of course, you could be correct. But prior to starting the lessons, Snape had been, well, civil for Snape. Compare it to the manner in which he talks to Dumbledore in private. This isn't much different in tone. He really talks to Harry fairly well at that point (for Snape, I mean). He tells Harry a lot more than most any other adults do and he actually explains more than typical (about as much as Lupin explains the patronus at any rate). And immediately after Harry answered Snape about whose dog it was, Snape says:
‘Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been,’ said Snape, raising his wand once more. ‘You managed to stop me eventually, though you wasted time and energy shouting. You must remain focused. Repel me with your brain and you will not need to resort to your wand.’
Since Snape practically never compliments anyone, including Draco, that's practically high praise. In any case, it doesn't seem that Snape was in a malicious state of mind at the time.
Then they try again and Harry's mind goes to some very stressful subjects including scenes of Lily (tough on Snape probably) and the dead Cedric (probably also tough on Snape given his reaction to Ginny being taken in COS). So then they're both stressed and getting more angry every second, with Snape telling Harry repeatedly to clear his mind (yeah right), and get rid of emotion (like Snape was getting rid of his?).
And then the next try Harry sees some of the abusive behavior of the Dursleys, but then he sees the Dept. of Mysteries and his "I KNOW, I KNOW" seems to make Snape pull out of the legilimency to find out what exactly Harry knew. Snape is trying to analyse what Harry reveals about his knowledge of that hallway and door, but Snape is not angry particularly at Harry at that point. It's only when Harry uses Voldemort's name that Snape gets angry again -- we never are told exactly why Snape insists on not saying that, but I suspect there's something about saying it that's akin to the problems with saying it in DH. Anyway, Snape then goes back to giving somewhat stern, but otherwise uninflamatory directions and then the meeting is over.
I don't think, reviewing how Snape's reactions shift throughout that teaching session, that Snape was in a malicious frame of mind at that particular time. Therefore I don't think his comment about the dog is due to malice toward Harry. Remember though that with his memories of Petunia, he probably still dislikes the memory of her and looks down on her. Views of Petunia, Vernon and the rest of the family probably fit exactly the sort of people he'd have expected Petunia to end up with as a family (idiots, he'd probably assume), and I suspect that in retrospect (after DH revelations) the curl of his lip was more of a sneer at the Dursleys.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 2:17 pm (#1752 of 2617)
Orion, you actually thought I was being sarcastic! No, not at all! I like your sense of humour very much. It was just that I found Mona's comment totally touching and then you showed me that it was also humorous.
As for "Snape's lips curling": I did not interpret it as kind either but I thought he checked himself soon enough and immediately afterwards he tried to say something kind and soothing. Now I think Wynnleaf is probably right:
"I suspect that in retrospect (after DH revelations) the curl of his lip was more of a sneer at the Dursleys."
Of course, he knew Petunia! That's a great connection.
"It's only when Harry uses Voldemort's name that Snape gets angry again -- we never are told exactly why Snape insists on not saying that, but I suspect there's something about saying it that's akin to the problems with saying it in DH." (Wynnleaf)
To me it seems it has something to do with the Dark Mark. Perhaps there is a jinx attached to it so that those who have the mark cannot or must not use any other name but "the Dark Lord" with reference to LV. But there must be something more behind it if Snape insists that Harry should not use the name either. Snape may know or suspect something about the possible dangers of using the name. Perhaps the reason is precisely Harry's connection to LV's mind. I mean the Dark Mark is a connection between DE's and LV and it seems to be related to Snape not using the name (he touches his forearm when they discuss this), so he might think since Harry also has a special (though different) direct connection to LV, the name may not be totally safe for him.
Orion - Feb 21, 2008 2:21 pm (#1753 of 2617)
Names again - like summoning house-elfs, or Ron with the Deluminator. Another catch! We should make a list. Names are fascinating anyway, aren't they?
Julia, I'm so glad you weren't being sarcastic. If one's used to Zelmia, one expects anything.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 2:29 pm (#1754 of 2617)
"Names are fascinating anyway, aren't they?" (Orion)
Absolutely. I wonder why there is no "Names thread" here. (Or is there?)
(It is perhaps off-thread but isn't it interesting how LV changes his names? First he hates the name "Tom Marvolo Riddle", so he changes it to "Lord Voldemort" but then this name becomes taboo. One can't help feeling he does not like to be called anything.)
Potteraholic - Feb 21, 2008 2:46 pm (#1755 of 2617)
"I like to imagine that he let go of his hatred that night in the Forest of Dean, seeing him again after so many months of not knowing what was happening to this boy he had sworn to protect, and watching him follow his patronus so trustingly." mona amon
Like Julia H., I too, liked how you worded this idea, mona. I'm a lurker on this thread -- the last time I posted anything was way back in August 2007 -- but when I read these words, mona, I got a bit teary-eyed. So I had to post!
wynnleaf - Feb 21, 2008 6:35 pm (#1756 of 2617)
I would add that, in revealing his Patronus - though Harry did not yet realise this - Snape was really opening up to Harry for the very first time. (zelmia)
It was Snape's plan to use the doe patronus to lure Harry toward the sword. But in deciding to use the doe, Snape must have felt very strongly that the doe would be something that Harry would feel tempted enough to follow out into the dark forest. It seems to me that it's likely Snape knew that Harry would recognize the doe as having to do with Lily and would automatically trust it.
And that's interesting in itself. Snape determined on a plan that was dependent on Harry being drawn to anything related to Lily.
mona amon - Feb 21, 2008 9:56 pm (#1757 of 2617)
-- but when I read these words, mona, I got a bit teary-eyed. So I had to post! (Potteraholic)
Aww, thanks, PAH! You are making me blush!
Lol, I never suspected you of being a lurker on this thread!
Orion, you actually thought I was being sarcastic! No, not at all! I like your sense of humour very much. It was just that I found Mona's comment totally touching and then you showed me that it was also humorous. (Julia)
Ha! Two different interpretations! You are both right. I was laughing at Snape, as I often do, but I also felt for his loneliness.
To me it seems it has something to do with the Dark Mark. Perhaps there is a jinx attached to it so that those who have the mark cannot or must not use any other name but "the Dark Lord" with reference to LV. (Julia)
I do not think there was an actual jinx. It only shows how much Snape feared Voldemort. And it upsets him to see the feared name being used so casually by Harry. Dumbledore with his impeccable manners, always refers to him politely as Lord Voldemort.
Julia H. - Feb 21, 2008 10:13 pm (#1758 of 2617)
"It only shows how much Snape feared Voldemort." (Mona)
But he is brave enough to deceive him and to "utter lies in his presence" regularly, to fight against him, to prevent him from achieving his major goal of killing Harry. When the use of the name is discussed, Snape involuntarily rubs his forearm (or something similar) as if he was checking that it was not signalling anything (?). Of course, it could be something psychological only (not necessarily a jinx, though LV did jinx his name later) - like not being able to get rid of his past.
The Doe:
Yes, Snape needs to open up by producing the Patronus, which symbolizes his secret and so many things he has tried to hide. The Patronus also reveals Snape's light side - or perhaps not only reveals it but lets his light side come to the surface, "come to light". It is his own decision and it is important that he chooses to do this in order to help Harry. He has already given up so much while fulfilling his vow that it is good to see that now he is making a "sacrifice" - by giving up his secrecy - that is good for him as well.
"Harry stared at the creature, filled with wonder, not at her strangeness, but at her inexplicable familiarity."
Perhaps this is why Harry later knows that the Doe was also his mother's Patronus: it looks familiar, he may have seen it as a baby. Of course, Snape cannot know that, still he trusts that Harry will trust the Doe. Does Snape realize that Lily represents a bond between them? If he does, the "Look at me" scene is only one short step away.
It is interesting that Ron's catharsis comes immediately afterwards but it also seems that the appearance of the Doe is a turning point in Harry's Quest. For quite a while he has been losing support and resources until he is left alone with Hermione, gets almost captured by LV and loses (temporarily) faith in DD. Desperate situation. The Patronus/Snape is the first to come and help. Then Ron comes back, the locket is destroyed and after that Harry gets help from various sources: Dobby, Aberforth, Griphook, Bill and Fleur (even Xeno, as regards information) and so on until he is joined by a whole army of people on the light side.
mona amon - Feb 22, 2008 3:02 am (#1759 of 2617)
But bravery doesn't mean the absense of fear. If Snape is very much afraid of Voldemort, and yet faces him and does whatever he has to do, that only makes him all the more brave. I think it was important to show us that he was afraid, so we could better appreciate his bravery.
It is during these Occlumency Lessons that a more human and vulnerable side of Snape is revealed for the first time, to be developed later in DH. He is agitated, unnerved, worried. And he reveals (to Harry of all people) that he is afraid of Voldemort.
"Professor Dumbledore says his name,' said Harry quietly.
'Dumbledore is an extremely powerful wizard,' Snape muttered. 'While he may feel secure enough to use the name...the rest of us...' He rubbed his left forearm, apparently unconsciouly, on the spot where Harry knew the Dark Mark was burned into his skin.'
It is interesting that Ron's catharsis comes immediately afterwards but it also seems that the appearance of the Doe is a turning point in Harry's Quest. For quite a while he has been losing support and resources until he is left alone with Hermione, gets almost captured by LV and loses (temporarily) faith in DD.
Good points. You forgot the breaking of his wand. That really makes him hit rock bottom.
Julia H. - Feb 22, 2008 3:15 am (#1760 of 2617)
I think I can agree with that, Mona.
Julia H. - Feb 25, 2008 4:01 am (#1761 of 2617)
Thanks to the Silver Doe, we seem to have reached a generally acceptable agreement on the question of redemption...
PeskyPixie - Mar 1, 2008 8:53 pm (#1762 of 2617)
I feel that Snape fears Voldemort. Also, since he has experience as a Death Eater, Snape has the added bonus of knowing exactly how terrible the Dark Lord can be. (I think it fair to assume that Dumbledore's knowledge of Voldemort's anger at Lucius being 'terrible to behold' comes from Snape?) I agree with Mona that his willingness to face something he fears exemplifies his bravery.
The moment in OotP (Occlumency) when he rubs his forearm, "apparently unconsciously, on the spot where Harry knew the Dark Mark was burned into his skin", Severus is completely vulnerable; he has unintentionally(?) let down his guard and in this one small, 'unconscious' gesture we catch a small glimpse of how he may feel about his own past and the choices he made in his youth.
Julia H. - Mar 2, 2008 5:14 am (#1763 of 2617)
Snape definitely knows what he is facing. (I agree that "terrible to behold" comes right from Snape, even the words may be Snape's own words.) It is really touching at the end of GoF when he tells Dumbledore that he is ready to do what Dumbledore wants him to do ("I am.") and he is paler than usual and then leaves without another word. At vital moments, when he says something very important, Snape, who can otherwise speak quite eloquently, never uses more than one or two (maybe three) words: "Anything." "I am." "Always." "Look at me." When he promises to kill Dumbledore, he only nods. These are probably the moments when his feelings are too deep for him to put them into words.
The "off-guard" moments, one of which Pesky mentions, are few and precious because the reader can catch a rare glimpse into Snape's soul. (It seems even Harry is touched by this unconscious revelation for a brief moment.) I agree that to Snape the Dark Mark is a physical manifestation of his feelings about the choices of his youth, his regret and shame that he ever let that mark be burned into his skin. It is also a symbol of the fact that he can never entirely free himself of his past: the consequences are always there, the feelings of remorse and loss are always there, the lingering doubt about his character is always there and then there is also his dangerous task of spying on Voldemort, of spending time among DE's, acting a person he could have become had he not changed his life.
In GoF it becomes quite clear how he feels about his Dark Mark. He unconsciously touches it and then becomes angry when fake-Moody cryptically taunts him about it and later he does not want to look at Karkarov's mark when Karkarov comes to discuss it with him. (In both cases Harry is present but Snape discovers it only later, so it is not because of Harry.) However, he does discuss the Dark Mark with Dumbledore in order to warn him about the Dark Lord's returning to power. At the end of the book, when Fudge does not want to believe Voldemort's return, Snape makes a sudden decision and reveals his mark in an attempt to convince Fudge. This is in sharp contrast with his previous reactions to the topic of the Dark Mark. The minister probably knows about Snape's past but in that room there are a lot of people present, including students (Harry etc.). Not every one of them will have heard about Snape's past (and there may be quite a few people there who did not know that DE's had the mark burned into their arms - Fudge does not seem to have known), still Snape does not only face his own Dark Mark (and by extension his dark past), but he also decides to reveal it in front of all these people because he thinks it is important to make the minister understand and believe the truth about Voldemort. I think this is another moment of bravery of a certain type and a moment that shows Snape's determination to do anything in order to fight Voldemort.
Orion - Mar 2, 2008 10:01 am (#1764 of 2617)
Oh, the Snapists are back from the Sirius thread, with bag and baggage, tent and backpack. You look exhausted after the long trip, does anyone want a drink?
PeskyPixie - Mar 2, 2008 10:59 am (#1765 of 2617)
Blood-red, elf-made wine please, Orion (the honorary Snaper)!
At the end of the book, when Fudge does not want to believe Voldemort's return, Snape makes a sudden decision and reveals his mark in an attempt to convince Fudge. -Julia
Oh, yes. This was the first (and most sound) event which confirmed my suspicion of Snape's allegiance to Dumbledore. I could not find any way to spin it around and explain it as some sort of subtle strategy for the Death Eaters.
Julia H. - Mar 2, 2008 11:06 am (#1766 of 2617)
Isn't it nice to have someone waiting for us with drinks? (The wine will do, yes, please.)
Snape's allegiance to Dumbledore is quite well established in GoF (only to make readers doubt it later). There is Dumbledore's mysterious reason to trust him, the Foe Glass, in which he is watching himself for a while (perhaps contemplating this newly emerged Snape who has finalized his allegiance and is ready to start a new fight), and finally the scene where the tasks are distributed.
Orion - Mar 2, 2008 12:26 pm (#1767 of 2617)
Archivist's note: This post is blank as it contained only an emoticon ~ Mona
rambkowalczyk - Mar 2, 2008 2:51 pm (#1768 of 2617)
Snape's allegiance to Dumbledore is quite well established in GoF (only to make readers doubt it later).
I agree. But then again, hindsight is always 20 20 vision. There were a number of people who felt for sure Snape was not Dumbledore's man through and through until they read book 7.
wine looks good!
mona amon - Mar 2, 2008 8:07 pm (#1769 of 2617)
LOL, thanks Orion!
The moment in OotP (Occlumency) when he rubs his forearm, "apparently unconsciously, on the spot where Harry knew the Dark Mark was burned into his skin", Severus is completely vulnerable; he has unintentionally(?) let down his guard and in this one small, 'unconscious' gesture we catch a small glimpse of how he may feel about his own past and the choices he made in his youth. (Pesky)
I think he makes this unconscious gesture three times in the series, in the above mentioned occlumency lesson, in the conversation with Minerva just before fleeing Hogwarts in DH, and in GOF, when the fake Moody does something to make it hurt. (What does he do to him, BTW? I never really understood that part.)
I love it when Snape lets down his guard, it happens so rarely. The part in CoS where he grips the chair very hard when he hears that a student has been taken by the monster springs to mind.
There are also the pensieve memories with Dumbledore. Its only when he is alone with Dumbledore that he can truly be himself, because Dumbledore is the only person from whom he has nothing to hide.
Julia H. - Mar 3, 2008 7:13 am (#1770 of 2617)
"What does he do to him, BTW? I never really understood that part." (Mona)
I have never really realized that fake-Moody may have been doing something to make Snape's arm hurt. Snape does react as if the mark started to hurt at that moment but there is no indication that fake-Moody does something besides speaking and reminding him of his Dark Mark. Of course, there are non-verbal spells and other things but I think it may be simply psychology. Or it is possible that the mark hurts anyway as it is getting stronger in those days and fake-Moody reminds Snape of this pain - maybe in order to check that the mark is signalling something (I guess he has no mark while he is Moody-shaped) - and then laughs contentedly. Psychologically it is also understandable: Snape has lived a Voldemort-free decade and then a few more nearly Voldemort-free years and now he knows that the Dark Lord's power is returning because the mark is becoming stronger. He also knows that soon he will have to face his own past again so he is clearly nervous and at the moment he is standing face-to-face with an auror (or so he thinks), who has already searched his room and who is taunting him about his past and its symbol, his dark mark. Facing his past is not only facing Voldemort (which is a lot in itself) but facing suspicion and distrust as well in the new situation.
I also love the moments when Snape lets down his guard and I agree that it is with Dumbledore alone that he can be truly himself. Also, there is perhaps only one moment when we see him totally alone and this is the scene in Sirius's room - and then again he is completely vulnerable.
(Good wine, Orion.)
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1771 to 1810
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:30 am
wynnleaf - Mar 3, 2008 8:25 am (#1771 of 2617)
I think the scene with fake-Moody also shows a great deal of unintentional vulnerability. Moody/Crouch is easily able to stress Snape by calling Dumbledore's trust of him into question. I like that scene in part because it shows us how very much Snape not only values Dumbledore's trust, but really desires and needs it. His protest to Moody/Crouch almost seems as though he's trying to keep himself convinced that DD does indeed trust him.
Then in The Prince's Tale, we can see Snape worrying over whether or not DD truly trusts him. It's a big concern and I don't think his concern rests primarily on his personal safety (DD's trust having kept him out of Azkaban, for instance), but more on a deep seated need to be trusted. Trust and respect seem to me to be the things Snape wants the most, and it therefore makes his sacrifice in giving up those things to follow DD's orders and AK him all the more amazing.
Julia H. - Mar 3, 2008 8:52 am (#1772 of 2617)
"I don't think his concern rests primarily on his personal safety (DD's trust having kept him out of Azkaban, for instance), but more on a deep seated need to be trusted. Trust and respect seem to me to be the things Snape wants the most, and it therefore makes his sacrifice in giving up those things to follow DD's orders and AK him all the more amazing."
Very well said, Wynnleaf. This is EXACTLY how I feel about it.
Orion - Mar 3, 2008 10:22 am (#1773 of 2617)
Something which has lurked in a shadowy corner of my memory for ages and just came back to my through a discussion on the Slytherin thread: (So it's a bit apropos of nothing, I apologize)
Snape isn't a teacher. He should have never become a teacher. He is a spy with a false identity. He bides his time at Hogwarts until LV comes back and until he, Snape, can help defeat him. So far so dreary.
Then why does he care so much? I had a maths teacher from hell once, he was cold as a fish and didn't care about the class at all, he looked out of the window when he explained something and he treated everyone who asked a question like an idiot. That was a very bad teacher like I picture a very bad teacher: Like somebody who is rude to the students because he would rather be somewhere else, someone who despises students because they exist.
Snape, on the other hand, is up to his eyeballs in emotions all the time. He awards house points and deducts house points in an unfair way. He enters into useless verbal duels with students and loses most of them. He abuses students because they don't match his high standards. He abuses students because they are in the wrong house.
Why does he care at all? If he indeed spends his time weeping after a dead girl and patiently waiting for his revenge, he should be utterly indifferent to school-related trivial everyday occurences. He should try to keep up Slytherin-friendly appearances for the benefit of the Death Nibblers, and leave it at that. Instead, he throws himself into the House wars, and his subject, which wasn't even his favourite subject at school, is still much too important for him.
Another strange scene which I have just re-read: In HBP there is a DADA lesson in which he abuses Ron, "a boy so solid he can't Apparate half an inch across the room" (LOL!) - after!!! DD has persuaded him to kill him. He is still able to crack a joke! Hadn't he already turned into a total wreck at that time?
journeymom - Mar 3, 2008 10:28 am (#1774 of 2617)
Snape feared Voldemort, but he was still learning from him, up to the end, as evidenced when he flew away from Hogwarts.
======
Snape wasn't personally 'called' to teach but he was bright, competitive and had a chip on his shoulder left over from his days as an abused student. He was there, so he made the best of it. If he had to teach and be head of house, he wasn't going to do a sloppy, half hearted job. He had some personal pride, is my impression. And he used the opportunity to put down Gryffindor and promote Slytherin.
======
A total wreck- maybe Snape took his anxiety out on Ron at that moment.
Soul Search - Mar 3, 2008 11:34 am (#1775 of 2617)
"... maybe Snape took his anxiety out on Ron at that moment."
This comment got me to wondering. There are a few occasions, perhaps as early as SS, where Snape says something we have never been able to explain. Previously, We have dismissed unusual comments just as "Snape being Snape," but now that we have "The Prince's Tale" I wonder if we can coordinate some unusual statement with something that happened with Dumbledore?
Orion - Mar 3, 2008 11:51 am (#1776 of 2617)
Well, we all know that there was never a "Snape being Snape", but always a total wreck, the reason being, his own personal guilt and the horrible punishment he had received. So Snape's behaviour towards students is so alarming sometimes because he is under enormous stress practically all the time and can't cope.
You can see that also in Alan Rickman's way of playing him. You think he is going to jump out of his skin. He is never cool and snarky, he is practically grinding his teeth all the time and spitting at students as if he was at the end of his tether.
Julia H. - Mar 3, 2008 12:42 pm (#1777 of 2617)
I agree with Journeymom. And perhaps Snape is not quite as bad a teacher as the maths teacher Orion described. Spending his time "weeping after a dead girl and patiently waiting for his revenge"? Not quite. If he gives himself totally over to grief, he will not be of much use when his time comes to fight. Of course, he is a total wreck all the time but he still goes on living - because Dumbledore has given him a life-purpose that is meaningful to him. So he has to spend his time somehow, not only "patiently waiting" but doing something in the meantime. He is hiding his grief and remorse from almost everyone else and he does not want to appear weak. Doing a job can help a person to keep his head above water in very serious situations. He does not only teach but (as Journeymom has pointed out) learns as well. I think Snape (the Half-Blood Prince) has always taken learning seriously and he realizes that improving his skills may help him achieve his goal. This is why he also takes teaching seriously. Actually, his "experiment" with Neville's toad probably has the purpose of bringing home the idea that at school they are learning things that have practical purposes, things that they may one day have to use in dead serious situations where mistakes can cost lives. He also cares for Slytherins because he knows what the Slytherin experience is like and he - as an adult - probably understands their isolation better than the kids themselves. He may also feel either sorry for them or some kind of defiance (is it the right word?) for being a Slytherin (and being treated like a Slytherin) and not something else - whatever that means.
PeskyPixie - Mar 3, 2008 10:59 pm (#1778 of 2617)
Severus loves learning (he took Muggle summer school to keep up with his studies in Calculus, Algebra & Geometry and Physics, after all. ) and works himself into a snit when his students do not live up to his expectations as scholars. I think if Hermione had been a Slytherin (and had nothing to do with Harry Potter) he may well have been proud to have her in his House.
I took Snape's 'twitch' in Mad-Eye Barty's presence as a coincidence. The Mark is growing stronger steadily throughout the year, and maybe it happened to burn stronger at that inopportune moment? Perhaps every Death Eater (including Barty) experiences the sting at that moment? (Does Barty even have the Dark Mark while he impersonates Moody?)
Which brings me to something I've often contemplated: What would Snape's fate with Voldy be if Barty hadn't been smooched by a dementor?
Julia H. - Mar 4, 2008 5:20 am (#1779 of 2617)
"I took Snape's 'twitch' in Mad-Eye Barty's presence as a coincidence." (Pesky)
Mad-Eye Barty has just made a reference to the mark when this happens.
"He's a trusting man, isn't he? Believes in second chances. But me -- I say there are spots that don't come off, Snape. Spots that never come off, d' you know what I mean?"
It is not likely to be just a coincidence.
"What would Snape's fate with Voldy be if Barty hadn't been smooched by a dementor? (Pesky)
Good question. Barty would have been sent to Azkaban, Snape would have been sent back to Voldemort and then in OOTP there is a mass break-out from Azkaban. Barty would get free and tell Voldemort what he knows about Snape. (Snape helped Dumbledore stop Barty when he wanted to kill Potter and Snape brought the Veritaserum, too.) Snape's mission is a dangerous one.
Swedish Short-Snout - Mar 4, 2008 6:15 am (#1780 of 2617)
If Barty had not been kissed by the Dementor, the Ministry might, just might, have realised that Voldemort had returned and then there would probably not have been a mass breakout.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 4, 2008 7:45 am (#1781 of 2617)
There used to be speculation that Snape may have suggested to Fudge to bring in the dementers to kill Barty mainly so Barty wouldn't have told Voldemort that Snape was a traitor. Now that we have Snape being thoroughly Dumbledore's man, it seems less likely.
mona amon - Mar 4, 2008 8:38 am (#1782 of 2617)
What would Snape's fate with Voldy be if Barty hadn't been smooched by a dementor? (Pesky)
I think he may have got away with it. After all, he helped Dumbledore to thwart Quirrell in PS, and Voldemort seems to know about it.
If Barty had not been kissed by the Dementor, the Ministry might, just might, have realised that Voldemort had returned and then there would probably not have been a mass breakout. (Swedish Short Snout)
Good point, SSS. Predicting what might have happened is way too complicated because everything has such diverse consequences... I think I'm paraphrasing Dumbledore from the end of POA.
Julia H. - Mar 4, 2008 9:13 am (#1783 of 2617)
"Now that we have Snape being thoroughly Dumbledore's man, it seems less likely." (Ramb)
It makes it much less likely. Besides, Fudge could have easily mentioned it to furious Minerva and DD if something like that had been suggested to him by anyone. Actually, bringing a dementor as body guard and then let it silence the man who would have told unpleasant news is very much like Fudge.
"I think he may have got away with it. After all, he helped Dumbledore to thwart Quirrell in PS, and Voldemort seems to know about it." (Mona)
The difference is that in the first case Snape was able to claim quite believably that he had had no idea Voldemort was anywhere nearby but in the second case the Dark Mark had been getting stronger for a while, then it burned and Snape was spending his time stunning or disarming (?) Barty (and saving Harry's life) along with DD and Minerva instead of appearing in front LV after being summoned.
I agree that any plot change could have diverse consequences - I guess we are just playing with ideas.
PeskyPixie - Mar 4, 2008 9:41 am (#1784 of 2617)
It just happens to be my point of view that Snape's lies to Lord Voldemort work quite well because Voldemort's servant at Hogwarts is disabled without the chance to tell Voldemort that that ol' Snape has been working with Dumbledore all year. Snape's lies about the Quirrell incident work because he does not need to tell similar tales about the Crouch incident.
Also, Crouch did not necessarily have to be kissed to be detained. The Ministry might just as well have chucked him into Azkaban as a crazy murderer and remained oblivious to the fact that this was living proof of the Dark Lord's return. People tend to believe what they want to believe. Snape exemplifies this.
However, if it is indeed the opinion of others that this line of thought is too complicated and influenced by individual opinion rather than canon, I won't mind at all if it's dropped.
ETA: "I took Snape's 'twitch' in Mad-Eye Barty's presence as a coincidence." -PeskyPixie
"Mad-Eye Barty has just made a reference to the mark when this happens ... It is not likely to be just a coincidence." -Julia H.
That's what makes it a coincidence. Could someone please explain to me why it can't be? I seem to be the only one who missed out on the subtlety here.
Julia H. - Mar 4, 2008 10:58 am (#1785 of 2617)
'That's what makes it a coincidence." (Pesky)
I thought you said it was a coincidence that Snape touched his arm in Barty's presence. Then I thought it was not just a coincidence because Barty was taunting him about the mark, so there was something more than just Barty's presence. If you say it is a coincidence that Snape's arm hurts (or something) when Barty mentions that "spot" ... it is a different question. I don't think I can prove that it is not just a coincidence but it still seems to me that there is some kind of causal relationship between Barty's words and Snape touching his arm, which makes it more than just a coincidence. It seems to me that this movement is Snape's reaction to Barty's words, then Barty laughs and Snape is angry. It seems they both know what is going on. (They don't tell us though.)
mona amon - Mar 4, 2008 8:55 pm (#1786 of 2617)
But Julia, Snape does not just touch his mark when Barty mentions the 'spots that never come off'. He 'seizes his left forearm convulsively', which makes it sound like an instinctive reaction to unexpected physical pain rather than an unconscious response to Barty's taunt. So I think it must be either as Pesky says, a coincidence (Dark Mark happened to burn at the same time that Barty made the remark), or Barty himself did something to make Snape's mark hurt.
Julia H. - Mar 5, 2008 12:34 am (#1787 of 2617)
Yes, that is right, it was much more than just a touch... I see what you mean. Still, could it perhaps be the sign of a very strong emotional reaction, a sign of how much Snape was hurt/agitated by Barty's remark? A sign that Barty was alluding to something Snape himself had been very much concerned about? The Dark Mark was getting stronger and the Dark Lord was regaining his power but part of Snape's concern (and perhaps the greater part of it) may have been how these things were going to affect his position among people. While LV was out of power and far away, people may have accepted (may have been willing to "forget") that a former DE (in fact quite a few former DE's) lived among them but what would be their attitude once the Dark Lord was back and the situation was dangerous again? Would they still trust him? Would anyone identify him with DE's because he still had the mark? There was an auror in the castle and Snape's office had been searched by him - why? All this may have been painful enough to Snape and Barty was talking about just that. I also feel that there must be something about that Dark Mark that we are never told explicitly. Whether it is some magic connected to it or simply that Snape has so strong feelings about it (loathing, shame, fear, anxiety, whatever) that he cannot properly control them (or perhaps some ancient, wandless magic of choices/emotions etc.) - I do not know.
wynnleaf - Mar 5, 2008 6:47 am (#1788 of 2617)
In that scene it's important to remember that Snape thinks he's talking to Mad Eye Moody, the auror that never appeared to have trusted Snape's return to the good side, even years before. And Moody is an auror, as well as a close associate/friend of Dumbledore's and trusted member of the Order. One thing we see in that encounter is that it's very easy to get Snape stressed over the question of Dumbledore's trust. Snape knows the Mark is getting darker and darker and LV's return is probably soon. But as far as he knows, Moody does not know that.
When Moody makes his remark about the Mark on Snape's arm, Snape grips it convulsively, but I think it's mainly anxiety that makes him do it. Sure, he knows that Moody would know the Mark is on his arm. But as far as Snape knows, Moody should not be aware that the Mark is changing, growing darker. At the moment Moody calls Snape's trustworthiness into question and implies to Snape that Dumbledore doesn't trust him and allowed Moody to search Snape's office, Snape is probably growing more anxious anyway about just those things, due to the darkening mark and the nearness of LV's return.
In other words, Moody's remarks aren't just stressful in themselves. They play on anxieties Snape probably already has and Snape has the evidence right there under his sleeve which he would like to keep hidden from Moody, that Voldemort is on the verge of calling Snape (and other DEs), back into service.
This quote from the scene is interesting:
Moody laughed. "Get back to bed, Snape."
"You don't have the authority to send me anywhere!" Snape hissed, letting go of his arm as though angry with himself.
I think that the "as though angry with himself" implies that Snape gripped his arm out of some emotional response, rather than a physical response, and he's irritated at himself for giving away his feelings about the mark in front of Moody.
Julia H. - Mar 5, 2008 9:59 am (#1789 of 2617)
"Snape gripped his arm out of some emotional response, rather than a physical response, and he's irritated at himself for giving away his feelings about the mark in front of Moody." (Wynnleaf)
That's how it seems to me.
It is also interesting that Snape does not want to discuss the fact that somebody has broken into his office in front of "Moody". He thinks he is already being suspected and does not want to seem to have been hiding something.
Still another interesting thing is the quote:
"You don't have the authority to send me anywhere!"
It sounds as if it was not only about sending or not sending someone back to bed but also about "Moody" (an auror) sending or not sending Snape (an ex-DE who was years ago acquitted by the council) to prison. Snape is perhaps trying to reassure himself both about Dumbledore's trust and that "Moody" has no legitimate reasons to prosecute him.
wynnleaf - Mar 5, 2008 10:19 am (#1790 of 2617)
I really love that entire scene. It's Snape at a very vulnerable point, both in terms of the whole series, where he knows that LV is going to be coming back soon and what that means for him, and the particular instance of having this confrontation with Moody and the issue of DD's trust.
But the start of the scene if interesting as well. If you recall, the egg, when opened, sounds like someone screaming. It apparently woke Snape, who must have literally run from his own rooms (still in his nightshirt), passing his office even though he could tell someone had just broken in, and going on through the castle trying to find the source of the screaming. To me, it accentuates his personal vigilance in protecting the castle and the students. Filch comes, and of course the fake-Moody shows up, but no other teachers come to investigate. I'm sure they just didn't hear the egg. Still, Snape must live in the dungeons since he had to pass his office on the way. Yet he was alert enough to be woken by the egg, leap out of bed without even stopping for a robe, and run.
Soul Search - Mar 5, 2008 12:18 pm (#1791 of 2617)
I think wynnleaf's comments are good, but I still don't understand the scene, or what it was trying to convey to the reader.
On first read, just using the storyline up to that point, JKR seems to be casting doubts about Dumbleodre's trust of Snape, perhaps in favor of Moody. (We think he really is Moody.) In spite of Snape saying Dumbledore trusts him, his actions, at least, reveal Snape's own doubts about Dumbledore's trust. We don't yet know about the Dark Mark on Snape's arm, so must wonder why Snape grabs his arm.
A second read, after finishing GoF, we know it isn't really Moody and that Snape has a Dark Mark on the arm he grabs. Yet, we still don't really have a good sense for the scene.
After Deathly Hallows, we know Dumbledore's trust of Snape was implicit, and Snape knew that, so why is Snape so upset in that scene. He should have been quite confident in Dumbledore's trust and that Dumbledore had not directed Moody to search his office. The real Moody should have known this. Snape should have wondered about Moody!
Orion - Mar 5, 2008 1:18 pm (#1792 of 2617)
DD hadn't sent Barty/Moody, but having your office searched is still a disturbing and infuriating experience. The problem with GOF is that Barty is so good as Moody that he is completely consistent with the actions the real Moody would take, even down to searching Snape's office without DD's consent. It's not quite believable that someone can impersonate someone so well, and sometimes Barty works against his own goals, like teaching the students in DADA really good jinxes which help Harry later on. That, for me, is a big flaw of the book.
Julia H. - Mar 5, 2008 2:32 pm (#1793 of 2617)
Reading the books again after finishing DH is like discovering another volumeful of plot between the lines.
"After Deathly Hallows, we know Dumbledore's trust of Snape was implicit, and Snape knew that, so why is Snape so upset in that scene." (Soul Search)
I don't know why Snape would "know" that for sure. Dumbledore keeps secrets from everybody and that is quite clear in DH. Snape worries that Dumbledore does not trust him (in DH) even when he has been a useful spy for a while, he has already saved Dumbledore's life and has made the terrible promise of killing him. So why could he not be anxious about this trust earlier, on the eve of the Dark Lord's return? Even if he has a strong reason to believe that Dumbledore trusts him, being sure of it, in my opinion, does not only depend on objective evidence; it also depends on the person's own inner feelings: self-confidence or anxiety, hope or doubt. Perhaps it is the fact that Dumbledore's trust is so extremely important to Snape that makes him truly anxious about it, that makes him perhaps wonder if it could really be Dumbledore who wanted Moody to search his office. At this time of his life Snape does not look for love or happiness but he still needs to be trusted and counted among respectable people. Dumbledore's trust (and only Dumbledore's trust) is his second chance for an honourable way of life so he is desperately clinging to this trust.
I think beyond wanting trust and respect, he also wants to really deserve these things. In fact, that he carries out Dumbledore's order to kill him against his own wish and interest shows that when the time comes for him to choose, Snape will rather choose to deserve his second chance in life than keep this chance actually.
At this turning point of his life (in GoF), Snape knows the time is coming for him to prove himself worthy of Dumbledore's trust and to fulfill his old promise in a much more dangerous situation. At that moment having a "suspecting auror" around, who does not care about Dumbledore's reason to trust Snape and who may perhaps want to turn Dumbledore (and everyone else) against him could mean that Snape loses this trust before he has the chance to prove that he deserves it. In this sense, he has a reason to be concerned and anxious even if Dumbledore does trust him in reality.
"Yet he was alert enough to be woken by the egg, leap out of bed without even stopping for a robe, and run." (Wynnleaf)
Thanks for this observation. I did not think it over before but now I have read the scene once again and yes, you are perfectly right. Another example of Snape's readiness to protect the people (the students) around him.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 5, 2008 9:02 pm (#1794 of 2617)
Maybe in Gof Snape is feeling a little bit of guilt. He is hard on Harry sometimes unjustifiably. Dumbledore may understand that Snape still has issues with dead James, but even the real Moody would wonder why Snape seems so obsessed with Harry. The real Moody would accuse Snape of putting Harry's name in the Goblet of Fire. I remember thinking that the purpose was to kill Harry by making it look like an accident. Snape looked and acted guilty but he would never explain (nor allow Dumbledore to explain) that he would never hurt Harry.
mona amon - Mar 6, 2008 3:17 am (#1795 of 2617)
Still, could it perhaps be the sign of a very strong emotional reaction, a sign of how much Snape was hurt/agitated by Barty's remark? A sign that Barty was alluding to something Snape himself had been very much concerned about? (Julia)
I think that the "as though angry with himself" implies that Snape gripped his arm out of some emotional response, rather than a physical response, and he's irritated at himself for giving away his feelings about the mark in front of Moody. (Wynnleaf)
I think I'll stick to my version. To me it seems so unlikely that he'd seize his arm convulsively 'as though something on it had hurt him' as an emotional response to fake Moody's remark, whatever feelings it may have aroused in him. I can imagine him being angry with himself even for responding to physical pain in front of someone from whom he was trying to hide his feelings.
And Moody is an auror, as well as a close associate/friend of Dumbledore's and trusted member of the Order. One thing we see in that encounter is that it's very easy to get Snape stressed over the question of Dumbledore's trust. (Wynnleaf)
Its very easy to get this volcano of emotions stressed, anyway. I do not recall anything from the book that suggests he had issues with Dumbledore's trust.
After all, at this point he has worked as Dumbledore's spy for almost a year when Voldemort was at the height of his powers. Dumbledore has vouched for him in front of the Wizengamot, and never as far as we know, given Snape any reason to suspect that he did not have his complete trust. A few days before this incident, when Snape tells Dumbledore about Karkaroff's plan to flee, he only asks him if he will be doing the same. He never calls his loyalties into question.
So when he retorts angrily, "Dumbledore happens to trust me. I refuse to believe that he gave you orders to search my office", I take him at his word.
After Deathly Hallows, we know Dumbledore's trust of Snape was implicit, and Snape knew that, so why is Snape so upset in that scene. (Soul Search)
Like Orion, I feel it's because of the 'disturbing and infuriating experience' of having his office searched. He's angry with Moody, who he probably always disliked for never believing him, and he dislikes most people, anyway.
Snape worries that Dumbledore does not trust him (in DH) even when he has been a useful spy for a while, he has already saved Dumbledore's life and has made the terrible promise of killing him. (Julia)
It's easy to interpret that scene as Snape having doubts about Dumbledore's trust, especially since he himself uses the word, "You trust him...You do not trust me." But to me he's just in a huff because it's now Harry who gets all the secret conferences with Dumbledore. He's feeling jealous and left out. His simple and direct way of confronting Dumbledore with his doubts indicate (to me at any rate) that he had no deep seated anxieties about Dumbledore's trust.
Julia H. - Mar 6, 2008 6:27 am (#1796 of 2617)
I agree that Dumbledore never calls Snape's loyalties into question. However, it is still possible that Snape is agitated about the presence of a person at Hogwarts (an auror, as he thinks) who seems very much to be suspecting him and who may try (who may very well have already tried) to make Dumbledore doubt Snape's loyalties. Snape does not know why "Moody" knows that the Dark Mark may be changing but he knows that he has told it to Dumbledore, so perhaps Dumbledore mentioned it to "Moody" - and Snape may not like the idea at all. Given how important Dumbledore's trust is to him and that the situation is at the moment very special, I think it is likely that he is stressed by the faintest possibility of any doubt on Dumbledore's part.
"Dumbledore happens to trust me. I refuse to believe that he gave you orders to search my office"
Even if I take him by his words, those words are interesting. "I refuse to believe" (not just "I don't believe"). He seems to be protesting not only against the idea that Dumbledore may have given these orders but against the idea that he (Snape) should think or believe that. The word "refuse" implies a kind of struggle but perhaps not only against fake-Moody's words. It may suggest that he thought of the possibility before and had to strengthen his own trust in Dumbledore's trust.
"His simple and direct way of confronting Dumbledore with his doubts indicate (to me at any rate) that he had no deep seated anxieties about Dumbledore's trust." (Mona)
It seems his manner is always direct and simple when he is alone with Dumbledore. Early on, in his great sorrow, he openly tells him he could not bear the disclosure of his role in the protection of James Potter's son. In another very important moment he simply and directly asks Dumbledore if he is not worried about his (Snape's) soul. Later he quite plainly expresses his feelings when DD tells him Harry must be killed by LV. Then the word "Always"is so beautifully simple and straightforward that it could not be more so. Yet, in all of theses cases he talks about important, deep seated feelings.
"You trust him...You do not trust me."
I agree that he is feeling jealous and left out - but why? Is it because he is not present at the evening meetings between Dumbledore and Harry? I don't think so. It is because he thinks Dumbledore does not trust him as much as he trusts Harry. (He may think that he now deserves to be trusted.)
I think the question of Dumbledore's trust comes up in these two cases under somewhat similar circumstances in the sense that Snape's life is about to change. In GoF not only does he know that LV will summon his DE's, he probably also knows or at least suspects that Dumbledore will want him to go back to spy on Voldemort. He will have to act as a double agent, a rather sensitive role for someone with his past, and the certainty of Dumbledore's trust suddenly becomes extremely important. In the DH scene, he also says: "You refuse to tell me everything, yet you expect that small service of me!" He has already agreed to carry out DD's terrible order, which (whatever the actual circumstances may be) is at least very likely to result in his exclusion from the society of respectable people and yet again DD's trust is something very important to cling to amid his own doubts and fears.
mona amon - Mar 6, 2008 9:24 pm (#1797 of 2617)
Snape does not know why "Moody" knows that the Dark Mark may be changing but he knows that he has told it to Dumbledore, so perhaps Dumbledore mentioned it to "Moody" - and Snape may not like the idea at all. Given how important Dumbledore's trust is to him and that the situation is at the moment very special, I think it is likely that he is stressed by the faintest possibility of any doubt on Dumbledore's part.
I think what's going on in that scene is, Snape knows that Moody does not trust him at all. So he's touchy, extremely angry and about to explode. Then he reminds himself that they are both working for Dumbledore, controls his anger, and goes off to bed. If he had any momentary doubts about Dumbledore's trust, (fake) Moody himself dispels them immediately.
Even if I take him by his words, those words are interesting. "I refuse to believe" (not just "I don't believe").
That's just his way of talking. "Dumbledore happens to trust me" instead of "Dumbledore trusts me", "I don't remember asking you to show off, Miss Granger" instead of "I didn't ask you to show off", and so on.
I agree that he is feeling jealous and left out - but why?
Because till then he was something like Dumbledore's right hand man, providing him with all the useful information about Voldemort, and probably Dumbledore shared secrets with him that he didn't share with the rest of the order. Now Harry seems to have supplanted him in that role. He resents it, and wants to know what information he's sharing with Harry that he, Snape, is not supposed to know.
My point is, even if this makes him think that Dumbledore does not have confidence in him, he does not hide his feelings. He confronts DD with his doubts, throws a small tantrum, and remains sulky until Dumbledore gives him some reassurance. Nothing is hidden, it is all out in the open. No unresolved doubts and anxieties about DD's trust eating him away on the inside. This is what I meant by 'he had no deep seated anxieties about Dumbledore's trust."
Julia H. - Mar 6, 2008 11:22 pm (#1798 of 2617)
"Then he reminds himself that they are both working for Dumbledore, controls his anger, and goes off to bed." (Mona)
Perhaps that is what happens but he does seem to be "giving in" to fake-Moody's threats and there is also his (correct) suspicion that Harry is there somewhere and he clearly does not want to continue the conversation with Harry listening.
"He resents it, and wants to know what information he's sharing with Harry that he, Snape, is not supposed to know." (Mona)
It is so but I still interpret it as a question of trust from Snape's point of view. He does not want to get information out of curiosity or to gain more influence: he wants Dumbledore's full trust. I think Snape is probably aware of what DD's latest request will/might cost him (especially that he has had time to think it over by now) and he may feel he is not getting information any more because he is going to be tossed over to Voldemort's camp for ever anyway. It is a very bad moment for him to be replaced by Harry as DD's most trusted man and it is understandable that he would like to feel at least that he is being trusted as long as possible now. He knows what is going to be sacrificed and he does not see that DD cares.
It is true Snape does not hide his feelings but the doubts are there in the first place and it still seems to be a deep concern - after all his whole life at present is built on Dumbledore's trust but this "building" is already shaking at the moment above his head, so he wants to keep at least the "foundation" under his feet as long as possible. Dumbledore's death would be a great loss to him even if he did not have to do the AK and this is part of his anxiety but now he feels perhaps that he is already losing him.
As for the reassurance he gets: I don't find DD's behaviour reassuring at all. Telling Snape "I prefer not to put all my secrets in one basket, particularly not a basket that spends so much time dangling on the arm of Lord Voldemort." is simply cruel. I seems to show that DD either has no idea about how Snape may feel or he does not care at all. DD probably realizes that in the next moment, because then he does try to reassure Snape (praising Snape's abilities as a spy) but it does not seem to be the kind of reassurance he wants.
Finally DD tells Snape to meet him in his office later. But even after that, though DD tells Snape the great, final piece of information concerning Harry, it remains clear that he still keeps things from him - including the nature of Harry's mission. (Why again? As "Voldemort's right hand man", Snape could even find information about the Horcruxes and pass this information on to Harry in some indirect way.) Snape's behaviour towards Harry - like his reaction to the potions book incident - is more understandable if we suppose that Snape connects it to his continuing concerns about being left out and being somehow "cheated" out of something (Dumbledore's trust) that he has worked for and that he has earned and that he needs. That these concerns do not vanish is shown in the last memory scene: "And you still aren't going to tell me why it's so important to give Potter the sword?" "Still": so it is not the first time he has asked this question. The question may also mean something like this: "So you still don't think I have earned the right to your full trust?" Stubborn and heartless portrait-Dumbledore says "no". Snape tries to pretend he does not care.
wynnleaf - Mar 7, 2008 4:57 am (#1799 of 2617)
Dumbledore's decisions about who had a "need to know" and who was too risky to tell or know things never makes any sense and surely Snape would realize that in spite of DD's comments. It's understandable that Harry had to know info about the horcruxes and that if others, such as Snape, didn't have to know, it would be less risky to just not tell. But then DD goes and tells Harry he can reveal all to Hermione and Ron, who could so easily have been captured and forced to give up their knowledge. Does DD truly think it's less risky for Hermione and Ron to know about horcruxes than Snape?? That's just ridiculous. And then he ends up telling Snape about Harry having a piece of LV's soul in him. If LV was going to manage to sift Snape's thoughts for info, he'd find that, and that's one of the most crucial pieces of knowledge. So if Snape could be told that, why not the rest of it?
In any case, I agree with Julia that Dumbledore's comments don't seem very reassuring.
I do think DD trusted Snape very deeply, as much or more than anyone. But DD always trusts himself most of all (his wisdom, his brilliance, his "guesses," etc) and that comes across, I think.
I suppose you can read the Snape/fake-Moody scene several ways, but I've always felt even at first reading that Snape felt at least a little insecure about Dumbledore's trust. Now that I've read DH, I think I can especially understand that because regardless how much DD did trust Snape, his actions aren't always consistent with that.
Steve Newton - Mar 7, 2008 5:39 am (#1800 of 2617)
Its clearly less risky to tell Ron and Hermione. They are never in the presence of Voldemort.
wynnleaf - Mar 7, 2008 6:45 am (#1801 of 2617)
Ron and Hermione haven't got any occlumency skills at all. They could and did get captured, however briefly. If recognized, it wouldn't have taken LV to get info out of them. Simple torture would probably have done the trick, and if not that, veritaserum. LV wouldn't have to have been anywhere around, just someone looking for Harry Potter and what his plans are.
Meanwhile, it seems likely that no one other than LV would have had any chance at getting info out of Snape. And we don't even know if LV's legilimency skills are strong enough to get info out of him. Yes, he might have been able to get information from Snape, if he became suspicious enough to try very hard with legilimency, and if he could break through all of Snape's occlumency. But that's all debatable. In other words, it was always up for question whether or not LV would suspect Snape and if he did, whether he could get info out of him.
It's not debatable that Hermione and Ron would be easy to break for practically any determined DE, especially if the DE got hold of veritaserum. And even if other DEs couldn't do it, if the DE told LV that they had Harry's friends in captivity, LV could always come and do legilimency.
So it doesn't seem sensible to say that Harry could tell Ron and Hermione about horcruxes, but it was too risky to tell Snape.
Julia H. - Mar 7, 2008 9:11 am (#1802 of 2617)
I did not intend to say that Dumbledore did not trust Snape completely. I think he does trust him as regards loyalties and character and general trustworthiness and perhaps more than anyone else - that seems to be indicated by the fact that Snape tends to receive all these special tasks. That Snape is worried about this trust is another question. In GoF it may be only his own insecurity. (Will he still trust me when others tell him not to trust a former DE in the new situation?) In DH, in another changing situation, Dumbledore's behaviour is ambiguous just when Snape is full of anxiety again. No wonder he is worried.
What Snape sees is that DD is spending more and more time with Harry, sharing more and more information with Harry (and perhaps less and less with him). The readers find out that the information DD shares with Harry is far from being "everything" and Harry at some points is just as disappointed as Snape. (Why didn't he tell me more?) Even in HBP, it is not only Snape who is jealous of Harry but vice versa. Harry tells DD about his suspicion regarding Snape but DD's trust in Snape seems to be unshakable no matter what Harry says and Harry is concerned about this. The difference between Snape's jealousy and Harry's jealousy is that Snape has nothing else but Dumbledore's trust, so he is probably more anxious than Harry.
I think DD trusts both Snape and Harry as deeply as he can trust anyone but he manages to make both of them doubt that. What is at the root of DD's behaviour? It is easier to see in Harry's case because DD tells about it: He tells Snape how much he trusts Harry's abilities and his willingness to eventually sacrifice himself "for the greater good". However, he wants to keep the final secret from Harry until Harry seems to have destroyed most of the Horcruxes, otherwise how could Harry have the strength to do what he must do? In the end, he confesses Harry that he wanted to save him from temptation. So he trusts Harry but at the same time he is afraid to put too much (emotional) burden on Harry, who needs a lot of strength anyway.
What about Snape? Surely, Snape already has important and dangerous secrets and Snape seems to be second only to Dumbledore regarding his ability to keep secrets. He is definitely a safer keeper of secrets than Ron or Hermione. We see how LV performs legilimency in the first chapter of DH and how Snape resists. However, this is a situation when Snape is a relatively "trusted" "DE" - earlier it may have been different. For example, at the end of GoF, when Snape goes back to LV and gives him the long explanation later summarized for Bella, it is very likely that a rather strong legilimency test was carried out right then. Snape even seems to refer to something like that (to Bella): do you think I somehow fooled the greatest wizard on earth? Since LV does not seem to take chances, it is rather probable that Snape's occlumency skills are better than LV's legilimency skills, on the one hand. On the other hand, one small mistake is enough, one moment when Snape lets down his guard in front of LV and the game is over - but of course Snape knows that and takes care. Still, it is perhaps possible (what do you think?) that DD does not want to test the limits of Snape's abilities. Occlumency means closing down a part of one's mind but is it the same how large that part is? Does it matter how many thoughts, memories one hides? Snape must already have a lot of secrets to hide and DD may not want to burden him with more than necessary, perhaps precisely because he can see that Snape (knowing what he knows) is already agitated, so perhaps more vulnerable.
I am not sure whether it makes any sense at all but this is the only explanation of DD's decisions I can think of. But it still does not seem to be a good strategy, much less a truly safe one.
Steve Newton - Mar 7, 2008 10:19 am (#1803 of 2617)
If Ron or Hermione were captured the game would be up. Harry would totally forget about horcruxes to rescue his friends.
mona amon - Mar 7, 2008 1:21 pm (#1804 of 2617)
As for the reassurance he gets: I don't find DD's behaviour reassuring at all. Telling Snape "I prefer not to put all my secrets in one basket, particularly not a basket that spends so much time dangling on the arm of Lord Voldemort." is simply cruel. I seems to show that DD either has no idea about how Snape may feel or he does not care at all.
But it's the truth! Perhaps he could have phrased it differently, but that's the way DD usually talks ('flighty temptress adventure' and all that), and Snape fights back, "Which I do on your orders!"
But I think I know what you mean. Snape's accusation is quite close to the mark. Dumbledore does take Snape for granted, and it's only after this quarrel that he realises how Snape feels about it all.
The reassurance I'm talking about is Dumbledore proving to Snape that he has full confidence in him by giving him the Harrycrux information. Until then Snape refuses to unbend ('Snape looked angry, mutinous').
That these concerns do not vanish is shown in the last memory scene: "And you still aren't going to tell me why it's so important to give Potter the sword?" "Still": so it is not the first time he has asked this question. The question may also mean something like this: "So you still don't think I have earned the right to your full trust?" Stubborn and heartless portrait-Dumbledore says "no". Snape tries to pretend he does not care.
Well, Dumbledore is secretive. He seems to give each person only the information they need, and no more. Harry, when things are going badly during the horcrux hunt, bursts out,"Look what he asked from me, Hermione! Risk your life, Harry! And again! And again! And don't expect me to explain everything, just trust me blindly, trust that I know what I'm doing, trust me even though I don't trust you! Never the whole truth! Never!"
No doubt Snape also felt like this at times, but in close relationships, when one of the parties is feeing angry with the other, these accusations of 'you don't trust me' or 'you dont love me' often come up, without meaning anything much.
I do think DD trusted Snape very deeply, as much or more than anyone. But DD always trusts himself most of all (his wisdom, his brilliance, his "guesses," etc) and that comes across, I think. (Wynnleaf)
I think you're right about that, Wynnleaf.
But then DD goes and tells Harry he can reveal all to Hermione and Ron, who could so easily have been captured and forced to give up their knowledge. Does DD truly think it's less risky for Hermione and Ron to know about horcruxes than Snape?? That's just ridiculous. And then he ends up telling Snape about Harry having a piece of LV's soul in him. If LV was going to manage to sift Snape's thoughts for info, he'd find that, and that's one of the most crucial pieces of knowledge. So if Snape could be told that, why not the rest of it?
I don't think it was about risk. Ron and Hermione had to know about the Horcruxes because they were part of Harry's team. And as Steve says, if they had been captured, the game would be up. The plan would have failed.
But there was no need for Snape to be told about the Horcruxes. He had enough on his plate already. His job was to try and protect the kids of Hogwarts from people like Alecto and Amycus Carrow while pretending to be a loyal DE, and to pass on the 'there's a bit of LV's soul in you' news to Harry when the time came.
I'm not sure if all this makes sense, as it's very late out here (1.58 AM). I haven't yet read your latest post, Julia. Will do so when I wake up!
mona amon - Mar 7, 2008 8:58 pm (#1805 of 2617)
I think he does trust him as regards loyalties and character and general trustworthiness and perhaps more than anyone else - that seems to be indicated by the fact that Snape tends to receive all these special tasks. That Snape is worried about this trust is another question. In GoF it may be only his own insecurity. (Will he still trust me when others tell him not to trust a former DE in the new situation?) (Julia)
It is not a new situation at all. He was spying for Dumbledore for nearly a year when Voldemort was at the height of his powers, and Dumbledore trusted him then. Why should he suddenly get doubts now? IMO, all his anxieties at this time would have centred on the repugnant task of returning to LV and how he was going to cope.
Still, it is perhaps possible (what do you think?) that DD does not want to test the limits of Snape's abilities. Occlumency means closing down a part of one's mind but is it the same how large that part is? Does it matter how many thoughts, memories one hides? Snape must already have a lot of secrets to hide and DD may not want to burden him with more than necessary, perhaps precisely because he can see that Snape (knowing what he knows) is already agitated, so perhaps more vulnerable.
As far as we know, the only thing DD did not tell Snape was the Horcrux information. Since Snape was already hiding the Big Secret from LV (that he was a traitor to him), I don't think giving him this extra bit of information would have made that much difference. But Dumbledore did not want Snape to hunt Horcruxes. He wanted him to concentrate on the tasks that he had given him. So from DD's point of view, why give him this risky information when he does not need it?
EDIT:Snape's behaviour towards Harry - like his reaction to the potions book incident - is more understandable if we suppose that Snape connects it to his continuing concerns about being left out and being somehow "cheated" out of something (Dumbledore's trust) that he has worked for and that he has earned and that he needs.
Julia, I'm not sure what you mean here. Why does his reaction to the potions book incident mean he's feeling cheated out of something?
Julia H. - Mar 8, 2008 4:48 am (#1806 of 2617)
"Why does his reaction to the potions book incident mean he's feeling cheated out of something?"
After the Sectumsempra incident Snape realizes that Harry is using his inventions in order to appear brilliant at the potions classes and Harry has also learned about and is using the spells he invented. Moreover Harry lies about it to Snape, making it clear that he does not want to disclose the real source of his knowledge. If we put this side by side with the conversation between Snape and DD (occurring a little while before), which indicates that Snape thinks DD now trusts Harry more than him (and Harry is the Chosen One while Snape is going to do the AK and lose the respect of everyone), it seems possible that both the potions book incident and the question of trust may make Snape feel the same thing: Harry has taken from him something he has earned and something he needs. I think his knowledge (magic ability etc.) is one of the very few things that Snape is proud of and DD's trust is the closest thing he has to any human relationships but now he feels he is being cheated out of these treasures (and seriously, what else does he have?) by Harry. It is a pity, he does not do a bit more legilimency when the potions book comes up: perhaps he could discover - with a surprise - how much Harry values the unknown Half-blood Prince.
"He was spying for Dumbledore for nearly a year when Voldemort was at the height of his powers, and Dumbledore trusted him then."
I know. But at that time only Dumbledore knew what Snape was and what he had been. More than ten years passed and now quite a few people know about his past and fake-Moody's presence and behaviour possibly remind him that not everybody will be now as trusting as Dumbledore and Dumbledore might be influenced by that. It may also remind him of how much he is dependent on Dumbledore's trust. I agree with you that he does not have any real reasons to doubt DD's trust but anxieties are not always logical and he does seem to be anxious and stressed in the scene with fake-Moody.
I meant "new situation" in general, not simply from Snape's point of view. New in the sense that after 13 LV-free years, people will find themselves at war again. People's attitudes are bound to change: even if they could put up with the idea of a former DE living among them while the situation was safe, now when there is a reason to be afraid, it may be different. As for Snape himself, he was a spy before but then he was very young and cared only about Lily's safety - he may not have thought much about what Dumbledore's trust would mean for him. Many years have passed and now it is important to him to keep people's respect and trust and "Moody" confronts him with the possibility of having to face suspicion and distrust because of his past. I find this an understandable reason to be anxious, even though this is not his only reason. Maybe it is not DD's trust that he doubts but perhaps he is unsure whether this trust will be enough against other people's doubts once Voldemort is back. (I know it was enough once but then LV was out of power, moreover it is easy to have doubts beyond reason when something very important is at stake.) The fact that his behaviour changes when "Moody" appears and the whole scene suggests (to me) that his anxieties are complex. But it is quite clear that various interpretations are possible.
"Well, Dumbledore is secretive. He seems to give each person only the information they need, and no more."
Yes, but some people (Snape, Harry) are not satisfied with this and, IMO, DD seems to be at times mistaken in his assessment regarding who needs a certain piece of information and who not.
"As far as we know, the only thing DD did not tell Snape was the Horcrux information."
And the Elder Wand information but we have been through this. DD may well think Snape already has enough to do but still Snape is so close to some of the Horcruxes sometimes. He hides the fake sword in the vault where the cup is, while the diadem is in the castle all the time, where Snape could do as much searching as he wants. He even has the sword for quite a while and even if he could not use it, he could probably produce Fiendfyre.
I can believe that it is simply DD's way of distributing the tasks but information is not only responsibility, it is also a tool. Snape has a huge responsibility anyway. With DD gone and Snape isolated from the rest of the Light side, he is very much in need of information in order to make the right decisions. Of course, DD is not gone completely, there is his portrait but I think portrait-DD does not seem to be aware of the fact that he is, after all, dead. He may still plan and give advice but the responsibility for their actions belongs exclusively to the living. That is what Snape learns during the chase.
mona amon - Mar 9, 2008 8:31 am (#1807 of 2617)
And the Elder Wand information but we have been through this.
But we didn't arrive at any conclusion. There's really nothing in the text to show whether DD did or did not tell Snape about the Elder Wand.
DD may well think Snape already has enough to do but still Snape is so close to some of the Horcruxes sometimes. He hides the fake sword in the vault where the cup is, while the diadem is in the castle all the time, where Snape could do as much searching as he wants.
Let's look at it from DD's point of view. He knew Voldemort had made six horcruxes, and the unintentional bit of soul in Harry. Two of them are already destroyed, and he thinks he's going to destroy one more before he dies. He has no idea where the other two are, and he has no idea that one of them is hidden in Hogwarts. So why would he think Snape would have a chance of discovering a Horcrux? The best he can do is trust that Harry's unique connection to Voldemort will somehow give him an edge in figuring out where they are.
Maybe it is not DD's trust that he doubts but perhaps he is unsure whether this trust will be enough against other people's doubts once Voldemort is back.
I feel he does not care a jot what others think (except for DD). He certainly doesn't do anything to try and get their respect or affection or trust. This is a warped, bitter individual who's trying his best to help Dumbledore (the only living person on earth for whom he feels affection) fight the forces of darkness, but he does not seem to care about improving his own damaged personality.
wynnleaf - Mar 9, 2008 8:45 am (#1808 of 2617)
Doesn't care what others think except DD? Hm. I don't think that's quite right. He does seem in several of the books to care what Harry thinks. Not in the sense of wanting Harry to like him of course, but he does seem quite satisfied when Harry acknowledges that it's Snape's job to find out what Voldemort's up to. He wants Harry to treat him with respect. It also appears, in GOF, that he doesn't like fake-Moody's comments. If he truly didn't care about what "Moody" said, in the scene on the stairs, he wouldn't have contradicted him or bothered to argue at all. I think the respect of others is quite important to Snape, as well as the sense that others are aware of Dumbledore's trust in him. I think DD's trust is both important to him on a personal level (he values it for its own sake), and also important for others to know that DD trusts him.
I realize one can look at it several ways, but in GOF when Moody confronts Snape, it is perfectly natural for Snape to worry over DD's trust. Knowing that someone has trusted you in the past, or claims to trust you in the present, is not by any means enough to absolve one of doubts if you know that there are rational and reasonable things to cause a person to doubt you. Snape must know that LV's return would make a rational person wonder if Snape would continue to be faithful to the cause. So why wouldn't he be concerned over DD's continued trust?
Further, we do learn in The Prince's Tale that DD was not certain of Snape's commitment to see the entire mission through and go back to Voldemort. Didn't he ask Snape what he would do? And Snape told him he wasn't a coward like Karkarof. But the whole conversation comes up in part because DD didn't know that Snape would continue to do the work he'd done in the past. DD wasn't showing doubt as to whether Snape would be loyal to LV, but he was showing that he didn't fully know whether Snape would continue to serve the Order.
Orion - Mar 9, 2008 8:47 am (#1809 of 2617)
" "And the Elder Wand information but we have been through this."
But we didn't arrive at any conclusion. There's really nothing in the text to show whether DD did or did not tell Snape about the Elder Wand." mona amon
This is complicated. I only understand it if I refine it to very simple sentences I can manage.
I don't think DD told Snape about the Elder wand. Why?
Because Snape wouldn't have gone near LV again. That would have been suicidal.
From his point of view, LV needed to kill Snape to get the allegiance of the Elder wand. The murder was entirely necessary.
If Snape had known this, he would have been very stupid to hang around LV. Maybe in a little corner of his mind he didn't care about dying so much, because he was heartily sick of his life, but he wasn't plain suicidal. He had an important job to fulfill, for example.
So DD didn't tell Snape that being in LV's proximity was deadly especially for him and even more than Snape knew.
DD continued to send Snape to LV even thought he knew of the danger.
I just can't make up my mind whether this qualifies as "murder" or not.
wynnleaf - Mar 9, 2008 9:58 am (#1810 of 2617)
This is a good point. As soon as DD's portrait knew that LV knew about the elder wand and was attempting to get it (like breaking into DD's grave), and gain mastery over it, it would only be a matter of time before LV figured out that Snape had "defeated" DD. Therefore, it was almost certain that eventually LV would try to kill Snape. Snape does not appear to have known that. Or, there's a slight chance that he'd figured it out not long before he was killed. But to me, in his murder scene, it doesn't seem like Snape understands completely about the wand, although he seems to get it while LV is talking about it.
So Dumbledore allowed Snape to go repeatedly to LV without informing him of the huge risk.
Why not tell Snape about the Elder Wand? I realize some speculate that DD didn't tell Snape prior to Snape's killing him, because he didn't want Snape to be thinking in terms of "defeating" DD, but rather in terms of following DD's desires, at the moment of AKing him. But after that, DD's portrait should have told Snape.
Even before Snape killed DD, was it really right to pretend to Snape that he was only killing DD as an act of mercy, when in fact killing DD was setting Snape up for eventual murder? Well, at the time DD didn't know for sure whether or not LV would realize anything about the Elder Wand, or start seeking it, and eventually realize that Snape might be the "master" of the wand.
But by midway through DH, Dumbledore's portrait did know this. Does that equate to murder of Snape? Well, the portrait isn't technically a person, of course. Still, the portrait does seem to act in DD's interests and according to his purposes.
I think the scene with fake-Moody also shows a great deal of unintentional vulnerability. Moody/Crouch is easily able to stress Snape by calling Dumbledore's trust of him into question. I like that scene in part because it shows us how very much Snape not only values Dumbledore's trust, but really desires and needs it. His protest to Moody/Crouch almost seems as though he's trying to keep himself convinced that DD does indeed trust him.
Then in The Prince's Tale, we can see Snape worrying over whether or not DD truly trusts him. It's a big concern and I don't think his concern rests primarily on his personal safety (DD's trust having kept him out of Azkaban, for instance), but more on a deep seated need to be trusted. Trust and respect seem to me to be the things Snape wants the most, and it therefore makes his sacrifice in giving up those things to follow DD's orders and AK him all the more amazing.
Julia H. - Mar 3, 2008 8:52 am (#1772 of 2617)
"I don't think his concern rests primarily on his personal safety (DD's trust having kept him out of Azkaban, for instance), but more on a deep seated need to be trusted. Trust and respect seem to me to be the things Snape wants the most, and it therefore makes his sacrifice in giving up those things to follow DD's orders and AK him all the more amazing."
Very well said, Wynnleaf. This is EXACTLY how I feel about it.
Orion - Mar 3, 2008 10:22 am (#1773 of 2617)
Something which has lurked in a shadowy corner of my memory for ages and just came back to my through a discussion on the Slytherin thread: (So it's a bit apropos of nothing, I apologize)
Snape isn't a teacher. He should have never become a teacher. He is a spy with a false identity. He bides his time at Hogwarts until LV comes back and until he, Snape, can help defeat him. So far so dreary.
Then why does he care so much? I had a maths teacher from hell once, he was cold as a fish and didn't care about the class at all, he looked out of the window when he explained something and he treated everyone who asked a question like an idiot. That was a very bad teacher like I picture a very bad teacher: Like somebody who is rude to the students because he would rather be somewhere else, someone who despises students because they exist.
Snape, on the other hand, is up to his eyeballs in emotions all the time. He awards house points and deducts house points in an unfair way. He enters into useless verbal duels with students and loses most of them. He abuses students because they don't match his high standards. He abuses students because they are in the wrong house.
Why does he care at all? If he indeed spends his time weeping after a dead girl and patiently waiting for his revenge, he should be utterly indifferent to school-related trivial everyday occurences. He should try to keep up Slytherin-friendly appearances for the benefit of the Death Nibblers, and leave it at that. Instead, he throws himself into the House wars, and his subject, which wasn't even his favourite subject at school, is still much too important for him.
Another strange scene which I have just re-read: In HBP there is a DADA lesson in which he abuses Ron, "a boy so solid he can't Apparate half an inch across the room" (LOL!) - after!!! DD has persuaded him to kill him. He is still able to crack a joke! Hadn't he already turned into a total wreck at that time?
journeymom - Mar 3, 2008 10:28 am (#1774 of 2617)
Snape feared Voldemort, but he was still learning from him, up to the end, as evidenced when he flew away from Hogwarts.
======
Snape wasn't personally 'called' to teach but he was bright, competitive and had a chip on his shoulder left over from his days as an abused student. He was there, so he made the best of it. If he had to teach and be head of house, he wasn't going to do a sloppy, half hearted job. He had some personal pride, is my impression. And he used the opportunity to put down Gryffindor and promote Slytherin.
======
A total wreck- maybe Snape took his anxiety out on Ron at that moment.
Soul Search - Mar 3, 2008 11:34 am (#1775 of 2617)
"... maybe Snape took his anxiety out on Ron at that moment."
This comment got me to wondering. There are a few occasions, perhaps as early as SS, where Snape says something we have never been able to explain. Previously, We have dismissed unusual comments just as "Snape being Snape," but now that we have "The Prince's Tale" I wonder if we can coordinate some unusual statement with something that happened with Dumbledore?
Orion - Mar 3, 2008 11:51 am (#1776 of 2617)
Well, we all know that there was never a "Snape being Snape", but always a total wreck, the reason being, his own personal guilt and the horrible punishment he had received. So Snape's behaviour towards students is so alarming sometimes because he is under enormous stress practically all the time and can't cope.
You can see that also in Alan Rickman's way of playing him. You think he is going to jump out of his skin. He is never cool and snarky, he is practically grinding his teeth all the time and spitting at students as if he was at the end of his tether.
Julia H. - Mar 3, 2008 12:42 pm (#1777 of 2617)
I agree with Journeymom. And perhaps Snape is not quite as bad a teacher as the maths teacher Orion described. Spending his time "weeping after a dead girl and patiently waiting for his revenge"? Not quite. If he gives himself totally over to grief, he will not be of much use when his time comes to fight. Of course, he is a total wreck all the time but he still goes on living - because Dumbledore has given him a life-purpose that is meaningful to him. So he has to spend his time somehow, not only "patiently waiting" but doing something in the meantime. He is hiding his grief and remorse from almost everyone else and he does not want to appear weak. Doing a job can help a person to keep his head above water in very serious situations. He does not only teach but (as Journeymom has pointed out) learns as well. I think Snape (the Half-Blood Prince) has always taken learning seriously and he realizes that improving his skills may help him achieve his goal. This is why he also takes teaching seriously. Actually, his "experiment" with Neville's toad probably has the purpose of bringing home the idea that at school they are learning things that have practical purposes, things that they may one day have to use in dead serious situations where mistakes can cost lives. He also cares for Slytherins because he knows what the Slytherin experience is like and he - as an adult - probably understands their isolation better than the kids themselves. He may also feel either sorry for them or some kind of defiance (is it the right word?) for being a Slytherin (and being treated like a Slytherin) and not something else - whatever that means.
PeskyPixie - Mar 3, 2008 10:59 pm (#1778 of 2617)
Severus loves learning (he took Muggle summer school to keep up with his studies in Calculus, Algebra & Geometry and Physics, after all. ) and works himself into a snit when his students do not live up to his expectations as scholars. I think if Hermione had been a Slytherin (and had nothing to do with Harry Potter) he may well have been proud to have her in his House.
I took Snape's 'twitch' in Mad-Eye Barty's presence as a coincidence. The Mark is growing stronger steadily throughout the year, and maybe it happened to burn stronger at that inopportune moment? Perhaps every Death Eater (including Barty) experiences the sting at that moment? (Does Barty even have the Dark Mark while he impersonates Moody?)
Which brings me to something I've often contemplated: What would Snape's fate with Voldy be if Barty hadn't been smooched by a dementor?
Julia H. - Mar 4, 2008 5:20 am (#1779 of 2617)
"I took Snape's 'twitch' in Mad-Eye Barty's presence as a coincidence." (Pesky)
Mad-Eye Barty has just made a reference to the mark when this happens.
"He's a trusting man, isn't he? Believes in second chances. But me -- I say there are spots that don't come off, Snape. Spots that never come off, d' you know what I mean?"
It is not likely to be just a coincidence.
"What would Snape's fate with Voldy be if Barty hadn't been smooched by a dementor? (Pesky)
Good question. Barty would have been sent to Azkaban, Snape would have been sent back to Voldemort and then in OOTP there is a mass break-out from Azkaban. Barty would get free and tell Voldemort what he knows about Snape. (Snape helped Dumbledore stop Barty when he wanted to kill Potter and Snape brought the Veritaserum, too.) Snape's mission is a dangerous one.
Swedish Short-Snout - Mar 4, 2008 6:15 am (#1780 of 2617)
If Barty had not been kissed by the Dementor, the Ministry might, just might, have realised that Voldemort had returned and then there would probably not have been a mass breakout.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 4, 2008 7:45 am (#1781 of 2617)
There used to be speculation that Snape may have suggested to Fudge to bring in the dementers to kill Barty mainly so Barty wouldn't have told Voldemort that Snape was a traitor. Now that we have Snape being thoroughly Dumbledore's man, it seems less likely.
mona amon - Mar 4, 2008 8:38 am (#1782 of 2617)
What would Snape's fate with Voldy be if Barty hadn't been smooched by a dementor? (Pesky)
I think he may have got away with it. After all, he helped Dumbledore to thwart Quirrell in PS, and Voldemort seems to know about it.
If Barty had not been kissed by the Dementor, the Ministry might, just might, have realised that Voldemort had returned and then there would probably not have been a mass breakout. (Swedish Short Snout)
Good point, SSS. Predicting what might have happened is way too complicated because everything has such diverse consequences... I think I'm paraphrasing Dumbledore from the end of POA.
Julia H. - Mar 4, 2008 9:13 am (#1783 of 2617)
"Now that we have Snape being thoroughly Dumbledore's man, it seems less likely." (Ramb)
It makes it much less likely. Besides, Fudge could have easily mentioned it to furious Minerva and DD if something like that had been suggested to him by anyone. Actually, bringing a dementor as body guard and then let it silence the man who would have told unpleasant news is very much like Fudge.
"I think he may have got away with it. After all, he helped Dumbledore to thwart Quirrell in PS, and Voldemort seems to know about it." (Mona)
The difference is that in the first case Snape was able to claim quite believably that he had had no idea Voldemort was anywhere nearby but in the second case the Dark Mark had been getting stronger for a while, then it burned and Snape was spending his time stunning or disarming (?) Barty (and saving Harry's life) along with DD and Minerva instead of appearing in front LV after being summoned.
I agree that any plot change could have diverse consequences - I guess we are just playing with ideas.
PeskyPixie - Mar 4, 2008 9:41 am (#1784 of 2617)
It just happens to be my point of view that Snape's lies to Lord Voldemort work quite well because Voldemort's servant at Hogwarts is disabled without the chance to tell Voldemort that that ol' Snape has been working with Dumbledore all year. Snape's lies about the Quirrell incident work because he does not need to tell similar tales about the Crouch incident.
Also, Crouch did not necessarily have to be kissed to be detained. The Ministry might just as well have chucked him into Azkaban as a crazy murderer and remained oblivious to the fact that this was living proof of the Dark Lord's return. People tend to believe what they want to believe. Snape exemplifies this.
However, if it is indeed the opinion of others that this line of thought is too complicated and influenced by individual opinion rather than canon, I won't mind at all if it's dropped.
ETA: "I took Snape's 'twitch' in Mad-Eye Barty's presence as a coincidence." -PeskyPixie
"Mad-Eye Barty has just made a reference to the mark when this happens ... It is not likely to be just a coincidence." -Julia H.
That's what makes it a coincidence. Could someone please explain to me why it can't be? I seem to be the only one who missed out on the subtlety here.
Julia H. - Mar 4, 2008 10:58 am (#1785 of 2617)
'That's what makes it a coincidence." (Pesky)
I thought you said it was a coincidence that Snape touched his arm in Barty's presence. Then I thought it was not just a coincidence because Barty was taunting him about the mark, so there was something more than just Barty's presence. If you say it is a coincidence that Snape's arm hurts (or something) when Barty mentions that "spot" ... it is a different question. I don't think I can prove that it is not just a coincidence but it still seems to me that there is some kind of causal relationship between Barty's words and Snape touching his arm, which makes it more than just a coincidence. It seems to me that this movement is Snape's reaction to Barty's words, then Barty laughs and Snape is angry. It seems they both know what is going on. (They don't tell us though.)
mona amon - Mar 4, 2008 8:55 pm (#1786 of 2617)
But Julia, Snape does not just touch his mark when Barty mentions the 'spots that never come off'. He 'seizes his left forearm convulsively', which makes it sound like an instinctive reaction to unexpected physical pain rather than an unconscious response to Barty's taunt. So I think it must be either as Pesky says, a coincidence (Dark Mark happened to burn at the same time that Barty made the remark), or Barty himself did something to make Snape's mark hurt.
Julia H. - Mar 5, 2008 12:34 am (#1787 of 2617)
Yes, that is right, it was much more than just a touch... I see what you mean. Still, could it perhaps be the sign of a very strong emotional reaction, a sign of how much Snape was hurt/agitated by Barty's remark? A sign that Barty was alluding to something Snape himself had been very much concerned about? The Dark Mark was getting stronger and the Dark Lord was regaining his power but part of Snape's concern (and perhaps the greater part of it) may have been how these things were going to affect his position among people. While LV was out of power and far away, people may have accepted (may have been willing to "forget") that a former DE (in fact quite a few former DE's) lived among them but what would be their attitude once the Dark Lord was back and the situation was dangerous again? Would they still trust him? Would anyone identify him with DE's because he still had the mark? There was an auror in the castle and Snape's office had been searched by him - why? All this may have been painful enough to Snape and Barty was talking about just that. I also feel that there must be something about that Dark Mark that we are never told explicitly. Whether it is some magic connected to it or simply that Snape has so strong feelings about it (loathing, shame, fear, anxiety, whatever) that he cannot properly control them (or perhaps some ancient, wandless magic of choices/emotions etc.) - I do not know.
wynnleaf - Mar 5, 2008 6:47 am (#1788 of 2617)
In that scene it's important to remember that Snape thinks he's talking to Mad Eye Moody, the auror that never appeared to have trusted Snape's return to the good side, even years before. And Moody is an auror, as well as a close associate/friend of Dumbledore's and trusted member of the Order. One thing we see in that encounter is that it's very easy to get Snape stressed over the question of Dumbledore's trust. Snape knows the Mark is getting darker and darker and LV's return is probably soon. But as far as he knows, Moody does not know that.
When Moody makes his remark about the Mark on Snape's arm, Snape grips it convulsively, but I think it's mainly anxiety that makes him do it. Sure, he knows that Moody would know the Mark is on his arm. But as far as Snape knows, Moody should not be aware that the Mark is changing, growing darker. At the moment Moody calls Snape's trustworthiness into question and implies to Snape that Dumbledore doesn't trust him and allowed Moody to search Snape's office, Snape is probably growing more anxious anyway about just those things, due to the darkening mark and the nearness of LV's return.
In other words, Moody's remarks aren't just stressful in themselves. They play on anxieties Snape probably already has and Snape has the evidence right there under his sleeve which he would like to keep hidden from Moody, that Voldemort is on the verge of calling Snape (and other DEs), back into service.
This quote from the scene is interesting:
Moody laughed. "Get back to bed, Snape."
"You don't have the authority to send me anywhere!" Snape hissed, letting go of his arm as though angry with himself.
I think that the "as though angry with himself" implies that Snape gripped his arm out of some emotional response, rather than a physical response, and he's irritated at himself for giving away his feelings about the mark in front of Moody.
Julia H. - Mar 5, 2008 9:59 am (#1789 of 2617)
"Snape gripped his arm out of some emotional response, rather than a physical response, and he's irritated at himself for giving away his feelings about the mark in front of Moody." (Wynnleaf)
That's how it seems to me.
It is also interesting that Snape does not want to discuss the fact that somebody has broken into his office in front of "Moody". He thinks he is already being suspected and does not want to seem to have been hiding something.
Still another interesting thing is the quote:
"You don't have the authority to send me anywhere!"
It sounds as if it was not only about sending or not sending someone back to bed but also about "Moody" (an auror) sending or not sending Snape (an ex-DE who was years ago acquitted by the council) to prison. Snape is perhaps trying to reassure himself both about Dumbledore's trust and that "Moody" has no legitimate reasons to prosecute him.
wynnleaf - Mar 5, 2008 10:19 am (#1790 of 2617)
I really love that entire scene. It's Snape at a very vulnerable point, both in terms of the whole series, where he knows that LV is going to be coming back soon and what that means for him, and the particular instance of having this confrontation with Moody and the issue of DD's trust.
But the start of the scene if interesting as well. If you recall, the egg, when opened, sounds like someone screaming. It apparently woke Snape, who must have literally run from his own rooms (still in his nightshirt), passing his office even though he could tell someone had just broken in, and going on through the castle trying to find the source of the screaming. To me, it accentuates his personal vigilance in protecting the castle and the students. Filch comes, and of course the fake-Moody shows up, but no other teachers come to investigate. I'm sure they just didn't hear the egg. Still, Snape must live in the dungeons since he had to pass his office on the way. Yet he was alert enough to be woken by the egg, leap out of bed without even stopping for a robe, and run.
Soul Search - Mar 5, 2008 12:18 pm (#1791 of 2617)
I think wynnleaf's comments are good, but I still don't understand the scene, or what it was trying to convey to the reader.
On first read, just using the storyline up to that point, JKR seems to be casting doubts about Dumbleodre's trust of Snape, perhaps in favor of Moody. (We think he really is Moody.) In spite of Snape saying Dumbledore trusts him, his actions, at least, reveal Snape's own doubts about Dumbledore's trust. We don't yet know about the Dark Mark on Snape's arm, so must wonder why Snape grabs his arm.
A second read, after finishing GoF, we know it isn't really Moody and that Snape has a Dark Mark on the arm he grabs. Yet, we still don't really have a good sense for the scene.
After Deathly Hallows, we know Dumbledore's trust of Snape was implicit, and Snape knew that, so why is Snape so upset in that scene. He should have been quite confident in Dumbledore's trust and that Dumbledore had not directed Moody to search his office. The real Moody should have known this. Snape should have wondered about Moody!
Orion - Mar 5, 2008 1:18 pm (#1792 of 2617)
DD hadn't sent Barty/Moody, but having your office searched is still a disturbing and infuriating experience. The problem with GOF is that Barty is so good as Moody that he is completely consistent with the actions the real Moody would take, even down to searching Snape's office without DD's consent. It's not quite believable that someone can impersonate someone so well, and sometimes Barty works against his own goals, like teaching the students in DADA really good jinxes which help Harry later on. That, for me, is a big flaw of the book.
Julia H. - Mar 5, 2008 2:32 pm (#1793 of 2617)
Reading the books again after finishing DH is like discovering another volumeful of plot between the lines.
"After Deathly Hallows, we know Dumbledore's trust of Snape was implicit, and Snape knew that, so why is Snape so upset in that scene." (Soul Search)
I don't know why Snape would "know" that for sure. Dumbledore keeps secrets from everybody and that is quite clear in DH. Snape worries that Dumbledore does not trust him (in DH) even when he has been a useful spy for a while, he has already saved Dumbledore's life and has made the terrible promise of killing him. So why could he not be anxious about this trust earlier, on the eve of the Dark Lord's return? Even if he has a strong reason to believe that Dumbledore trusts him, being sure of it, in my opinion, does not only depend on objective evidence; it also depends on the person's own inner feelings: self-confidence or anxiety, hope or doubt. Perhaps it is the fact that Dumbledore's trust is so extremely important to Snape that makes him truly anxious about it, that makes him perhaps wonder if it could really be Dumbledore who wanted Moody to search his office. At this time of his life Snape does not look for love or happiness but he still needs to be trusted and counted among respectable people. Dumbledore's trust (and only Dumbledore's trust) is his second chance for an honourable way of life so he is desperately clinging to this trust.
I think beyond wanting trust and respect, he also wants to really deserve these things. In fact, that he carries out Dumbledore's order to kill him against his own wish and interest shows that when the time comes for him to choose, Snape will rather choose to deserve his second chance in life than keep this chance actually.
At this turning point of his life (in GoF), Snape knows the time is coming for him to prove himself worthy of Dumbledore's trust and to fulfill his old promise in a much more dangerous situation. At that moment having a "suspecting auror" around, who does not care about Dumbledore's reason to trust Snape and who may perhaps want to turn Dumbledore (and everyone else) against him could mean that Snape loses this trust before he has the chance to prove that he deserves it. In this sense, he has a reason to be concerned and anxious even if Dumbledore does trust him in reality.
"Yet he was alert enough to be woken by the egg, leap out of bed without even stopping for a robe, and run." (Wynnleaf)
Thanks for this observation. I did not think it over before but now I have read the scene once again and yes, you are perfectly right. Another example of Snape's readiness to protect the people (the students) around him.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 5, 2008 9:02 pm (#1794 of 2617)
Maybe in Gof Snape is feeling a little bit of guilt. He is hard on Harry sometimes unjustifiably. Dumbledore may understand that Snape still has issues with dead James, but even the real Moody would wonder why Snape seems so obsessed with Harry. The real Moody would accuse Snape of putting Harry's name in the Goblet of Fire. I remember thinking that the purpose was to kill Harry by making it look like an accident. Snape looked and acted guilty but he would never explain (nor allow Dumbledore to explain) that he would never hurt Harry.
mona amon - Mar 6, 2008 3:17 am (#1795 of 2617)
Still, could it perhaps be the sign of a very strong emotional reaction, a sign of how much Snape was hurt/agitated by Barty's remark? A sign that Barty was alluding to something Snape himself had been very much concerned about? (Julia)
I think that the "as though angry with himself" implies that Snape gripped his arm out of some emotional response, rather than a physical response, and he's irritated at himself for giving away his feelings about the mark in front of Moody. (Wynnleaf)
I think I'll stick to my version. To me it seems so unlikely that he'd seize his arm convulsively 'as though something on it had hurt him' as an emotional response to fake Moody's remark, whatever feelings it may have aroused in him. I can imagine him being angry with himself even for responding to physical pain in front of someone from whom he was trying to hide his feelings.
And Moody is an auror, as well as a close associate/friend of Dumbledore's and trusted member of the Order. One thing we see in that encounter is that it's very easy to get Snape stressed over the question of Dumbledore's trust. (Wynnleaf)
Its very easy to get this volcano of emotions stressed, anyway. I do not recall anything from the book that suggests he had issues with Dumbledore's trust.
After all, at this point he has worked as Dumbledore's spy for almost a year when Voldemort was at the height of his powers. Dumbledore has vouched for him in front of the Wizengamot, and never as far as we know, given Snape any reason to suspect that he did not have his complete trust. A few days before this incident, when Snape tells Dumbledore about Karkaroff's plan to flee, he only asks him if he will be doing the same. He never calls his loyalties into question.
So when he retorts angrily, "Dumbledore happens to trust me. I refuse to believe that he gave you orders to search my office", I take him at his word.
After Deathly Hallows, we know Dumbledore's trust of Snape was implicit, and Snape knew that, so why is Snape so upset in that scene. (Soul Search)
Like Orion, I feel it's because of the 'disturbing and infuriating experience' of having his office searched. He's angry with Moody, who he probably always disliked for never believing him, and he dislikes most people, anyway.
Snape worries that Dumbledore does not trust him (in DH) even when he has been a useful spy for a while, he has already saved Dumbledore's life and has made the terrible promise of killing him. (Julia)
It's easy to interpret that scene as Snape having doubts about Dumbledore's trust, especially since he himself uses the word, "You trust him...You do not trust me." But to me he's just in a huff because it's now Harry who gets all the secret conferences with Dumbledore. He's feeling jealous and left out. His simple and direct way of confronting Dumbledore with his doubts indicate (to me at any rate) that he had no deep seated anxieties about Dumbledore's trust.
Julia H. - Mar 6, 2008 6:27 am (#1796 of 2617)
I agree that Dumbledore never calls Snape's loyalties into question. However, it is still possible that Snape is agitated about the presence of a person at Hogwarts (an auror, as he thinks) who seems very much to be suspecting him and who may try (who may very well have already tried) to make Dumbledore doubt Snape's loyalties. Snape does not know why "Moody" knows that the Dark Mark may be changing but he knows that he has told it to Dumbledore, so perhaps Dumbledore mentioned it to "Moody" - and Snape may not like the idea at all. Given how important Dumbledore's trust is to him and that the situation is at the moment very special, I think it is likely that he is stressed by the faintest possibility of any doubt on Dumbledore's part.
"Dumbledore happens to trust me. I refuse to believe that he gave you orders to search my office"
Even if I take him by his words, those words are interesting. "I refuse to believe" (not just "I don't believe"). He seems to be protesting not only against the idea that Dumbledore may have given these orders but against the idea that he (Snape) should think or believe that. The word "refuse" implies a kind of struggle but perhaps not only against fake-Moody's words. It may suggest that he thought of the possibility before and had to strengthen his own trust in Dumbledore's trust.
"His simple and direct way of confronting Dumbledore with his doubts indicate (to me at any rate) that he had no deep seated anxieties about Dumbledore's trust." (Mona)
It seems his manner is always direct and simple when he is alone with Dumbledore. Early on, in his great sorrow, he openly tells him he could not bear the disclosure of his role in the protection of James Potter's son. In another very important moment he simply and directly asks Dumbledore if he is not worried about his (Snape's) soul. Later he quite plainly expresses his feelings when DD tells him Harry must be killed by LV. Then the word "Always"is so beautifully simple and straightforward that it could not be more so. Yet, in all of theses cases he talks about important, deep seated feelings.
"You trust him...You do not trust me."
I agree that he is feeling jealous and left out - but why? Is it because he is not present at the evening meetings between Dumbledore and Harry? I don't think so. It is because he thinks Dumbledore does not trust him as much as he trusts Harry. (He may think that he now deserves to be trusted.)
I think the question of Dumbledore's trust comes up in these two cases under somewhat similar circumstances in the sense that Snape's life is about to change. In GoF not only does he know that LV will summon his DE's, he probably also knows or at least suspects that Dumbledore will want him to go back to spy on Voldemort. He will have to act as a double agent, a rather sensitive role for someone with his past, and the certainty of Dumbledore's trust suddenly becomes extremely important. In the DH scene, he also says: "You refuse to tell me everything, yet you expect that small service of me!" He has already agreed to carry out DD's terrible order, which (whatever the actual circumstances may be) is at least very likely to result in his exclusion from the society of respectable people and yet again DD's trust is something very important to cling to amid his own doubts and fears.
mona amon - Mar 6, 2008 9:24 pm (#1797 of 2617)
Snape does not know why "Moody" knows that the Dark Mark may be changing but he knows that he has told it to Dumbledore, so perhaps Dumbledore mentioned it to "Moody" - and Snape may not like the idea at all. Given how important Dumbledore's trust is to him and that the situation is at the moment very special, I think it is likely that he is stressed by the faintest possibility of any doubt on Dumbledore's part.
I think what's going on in that scene is, Snape knows that Moody does not trust him at all. So he's touchy, extremely angry and about to explode. Then he reminds himself that they are both working for Dumbledore, controls his anger, and goes off to bed. If he had any momentary doubts about Dumbledore's trust, (fake) Moody himself dispels them immediately.
Even if I take him by his words, those words are interesting. "I refuse to believe" (not just "I don't believe").
That's just his way of talking. "Dumbledore happens to trust me" instead of "Dumbledore trusts me", "I don't remember asking you to show off, Miss Granger" instead of "I didn't ask you to show off", and so on.
I agree that he is feeling jealous and left out - but why?
Because till then he was something like Dumbledore's right hand man, providing him with all the useful information about Voldemort, and probably Dumbledore shared secrets with him that he didn't share with the rest of the order. Now Harry seems to have supplanted him in that role. He resents it, and wants to know what information he's sharing with Harry that he, Snape, is not supposed to know.
My point is, even if this makes him think that Dumbledore does not have confidence in him, he does not hide his feelings. He confronts DD with his doubts, throws a small tantrum, and remains sulky until Dumbledore gives him some reassurance. Nothing is hidden, it is all out in the open. No unresolved doubts and anxieties about DD's trust eating him away on the inside. This is what I meant by 'he had no deep seated anxieties about Dumbledore's trust."
Julia H. - Mar 6, 2008 11:22 pm (#1798 of 2617)
"Then he reminds himself that they are both working for Dumbledore, controls his anger, and goes off to bed." (Mona)
Perhaps that is what happens but he does seem to be "giving in" to fake-Moody's threats and there is also his (correct) suspicion that Harry is there somewhere and he clearly does not want to continue the conversation with Harry listening.
"He resents it, and wants to know what information he's sharing with Harry that he, Snape, is not supposed to know." (Mona)
It is so but I still interpret it as a question of trust from Snape's point of view. He does not want to get information out of curiosity or to gain more influence: he wants Dumbledore's full trust. I think Snape is probably aware of what DD's latest request will/might cost him (especially that he has had time to think it over by now) and he may feel he is not getting information any more because he is going to be tossed over to Voldemort's camp for ever anyway. It is a very bad moment for him to be replaced by Harry as DD's most trusted man and it is understandable that he would like to feel at least that he is being trusted as long as possible now. He knows what is going to be sacrificed and he does not see that DD cares.
It is true Snape does not hide his feelings but the doubts are there in the first place and it still seems to be a deep concern - after all his whole life at present is built on Dumbledore's trust but this "building" is already shaking at the moment above his head, so he wants to keep at least the "foundation" under his feet as long as possible. Dumbledore's death would be a great loss to him even if he did not have to do the AK and this is part of his anxiety but now he feels perhaps that he is already losing him.
As for the reassurance he gets: I don't find DD's behaviour reassuring at all. Telling Snape "I prefer not to put all my secrets in one basket, particularly not a basket that spends so much time dangling on the arm of Lord Voldemort." is simply cruel. I seems to show that DD either has no idea about how Snape may feel or he does not care at all. DD probably realizes that in the next moment, because then he does try to reassure Snape (praising Snape's abilities as a spy) but it does not seem to be the kind of reassurance he wants.
Finally DD tells Snape to meet him in his office later. But even after that, though DD tells Snape the great, final piece of information concerning Harry, it remains clear that he still keeps things from him - including the nature of Harry's mission. (Why again? As "Voldemort's right hand man", Snape could even find information about the Horcruxes and pass this information on to Harry in some indirect way.) Snape's behaviour towards Harry - like his reaction to the potions book incident - is more understandable if we suppose that Snape connects it to his continuing concerns about being left out and being somehow "cheated" out of something (Dumbledore's trust) that he has worked for and that he has earned and that he needs. That these concerns do not vanish is shown in the last memory scene: "And you still aren't going to tell me why it's so important to give Potter the sword?" "Still": so it is not the first time he has asked this question. The question may also mean something like this: "So you still don't think I have earned the right to your full trust?" Stubborn and heartless portrait-Dumbledore says "no". Snape tries to pretend he does not care.
wynnleaf - Mar 7, 2008 4:57 am (#1799 of 2617)
Dumbledore's decisions about who had a "need to know" and who was too risky to tell or know things never makes any sense and surely Snape would realize that in spite of DD's comments. It's understandable that Harry had to know info about the horcruxes and that if others, such as Snape, didn't have to know, it would be less risky to just not tell. But then DD goes and tells Harry he can reveal all to Hermione and Ron, who could so easily have been captured and forced to give up their knowledge. Does DD truly think it's less risky for Hermione and Ron to know about horcruxes than Snape?? That's just ridiculous. And then he ends up telling Snape about Harry having a piece of LV's soul in him. If LV was going to manage to sift Snape's thoughts for info, he'd find that, and that's one of the most crucial pieces of knowledge. So if Snape could be told that, why not the rest of it?
In any case, I agree with Julia that Dumbledore's comments don't seem very reassuring.
I do think DD trusted Snape very deeply, as much or more than anyone. But DD always trusts himself most of all (his wisdom, his brilliance, his "guesses," etc) and that comes across, I think.
I suppose you can read the Snape/fake-Moody scene several ways, but I've always felt even at first reading that Snape felt at least a little insecure about Dumbledore's trust. Now that I've read DH, I think I can especially understand that because regardless how much DD did trust Snape, his actions aren't always consistent with that.
Steve Newton - Mar 7, 2008 5:39 am (#1800 of 2617)
Its clearly less risky to tell Ron and Hermione. They are never in the presence of Voldemort.
wynnleaf - Mar 7, 2008 6:45 am (#1801 of 2617)
Ron and Hermione haven't got any occlumency skills at all. They could and did get captured, however briefly. If recognized, it wouldn't have taken LV to get info out of them. Simple torture would probably have done the trick, and if not that, veritaserum. LV wouldn't have to have been anywhere around, just someone looking for Harry Potter and what his plans are.
Meanwhile, it seems likely that no one other than LV would have had any chance at getting info out of Snape. And we don't even know if LV's legilimency skills are strong enough to get info out of him. Yes, he might have been able to get information from Snape, if he became suspicious enough to try very hard with legilimency, and if he could break through all of Snape's occlumency. But that's all debatable. In other words, it was always up for question whether or not LV would suspect Snape and if he did, whether he could get info out of him.
It's not debatable that Hermione and Ron would be easy to break for practically any determined DE, especially if the DE got hold of veritaserum. And even if other DEs couldn't do it, if the DE told LV that they had Harry's friends in captivity, LV could always come and do legilimency.
So it doesn't seem sensible to say that Harry could tell Ron and Hermione about horcruxes, but it was too risky to tell Snape.
Julia H. - Mar 7, 2008 9:11 am (#1802 of 2617)
I did not intend to say that Dumbledore did not trust Snape completely. I think he does trust him as regards loyalties and character and general trustworthiness and perhaps more than anyone else - that seems to be indicated by the fact that Snape tends to receive all these special tasks. That Snape is worried about this trust is another question. In GoF it may be only his own insecurity. (Will he still trust me when others tell him not to trust a former DE in the new situation?) In DH, in another changing situation, Dumbledore's behaviour is ambiguous just when Snape is full of anxiety again. No wonder he is worried.
What Snape sees is that DD is spending more and more time with Harry, sharing more and more information with Harry (and perhaps less and less with him). The readers find out that the information DD shares with Harry is far from being "everything" and Harry at some points is just as disappointed as Snape. (Why didn't he tell me more?) Even in HBP, it is not only Snape who is jealous of Harry but vice versa. Harry tells DD about his suspicion regarding Snape but DD's trust in Snape seems to be unshakable no matter what Harry says and Harry is concerned about this. The difference between Snape's jealousy and Harry's jealousy is that Snape has nothing else but Dumbledore's trust, so he is probably more anxious than Harry.
I think DD trusts both Snape and Harry as deeply as he can trust anyone but he manages to make both of them doubt that. What is at the root of DD's behaviour? It is easier to see in Harry's case because DD tells about it: He tells Snape how much he trusts Harry's abilities and his willingness to eventually sacrifice himself "for the greater good". However, he wants to keep the final secret from Harry until Harry seems to have destroyed most of the Horcruxes, otherwise how could Harry have the strength to do what he must do? In the end, he confesses Harry that he wanted to save him from temptation. So he trusts Harry but at the same time he is afraid to put too much (emotional) burden on Harry, who needs a lot of strength anyway.
What about Snape? Surely, Snape already has important and dangerous secrets and Snape seems to be second only to Dumbledore regarding his ability to keep secrets. He is definitely a safer keeper of secrets than Ron or Hermione. We see how LV performs legilimency in the first chapter of DH and how Snape resists. However, this is a situation when Snape is a relatively "trusted" "DE" - earlier it may have been different. For example, at the end of GoF, when Snape goes back to LV and gives him the long explanation later summarized for Bella, it is very likely that a rather strong legilimency test was carried out right then. Snape even seems to refer to something like that (to Bella): do you think I somehow fooled the greatest wizard on earth? Since LV does not seem to take chances, it is rather probable that Snape's occlumency skills are better than LV's legilimency skills, on the one hand. On the other hand, one small mistake is enough, one moment when Snape lets down his guard in front of LV and the game is over - but of course Snape knows that and takes care. Still, it is perhaps possible (what do you think?) that DD does not want to test the limits of Snape's abilities. Occlumency means closing down a part of one's mind but is it the same how large that part is? Does it matter how many thoughts, memories one hides? Snape must already have a lot of secrets to hide and DD may not want to burden him with more than necessary, perhaps precisely because he can see that Snape (knowing what he knows) is already agitated, so perhaps more vulnerable.
I am not sure whether it makes any sense at all but this is the only explanation of DD's decisions I can think of. But it still does not seem to be a good strategy, much less a truly safe one.
Steve Newton - Mar 7, 2008 10:19 am (#1803 of 2617)
If Ron or Hermione were captured the game would be up. Harry would totally forget about horcruxes to rescue his friends.
mona amon - Mar 7, 2008 1:21 pm (#1804 of 2617)
As for the reassurance he gets: I don't find DD's behaviour reassuring at all. Telling Snape "I prefer not to put all my secrets in one basket, particularly not a basket that spends so much time dangling on the arm of Lord Voldemort." is simply cruel. I seems to show that DD either has no idea about how Snape may feel or he does not care at all.
But it's the truth! Perhaps he could have phrased it differently, but that's the way DD usually talks ('flighty temptress adventure' and all that), and Snape fights back, "Which I do on your orders!"
But I think I know what you mean. Snape's accusation is quite close to the mark. Dumbledore does take Snape for granted, and it's only after this quarrel that he realises how Snape feels about it all.
The reassurance I'm talking about is Dumbledore proving to Snape that he has full confidence in him by giving him the Harrycrux information. Until then Snape refuses to unbend ('Snape looked angry, mutinous').
That these concerns do not vanish is shown in the last memory scene: "And you still aren't going to tell me why it's so important to give Potter the sword?" "Still": so it is not the first time he has asked this question. The question may also mean something like this: "So you still don't think I have earned the right to your full trust?" Stubborn and heartless portrait-Dumbledore says "no". Snape tries to pretend he does not care.
Well, Dumbledore is secretive. He seems to give each person only the information they need, and no more. Harry, when things are going badly during the horcrux hunt, bursts out,"Look what he asked from me, Hermione! Risk your life, Harry! And again! And again! And don't expect me to explain everything, just trust me blindly, trust that I know what I'm doing, trust me even though I don't trust you! Never the whole truth! Never!"
No doubt Snape also felt like this at times, but in close relationships, when one of the parties is feeing angry with the other, these accusations of 'you don't trust me' or 'you dont love me' often come up, without meaning anything much.
I do think DD trusted Snape very deeply, as much or more than anyone. But DD always trusts himself most of all (his wisdom, his brilliance, his "guesses," etc) and that comes across, I think. (Wynnleaf)
I think you're right about that, Wynnleaf.
But then DD goes and tells Harry he can reveal all to Hermione and Ron, who could so easily have been captured and forced to give up their knowledge. Does DD truly think it's less risky for Hermione and Ron to know about horcruxes than Snape?? That's just ridiculous. And then he ends up telling Snape about Harry having a piece of LV's soul in him. If LV was going to manage to sift Snape's thoughts for info, he'd find that, and that's one of the most crucial pieces of knowledge. So if Snape could be told that, why not the rest of it?
I don't think it was about risk. Ron and Hermione had to know about the Horcruxes because they were part of Harry's team. And as Steve says, if they had been captured, the game would be up. The plan would have failed.
But there was no need for Snape to be told about the Horcruxes. He had enough on his plate already. His job was to try and protect the kids of Hogwarts from people like Alecto and Amycus Carrow while pretending to be a loyal DE, and to pass on the 'there's a bit of LV's soul in you' news to Harry when the time came.
I'm not sure if all this makes sense, as it's very late out here (1.58 AM). I haven't yet read your latest post, Julia. Will do so when I wake up!
mona amon - Mar 7, 2008 8:58 pm (#1805 of 2617)
I think he does trust him as regards loyalties and character and general trustworthiness and perhaps more than anyone else - that seems to be indicated by the fact that Snape tends to receive all these special tasks. That Snape is worried about this trust is another question. In GoF it may be only his own insecurity. (Will he still trust me when others tell him not to trust a former DE in the new situation?) (Julia)
It is not a new situation at all. He was spying for Dumbledore for nearly a year when Voldemort was at the height of his powers, and Dumbledore trusted him then. Why should he suddenly get doubts now? IMO, all his anxieties at this time would have centred on the repugnant task of returning to LV and how he was going to cope.
Still, it is perhaps possible (what do you think?) that DD does not want to test the limits of Snape's abilities. Occlumency means closing down a part of one's mind but is it the same how large that part is? Does it matter how many thoughts, memories one hides? Snape must already have a lot of secrets to hide and DD may not want to burden him with more than necessary, perhaps precisely because he can see that Snape (knowing what he knows) is already agitated, so perhaps more vulnerable.
As far as we know, the only thing DD did not tell Snape was the Horcrux information. Since Snape was already hiding the Big Secret from LV (that he was a traitor to him), I don't think giving him this extra bit of information would have made that much difference. But Dumbledore did not want Snape to hunt Horcruxes. He wanted him to concentrate on the tasks that he had given him. So from DD's point of view, why give him this risky information when he does not need it?
EDIT:Snape's behaviour towards Harry - like his reaction to the potions book incident - is more understandable if we suppose that Snape connects it to his continuing concerns about being left out and being somehow "cheated" out of something (Dumbledore's trust) that he has worked for and that he has earned and that he needs.
Julia, I'm not sure what you mean here. Why does his reaction to the potions book incident mean he's feeling cheated out of something?
Julia H. - Mar 8, 2008 4:48 am (#1806 of 2617)
"Why does his reaction to the potions book incident mean he's feeling cheated out of something?"
After the Sectumsempra incident Snape realizes that Harry is using his inventions in order to appear brilliant at the potions classes and Harry has also learned about and is using the spells he invented. Moreover Harry lies about it to Snape, making it clear that he does not want to disclose the real source of his knowledge. If we put this side by side with the conversation between Snape and DD (occurring a little while before), which indicates that Snape thinks DD now trusts Harry more than him (and Harry is the Chosen One while Snape is going to do the AK and lose the respect of everyone), it seems possible that both the potions book incident and the question of trust may make Snape feel the same thing: Harry has taken from him something he has earned and something he needs. I think his knowledge (magic ability etc.) is one of the very few things that Snape is proud of and DD's trust is the closest thing he has to any human relationships but now he feels he is being cheated out of these treasures (and seriously, what else does he have?) by Harry. It is a pity, he does not do a bit more legilimency when the potions book comes up: perhaps he could discover - with a surprise - how much Harry values the unknown Half-blood Prince.
"He was spying for Dumbledore for nearly a year when Voldemort was at the height of his powers, and Dumbledore trusted him then."
I know. But at that time only Dumbledore knew what Snape was and what he had been. More than ten years passed and now quite a few people know about his past and fake-Moody's presence and behaviour possibly remind him that not everybody will be now as trusting as Dumbledore and Dumbledore might be influenced by that. It may also remind him of how much he is dependent on Dumbledore's trust. I agree with you that he does not have any real reasons to doubt DD's trust but anxieties are not always logical and he does seem to be anxious and stressed in the scene with fake-Moody.
I meant "new situation" in general, not simply from Snape's point of view. New in the sense that after 13 LV-free years, people will find themselves at war again. People's attitudes are bound to change: even if they could put up with the idea of a former DE living among them while the situation was safe, now when there is a reason to be afraid, it may be different. As for Snape himself, he was a spy before but then he was very young and cared only about Lily's safety - he may not have thought much about what Dumbledore's trust would mean for him. Many years have passed and now it is important to him to keep people's respect and trust and "Moody" confronts him with the possibility of having to face suspicion and distrust because of his past. I find this an understandable reason to be anxious, even though this is not his only reason. Maybe it is not DD's trust that he doubts but perhaps he is unsure whether this trust will be enough against other people's doubts once Voldemort is back. (I know it was enough once but then LV was out of power, moreover it is easy to have doubts beyond reason when something very important is at stake.) The fact that his behaviour changes when "Moody" appears and the whole scene suggests (to me) that his anxieties are complex. But it is quite clear that various interpretations are possible.
"Well, Dumbledore is secretive. He seems to give each person only the information they need, and no more."
Yes, but some people (Snape, Harry) are not satisfied with this and, IMO, DD seems to be at times mistaken in his assessment regarding who needs a certain piece of information and who not.
"As far as we know, the only thing DD did not tell Snape was the Horcrux information."
And the Elder Wand information but we have been through this. DD may well think Snape already has enough to do but still Snape is so close to some of the Horcruxes sometimes. He hides the fake sword in the vault where the cup is, while the diadem is in the castle all the time, where Snape could do as much searching as he wants. He even has the sword for quite a while and even if he could not use it, he could probably produce Fiendfyre.
I can believe that it is simply DD's way of distributing the tasks but information is not only responsibility, it is also a tool. Snape has a huge responsibility anyway. With DD gone and Snape isolated from the rest of the Light side, he is very much in need of information in order to make the right decisions. Of course, DD is not gone completely, there is his portrait but I think portrait-DD does not seem to be aware of the fact that he is, after all, dead. He may still plan and give advice but the responsibility for their actions belongs exclusively to the living. That is what Snape learns during the chase.
mona amon - Mar 9, 2008 8:31 am (#1807 of 2617)
And the Elder Wand information but we have been through this.
But we didn't arrive at any conclusion. There's really nothing in the text to show whether DD did or did not tell Snape about the Elder Wand.
DD may well think Snape already has enough to do but still Snape is so close to some of the Horcruxes sometimes. He hides the fake sword in the vault where the cup is, while the diadem is in the castle all the time, where Snape could do as much searching as he wants.
Let's look at it from DD's point of view. He knew Voldemort had made six horcruxes, and the unintentional bit of soul in Harry. Two of them are already destroyed, and he thinks he's going to destroy one more before he dies. He has no idea where the other two are, and he has no idea that one of them is hidden in Hogwarts. So why would he think Snape would have a chance of discovering a Horcrux? The best he can do is trust that Harry's unique connection to Voldemort will somehow give him an edge in figuring out where they are.
Maybe it is not DD's trust that he doubts but perhaps he is unsure whether this trust will be enough against other people's doubts once Voldemort is back.
I feel he does not care a jot what others think (except for DD). He certainly doesn't do anything to try and get their respect or affection or trust. This is a warped, bitter individual who's trying his best to help Dumbledore (the only living person on earth for whom he feels affection) fight the forces of darkness, but he does not seem to care about improving his own damaged personality.
wynnleaf - Mar 9, 2008 8:45 am (#1808 of 2617)
Doesn't care what others think except DD? Hm. I don't think that's quite right. He does seem in several of the books to care what Harry thinks. Not in the sense of wanting Harry to like him of course, but he does seem quite satisfied when Harry acknowledges that it's Snape's job to find out what Voldemort's up to. He wants Harry to treat him with respect. It also appears, in GOF, that he doesn't like fake-Moody's comments. If he truly didn't care about what "Moody" said, in the scene on the stairs, he wouldn't have contradicted him or bothered to argue at all. I think the respect of others is quite important to Snape, as well as the sense that others are aware of Dumbledore's trust in him. I think DD's trust is both important to him on a personal level (he values it for its own sake), and also important for others to know that DD trusts him.
I realize one can look at it several ways, but in GOF when Moody confronts Snape, it is perfectly natural for Snape to worry over DD's trust. Knowing that someone has trusted you in the past, or claims to trust you in the present, is not by any means enough to absolve one of doubts if you know that there are rational and reasonable things to cause a person to doubt you. Snape must know that LV's return would make a rational person wonder if Snape would continue to be faithful to the cause. So why wouldn't he be concerned over DD's continued trust?
Further, we do learn in The Prince's Tale that DD was not certain of Snape's commitment to see the entire mission through and go back to Voldemort. Didn't he ask Snape what he would do? And Snape told him he wasn't a coward like Karkarof. But the whole conversation comes up in part because DD didn't know that Snape would continue to do the work he'd done in the past. DD wasn't showing doubt as to whether Snape would be loyal to LV, but he was showing that he didn't fully know whether Snape would continue to serve the Order.
Orion - Mar 9, 2008 8:47 am (#1809 of 2617)
" "And the Elder Wand information but we have been through this."
But we didn't arrive at any conclusion. There's really nothing in the text to show whether DD did or did not tell Snape about the Elder Wand." mona amon
This is complicated. I only understand it if I refine it to very simple sentences I can manage.
I don't think DD told Snape about the Elder wand. Why?
Because Snape wouldn't have gone near LV again. That would have been suicidal.
From his point of view, LV needed to kill Snape to get the allegiance of the Elder wand. The murder was entirely necessary.
If Snape had known this, he would have been very stupid to hang around LV. Maybe in a little corner of his mind he didn't care about dying so much, because he was heartily sick of his life, but he wasn't plain suicidal. He had an important job to fulfill, for example.
So DD didn't tell Snape that being in LV's proximity was deadly especially for him and even more than Snape knew.
DD continued to send Snape to LV even thought he knew of the danger.
I just can't make up my mind whether this qualifies as "murder" or not.
wynnleaf - Mar 9, 2008 9:58 am (#1810 of 2617)
This is a good point. As soon as DD's portrait knew that LV knew about the elder wand and was attempting to get it (like breaking into DD's grave), and gain mastery over it, it would only be a matter of time before LV figured out that Snape had "defeated" DD. Therefore, it was almost certain that eventually LV would try to kill Snape. Snape does not appear to have known that. Or, there's a slight chance that he'd figured it out not long before he was killed. But to me, in his murder scene, it doesn't seem like Snape understands completely about the wand, although he seems to get it while LV is talking about it.
So Dumbledore allowed Snape to go repeatedly to LV without informing him of the huge risk.
Why not tell Snape about the Elder Wand? I realize some speculate that DD didn't tell Snape prior to Snape's killing him, because he didn't want Snape to be thinking in terms of "defeating" DD, but rather in terms of following DD's desires, at the moment of AKing him. But after that, DD's portrait should have told Snape.
Even before Snape killed DD, was it really right to pretend to Snape that he was only killing DD as an act of mercy, when in fact killing DD was setting Snape up for eventual murder? Well, at the time DD didn't know for sure whether or not LV would realize anything about the Elder Wand, or start seeking it, and eventually realize that Snape might be the "master" of the wand.
But by midway through DH, Dumbledore's portrait did know this. Does that equate to murder of Snape? Well, the portrait isn't technically a person, of course. Still, the portrait does seem to act in DD's interests and according to his purposes.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1811 to 1830
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:37 am
Julia H. - Mar 9, 2008 5:05 pm (#1811 of 2617)
I have tried to collect some information that may indicate that Snape, in his own way, cared what others thought of him.
He makes Dumbledore promise to keep his secret because he does not want other people to know that he is protecting his rival's/enemy's son and (probably) that he loves a woman who loved and married another man (the same rival). This is pride but it only makes sense if others' opinion matters to him.
In PoA, he is irritated when the boggart incident becomes common knowledge in the school. His irritation is best shown in the Christmas dinner scene. He does not like being made fun of.
In GoF, besides the fake-Moody scene, there is the scene when Karkaroff comes to Snape's class to talk to him. Karkaroff accuses Snape of avoiding him. Why? Snape clearly has no reason to like Karkaroff but definitely avoiding him may suggest that he does not want to be seen in close conversation with another former DE. I think the reason may be that he wants to avoid (further) suspicion - this is the question of trust. When Karkaroff shows him his dark mark, Snape is nervous and he also looks around. It seems he does not want anybody to know about the mark. Since he mentions the darkening of the mark to Dumbledore anyway, this seems to be a case when he is worried about others, not Dumbledore. Although the information regarding the darkening mark is dangerous information, this may also be a question of losing others' respect (students, in this case, since they are in a classroom).
In OoTP, the argument between Snape and Sirius seems to have a well-established pattern: Snape calling Sirius's bravery (and usefulness) into question, while Sirius alluding to doubts about Snape's trustworthiness. Both of them seem to know how to hurt the other the most. Sirius is angry for having to be satisfied with doing the "cleaning" while Snape is risking his life for the Order. I suspect it was Snape who originally pointed this out to him, possibly in front of others - it may mean Snape wanted his work and his bravery to be appreciated or at least acknowledged by other order members (if not precisely by Sirius).
When he finds out that Harry has been watching his worst memory, he bellows - among other things - "You will not repeat what you saw to anybody!" This is not someone who does not care about others' opinion of him.
In HBP, in The Flight of the Prince, Snape, having just AK-ed Dumbledore, is in total despair, still he has enough presence of mind to go on playing his part and to drive the DE's out of Hogwarts and to save both Draco and Harry. His loss is as terrible as the task he has to do and in this situation, the last straw seems to be the word "coward" shouted at him by Harry.
"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!"
After everything that happened and is happening, should it matter what Harry shouts at him? There is no logic behind it, he must know what everyone else will think about him but this is a purely emotional reaction. What he is doing at the moment requires a lot of true bravery without the hope of the smallest reward and he manages to carry it all through but this word, this single word, Harry's opinion or everyone else's opinion of him makes the pain he is trying to hide, the pain he is supposed to hide suddenly become visible on his face and audible in his voice.
Bitter he may be, but he still seems to want the trust and the respect of others and it is understandable why.
First of all, in his youth he did something (joining LV) that cost him the respect and the trust of society. He did not go to prison but he is for ever a marked person (quite literally) because of his past. I think he truly regrets his tragically bad choice and wishes he could leave his past behind and I think he realizes that he cannot take other people's trust and respect for granted and because of that, he feels how valuable these things are.
Secondly, the fact that Dumbledore is so important to him that he is willing to go through all these things on Dumbledore's orders indicates how much he needs someone who trusts him. I know he does everything for Lily in the first place but he would not feel any affection for Dumbledore simply for Lily's sake. Dumbledore trusts him and perhaps that is why he becomes attached to Dumbledore personally.
Thirdly, he has to work and cooperate with others. It would be easy not to care about others's opinion if he lived in an ivory tower but he does not.
Finally and quite personally, I like the HP-books more if the stakes are higher for Snape as he keeps on fulfilling his promise (Anything.). Dumbledore's death is a great loss to Snape but Dumbledore would die anyway, so there is no real choice regarding this loss. By AK-ing him, however, Snape risks his soul (and his peace of mind). This is a great risk but his motives are the purest and he also saves lives by doing it (he puts an end to the fight, for example) and his own selflessness and suffering will hopefully heal his soul. But apart from this (and perhaps to "balance" risking his soul), he has to make a sacrifice of a more "wordly" type as well, by giving up things that he may not have sought but still found and has come to value during his journey towards redemption. A home, a respectable way of life and at least a certain amount of trust and respect from others, his present and future reputation, his honour and dignity. The sacrifice is greater and more complete if he has all these valuable things to give up for something he finds even more valuable and important.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 9, 2008 6:26 pm (#1812 of 2617)
Generally I agree that Snape did care about other people's opinions in the sense that he wanted their respect.
But some of his actions serve two purposes. For instance, He doesn't want anyone to know his feelings for Lily for fear this could get back to Voldemort.
He may not want students to know of his Dark Mark because if they tell their parents they might want the Ministry to tell Dumbledore to fire him.
Good examples Julia
Julia H. - Mar 10, 2008 1:18 am (#1813 of 2617)
"Very well. Very well. But never - never tell, Dumbledore! This must be between us! Swear it! I cannot bear ... especially Potter's son ... I want your word!"
That is what Snape says when he asks DD to keep his secret. DD answers: "My word, Severus, that I shall never reveal the best of you?"
It is quite clear that Snape is not asking DD to keep the dirty part of his secret but the part that emotionally affects him the most. DD's answer indicates that he thinks the same.
I cannot see how the fact that Harry saw his Worst Memory could result in LV suddenly realizing Snape's true feelings for Lily. All Harry could tell is how Snape was tortured by future Order members and how he called Lily a "Mudblood" - that is what Harry saw (and the finer details would be lost anyway before the tale could reach LV). LV does not recognize love in its most obvious form, how could he know anything about the more complicated aspects? But it is more than just "a certain amount of concern over having looked like a fool" - Snape is wounded and totally out of his mind. Wanting to keep this humiliating experience (and perhaps his use of the M-word in this situation) a secret is totally understandable without LV and all.
wynnleaf - Mar 10, 2008 6:07 am (#1814 of 2617)
He certainly doesn't do anything to try and get their respect or affection or trust. (mona amon)
Snape is not an emotionally whole person, nor does he relate to people in a healthy way. We should not expect to judge whether or not he desires the respect or trust of others based on whether he relates to people in a way that normally could be expected to produce respect or trust.
The idea that people that want respect and trust, must necessarily act in ways worthy of respect and trust, simply doesn't fit the way many real people actually act. It's a fact of humanity that plenty of people want others to respond to them in certain ways, but don't do the usual requisite things that most people would expect in order to get those responses.
Julia has brought up several specific examples where Snape says that he doesn't want things shared, and it could not be because of protecting the information from Voldemort because in the first case (Worst Memory) there's no info LV couldn't be privy to, and in the second case (Snape's reasons for protecting Harry), Snape tells what the reason is, and it is because he couldn't bear anyone to know, especially Potter's son.
Julia H. - Mar 10, 2008 8:43 am (#1815 of 2617)
"He certainly doesn't do anything to try and get their respect or affection or trust. (mona amon)"
At least nothing more than doing his duty as well as he can. He does everything in his power to fight the Dark side, to protect the students and to shoulder his various responsibilities even before LV's return. I am thinking of things like defending the Philosopher's Stone (in cooperation with others), accompanying students and patrolling the corridors, just as his colleagues do, when it is necessary (there is Lockhart as an example of someone who is not willing to take part in the general duties and responsibilities of teachers) and making a perfect Wolfsbane Potion from month to month - when basically the safety of the whole school is in his hands alone. A consistent pattern of behaviour like this would often be enough to ensure respect and trust (not necessarily affection) for the person in question. In Snape's case, it is not enough and he really does not try to do more than that. The cause of distrust is not so much his present as his past and he cannot wipe that out. Besides, he has more important reasons for doing his duty than "just" winning trust and respect. Nevertheless he still may wish (and I think it is strongly implied that he does wish) to win respect and trust for these things and/or to keep any amount of respect and trust he may have already won.
"Therefore, his concern over having his agreement to protect Harry revealed is just as likely to incorporate his fear that it will get back to Voldemort." (Zelmia)
He may think anything he does not actually mention but he does mention a reason that is not Voldemort and DD seems to understand it in this way. While we can think he can have other reasons, we have no reason to think that the reason he mentions is not true. So that still means that it matters to him what other people (besides Voldemort) know or think about him. This was the original point in bringing up the example.
Orion - Mar 10, 2008 11:02 am (#1816 of 2617)
This might be an incredibly stupid question, directed mainly at mona, but I simply don't know the answer, so please don't come down on me like a ton of bricks:
There was this maths teacher from hell, right? The one who looked out of the window when he wrote on the blackboard and who looked exasperated when you were daring enough to ask a question? Whose lessons consisted mainly of making students "solve" problems at the blackboard, but not helping them in any way, that is, making them stand there like idiots for some minutes and sending them back?
Well, he was obviously a well-respected member of society, civil and polite to adults and a loving husband who treated his wife like royalty. (In a little town you know everything about your teachers!)
That is, nobody cared how he treated students. They were only students. They didn't count. We never had the feeling that this teacher was an outcast of society for being nasty in class. We thought that we were an extremely dumb maths class and were embarrassed about it, and huddled together for comfort. (That was why being humiliated at the blackboard wasn't very bad, because with the exception of the two brightest Hermiones, nobody got it and everybody felt with you.)
So why should Snape be an extremely nasty person who doesn't communicate civilly with other adults? We mostly see him in the classroom, where he is indeed nasty, but that doesn't say anything about his interactions with, let's say, his colleagues. (You can't count scenes with Sirius!) So my question is: What makes you think Snape is a nasty person? *duck*
mona amon - Mar 10, 2008 11:16 am (#1817 of 2617)
Doesn't care what others think except DD? Hm. I don't think that's quite right. (Wynnleaf)
I have tried to collect some information that may indicate that Snape, in his own way, cared what others thought of him. (Julia)
Maybe I was exagerating when I said 'doesn't care a jot. He does get mighty peeved when anyone gets a wrong idea about him ("Don't call me coward" and "Have you been imagining some act of glorious heroism?"). And he also does not like to be made fun of. Severus unfortunately, has no sense of humour!
I suspect it was Snape who originally pointed this out to him, possibly in front of others - it may mean Snape wanted his work and his bravery to be appreciated or at least acknowledged by other order members (if not precisely by Sirius). (Julia)
I think (in fact I'm pretty sure!) his sole motive here was to lord it over Sirius.
So while he does care about a few aspects of how people view him, on the whole I think he's not bothered about others' opinions.
The idea that people that want respect and trust, must necessarily act in ways worthy of respect and trust, simply doesn't fit the way many real people actually act. (Wynnleaf)
I know people like that in real life. And I have absolutely no respect or sympathy for them. And if JKR had potrayed Severus like that, whining about how much he needs others' respect and affection and trust while not lifting a finger to do anything about it, would any of us like him at all?
I feel it works much better if he is this character who has turned his back on things like friendship, love and happiness, too busy mourning for Lily to care about other human relationships. This way he is still a head case, but at least a tragic one, rather than an annoying one!
Finally and quite personally, I like the HP-books more if the stakes are higher for Snape as he keeps on fulfilling his promise (Anything.) (Julia)
Well, it isn't easy for anyone, not even one who doesn't care much about other people and what they think of him, to willingly enter into a situation where he will be hated and hunted as a murderer and coward by everyone. I do not think it minimises Snape's sacrifice in any way, especially since he had absolutely nothing to gain from it. No loved ones or friends whom he could have hoped to benefit by his sacrifice.
It is quite clear that Snape is not asking DD to keep the dirty part of his secret but the part that emotionally affects him the most. DD's answer indicates that he thinks the same. (Julia)
I agree with Zelmia. There's nothing clear about Snape's broken sentences at all. Exactly what does he not want Harry to find out? That he is protecting him? Or that he was the one who gave the prophecy to Voldemort? Dumbledore seems to absolve him of all guilt in the matter, because his reply is "My word, Severus, that I will not reveal the best of you?" But we are left without a clear idea of what Severus himself feels about it.
There's a lot more I wanted to reply to, the elder wand for instance, but I'll leave it for another post. this one is too long already!
EDIT: So why should Snape be an extremely nasty person who doesn't communicate civilly with other adults? We mostly see him in the classroom, where he is indeed nasty, but that doesn't say anything about his interactions with, let's say, his colleagues. (You can't count scenes with Sirius!) So my question is: What makes you think Snape is a nasty person? (Orion)
LOL, you don't have to duck! One scene that stands out is the way he treats Tonks in HBP. And he's consistently nasty to Lupin, who, although he was a Marauder, is obviously trying his best to make up with him. But I'll think about it some more and answer you in my next post!
wynnleaf - Mar 10, 2008 1:20 pm (#1818 of 2617)
It is quite clear that Snape is not asking DD to keep the dirty part of his secret but the part that emotionally affects him the most. (julia)
Snape tells what the reason is, and it is because he couldn't bear anyone to know, especially Potter's son. - Interesting that when I say things like "it's quite clear" or phrase things in a definitive way such as "it is because...." (because in my opinion it is), I get totally pummeled for it and accused of setting myself up as some kind of self-appointed voice for the author. But apparently other people can say precisely the same thing and it's perfectly fine; there's not the slightest issue. Good to know. (zelmia)
Zelmia, I think really it's mainly me that made a point on another thread about a tendency to use definitive statements over areas of the books where we have no definite answers. I'm not sure that it's quite fair to castigate Julia because she did that. If you find a place where I did that, you are quite welcome to suggest that I uphold my own standard.
However, there are plenty of things in canon that are definitive. Because Julia directly quoted Snape's own words on the subject, I think it was fair for her to say the matter, at least in that case, was clear. If you disagree, perhaps you could give us an alternative meaning for Snape's words.
There's nothing clear about Snape's broken sentences at all. Exactly what does he not want Harry to find out? That he is protecting him? Or that he was the one who gave the prophecy to Voldemort? Dumbledore seems to absolve him of all guilt in the matter, because his reply is "My word, Severus, that I will not reveal the best of you?" But we are left without a clear idea of what Severus himself feels about it. (mona amon)
While it is true that Snape isn't clear about what exactly it is that he doesn't want revealed to Harry, we do see that he's saying he can't bear for Harry to know. That is different from saying that it just isn't safe for Harry to know because he could pass it on inadvertently to LV. And Snape is making it an emotional issue (can't bear), rather than a logistics one, or just a safety issue.
There is either a standard of what is considered acceptable behavior or there isn't. If there is a standard, then why should we ignore it simply because the person in question refuses to even attempt to meet the standard? (zelmia)
Perhaps I was misunderstood. I don't mean that anyone should ignore the standard of acceptable behavior. I'm saying that even if a person is not coming anywhere close to a standard for acceptable behavior to gain respect or trust, that doesn't mean they don't want it. To say otherwise is to presuppose that people that want respect and trust, necessarily act in such a way as to get it.
And does Snape actually act so poorly to adults that he doesn't deserve their respect or trust? Actually, I don't think we've got much evidence. How Snape treats Sirius and Lupin, who he feels tried to kill him and/or bully him, isn't a guide for us to assume that's how he treated everyone. Sure, others in the Order may not have trusted him completely because of his earlier being a Death Eater, but that doesn't mean that he later acted in any way that would make them distrust him (prior to AKing DD, that is).
However, the real question is what Snape actually values, regardless of whether he deserves it or not. Does Snape want the respect of others? I think there's enough evidence to show that he wants the respect of his students (wanting them to speak to him respectfully, for instance). And I think Snape's own words show that he couldn't "bear" for Harry to know his true motivations.
I agree with Julia, by the way, on what makes Snape's actions more satisfactory. If Snape has nothing really personally, deep down, to lose when he AKs Dumbledore and is considered a traitor and murderer by all of his former associates in the Order and his colleagues at the school, then his action loses a great deal of its sacrifice. In fact, the only sacrifice seems to be the extra danger he goes into after AKing Dumbledore. It's a lot more deep a sacrifice if Snape was also giving up something he really, really valued -- any possibility for the respect of others, and the complete loss of any trust by anyone on the good side.
wynnleaf - Mar 10, 2008 2:08 pm (#1819 of 2617)
However, one cannot simply demand to be respected. It must be earned. (zelmia)
While I agree with this, I think partly how this came up was in trying to figure out whether it is important to Snape to have the respect of others. We may agree or disagree on whether he deserves it or not, but what I think we were focusing on initially was whether he wants it. And what I was trying to point out is that just because a person may not act in a way that one feels deserves respect doesn't mean that person doesn't desire respect. So the argument that Snape doesn't desire the respect of others, because if he did he'd act more deserving of it, just doesn't hold up. It presupposes that all people that desire respect try to gain it through socially acceptable methods, which is not a fact.
I am suggesting that you uphold your own standard, Wynnleaf. (zelmia)
I do try very hard to not say that things are certain in canon for which we have no certainty or clear statements, and we're basically just dealing with guesswork and interpretation. If you meant me, you are welcome to point out specifics in what I say (rather than others), and I'll be happy to address it.
Julia H. - Mar 10, 2008 2:47 pm (#1820 of 2617)
"I feel it works much better if he is this character who has turned his back on things like friendship, love and happiness, too busy mourning for Lily to care about other human relationships."(Mona)
But Mona, who ever said that Snape wanted friendship, love and happiness or any really personal relationships (except for the one he has with Dumbledore)? I absolutely agree that he does not want any of these things - he is indeed busy mourning Lily, he may be punishing himself and he probably feels that he has done with the pursuit of these things in his life. (I am ready to accept any or all of these reasons.) However, respect and trust are not the same as the things you list. Receiving trust and respect does not mean he will have friends or find happiness, not at all. Happiness would probably mean to him nothing less than getting back Lily. I don't think he dreams about being invited to parties or becoming a popular teacher. Respect means he is not despised for his past but accepted as one of the people he is living among (probably with the additional appreciation of his bravery and knowledge) and trust means that he is acknowledged by those he is working for to be a useful and valuable - or simply a trustworthy - member of society (school, Order, anything). I think we generally agree that Snape is a human being (not a machine) and you called him a volcano of emotions - why cannot he want dignity and acceptance back among the people he once left? Actually, perhaps in a situation where personal happiness and the other things you mention are not possible any more, things like honour and dignity can become even more valuable.
I don't think he wants anything that can be achieved by being nice or conventional, by the way. (He is not Ludo Bagman.) I think his present life absolutely qualifies him for what he seems to want. Will people seriously say "I know he can always be counted on in times of danger and does his best to do whatever dangerous or complicated tasks he gets to help others, has saved several lives but he is biased towards his own house in matters like Quidditch and house points, so I don't think he can be trusted or respected."? I understand if he is not loved - but not trusted? My opinion is that respect and trust are a problem for Snape because of his past (and later of course because of his ambiguous role as a spy but that is a different story). It is not unfriendly behaviour but the shadow of his past that he needs to overcome to win true respect and trust - and it is extremely difficult even though he is loyal, unselfish and true to his words and uses all his talents to promote the cause of the Light side.
Julia H. - Mar 11, 2008 12:09 am (#1821 of 2617)
P.S. I forgot to mention but Snape also wants basic human dignity (like not being laughed at or humiliated - the issue brought up especially by the worst memory) but again this has nothing to do with love or happiness or friendship and this is also something he "qualifies for" the way he is (being a human being).
mona amon - Mar 11, 2008 6:03 am (#1822 of 2617)
Julia, isn't it all part of the same package deal? If you want friendship, love and hapiness, you'll try to be more sociable, friendly and loving towards others, and that is what will earn you respect and trust. I mean, there are people whom I don't like but still trust, but they are people I know really well, and for a long time. But generally when you've got a past that you have to make up for, people aren't going to trust you unless they like you. To me, the fact that he never bothered to get himself liked means that he did not worry very much about the attendent benefits of respect and trust.
I don't think he dreams about being invited to parties or becoming a popular teacher. Respect means he is not despised for his past but accepted as one of the people he is living among (probably with the additional appreciation of his bravery and knowledge) and trust means that he is acknowledged by those he is working for to be a useful and valuable - or simply a trustworthy - member of society (school, Order, anything).
He does get invited to parties, lol!
To a certain extent I agree with your points, Julia. As you say, he was human after all, and which human being can completely do without these things? Where we differ is the extent to which he was dependent on the respect and trust of others. I feel, unlike you, that he never allowed it to be an important part of his life.
While it is true that Snape isn't clear about what exactly it is that he doesn't want revealed to Harry, we do see that he's saying he can't bear for Harry to know. That is different from saying that it just isn't safe for Harry to know because he could pass it on inadvertently to LV. (Wynnleaf)
I didn't say he was worried about Harry passing it on to Voldemort. I said he may not be able to bear Harry knowing that he was the one who gave Voldemort the prophecy. I think, what comes across in that scene is that he does not want to be emotionally involved with Potter's son.
I agree with Julia, by the way, on what makes Snape's actions more satisfactory. If Snape has nothing really personally, deep down, to lose when he AKs Dumbledore and is considered a traitor and murderer by all of his former associates in the Order and his colleagues at the school, then his action loses a great deal of its sacrifice. In fact, the only sacrifice seems to be the extra danger he goes into after AKing Dumbledore.
As I said earlier, no one wants to be regarded as a murderer and a traitor. Anyone who agrees to it is making a sacrfice, irrespective of the extent to which he generally cares about other's opinions.
This might be an incredibly stupid question, directed mainly at mona,...(Orion)
Orion, I think, unlike your math teacher, Snape seems just as nasty outside the classroom as inside it. Have we ever seen him laugh? Or a smile that was not also a sneer? He doesn't dance with anyone at the Yule Ball. And even Filch at least has a cat. We are shown him being mean to quite a number of adults, and nice to only one of them, Narcissa.
OK, maybe this is a bit exagerated, but this is the general impression I got.
wynnleaf - Mar 11, 2008 7:11 am (#1823 of 2617)
If you want friendship, love and hapiness, you'll try to be more sociable, friendly and loving towards others, and that is what will earn you respect and trust. (mona amon)
Well, in fact, no. That's what emotionally healthy people do. But people who are not emotionally healthy do not necessarily attempt to get the responses they desire from others in typically socially acceptable ways. For instance, a quick well known example is the neglected child who wants parental attention and uses misbehavior to get it. What he really wants is positive attention, but not really knowing how to get that, instead uses negative behaviors to get attention. I'm not saying Snape is doing that - he's not a child and he's not after attention. That's just an example. I just mean that it really is common for people to want positive responses from others, but not to use the typical socially acceptable ways of getting it.
I said he may not be able to bear Harry knowing that he was the one who gave Voldemort the prophecy. (mona amon)
Yes, but that means he cares what Harry thinks of him. What would it mean for him to say he couldn't bear Harry to know of it, if he didn't care what Harry thought of him? Sure, Snape doesn't care if Harry likes him, in fact, he probably wouldn't want Harry to like him. But that doesn't mean he doesn't want his respect, or that he doesn't want to avoid being humiliated around Harry.
We are shown him being mean to quite a number of adults, and nice to only one of them, Narcissa. (mona amon)
Hm. He is fine with Minerva and Dumbledore. He is civil to Fudge in POA. He is actually fairly civil to Umbridge. He seems on okay terms with Filch. He was fairly nice to Slughorn and didn't even shrug off Slughorn throwing an arm around him. Who is he nasty to? Well, he's not nice to Lupin and Sirius, but they have a history and whether we agree with his attitude toward them or not, it certainly doesn't mean he's like that to everyone. So who else is he nasty to? The only other I can think of is Bella, and since she clearly dislikes him and is apparently trying to undermine him, it's hard to blame him for treating her sarcastically. Oh, and he's unpleasant to Peter, another ex-Marauder, not to mention the real traitor who got Lily killed, so that's understandable too.
He interacts only one time that I can recall with Hagrid, and that wasn't either nicely or nastily, just focused on some misbehavior of students. Hagrid seems to trust Snape more than most of the staff and Order members, as Hagrid takes up for Snape several times in front of Harry, so it's hard to think Snape is particularly nasty to Hagrid.
So other than Marauders and Bella, what adults is Snape nasty to?
Well, there's Lockhart. But Snape isn't nasty, per se, to Lockhart. He makes a dampening remark when Lockhart claims he'll mix up a potion instead of Snape, the potions master. After Ginny is taken, he makes some sarcastic remarks to Lockhart, but other staff do the same, so that's hardly proof of Snape's particular nastiness to adults in general.
I don't count fake-Moody, since that confrontation starts off with fake-Moody making antagonistic remarks to Snape.
So that gives us Snape acting fairly well to Dumbledore, McGonagall, Filch, Slughorn, Fudge and Narcissa, and acting as well as one could ask toward Umbridge. He acts kind of neutrally to Hagrid in the one interaction we see between them. He seems quiet, but not unpleasant at the POA Christmas dinner. And he's sarcastic and insulting to the Marauders and Bella.
Any other adult interactions I left out?
rambkowalczyk - Mar 11, 2008 7:40 am (#1824 of 2617)
I feel he does not care a jot what others think (except for DD). He certainly doesn't do anything to try and get their respect or affection or trust. Mona Amon
I realize,Mona, that some of the above is an exaggeration but I would like to argue that Snape may have valued other peoples' opinion besides Dumbledore's.
I will agree that he doesn't do anything to try to get their respect affection or trust but that could simply be that he is afraid to get hurt. However he does want some acknowledgment of what good he has done.
In OOP, when Harry says that spying on Lord Voldemort is Snape's job, ...Harry convinced he had gone too far. But there was a curious, most satisfied expression on Snape's face...
The weird thing about the dynamics between bullies and their victims is that there is a bond between them that desires to mature into a friendship but doesn't know how. For instance, I think most of Draco's anger toward Harry is due to the fact that Harry rejected his friendship in book 1. Snape and James could have been friendly rivals but it didn't happen.
Snape's original motivation to save Lily was selfish, he hoped he could get the girl, but I would like to think that once he got that idea out of his head, he also wanted James' respect or at the very least an acknowledgment that what he did paid back James for saving his life at Hogwarts.
I think in some way Snape wanted Harry's respect. He wanted Harry to acknowledge what he did for the side of good. But he knew that in order for Harry to do this, Harry would have to know that it was Snape who gave the prophecy to Voldemort putting their lives in danger in the first place. Harry would have to know the whole sordid story of why Snape betrayed Voldemort. Snape was afraid to confess to Harry the wrong that he did.
it seems possible that both the potions book incident and the question of trust may make Snape feel the same thing: Harry has taken from him something he has earned and something he needs.
From Snape's point of view, it always seems that Harry takes something that he feels he's earned and needs.
In the case of Lily, one can make a case that Snape was trying to earn Lily's love. Obviously he blew it, to his eternal regret.
In book 3, Fudge promises him the Order of Merlin because he captured Sirius Black. At this point Snape is at his most calmest because Fudge has just acknowledged that Snape did something good. He isn't even angry at Harry but calmly says he was Confunded. So Snape clearly wanted that type of respect. When Sirius escapes, Snape of course becomes unhinged and blames Harry.
mona amon - Mar 11, 2008 12:12 pm (#1825 of 2617)
Yes, but that means he cares what Harry thinks of him. What would it mean for him to say he couldn't bear Harry to know of it, if he didn't care what Harry thought of him? (Wynnleaf)
Harry would have to know the whole sordid story of why Snape betrayed Voldemort. Snape was afraid to confess to Harry the wrong that he did. (Ramb)
Not necessarily. He asks DD to never tell. Tell what? The whole story I presume, his love for Lily, carrying the prophecy to LV, turning spy for DD and now, protecting Harry. He cannot bear it if people come to know of this. But it's not just a sordid story of wrongdoing to be ashamed of. As DD points out, it also reveals the best in him. But he doesn't want people to know the best of him. He is not bothered about justifying himself to others.
So that gives us Snape acting fairly well to Dumbledore, McGonagall, Filch, Slughorn, Fudge and Narcissa, and acting as well as one could ask toward Umbridge. He acts kind of neutrally to Hagrid in the one interaction we see between them. He seems quiet, but not unpleasant at the POA Christmas dinner. And he's sarcastic and insulting to the Marauders and Bella. (Wynnleaf)
We can leave out Dumbledore since we all agree he's the exception. And I suppose he isn't nasty to adults he happens to meet in the corridors, and it's hardly more than one expects if he behaves himself at the Christmas dinner! He's rather snide to Umbridge and very much so to Bella, which is good. Slughorn likes him, and Hagrid seems to be in favour of him. Bill doesn't like him, Tonks doesn't like him, and there's a scene where he's nasty to her. Actually the only places where he's nice to someone are when he reassures Narcissa in HBP and when he seems glad that Minerva is back from St Mungo's.
-----------------
As soon as DD's portrait knew that LV knew about the elder wand and was attempting to get it (like breaking into DD's grave), and gain mastery over it, it would only be a matter of time before LV figured out that Snape had "defeated" DD. (Wynnleaf)
Wynnleaf, this is from way back, but I've been wanting to ask you, why do you think Dumbledore's portrait knew about LV's attempts to get the Elder wand?
wynnleaf - Mar 11, 2008 12:40 pm (#1826 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, this is from way back, but I've been wanting to ask you, why do you think Dumbledore's portrait knew about LV's attempts to get the Elder wand?
Because the tomb was broken into. The characters in the paintings know a great deal, after all, and even gossip between themselves. And even if DD's portrait didn't learn it simply as an item of gossip, wouldn't Snape have told him? After all, Snape must wonder why anyone would break into DD's tomb and take the wand. This would have to be noticed when the grave site was investigated. Remember the song that Slughorn and Hagrid sing? Apparently burying people with their wands was common practice. And surely Snape would want the grave checked out to try to understand why it happened. Can anyone really believe he wouldn't have mentioned it to Dumbledore's portrait? They were obviously talking on a regular day-to-day basis.
So naturally the portrait would realize that LV must be after the wand. Or at least that would be a good guess. And to then not warn Snape would be very wrong indeed.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 11, 2008 1:38 pm (#1827 of 2617)
But it's not just a sordid story of wrongdoing to be ashamed of. As DD points out, it also reveals the best in him. Mona Amon
Just to clarify. The sordid story is that Snape originally wanted to save Lily and let Harry and James die. It is possible in that conversation Snape has with Dumbledore, that Snape wishes that Harry and James were dead and that Lily was still alive. In his eyes, Harry's mere existence is what caused what caused the prophecy to come true and cause Lily's death. So part of him hates Harry for that.
After all, Snape must wonder why anyone would break into DD's tomb and take the wand. This would have to be noticed when the grave site was investigated. wynnleaf
I don't think Snape knows the Elder Wand was taken from Dumbledore's grave. How would the portraits know? There aren't any outside. It would not do for Snape, or indeed anyone else, to see where he was going. Although Voldemort may have made a mess getting into the grave, I'm sure he cleaned up afterwards.
It's possible that at this point 'the best of Snape' is just his potential ---a potential that takes 17 years to develop.
wynnleaf - Mar 11, 2008 2:30 pm (#1828 of 2617)
The sordid story is that Snape originally wanted to save Lily and let Harry and James die. It is possible in that conversation Snape has with Dumbledore, that Snape wishes that Harry and James were dead and that Lily was still alive. (ramb)
While I agree that it's within the realm of possibility that Snape wished for Harry and James to die, I think it's unlikely that he actively wanted it. He may have some maturity problems emotionally, but you'd have to be brainless to think Lily wouldn't be devastated by their deaths. Would he really want her hurt in that way? The fact that even after Lily was dead, Snape was willing to spend years protecting and risking his life for her son, who he loathed, seems to show that he did realize that Lily's son would be highly important to her.
But the fact is that there was nothing he could have done as regards begging LV to not kill Harry or James. Even JKR said that James would have died irregardless. LV wanted to kill him and his primary purpose in the whole deal of targeting the Potters was to kill Harry. So it would always have been pointless for Snape to try and convince LV to not kill Harry, and it would make next to no sense for him to try and convince LV not to kill James, when all the DEs Snape's age must have known he despised James. But for Snape to beg for Lily's life would make sense to Voldemort, and Snape could do that with at least a tiny hope of it doing some good. Even then, with LV agreeing to not kill her, Snape knew that there was still a huge chance that LV would kill her anyway. That's why he was willing to risk his life to go to Dumbledore for help.
I realize that Dumbledore was disgusted that Snape seemed to only care about Lily's life, but since he follows that with an offer to bargain for his help in protecting the Potters ("what will you give me in return, Severus?"), I think it's a bit of the pot calling the kettle black.
Julia H. - Mar 11, 2008 4:56 pm (#1829 of 2617)
"Julia, isn't it all part of the same package deal? If you want friendship, love and hapiness, you'll try to be more sociable, friendly and loving towards others, and that is what will earn you respect and trust." (Mona)
Maybe I have a different type of respect and trust in my mind. The simplest way to put it is perhaps that, in my opinion, Snape wants a reputation that is not that of a (former) DE, not of a turn-coat, a traitor (etc.), not even of someone whose character is often doubted but a reputation perhaps as Dumbledore's man through and through, as someone who can be trusted both in terms of character and abilities. If someone is liked for these things, it is still not the same as being loved or having friends. (His behaviour towards others tends to reflect his current mood or feelings: if he is irritated or in a very bad mood, he does not try to hide this - unlike his deeper feelings - otherwise he can be civil enough. But his life is not about socializing.) I think in Snape's case, trust and respect are the first things to get before he can have love or friendship (here you and I seem to differ); but I don't think he ever thinks of getting anything beyond respect and trust - or let's call it simply a clean reputation. This, however, seems to be important to him. It is extremely difficult as well - because of his past and also because a large part of his work against the dark side must be kept a secret. So he is absolutely dependent on Dumbledore's trust. (I also think that Dumbledore's trust in itself is important to him in the first place but then it is also the first step towards a better reputation in general.) By AK-ing DD, this is precisely what he has to sacrifice: the hope of a good name and the amount of trust and respect he may have already won. (As we see, Hagrid does not want to believe that Snape is a murderer and Slughorn is quite devastated because he - apparently - had a good opinion of Snape. Neither of them is Snape's friend.) But Snape chooses to give up all hope of these things because of even more important things.
wynnleaf - Mar 11, 2008 5:38 pm (#1830 of 2617)
Well said, Julia.
While I keep arguing that a person need not act in a way that typically wins trust or respect in order to want trust and respect, that doesn't mean that I disagree with the notion that actually Snape does merit the kind of trust and respect that he wants.
Respect is a word that can mean many different things and one can respect many things about an individual and disrespect other things about the same individual.
I agree that the areas where Snape probably wanted respect are not in the "how to win friends and influence people" sorts of areas, but simply in the realm of being a person who is committed to working hard for the good side at great personal risk and sacrifice, for having a respectable job at which he works hard, and a person who can be trusted to carry out the duties he's committed to. I don't think a person has to treat people in a friendly manner to win respect for those things, nor would Snape have to be acting nicely to others in order to desire respect in those areas.
I have tried to collect some information that may indicate that Snape, in his own way, cared what others thought of him.
He makes Dumbledore promise to keep his secret because he does not want other people to know that he is protecting his rival's/enemy's son and (probably) that he loves a woman who loved and married another man (the same rival). This is pride but it only makes sense if others' opinion matters to him.
In PoA, he is irritated when the boggart incident becomes common knowledge in the school. His irritation is best shown in the Christmas dinner scene. He does not like being made fun of.
In GoF, besides the fake-Moody scene, there is the scene when Karkaroff comes to Snape's class to talk to him. Karkaroff accuses Snape of avoiding him. Why? Snape clearly has no reason to like Karkaroff but definitely avoiding him may suggest that he does not want to be seen in close conversation with another former DE. I think the reason may be that he wants to avoid (further) suspicion - this is the question of trust. When Karkaroff shows him his dark mark, Snape is nervous and he also looks around. It seems he does not want anybody to know about the mark. Since he mentions the darkening of the mark to Dumbledore anyway, this seems to be a case when he is worried about others, not Dumbledore. Although the information regarding the darkening mark is dangerous information, this may also be a question of losing others' respect (students, in this case, since they are in a classroom).
In OoTP, the argument between Snape and Sirius seems to have a well-established pattern: Snape calling Sirius's bravery (and usefulness) into question, while Sirius alluding to doubts about Snape's trustworthiness. Both of them seem to know how to hurt the other the most. Sirius is angry for having to be satisfied with doing the "cleaning" while Snape is risking his life for the Order. I suspect it was Snape who originally pointed this out to him, possibly in front of others - it may mean Snape wanted his work and his bravery to be appreciated or at least acknowledged by other order members (if not precisely by Sirius).
When he finds out that Harry has been watching his worst memory, he bellows - among other things - "You will not repeat what you saw to anybody!" This is not someone who does not care about others' opinion of him.
In HBP, in The Flight of the Prince, Snape, having just AK-ed Dumbledore, is in total despair, still he has enough presence of mind to go on playing his part and to drive the DE's out of Hogwarts and to save both Draco and Harry. His loss is as terrible as the task he has to do and in this situation, the last straw seems to be the word "coward" shouted at him by Harry.
"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!"
After everything that happened and is happening, should it matter what Harry shouts at him? There is no logic behind it, he must know what everyone else will think about him but this is a purely emotional reaction. What he is doing at the moment requires a lot of true bravery without the hope of the smallest reward and he manages to carry it all through but this word, this single word, Harry's opinion or everyone else's opinion of him makes the pain he is trying to hide, the pain he is supposed to hide suddenly become visible on his face and audible in his voice.
Bitter he may be, but he still seems to want the trust and the respect of others and it is understandable why.
First of all, in his youth he did something (joining LV) that cost him the respect and the trust of society. He did not go to prison but he is for ever a marked person (quite literally) because of his past. I think he truly regrets his tragically bad choice and wishes he could leave his past behind and I think he realizes that he cannot take other people's trust and respect for granted and because of that, he feels how valuable these things are.
Secondly, the fact that Dumbledore is so important to him that he is willing to go through all these things on Dumbledore's orders indicates how much he needs someone who trusts him. I know he does everything for Lily in the first place but he would not feel any affection for Dumbledore simply for Lily's sake. Dumbledore trusts him and perhaps that is why he becomes attached to Dumbledore personally.
Thirdly, he has to work and cooperate with others. It would be easy not to care about others's opinion if he lived in an ivory tower but he does not.
Finally and quite personally, I like the HP-books more if the stakes are higher for Snape as he keeps on fulfilling his promise (Anything.). Dumbledore's death is a great loss to Snape but Dumbledore would die anyway, so there is no real choice regarding this loss. By AK-ing him, however, Snape risks his soul (and his peace of mind). This is a great risk but his motives are the purest and he also saves lives by doing it (he puts an end to the fight, for example) and his own selflessness and suffering will hopefully heal his soul. But apart from this (and perhaps to "balance" risking his soul), he has to make a sacrifice of a more "wordly" type as well, by giving up things that he may not have sought but still found and has come to value during his journey towards redemption. A home, a respectable way of life and at least a certain amount of trust and respect from others, his present and future reputation, his honour and dignity. The sacrifice is greater and more complete if he has all these valuable things to give up for something he finds even more valuable and important.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 9, 2008 6:26 pm (#1812 of 2617)
Generally I agree that Snape did care about other people's opinions in the sense that he wanted their respect.
But some of his actions serve two purposes. For instance, He doesn't want anyone to know his feelings for Lily for fear this could get back to Voldemort.
He may not want students to know of his Dark Mark because if they tell their parents they might want the Ministry to tell Dumbledore to fire him.
Good examples Julia
Julia H. - Mar 10, 2008 1:18 am (#1813 of 2617)
"Very well. Very well. But never - never tell, Dumbledore! This must be between us! Swear it! I cannot bear ... especially Potter's son ... I want your word!"
That is what Snape says when he asks DD to keep his secret. DD answers: "My word, Severus, that I shall never reveal the best of you?"
It is quite clear that Snape is not asking DD to keep the dirty part of his secret but the part that emotionally affects him the most. DD's answer indicates that he thinks the same.
I cannot see how the fact that Harry saw his Worst Memory could result in LV suddenly realizing Snape's true feelings for Lily. All Harry could tell is how Snape was tortured by future Order members and how he called Lily a "Mudblood" - that is what Harry saw (and the finer details would be lost anyway before the tale could reach LV). LV does not recognize love in its most obvious form, how could he know anything about the more complicated aspects? But it is more than just "a certain amount of concern over having looked like a fool" - Snape is wounded and totally out of his mind. Wanting to keep this humiliating experience (and perhaps his use of the M-word in this situation) a secret is totally understandable without LV and all.
wynnleaf - Mar 10, 2008 6:07 am (#1814 of 2617)
He certainly doesn't do anything to try and get their respect or affection or trust. (mona amon)
Snape is not an emotionally whole person, nor does he relate to people in a healthy way. We should not expect to judge whether or not he desires the respect or trust of others based on whether he relates to people in a way that normally could be expected to produce respect or trust.
The idea that people that want respect and trust, must necessarily act in ways worthy of respect and trust, simply doesn't fit the way many real people actually act. It's a fact of humanity that plenty of people want others to respond to them in certain ways, but don't do the usual requisite things that most people would expect in order to get those responses.
Julia has brought up several specific examples where Snape says that he doesn't want things shared, and it could not be because of protecting the information from Voldemort because in the first case (Worst Memory) there's no info LV couldn't be privy to, and in the second case (Snape's reasons for protecting Harry), Snape tells what the reason is, and it is because he couldn't bear anyone to know, especially Potter's son.
Julia H. - Mar 10, 2008 8:43 am (#1815 of 2617)
"He certainly doesn't do anything to try and get their respect or affection or trust. (mona amon)"
At least nothing more than doing his duty as well as he can. He does everything in his power to fight the Dark side, to protect the students and to shoulder his various responsibilities even before LV's return. I am thinking of things like defending the Philosopher's Stone (in cooperation with others), accompanying students and patrolling the corridors, just as his colleagues do, when it is necessary (there is Lockhart as an example of someone who is not willing to take part in the general duties and responsibilities of teachers) and making a perfect Wolfsbane Potion from month to month - when basically the safety of the whole school is in his hands alone. A consistent pattern of behaviour like this would often be enough to ensure respect and trust (not necessarily affection) for the person in question. In Snape's case, it is not enough and he really does not try to do more than that. The cause of distrust is not so much his present as his past and he cannot wipe that out. Besides, he has more important reasons for doing his duty than "just" winning trust and respect. Nevertheless he still may wish (and I think it is strongly implied that he does wish) to win respect and trust for these things and/or to keep any amount of respect and trust he may have already won.
"Therefore, his concern over having his agreement to protect Harry revealed is just as likely to incorporate his fear that it will get back to Voldemort." (Zelmia)
He may think anything he does not actually mention but he does mention a reason that is not Voldemort and DD seems to understand it in this way. While we can think he can have other reasons, we have no reason to think that the reason he mentions is not true. So that still means that it matters to him what other people (besides Voldemort) know or think about him. This was the original point in bringing up the example.
Orion - Mar 10, 2008 11:02 am (#1816 of 2617)
This might be an incredibly stupid question, directed mainly at mona, but I simply don't know the answer, so please don't come down on me like a ton of bricks:
There was this maths teacher from hell, right? The one who looked out of the window when he wrote on the blackboard and who looked exasperated when you were daring enough to ask a question? Whose lessons consisted mainly of making students "solve" problems at the blackboard, but not helping them in any way, that is, making them stand there like idiots for some minutes and sending them back?
Well, he was obviously a well-respected member of society, civil and polite to adults and a loving husband who treated his wife like royalty. (In a little town you know everything about your teachers!)
That is, nobody cared how he treated students. They were only students. They didn't count. We never had the feeling that this teacher was an outcast of society for being nasty in class. We thought that we were an extremely dumb maths class and were embarrassed about it, and huddled together for comfort. (That was why being humiliated at the blackboard wasn't very bad, because with the exception of the two brightest Hermiones, nobody got it and everybody felt with you.)
So why should Snape be an extremely nasty person who doesn't communicate civilly with other adults? We mostly see him in the classroom, where he is indeed nasty, but that doesn't say anything about his interactions with, let's say, his colleagues. (You can't count scenes with Sirius!) So my question is: What makes you think Snape is a nasty person? *duck*
mona amon - Mar 10, 2008 11:16 am (#1817 of 2617)
Doesn't care what others think except DD? Hm. I don't think that's quite right. (Wynnleaf)
I have tried to collect some information that may indicate that Snape, in his own way, cared what others thought of him. (Julia)
Maybe I was exagerating when I said 'doesn't care a jot. He does get mighty peeved when anyone gets a wrong idea about him ("Don't call me coward" and "Have you been imagining some act of glorious heroism?"). And he also does not like to be made fun of. Severus unfortunately, has no sense of humour!
I suspect it was Snape who originally pointed this out to him, possibly in front of others - it may mean Snape wanted his work and his bravery to be appreciated or at least acknowledged by other order members (if not precisely by Sirius). (Julia)
I think (in fact I'm pretty sure!) his sole motive here was to lord it over Sirius.
So while he does care about a few aspects of how people view him, on the whole I think he's not bothered about others' opinions.
The idea that people that want respect and trust, must necessarily act in ways worthy of respect and trust, simply doesn't fit the way many real people actually act. (Wynnleaf)
I know people like that in real life. And I have absolutely no respect or sympathy for them. And if JKR had potrayed Severus like that, whining about how much he needs others' respect and affection and trust while not lifting a finger to do anything about it, would any of us like him at all?
I feel it works much better if he is this character who has turned his back on things like friendship, love and happiness, too busy mourning for Lily to care about other human relationships. This way he is still a head case, but at least a tragic one, rather than an annoying one!
Finally and quite personally, I like the HP-books more if the stakes are higher for Snape as he keeps on fulfilling his promise (Anything.) (Julia)
Well, it isn't easy for anyone, not even one who doesn't care much about other people and what they think of him, to willingly enter into a situation where he will be hated and hunted as a murderer and coward by everyone. I do not think it minimises Snape's sacrifice in any way, especially since he had absolutely nothing to gain from it. No loved ones or friends whom he could have hoped to benefit by his sacrifice.
It is quite clear that Snape is not asking DD to keep the dirty part of his secret but the part that emotionally affects him the most. DD's answer indicates that he thinks the same. (Julia)
I agree with Zelmia. There's nothing clear about Snape's broken sentences at all. Exactly what does he not want Harry to find out? That he is protecting him? Or that he was the one who gave the prophecy to Voldemort? Dumbledore seems to absolve him of all guilt in the matter, because his reply is "My word, Severus, that I will not reveal the best of you?" But we are left without a clear idea of what Severus himself feels about it.
There's a lot more I wanted to reply to, the elder wand for instance, but I'll leave it for another post. this one is too long already!
EDIT: So why should Snape be an extremely nasty person who doesn't communicate civilly with other adults? We mostly see him in the classroom, where he is indeed nasty, but that doesn't say anything about his interactions with, let's say, his colleagues. (You can't count scenes with Sirius!) So my question is: What makes you think Snape is a nasty person? (Orion)
LOL, you don't have to duck! One scene that stands out is the way he treats Tonks in HBP. And he's consistently nasty to Lupin, who, although he was a Marauder, is obviously trying his best to make up with him. But I'll think about it some more and answer you in my next post!
wynnleaf - Mar 10, 2008 1:20 pm (#1818 of 2617)
It is quite clear that Snape is not asking DD to keep the dirty part of his secret but the part that emotionally affects him the most. (julia)
Snape tells what the reason is, and it is because he couldn't bear anyone to know, especially Potter's son. - Interesting that when I say things like "it's quite clear" or phrase things in a definitive way such as "it is because...." (because in my opinion it is), I get totally pummeled for it and accused of setting myself up as some kind of self-appointed voice for the author. But apparently other people can say precisely the same thing and it's perfectly fine; there's not the slightest issue. Good to know. (zelmia)
Zelmia, I think really it's mainly me that made a point on another thread about a tendency to use definitive statements over areas of the books where we have no definite answers. I'm not sure that it's quite fair to castigate Julia because she did that. If you find a place where I did that, you are quite welcome to suggest that I uphold my own standard.
However, there are plenty of things in canon that are definitive. Because Julia directly quoted Snape's own words on the subject, I think it was fair for her to say the matter, at least in that case, was clear. If you disagree, perhaps you could give us an alternative meaning for Snape's words.
There's nothing clear about Snape's broken sentences at all. Exactly what does he not want Harry to find out? That he is protecting him? Or that he was the one who gave the prophecy to Voldemort? Dumbledore seems to absolve him of all guilt in the matter, because his reply is "My word, Severus, that I will not reveal the best of you?" But we are left without a clear idea of what Severus himself feels about it. (mona amon)
While it is true that Snape isn't clear about what exactly it is that he doesn't want revealed to Harry, we do see that he's saying he can't bear for Harry to know. That is different from saying that it just isn't safe for Harry to know because he could pass it on inadvertently to LV. And Snape is making it an emotional issue (can't bear), rather than a logistics one, or just a safety issue.
There is either a standard of what is considered acceptable behavior or there isn't. If there is a standard, then why should we ignore it simply because the person in question refuses to even attempt to meet the standard? (zelmia)
Perhaps I was misunderstood. I don't mean that anyone should ignore the standard of acceptable behavior. I'm saying that even if a person is not coming anywhere close to a standard for acceptable behavior to gain respect or trust, that doesn't mean they don't want it. To say otherwise is to presuppose that people that want respect and trust, necessarily act in such a way as to get it.
And does Snape actually act so poorly to adults that he doesn't deserve their respect or trust? Actually, I don't think we've got much evidence. How Snape treats Sirius and Lupin, who he feels tried to kill him and/or bully him, isn't a guide for us to assume that's how he treated everyone. Sure, others in the Order may not have trusted him completely because of his earlier being a Death Eater, but that doesn't mean that he later acted in any way that would make them distrust him (prior to AKing DD, that is).
However, the real question is what Snape actually values, regardless of whether he deserves it or not. Does Snape want the respect of others? I think there's enough evidence to show that he wants the respect of his students (wanting them to speak to him respectfully, for instance). And I think Snape's own words show that he couldn't "bear" for Harry to know his true motivations.
I agree with Julia, by the way, on what makes Snape's actions more satisfactory. If Snape has nothing really personally, deep down, to lose when he AKs Dumbledore and is considered a traitor and murderer by all of his former associates in the Order and his colleagues at the school, then his action loses a great deal of its sacrifice. In fact, the only sacrifice seems to be the extra danger he goes into after AKing Dumbledore. It's a lot more deep a sacrifice if Snape was also giving up something he really, really valued -- any possibility for the respect of others, and the complete loss of any trust by anyone on the good side.
wynnleaf - Mar 10, 2008 2:08 pm (#1819 of 2617)
However, one cannot simply demand to be respected. It must be earned. (zelmia)
While I agree with this, I think partly how this came up was in trying to figure out whether it is important to Snape to have the respect of others. We may agree or disagree on whether he deserves it or not, but what I think we were focusing on initially was whether he wants it. And what I was trying to point out is that just because a person may not act in a way that one feels deserves respect doesn't mean that person doesn't desire respect. So the argument that Snape doesn't desire the respect of others, because if he did he'd act more deserving of it, just doesn't hold up. It presupposes that all people that desire respect try to gain it through socially acceptable methods, which is not a fact.
I am suggesting that you uphold your own standard, Wynnleaf. (zelmia)
I do try very hard to not say that things are certain in canon for which we have no certainty or clear statements, and we're basically just dealing with guesswork and interpretation. If you meant me, you are welcome to point out specifics in what I say (rather than others), and I'll be happy to address it.
Julia H. - Mar 10, 2008 2:47 pm (#1820 of 2617)
"I feel it works much better if he is this character who has turned his back on things like friendship, love and happiness, too busy mourning for Lily to care about other human relationships."(Mona)
But Mona, who ever said that Snape wanted friendship, love and happiness or any really personal relationships (except for the one he has with Dumbledore)? I absolutely agree that he does not want any of these things - he is indeed busy mourning Lily, he may be punishing himself and he probably feels that he has done with the pursuit of these things in his life. (I am ready to accept any or all of these reasons.) However, respect and trust are not the same as the things you list. Receiving trust and respect does not mean he will have friends or find happiness, not at all. Happiness would probably mean to him nothing less than getting back Lily. I don't think he dreams about being invited to parties or becoming a popular teacher. Respect means he is not despised for his past but accepted as one of the people he is living among (probably with the additional appreciation of his bravery and knowledge) and trust means that he is acknowledged by those he is working for to be a useful and valuable - or simply a trustworthy - member of society (school, Order, anything). I think we generally agree that Snape is a human being (not a machine) and you called him a volcano of emotions - why cannot he want dignity and acceptance back among the people he once left? Actually, perhaps in a situation where personal happiness and the other things you mention are not possible any more, things like honour and dignity can become even more valuable.
I don't think he wants anything that can be achieved by being nice or conventional, by the way. (He is not Ludo Bagman.) I think his present life absolutely qualifies him for what he seems to want. Will people seriously say "I know he can always be counted on in times of danger and does his best to do whatever dangerous or complicated tasks he gets to help others, has saved several lives but he is biased towards his own house in matters like Quidditch and house points, so I don't think he can be trusted or respected."? I understand if he is not loved - but not trusted? My opinion is that respect and trust are a problem for Snape because of his past (and later of course because of his ambiguous role as a spy but that is a different story). It is not unfriendly behaviour but the shadow of his past that he needs to overcome to win true respect and trust - and it is extremely difficult even though he is loyal, unselfish and true to his words and uses all his talents to promote the cause of the Light side.
Julia H. - Mar 11, 2008 12:09 am (#1821 of 2617)
P.S. I forgot to mention but Snape also wants basic human dignity (like not being laughed at or humiliated - the issue brought up especially by the worst memory) but again this has nothing to do with love or happiness or friendship and this is also something he "qualifies for" the way he is (being a human being).
mona amon - Mar 11, 2008 6:03 am (#1822 of 2617)
Julia, isn't it all part of the same package deal? If you want friendship, love and hapiness, you'll try to be more sociable, friendly and loving towards others, and that is what will earn you respect and trust. I mean, there are people whom I don't like but still trust, but they are people I know really well, and for a long time. But generally when you've got a past that you have to make up for, people aren't going to trust you unless they like you. To me, the fact that he never bothered to get himself liked means that he did not worry very much about the attendent benefits of respect and trust.
I don't think he dreams about being invited to parties or becoming a popular teacher. Respect means he is not despised for his past but accepted as one of the people he is living among (probably with the additional appreciation of his bravery and knowledge) and trust means that he is acknowledged by those he is working for to be a useful and valuable - or simply a trustworthy - member of society (school, Order, anything).
He does get invited to parties, lol!
To a certain extent I agree with your points, Julia. As you say, he was human after all, and which human being can completely do without these things? Where we differ is the extent to which he was dependent on the respect and trust of others. I feel, unlike you, that he never allowed it to be an important part of his life.
While it is true that Snape isn't clear about what exactly it is that he doesn't want revealed to Harry, we do see that he's saying he can't bear for Harry to know. That is different from saying that it just isn't safe for Harry to know because he could pass it on inadvertently to LV. (Wynnleaf)
I didn't say he was worried about Harry passing it on to Voldemort. I said he may not be able to bear Harry knowing that he was the one who gave Voldemort the prophecy. I think, what comes across in that scene is that he does not want to be emotionally involved with Potter's son.
I agree with Julia, by the way, on what makes Snape's actions more satisfactory. If Snape has nothing really personally, deep down, to lose when he AKs Dumbledore and is considered a traitor and murderer by all of his former associates in the Order and his colleagues at the school, then his action loses a great deal of its sacrifice. In fact, the only sacrifice seems to be the extra danger he goes into after AKing Dumbledore.
As I said earlier, no one wants to be regarded as a murderer and a traitor. Anyone who agrees to it is making a sacrfice, irrespective of the extent to which he generally cares about other's opinions.
This might be an incredibly stupid question, directed mainly at mona,...(Orion)
Orion, I think, unlike your math teacher, Snape seems just as nasty outside the classroom as inside it. Have we ever seen him laugh? Or a smile that was not also a sneer? He doesn't dance with anyone at the Yule Ball. And even Filch at least has a cat. We are shown him being mean to quite a number of adults, and nice to only one of them, Narcissa.
OK, maybe this is a bit exagerated, but this is the general impression I got.
wynnleaf - Mar 11, 2008 7:11 am (#1823 of 2617)
If you want friendship, love and hapiness, you'll try to be more sociable, friendly and loving towards others, and that is what will earn you respect and trust. (mona amon)
Well, in fact, no. That's what emotionally healthy people do. But people who are not emotionally healthy do not necessarily attempt to get the responses they desire from others in typically socially acceptable ways. For instance, a quick well known example is the neglected child who wants parental attention and uses misbehavior to get it. What he really wants is positive attention, but not really knowing how to get that, instead uses negative behaviors to get attention. I'm not saying Snape is doing that - he's not a child and he's not after attention. That's just an example. I just mean that it really is common for people to want positive responses from others, but not to use the typical socially acceptable ways of getting it.
I said he may not be able to bear Harry knowing that he was the one who gave Voldemort the prophecy. (mona amon)
Yes, but that means he cares what Harry thinks of him. What would it mean for him to say he couldn't bear Harry to know of it, if he didn't care what Harry thought of him? Sure, Snape doesn't care if Harry likes him, in fact, he probably wouldn't want Harry to like him. But that doesn't mean he doesn't want his respect, or that he doesn't want to avoid being humiliated around Harry.
We are shown him being mean to quite a number of adults, and nice to only one of them, Narcissa. (mona amon)
Hm. He is fine with Minerva and Dumbledore. He is civil to Fudge in POA. He is actually fairly civil to Umbridge. He seems on okay terms with Filch. He was fairly nice to Slughorn and didn't even shrug off Slughorn throwing an arm around him. Who is he nasty to? Well, he's not nice to Lupin and Sirius, but they have a history and whether we agree with his attitude toward them or not, it certainly doesn't mean he's like that to everyone. So who else is he nasty to? The only other I can think of is Bella, and since she clearly dislikes him and is apparently trying to undermine him, it's hard to blame him for treating her sarcastically. Oh, and he's unpleasant to Peter, another ex-Marauder, not to mention the real traitor who got Lily killed, so that's understandable too.
He interacts only one time that I can recall with Hagrid, and that wasn't either nicely or nastily, just focused on some misbehavior of students. Hagrid seems to trust Snape more than most of the staff and Order members, as Hagrid takes up for Snape several times in front of Harry, so it's hard to think Snape is particularly nasty to Hagrid.
So other than Marauders and Bella, what adults is Snape nasty to?
Well, there's Lockhart. But Snape isn't nasty, per se, to Lockhart. He makes a dampening remark when Lockhart claims he'll mix up a potion instead of Snape, the potions master. After Ginny is taken, he makes some sarcastic remarks to Lockhart, but other staff do the same, so that's hardly proof of Snape's particular nastiness to adults in general.
I don't count fake-Moody, since that confrontation starts off with fake-Moody making antagonistic remarks to Snape.
So that gives us Snape acting fairly well to Dumbledore, McGonagall, Filch, Slughorn, Fudge and Narcissa, and acting as well as one could ask toward Umbridge. He acts kind of neutrally to Hagrid in the one interaction we see between them. He seems quiet, but not unpleasant at the POA Christmas dinner. And he's sarcastic and insulting to the Marauders and Bella.
Any other adult interactions I left out?
rambkowalczyk - Mar 11, 2008 7:40 am (#1824 of 2617)
I feel he does not care a jot what others think (except for DD). He certainly doesn't do anything to try and get their respect or affection or trust. Mona Amon
I realize,Mona, that some of the above is an exaggeration but I would like to argue that Snape may have valued other peoples' opinion besides Dumbledore's.
I will agree that he doesn't do anything to try to get their respect affection or trust but that could simply be that he is afraid to get hurt. However he does want some acknowledgment of what good he has done.
In OOP, when Harry says that spying on Lord Voldemort is Snape's job, ...Harry convinced he had gone too far. But there was a curious, most satisfied expression on Snape's face...
The weird thing about the dynamics between bullies and their victims is that there is a bond between them that desires to mature into a friendship but doesn't know how. For instance, I think most of Draco's anger toward Harry is due to the fact that Harry rejected his friendship in book 1. Snape and James could have been friendly rivals but it didn't happen.
Snape's original motivation to save Lily was selfish, he hoped he could get the girl, but I would like to think that once he got that idea out of his head, he also wanted James' respect or at the very least an acknowledgment that what he did paid back James for saving his life at Hogwarts.
I think in some way Snape wanted Harry's respect. He wanted Harry to acknowledge what he did for the side of good. But he knew that in order for Harry to do this, Harry would have to know that it was Snape who gave the prophecy to Voldemort putting their lives in danger in the first place. Harry would have to know the whole sordid story of why Snape betrayed Voldemort. Snape was afraid to confess to Harry the wrong that he did.
it seems possible that both the potions book incident and the question of trust may make Snape feel the same thing: Harry has taken from him something he has earned and something he needs.
From Snape's point of view, it always seems that Harry takes something that he feels he's earned and needs.
In the case of Lily, one can make a case that Snape was trying to earn Lily's love. Obviously he blew it, to his eternal regret.
In book 3, Fudge promises him the Order of Merlin because he captured Sirius Black. At this point Snape is at his most calmest because Fudge has just acknowledged that Snape did something good. He isn't even angry at Harry but calmly says he was Confunded. So Snape clearly wanted that type of respect. When Sirius escapes, Snape of course becomes unhinged and blames Harry.
mona amon - Mar 11, 2008 12:12 pm (#1825 of 2617)
Yes, but that means he cares what Harry thinks of him. What would it mean for him to say he couldn't bear Harry to know of it, if he didn't care what Harry thought of him? (Wynnleaf)
Harry would have to know the whole sordid story of why Snape betrayed Voldemort. Snape was afraid to confess to Harry the wrong that he did. (Ramb)
Not necessarily. He asks DD to never tell. Tell what? The whole story I presume, his love for Lily, carrying the prophecy to LV, turning spy for DD and now, protecting Harry. He cannot bear it if people come to know of this. But it's not just a sordid story of wrongdoing to be ashamed of. As DD points out, it also reveals the best in him. But he doesn't want people to know the best of him. He is not bothered about justifying himself to others.
So that gives us Snape acting fairly well to Dumbledore, McGonagall, Filch, Slughorn, Fudge and Narcissa, and acting as well as one could ask toward Umbridge. He acts kind of neutrally to Hagrid in the one interaction we see between them. He seems quiet, but not unpleasant at the POA Christmas dinner. And he's sarcastic and insulting to the Marauders and Bella. (Wynnleaf)
We can leave out Dumbledore since we all agree he's the exception. And I suppose he isn't nasty to adults he happens to meet in the corridors, and it's hardly more than one expects if he behaves himself at the Christmas dinner! He's rather snide to Umbridge and very much so to Bella, which is good. Slughorn likes him, and Hagrid seems to be in favour of him. Bill doesn't like him, Tonks doesn't like him, and there's a scene where he's nasty to her. Actually the only places where he's nice to someone are when he reassures Narcissa in HBP and when he seems glad that Minerva is back from St Mungo's.
-----------------
As soon as DD's portrait knew that LV knew about the elder wand and was attempting to get it (like breaking into DD's grave), and gain mastery over it, it would only be a matter of time before LV figured out that Snape had "defeated" DD. (Wynnleaf)
Wynnleaf, this is from way back, but I've been wanting to ask you, why do you think Dumbledore's portrait knew about LV's attempts to get the Elder wand?
wynnleaf - Mar 11, 2008 12:40 pm (#1826 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, this is from way back, but I've been wanting to ask you, why do you think Dumbledore's portrait knew about LV's attempts to get the Elder wand?
Because the tomb was broken into. The characters in the paintings know a great deal, after all, and even gossip between themselves. And even if DD's portrait didn't learn it simply as an item of gossip, wouldn't Snape have told him? After all, Snape must wonder why anyone would break into DD's tomb and take the wand. This would have to be noticed when the grave site was investigated. Remember the song that Slughorn and Hagrid sing? Apparently burying people with their wands was common practice. And surely Snape would want the grave checked out to try to understand why it happened. Can anyone really believe he wouldn't have mentioned it to Dumbledore's portrait? They were obviously talking on a regular day-to-day basis.
So naturally the portrait would realize that LV must be after the wand. Or at least that would be a good guess. And to then not warn Snape would be very wrong indeed.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 11, 2008 1:38 pm (#1827 of 2617)
But it's not just a sordid story of wrongdoing to be ashamed of. As DD points out, it also reveals the best in him. Mona Amon
Just to clarify. The sordid story is that Snape originally wanted to save Lily and let Harry and James die. It is possible in that conversation Snape has with Dumbledore, that Snape wishes that Harry and James were dead and that Lily was still alive. In his eyes, Harry's mere existence is what caused what caused the prophecy to come true and cause Lily's death. So part of him hates Harry for that.
After all, Snape must wonder why anyone would break into DD's tomb and take the wand. This would have to be noticed when the grave site was investigated. wynnleaf
I don't think Snape knows the Elder Wand was taken from Dumbledore's grave. How would the portraits know? There aren't any outside. It would not do for Snape, or indeed anyone else, to see where he was going. Although Voldemort may have made a mess getting into the grave, I'm sure he cleaned up afterwards.
It's possible that at this point 'the best of Snape' is just his potential ---a potential that takes 17 years to develop.
wynnleaf - Mar 11, 2008 2:30 pm (#1828 of 2617)
The sordid story is that Snape originally wanted to save Lily and let Harry and James die. It is possible in that conversation Snape has with Dumbledore, that Snape wishes that Harry and James were dead and that Lily was still alive. (ramb)
While I agree that it's within the realm of possibility that Snape wished for Harry and James to die, I think it's unlikely that he actively wanted it. He may have some maturity problems emotionally, but you'd have to be brainless to think Lily wouldn't be devastated by their deaths. Would he really want her hurt in that way? The fact that even after Lily was dead, Snape was willing to spend years protecting and risking his life for her son, who he loathed, seems to show that he did realize that Lily's son would be highly important to her.
But the fact is that there was nothing he could have done as regards begging LV to not kill Harry or James. Even JKR said that James would have died irregardless. LV wanted to kill him and his primary purpose in the whole deal of targeting the Potters was to kill Harry. So it would always have been pointless for Snape to try and convince LV to not kill Harry, and it would make next to no sense for him to try and convince LV not to kill James, when all the DEs Snape's age must have known he despised James. But for Snape to beg for Lily's life would make sense to Voldemort, and Snape could do that with at least a tiny hope of it doing some good. Even then, with LV agreeing to not kill her, Snape knew that there was still a huge chance that LV would kill her anyway. That's why he was willing to risk his life to go to Dumbledore for help.
I realize that Dumbledore was disgusted that Snape seemed to only care about Lily's life, but since he follows that with an offer to bargain for his help in protecting the Potters ("what will you give me in return, Severus?"), I think it's a bit of the pot calling the kettle black.
Julia H. - Mar 11, 2008 4:56 pm (#1829 of 2617)
"Julia, isn't it all part of the same package deal? If you want friendship, love and hapiness, you'll try to be more sociable, friendly and loving towards others, and that is what will earn you respect and trust." (Mona)
Maybe I have a different type of respect and trust in my mind. The simplest way to put it is perhaps that, in my opinion, Snape wants a reputation that is not that of a (former) DE, not of a turn-coat, a traitor (etc.), not even of someone whose character is often doubted but a reputation perhaps as Dumbledore's man through and through, as someone who can be trusted both in terms of character and abilities. If someone is liked for these things, it is still not the same as being loved or having friends. (His behaviour towards others tends to reflect his current mood or feelings: if he is irritated or in a very bad mood, he does not try to hide this - unlike his deeper feelings - otherwise he can be civil enough. But his life is not about socializing.) I think in Snape's case, trust and respect are the first things to get before he can have love or friendship (here you and I seem to differ); but I don't think he ever thinks of getting anything beyond respect and trust - or let's call it simply a clean reputation. This, however, seems to be important to him. It is extremely difficult as well - because of his past and also because a large part of his work against the dark side must be kept a secret. So he is absolutely dependent on Dumbledore's trust. (I also think that Dumbledore's trust in itself is important to him in the first place but then it is also the first step towards a better reputation in general.) By AK-ing DD, this is precisely what he has to sacrifice: the hope of a good name and the amount of trust and respect he may have already won. (As we see, Hagrid does not want to believe that Snape is a murderer and Slughorn is quite devastated because he - apparently - had a good opinion of Snape. Neither of them is Snape's friend.) But Snape chooses to give up all hope of these things because of even more important things.
wynnleaf - Mar 11, 2008 5:38 pm (#1830 of 2617)
Well said, Julia.
While I keep arguing that a person need not act in a way that typically wins trust or respect in order to want trust and respect, that doesn't mean that I disagree with the notion that actually Snape does merit the kind of trust and respect that he wants.
Respect is a word that can mean many different things and one can respect many things about an individual and disrespect other things about the same individual.
I agree that the areas where Snape probably wanted respect are not in the "how to win friends and influence people" sorts of areas, but simply in the realm of being a person who is committed to working hard for the good side at great personal risk and sacrifice, for having a respectable job at which he works hard, and a person who can be trusted to carry out the duties he's committed to. I don't think a person has to treat people in a friendly manner to win respect for those things, nor would Snape have to be acting nicely to others in order to desire respect in those areas.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1831 to 1860
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:42 am
Julia H. - Mar 12, 2008 2:20 am (#1831 of 2617)
"Regardless of what he might feel about having respect/trust, he never appears to make the connection that these things are not just handed to a person; they need to be earned. Does he realise that through his intimacy with Dumbledore, through opening up and being honest and "real" with Dumbledore that this is how he has earned Dumbledore's trust?" (Zelmia)
I am sure he knows these things need to be earned: as I said before he works hard, does very difficult jobs well and reliably and in the school he participates in all major extra tasks in perfect cooperation with his colleagues (defending the stone, guarding the students, making potions for others). He is actually earning the kind of trust and respect he wants by these things. He cannot be open and "real" with people apart from Dumbledore because of his personality and because of the secrets he must keep and also because in order to deserve Dumbledore's trust he has to do things (at DD's orders) that will necessarily alienate him from everyone else. He has to put up with this but he is indeed earning the right to be respected and trusted. But then again, he will rather earn and deserve trust and respect than actually have these things: this is his choice when he agrees to AK DD. He does a lot to earn and deserve DD's trust (besides just being open and honest).
Once I had a teacher who always said quite straightforwardly exactly what she thought. Not only to students but to her colleagues as well - and she had a rather sarcastic approach to things. The effect could be quite devastating sometimes for people who had just met her. Besides saying what she thought she always showed her impatience and her irritation and one could easily get the impression that she hated beginners for not knowing anything (she is a language teacher). Keeping up with the speed of her classes was like keeping up with an express train (running). However, she was (is) very clever, had a great knowledge and one could learn a lot from her, only it was always something more advanced than what we were supposed to learn. And she (irritated as she was) was always ready to start all over again if the students did not seem to know what she had already told them. At the end of the day, she did a good job, was fairly reliable (except that she was always late for morning classes) and cooperative and - believe it or not - students and teachers all got used to her personal style (she never meant any harm to anyone apart from making "straightforward" remarks) and in spite of her unconventional behaviour she was generally liked by the students and colleagues (not friends) who had known her for a while and her talents were appreciated. (After a while I felt totally relaxed in her classes, while another teacher who taught the same language and wore a friendly smile to her classes managed to totally block my mind just by her presence: there was something beneath the friendly veneer that gave me the shivers.)
Now back to Snape: his colleagues have known him for a while and have probably got used to his behaviour. He has not made any personal friends but he regularly shares their concerns, is given important jobs, which he does well. Lockhart is a good counter-example: he has a surface friendliness but is completely unreliable, shallow and utterly selfish - so he is not accepted by his colleagues as one of their own, as readers can see at the end of CoS. It is probably not an accident that Lockhart is put side by side with Snape at times: the sharp contrast between them is striking.
Students: Young students are afraid of Snape but as they grow, they seem to get used to his style and do not seem to be really afraid any more. (Even in PoA, although he is Neville's Boggart, other students start an open debate with him when he substitutes Lupin.) At the end of the year they pass their exams, even their O.W.L., and they probably learn from him as well. There seem to be quite a few students in Snape's (Gryffindor) class in the sixth year when all classes seem to be elective: if students simply hate him, why don't they just run from his class as soon as they can? (Nobody takes poor Hagrid's classes although he is infinitely friendlier than Snape.) Snape is not liked but perhaps students realize that there are things they can learn from him once they are ready to put up with his personality and his classes may not seem to be so terrible to everyone.
All in all, eccentric as he is, it is not his behaviour that - in the long run - stands between him and a general respect/trust (earned by his work rather than by his personality) but the doubts about him due to his past and that probably becomes a real issue only when Voldemort returns (and it may have been an issue off-page for a while after LV's downfall when his having been a DE and then a spy came out).
I agree with Wynnleaf that it is probable he did not actively want James's and Harry's death (even DD accuses him of "not caring" about it, not of "wanting" it) - he was much too scared for Lily's safety to feel anything else. He does not seem to be someone who is trying to save Lily's life while calculating any advantage for himself. He is scared and desperate and begging DD to protect Lily - nothing else seems to matter to him but keeping Lily out of harm's way. If he wanted to take advantage of Lily's danger, LV's promise would be the perfect chance to him. If he calculates anything at all, then he must know that Dumbledore will try to save the whole family, so going to Dumbledore is against his own "interest" if he wants the death of Lily's family. But his love is not the kind of love that would allow him to take advantage of anything that harms Lily. Has anyone noticed that while he is a pretty advanced potions expert already in his teens, he never seems to try to give love potion to Lily? It would not be very difficult while Lily still trusts him (and the rival is already in sight). In my opinion, he understands the difference between real love and the thing that a love potion does and he does not want forced love even if he cannot get real love. When he goes to DD to save Lily, it it unlikely that he wants to somehow "win" Lily by first making her miserable. It is just totally unlikely to happen once DD is involved. As for asking LV: he asks LV, he asks DD and he would probably go and ask anybody else to help if there were anybody else he could think about - and he is ready to pay any price for Lily's life (including spying, risking his own life and certainly including the survival of the whole Potter-family and even the risk that the role he played in their danger may come out).
A note on Narcissa: Snape seems to be exceptionally kind to her but Narcissa's behaviour is also exceptional. Snape is used to receiving orders and instructions but when do we see people asking him to help and thanking him for his help? DD does that when he asks Snape to save him from pain and humiliation and Narcissa too, when she asks him to save Draco. (It is a bit like Dobby being offered a seat.) I think this is one of the things that makes a real difference to him in these scenes.
Orion - Mar 12, 2008 7:20 am (#1832 of 2617)
Well said, Julia, although I think that his civility towards Narcissa is totally false and just good acting on his part. She is a DE's wife, and Snape has grown to despise DEs and to work against them. I think that his "friendship" with Lucius is false as well and just a facade for the benefit of his role as a spy. In the Spinner's End chapter, I have the strong feeling that all Snape wants is to get Narcissa out of the house safely and without allowing her to cause more harm than necessary.
Apart from that, I agree with everything you say. The students don't seem remotely afraid of Snape, and certainly he doesn't cause any lasting traumas. (Does any teacher, ever?)
And his despair causes him to beg for Lily's life, and the other lives involved do have to take a back seat at that moment, just because the situation is so desperate and the sordid ending is clear - somehow it seems impossible to effectively hide the Potters from LV forever. There might have been a fleeting second when the wild hope crossed his mind - I can have her then - but at practically the same moment it should have dawned on him how ludicrous this hope was and how shameful.
Julia H. - Mar 12, 2008 8:42 am (#1833 of 2617)
"I have the strong feeling that all Snape wants is to get Narcissa out of the house safely and without allowing her to cause more harm than necessary." (Orion)
I agree that he does not feel friendship for any DE's and he cannot very much feel any particular admiration for Narcissa either. Still, it seems to me that on this occasion her despair because of her son genuinely moves him. He is already protecting a boy (precisely of Draco's age) who is in mortal danger - for the memory of his mother. Now another mother comes to him and begs him to protect her son - this is bound to remind him of Lily and he probably thinks how desperate Lily must have been to protect her son from the same Voldemort who is now threatening Draco. (Lily also begged for her son's life as we know from Harry's memories but I don't know if any talk of this may have reached Snape.)
Just to get Narcissa out of his house with as little harm as possible, he does not need to promise anything, much less to take a vow. There is a moment when he could safely put an end to the whole thing: Narcissa starts by saying she knows she must not talk about what she wants to talk about and then Snape says: "If he has forbidden it, you ought not to speak ... The Dark Lord's word is law." Even Bella is satisfied at this point. This is the moment when Snape could put an end to the whole conversation absolutely safely but instead of doing that he mentions that he knows about the plan. The only reason for him to do that (which I can think of) is that he has already resolved to listen to Narcissa in her despair. Later he says the Dark Lord cannot be persuaded and again he could just leave it there and he would even get support from Bella. But Narcissa cries and he can't help being kind to her. Not because he is forced to (he is not forced until the point where the Unbreakable Vow is mentioned) but because he chooses to try and comfort her and this is not a false comfort since he knows he will do the AK instead of Draco only he cannot tell this to Narcissa.
I think it is important that he does something kind and good here because he is asked and not ordered to - it means he has a choice and he does the kind thing not the easy thing. As I said, he is used to acting on command (and faithfully he does) but being asked and thanked is just a different feeling. I don't think he expects that from anybody any more than Dobby expects to be told to sit down but the less he expects it the more it touches him when it happens. In the scene where DD makes him promise the AK, first DD says: "You must kill me." This is a command but Snape reacts as if he thought it was a joke. Total rejection. Then wise and cunning DD realizes that this is not something that can be done on order and changes his tone: "I ask this one great favor of you..." (So this is the first time DD has asked a favour of him - so far it has always been a command.) Then he mentions "pain and humiliation" (DD knows Snape cares for him) and Snape finally agrees. There are things that are sooner done on request than on command. Perhaps Narcissa, with her mother's instinct, somehow feels what would be best for Draco and even though she herself does not care for anyone outside her family, she instinctively knows that she somehow has to appeal to Snape's feelings (of which she knows nothing otherwise), place herself at his feet as a weak and helpless creature begging for help and Snape will not be able to resist.
"There might have been a fleeting second when the wild hope crossed his mind - I can have her then - but at practically the same moment it should have dawned on him how ludicrous this hope was and how shameful." (Orion)
You said this very nicely, Orion. Touching in fact.
Julia H. - Mar 12, 2008 10:08 am (#1834 of 2617)
P.S. Once Snape himself was in a position that he desperately begged someone to protect the one he loved most. This memory may also play a part in his behaviour to Narcissa. He knows how she feels.
mona amon - Mar 12, 2008 11:05 am (#1835 of 2617)
Although Voldemort may have made a mess getting into the grave, I'm sure he cleaned up afterwards. (Ramb)
This is what I too thought. There is no mention of a violated grave.
but I don't think he ever thinks of getting anything beyond respect and trust - or let's call it simply a clean reputation. This, however, seems to be important to him. It is extremely difficult as well - because of his past and also because a large part of his work against the dark side must be kept a secret. (Julia)
But there is also a large part of his work that is not kept a secret, at least from fellow members of the Order. During the OOTP year they all knew (and appreciated) what he was doing. If they continued to have doubts about him due to his past, he has only himself to blame. He never allowed Dumbledore to reveal to the others exactly why he trusted him.
I agree that the areas where Snape probably wanted respect are not in the "how to win friends and influence people" sorts of areas, but simply in the realm of being a person who is committed to working hard for the good side at great personal risk and sacrifice, for having a respectable job at which he works hard, and a person who can be trusted to carry out the duties he's committed to. (wynnleaf)
As far as I can make out, he is respected for all these things, so he does get the respect that he wants (till he AKs DD).
Has anyone noticed that while he is a pretty advanced potions expert already in his teens, he never seems to try to give love potion to Lily? (Julia)
Come on, Julia, you can't go about giving Severus brownie points for all the bad things he didn't do!!!
Good points about Snape and Narcissa.
Edit: Cross posted with Zelmia!
rambkowalczyk - Mar 12, 2008 2:05 pm (#1836 of 2617)
While I agree that it's within the realm of possibility that Snape wished for Harry and James to die, I think it's unlikely that he actively wanted it. He may have some maturity problems emotionally, but you'd have to be brainless to think Lily wouldn't be devastated by their deaths. Would he really want her hurt in that way? The fact that even after Lily was dead, Snape was willing to spend years protecting and risking his life for her son, who he loathed, seems to show that he did realize that Lily's son would be highly important to her. wynnleaf
It wasn't my intention to prove that Snape actively wanted James and Harry dead, but to prove that Snape wanted Harry's respect even though part of him felt he didn't deserve it because of his original reason to save Lily. It would also explain why he had trouble giving Harry respect (because he believes Harry is the cause of all his troubles).
Julia H. - Mar 12, 2008 3:23 pm (#1837 of 2617)
"If that were so, surely at least one colleague would have stood up for him after his apparent murder of Dumbledore, but nobody does. Not one person ever considers the possibility of there being an alternative explanation." (Zelmia)
It is very difficult to think of an alternative explanation in this situation. (Hagrid actually tries at first.) There is an eye-witness to the murder and Snape flees with the DE's. What could they have thought? But his colleagues are shocked and that is something.
I did not say anything about anybody being respectful or otherwise to Snape so I don't know what you mean by this. What I tried to say was that the work he did seemed to be appreciated. This is not the same thing as decent behaviour. (Post-O.W.L. students do not take his class because they want to behave respectfully.) We do not get to see it too much how he is treated by his colleagues prior to DD's death but he does not seem to be treated like Lockhart. By "earning" I mean he is "deserving".
"those doubts linger after all these years precisely because his behaviour does nothing to counteract them" (Zelmia)
"If they continued to have doubts about him due to his past, he has only himself to blame. He never allowed Dumbledore to reveal to the others exactly why he trusted him." (Mona)
I don't know. I am not saying Snape is perfect. He is an introverted person and not exactly open with anyone personally but I don't see why he would deserve more trust if he were a talkative, friendly and easy-going individual. That does not make anybody any more reliable or honest, IMO. Should he really go about telling everyone how he loved Lily and how he wants to protect Harry for her memory or what? Let me refer to Ludo Bagman again. He also gets associated with LV and he also gets a second chance and everybody is willing to grant that to him because he is just SOOOOO nice and open and nobody could really think he ever means any harm. But I would much sooner trust my life to Snape than to Bagman. Outright evil Lucius Malfoy seems to know how to make himself trusted in the ministry after LV's downfall but does that mean he actually deserves this trust? It seems what Snape is missing is all surface phenomena that can be easily faked if someone wants to. Snape's motivations may be too deep for others to see them.
"As far as I can make out, he is respected for all these things, so he does get the respect that he wants (till he AKs DD)." (Mona)
There it is. Not my words.
"In my own experience, I have seen people fired due to precisely to the same kinds of personality quirks as you describe." (Zelmia)
I am sure you did. I don't know what Snape's chances would be outside Hogwarts. However, most wizarding organizations seem to think that someone like Lupin or Hagrid "reflects badly on the organisation as a whole" and only DD is willing to employ them. But Bagman and Umbridge and some absolutely genuine former (and future) DE's make it into the ministry because they know how to behave. I do not doubt that similar standards often apply in the real world as well. One of the things that I really like about Dumbledore is his wise and merciful tolerance and his ability to see beneath the surface.
"The whole redemption arc is that Snape starts off wanting Harry dead but spends the rest of his life doing what he can to protect Harry and aiding him to bring about Voldemort's demise." (Zelmia)
We must agree to differ. IMO Snape's joining Voldemort (and giving him the prophecy) is a perfectly good point of origin for the character arc. There is no need for him to want Harry dead and I see no canon that we are supposed to think this. Some people may think the lowest point in his character is the hilltop scene but my reading is that going to the hilltop is the beginning of rising because it is love and willingness to save someone that makes him do that (not hatred and wanting someone dead).
"Though his behaviour toward Narcissa is the only time we see him acting with anything remotely like compassion, still he isn't exactly comforting or even gentle in his manner." (Zelmia)
He is not supposed to feel sorry for Narcissa either as he really is (Narcissa belongs to the DE's and she herself does not care for anyone else outside her family as we see in DH) or as Voldemort's man (he has to be careful to avoid any traps, especially with Bella and Wormtail present). His job is already dangerous and complicated enough without Narcissa's problem. He knows the "plan" they are talking about is murdering DD, the only living person Snape has a personal relationship with and someone he cares for, someone he respects as a father figure. He also knows that DD will have to die anyway. If this is not enough, he knows he will have to AK him personally. Then Narcissa comes and begs him to help her son who is actually planning to kill DD. He has every reason to frown or to try and resist her plea. Besides, the situation he finds himself in is totally new to him ("clutching hands" and all) and is probably totally new and unexpected behaviour from proud pure-blood Mrs Malfoy too. (Does not she tell Bella that there is nothing she would not do any more? Going to a dilapidated muggle neighbourhood and kissing the hands of a half-blood wizard living there seems to be something totally out of character for Narcissa.) Despite all this, Snape feels genuine compassion for her and tries to comfort her. No, he does not embrace her as soon as she enters (not even later, which is OK I guess) but he listens to her out of compassion, tries to comfort her out of compassion and gives up any advantage of his position which he could use to defend his own safety - out of compassion.
"Snape stooped seized her by the arms, lifted her up, and steered her back onto the sofa. He then poured her more wine and forced the glass into her hand."
I have no problem with that. She seems to be at the end of her strength, so she needs someone else's strength and this is the point where he tells her that he can help her. (He knows all the time that in effect saving Draco is what he is going to do - but he needs some time to think it over how to tell her that without giving away his secret.) If we go on reading the scene, we find that he lets her take his hand, looks into her tear-filled eyes, talks to her quietly and slowly, kneels down by her and takes that very serious vow as she asks him to do. I find it all quite gentle (and if this behaviour is not comforting, I don't know what is) - especially if I consider that Narcissa is not his friend and that Snape himself is or should be just as much in need of comfort as Narcissa at the moment.
"Come on, Julia, you can't go about giving Severus brownie points for all the bad things he didn't do!!!" (Mona)
Clearly not. :-) I was just trying to point it out that his love does not seem to be selfish in any way. (Love potions do come up several times in the series and not only as a source of humour but precisely to indicate what is NOT real love and how harmful a selfish desire to merely possess the admired person can be. Snape's love, however, is real love focusing on the loved person and her well-being.)
PeskyPixie - Mar 12, 2008 8:41 pm (#1838 of 2617)
I think Sev does deserve a few brownie points for not spiking Lily's pumpkin juice with Love Potion. I mean, a Death Nibbler teen (who happens to be a Potions whiz kid) is losing the girl of his dreams to his popular, athletic rival. Since we are ready to believe the worst of him as a youth, I find it quite hopeful that he does not equate potion-induced love with real love, especially since he has never witnessed a healthy, loving relationship. Give the boy some credit for not pulling a Romilda Vane!
Merope Gaunt's use of Love Potion tends to be excusable by many (I'm not suggesting that any of the posters on this thread feel that way) due to the fact that she has endured a loveless existence. If this be the case, then the fact that Severus does not use Love Potion as a desperate last attempt to win Lily is worthy of acknowledgement.
I can not stress enough how important it is that young Severus loves Lily Evans enough to let her go when she no longer wishes to be associated with him. No, he doesn't change himself for her, neither does he care about her husband and child a few years later. However, far too many men would have a much more violent reaction to Lily's rejection. Snape is light years away from being perfect, but he is not wholly evil.
Julia H. - Mar 13, 2008 1:57 am (#1839 of 2617)
"Lucius is the perfect example of someone who knows precisely what appearances need to be kept up if he is to be trusted. Whether or not he deserves that trust - and Arthur Weasley would be the first to point out that he doesn't - is another matter." (Zelmia)
So in the case of Malfoy, the question of appearances and the question whether he truly deserves trust must be kept apart, while in the case of Snape, they are one and the same. I see.
"Even as a child he tries to sabotage Lily's relationship with her sister, albeit not entirely consciously, though he does apparently succeed in that ultimately. "
Sabotage??? Are we talking about a 9-year-old child? He does not like Petunia and Petunia does not like him and she is the first to attack him not vica versa. Petunia is already jealous of Lily's abilities when she does not know what it all means and positively envies her when she finds out that she is a witch and speaks with contempt about the wizarding world out of envy. It is her envy that spoils their relationship. We could just as well say she tries to sabotage Lily's relationship with her first wizarding friend.
"He doesn't care whether her husband and child are killed, as long as he can have what he wants."
I must have done a very bad job with all those long posts. I had the impression that I was saying there is no canon evidence that Snape wanted Harry or James dead or that he wanted to take advantage of Lily's danger. I said precisely that DD accuses Snape of not caring for the death of the other two people not of wanting the death of the other two people. I think "not caring" is not the same as "actively wanting". (I did not even say that not caring is good but it is still not the same as wanting.) What Snape "wants" is saving Lily and this is what he wants "to get". Granted, he does not mind what happens to the rest of the world, himself included. This is a good starting point for the redemption arc because he ends up protecting and saving the lives of whoever needs saving.
"In my view, he does not focus at all on her well-being."
OK. In my view he does. That is what makes him change his whole life, you know.
"But really, he's hardly on the verge of a breakdown, here."
He may not and in fact he cannot show what he feels and he has nobody with whom he can discuss how he feels but he is going to lose the only friend (or the closest thing to this) he has, the only person with whom he can be himself and at the moment they are talking about DD's murder even though the reader does not know it yet. He has already been made to promise the AK, which he does not want to do (perhaps I don't need to give quotes to prove that), the thought of which he rejects in his heart. This will also cost him losing his home, his life as he has lived it so far, the trust and the respect ... (see above). He even endangers his soul, as far as he knows. Since I think that Narcissa reminds him both of Lily (as a mother) and of himself as he was once desperately begging DD to protect the one he loved, IMO this is likely to be an additional source of sorrow and stress to him. (But this is also the reason why he understands Narcissa.) He cannot show himself to be on the verge of breakdown (when can he?) and his case is different from Narcissa's because Narcissa can still hope to save the one she loves, while the choice Snape has is only the mercy killing now. Snape or not, one does not have to be sobbing and actually cracking to be in need of comfort at a given moment, IMO at least - you may disagree. I don't believe that different people will necessarily behave in the same way if they have the same feelings or that there is only one acceptable way for people to act in any given situation, whether we talk about sorrow or love or about wanting respect or about happiness and so on. (Of course, Snape does not expect to be comforted any time by anyone, he has to shoulder it all alone but I don't think that makes it any easier.) I happen to think that lots of things go on in his head in this scene. I agree with Orion that Narcissa and Bella bring him extra trouble. Still he, out of sympathy and compassion, goes all the way from cautious politeness to holding hands with her, kneeling in front of her, making the vow exactly as she wants him to do and practically offering his own life as reassurance in order to comfort her. (The words of the vow are curiously similar to those of a vow at a wedding ceremony, aren't they?) And Narcissa is no one to him, personally, and Narcissa would not care a jot if Snape died or whatever happened to him. It seems he can understand even that. (Wonder why?) You know, I think the fact that Snape has the kind of history he has, that he sinned and went through regret and remorse, that he lost all that he lost (or never had), that he got a second chance, that he has to do without a lot of things that other people may take for granted is essential in his understanding behaviour towards a person like Narcissa in her despair, in spite of everything that separates them and in spite of everything that is painful to him with regard to Draco's mission.
wynnleaf - Mar 13, 2008 10:27 am (#1840 of 2617)
As Julia says, there's no canon evidence that Snape actually wanted LV to kill Harry and James. Only that he was focused on saving Lily without apparently any concern about Harry and James living or dying. Not being concerned isn't at all the same thing as actually wanting LV to go ahead and kill them.
And we have no evidence that Snape wants to "have" Lily in any sense of the word. Yes, he wanted her friendship and was probably in love with her (although we don't even know for certain that it was romantic love). Once again, there's a difference in loving someone and wanting them. We never have any evidence that after the breakup of their friendship Snape did anything to stalk Lily, try to break up a friendship or dating relationship between she and James, try to force her to see him again or anything. As far as we know, he accepted that they were no longer on friendship terms and didn't attempt to change that. So the idea that he wanted her, true or not, isn't supported in canon.
All we know from canon as regards his motives in trying to save Lily is that he loved her and didn't want her to be killed. Nothing about wanting her for himself. Readers may wish to imagine this, and it's not countered by canon, but nor is it supported, so making arguments based on the assumption that Snape was motivated to save her because he wanted Lily for himself is basically working on noncanon assumptions.
So in the case of Malfoy, the question of appearances and the question whether he truly deserves trust must be kept apart, while in the case of Snape, they are one and the same. I see. (Julia)
Yes, this a problem with such an argument. In the HP series we repeatedly have characters who appear nice or at least trustworthy to many, but are in fact just the opposite. Lucius is quite civil to many, but a true "snake in the grass." Lockhart seems likeable if too pretentious, but is in fact dangerous and a thief of the accomplishments of others. Fake-Moody is trusted by staff even though his actions in using and demonstrating unforgiveables on students, or bouncing a 14 year old (in ferret form) from a 10 foot height to the pavement is not seen as out-of-character for the supposedly highly trustworthy person he is impersonating. Umbridge talks in a very civil manner while actually saying things with horrible intent. In POA Lupin appears kind and very nice and trustworthy, but for his own benefit is hiding information that places hundreds of children's lives at risk. Even Tom Riddle, in his early years, insinuates himself into the good graces of many, all because they trust in someone who has the veneer of being nice and trustworthy.
Meanwhile, once Snape turns to the good side, he is extremely trustworthy. Should it truly be necessary to adopt the veneer of "niceness" in order to be trusted by Order members or staff members? Certainly, for some I'm sure the veneer is what they use to judge and therefore to get their trust, that would be needed. Perhaps Snape is not concerned about the kind of trust that is just looking for "niceness." But for those more interested in what a person actually does or accomplishes, I think probably Snape did have the respect and trust of those he worked with.
However, I think he always realized the precariousness of that trust and respect, in that it was partly dependent on Dumbledore's trust in him and Dumbledore's being willing to vouch for Snape's early years.
Because I think we are given canon evidence that Snape valued the trust and respect of others, this makes his willingness to AK Dumbledore and become an apparently completely loyal follower of LV after DD's death (rather than a double agent), far more sacrificial than if Snape never cared at all for the loss of trust and respect that would follow his actions in killing DD.
PeskyPixie - Mar 13, 2008 3:56 pm (#1841 of 2617)
I don't know whether he convinces Lily to read the letter. They are both being brats, snooping around in the older kid's room/part of the room, and come across the envelope. For all we know, they may be equally culpable of invading Petunia's privacy.
PeskyPixie - Mar 13, 2008 7:54 pm (#1842 of 2617)
That's definitely one way to look at it, Zelmia.
I just happen to think that it is just as likely a scenario that both Lily and Severus snoop around for the sheer pleasure younger kids get from peeking into an older sibling's personal space. He sees the envelope and knows its origins and explains the oddness of a Muggle apparently corresponding with Hogwarts. A highly curious situation, though that does not give either of them the right to open another person's mail.
I think Lily looks over at Snape because this is something the two of them are involved in together and, as with many children confronted with their wrongdoing, she gives away her accomplice. Besides, why should she take the heat herself if they are both involved?
mona amon - Mar 13, 2008 9:22 pm (#1843 of 2617)
I just happen to think that it is just as likely a scenario that both Lily and Severus snoop around for the sheer pleasure younger kids get from peeking into an older sibling's personal space. He sees the envelope and knows its origins and explains the oddness of a Muggle apparently corresponding with Hogwarts. (Pesky)
This is how I see it as well. In fact Lily's words give me the impression that she was the one who actually read the letter, while Sev was more interested in the logistics of how a wizarding letter is sent by ordinary post.
Anyway, that little incident cannot possibly be the cause of a life long rift between the two sisters. That happened because Petunia was unrelentingly jealous of Lily's magical abilities
Julia H. - Mar 14, 2008 12:29 am (#1844 of 2617)
"Still, it did seem to end up being the final straw that broke the sisters' relationship." (Zelmia)
"Anyway, that little incident cannot possibly be the cause of a life long rift between the two sisters." (Mona)
If it can happen, the relationship must already be very fragile. (My son with his newly acquired reading skill tries to read his sister's diary every day. It always results in an argument but the relationship between them seems to be in essence OK.) But I think Lily will have tried to make it up with her later if Petunia was important to her. The end of a good relationship (and two sisters of similar age may have plenty of shared experiences, little secrets etc. between them) cannot be blamed on an outsider entirely or even mainly.
Wynnleaf, thanks for the clear summary. I agree that Snape probably got the kind of respect and trust he wanted from the people at least who had the chance (and were willing) to take the results of his work into consideration. After all, being given important responsibilities is in itself a sign of being trusted. However, he probably knew he could not take this for granted as much as people with a clean past could, which explains a certain amount of trust-related anxiety in the GoF-year, when the darkening of the mark coincided with the presence of fake-Moody and Crouch Sr. as well as another former DE in Hogwarts and Snape's office was searched and "Moody" alluded to his past and to the possibility of suspicions and doubts about him. Dumbledore, however, continued to trust him and Snape continued to do his best to deserve his trust. Unfortunately, as he becomes a double-agent, his true allegiance must not appear to be too obvious and at the same time there are people in the Order who may voice doubts about his character (Sirius, who hates him, Moody perhaps, who does not believe in second chances and there are Order members who do not know him very much and only see what appears on the surface). Still, the Order as a whole seems to trust his reports and warnings enough to plan and act in accordance with them but again Dumbledore's trust is essential. In the end, DD asks Snape to AK him and by agreeing to do this, he agrees to sacrifice whatever trust and respect he has earned (or could otherwise earn in the future) with very little hope of ever regaining them.
"I don't think DD told Snape about the Elder wand. Why?
Because Snape wouldn't have gone near LV again. That would have been suicidal." (Orion)
This was a bit of time ago but I would like to add that while there seems to be no evidence that Snape knew anything about the Elder Wand and I think he should have been warned about it, I am not sure how this would have influenced his actions. He might have been even more cautious but I am not sure how. He would not have gone near LV again? I don't think he was very eager to be near LV anyway but if he wanted to find out top-secret information and wanted to plant first-class misinformation in LV's head, he had to talk to him now and then personally. However, on the whole, it was LV who decided to see or not to see any of his DE's. So if Snape was summoned by LV, he could do only one of two things: he either went to him or fled. While it is not exactly wise to get himself killed before accomplishing his task (though this possibility is always there), fleeing would have meant giving up his position as Dumbledore's spy through and through and I don't think he would have done that. As you said, Orion, his life lost any semblance of dignity by the end so he just may not have cared for keeping it that much but perhaps it was still important to him to be able to die (whenever it happened) without abandoning the duty he had been trusted with.
I promise I will not dwell on the Narcissa-theme for ever but the "Spinner's End" chapter is one of my favourite chapters, so let me add a few last (?) thoughts on it:
I'd like to stress again that comforting Narcissa is not included in Snape's job description either with DD or with LV and he could easily have put a safe ending to the whole scene early on. However, he decides to listen to her and his behaviour gradually changes. In comparison with desperate Narcissa, Snape is in a position of relative power and strength. Narcissa looks like a "drowned person" when she enters his house and the words that he seizes her, lifts her and steers her to the sofa, just before starting to tell her that he can help after all, reflect this image. It is as if he was rescuing a drowning person from the water. Then by agreeing to take the vow he gives up his position of relative power and distance completely. Snape lowers himself to kneel by her and they hold hands. In other words, he voluntarily takes a position of humility and reaches for the hand of a fellow human being in distress. A human being who trembles for the life of her son, who is risking her life to save her son and who does not care for other lives (DD's, Snape's) involved in the case and also a human being who has lived supporting the evil side and an ideology of hatred so far and who is now paying a terrible price through the danger of someone she loves. Then in this position, he takes the vow and practically offers his life just to give this human being hope. I think what happens at this moment is that Snape is extending the mercy he once received on the hilltop to someone else who now needs it.
mona amon - Mar 14, 2008 5:13 am (#1845 of 2617)
Because I think we are given canon evidence that Snape valued the trust and respect of others, this makes his willingness to AK Dumbledore and become an apparently completely loyal follower of LV after DD's death (rather than a double agent), far more sacrificial than if Snape never cared at all for the loss of trust and respect that would follow his actions in killing DD. (Wynnleaf)
I don't see why it should make it far more sacrificial. This is similar to the discussion we were having a while back about Snape sacrificing his life for the cause of defeating Voldemort. Some felt that it wasn't much of a sacrifice because his life was so miserable and he had no spouse, children or friends. Others felt he made just as much of a sacrifice as anyone else.
In the same way, I feel that, just as one should not judge the value of the sacrifice of his life based on how miserable or happy that life was, we also should not judge the value of the sacrifice of his reputation based on how much he cared for respect and trust. It is a huge sacrifice, whether he cared for these things or not.
A bit ironic, in my opinion, that the adult Petunia hates Harry for how much he reminds her of Lily, whereas the adult Snape hates Harry because he cannot see Lily in him at all. (Zelmia)
Excellent point, Zelmia. It never occurred to me that Harry must remind Petunia of Lily.
while there seems to be no evidence that Snape knew anything about the Elder Wand and I think he should have been warned about it, I am not sure how this would have influenced his actions. (Julia)
Since there's also no evidence that Dumbledore did not tell Severus about the Elder Wand, I'd like to give DD the benefit of the doubt here. Surely he didn't go about smiling to himself after he'd asked Snape to kill him, "He's signed his own death warrant and little does he know it!"
Julia H. - Mar 14, 2008 6:37 am (#1846 of 2617)
"In the same way, I feel that, just as one should not judge the value of the sacrifice of his life based on how miserable or happy that life was, we also should not judge the value of the sacrifice of his reputation based on how much he cared for respect and trust. It is a huge sacrifice, whether he cared for these things or not." (Mona)
I see what you mean, Mona, and I can agree that from an objective point of view it would be a huge sacrifice in both cases. It it very difficult to imagine that someone who understands that difference between right and wrong and chooses to do the right thing should not care for these things at all. However, most people can take their reputation and this basic kind of trust and respect for granted. Snape could not take it for granted first because it was already his second chance and secondly because he had to agree to play the role of a DE. So perhaps it was just as important to him as to everyone else but even then he had more reasons to be anxious about it. If he had not cared at all what people would think of him to the extent that he would not have cared for the loss of his reputation as an honourable person, he still would have sacrificed it but this sacrifice would not have touched him personally and he would not have considered it a loss when he agreed to the AK. (But here I am beginning to wonder what the word "sacrifice" should mean in this case.) However, it was a more difficult, hence more admirable choice (and because of that, a deeper sacrifice) for him to make if he truly wished he could have a clean reputation and if he truly wished he could have the trust and the respect of those he was fighting for.
I did not take part in the debate about the life sacrifice but I think sacrificing a miserable life can be just as huge a sacrifice as sacrificing a happy one because it is the person's only life and - miserable or not - it can be valued. Even a miserable life can be just as valuable to a person as a happy one. However, this is not the same as someone who is truly suicidal and does not value their life at all (which IMO does not have to mean that others would not find the same life tolerable or even fairly good, so a not valued life is not necessarily the same as a miserable one). A person can be unhappy and still find value in life or a cause to live for. Similarly, in the case of reputation, I think sacrificing a very good reputation or sacrificing a "marked" one (as in the case of Snape) can be just as huge a sacrifice but it is because the person making the sacrifice can be just as unwilling to give up the respect and trust he has earned (regardless how much exactly this respect or trust is) in both cases.
wynnleaf - Mar 14, 2008 12:11 pm (#1847 of 2617)
Mona amon,
I agree that we can't judge the sacrifice of one person's life over another just because one person appears, from the outside, to have more "worth living for" (however one wants to define that). But for Snape himself, I do think it matters as regards his decision to follow DD's request about AKing DD and going very deep under cover. If he doesn't care what anyone else thinks of him, than his decision regarding whether to follow DD's request is primarily one of whether or not he was willing to take the physical risk, undergo the added stress, etc. However, if he also was having to decide whether to allow himself to become possibly forever known as a traitor and coward to those on the good side, when the respect and trust of others was very important to him, then that makes his decision to go ahead with DD's request and plans far more of a sacrifice than it otherwise is.
haymoni - Mar 14, 2008 4:59 pm (#1848 of 2617)
He was supposed to tell Harry about the soul-bit and that he had to die. He probably thought he was going to die alone in that Shack.
Here comes Harry - he grabs him and says "Take it all" so that he could know the whole story.
And then, sniff! "Look at me" - green eyes - Lily's eyes - sniff!
Gone...
I think Snape could not get over his hatred & jealousy of James and what a mouse he was for never telling Lily how he felt.
PeskyPixie - Mar 14, 2008 8:17 pm (#1849 of 2617)
I think that Snape realizes for the first time that his love for Lily will die with him and thus, he releases very personal memories along with the ones Harry needs to fulfill his final task.
Yes, he thinks Harry will die, but at least his memories are 'out there' for anyone who may come across them. I feel Snape does want to be known for who he is, but his rigid personality prevents that during his life.
I'm writing in a rush, so I'm not sure whether this is coherent at all. My apologies if it's gibberish. I'll take another attempt at it on Sunday.
Julia H. - Mar 15, 2008 3:50 am (#1850 of 2617)
Very good observations, everyone.
"Snape's true sacrifice was not his life, his physical being, but any hope of ever completely shaking off the taint of his Dark past. He couldn't possibly have known that this would be rectified posthumously - though it now seems that perhaps some part of him was clinging to that hope as he grabbed Harry by the lapels." (Zelmia)
Very well put, Zelmia, I absolutely AGREE! Actually, this is what I find incredibly touching in the character: that he sacrificed more than his life. I mean the life-sacrifice or at least a very strong possibility of it is always there, since Snape can almost take it for granted that he will be killed sooner or later by someone either on the Light side or on the Dark side (or he might end up in Azkaban) but a lot of other characters sacrifice their lives - it is a constantly recurring theme. Snape, however sacrifices more. I think it is important that he wants to shake off the taint of his dark past and in spite of everything he can have a reasonable hope of succeeding until he agrees to AK Dumbledore. Then he has about a year to think about it but still has the strength to go on with the plan when the final moment comes.
I also agree that he was clinging to this hope as he was giving his memories to Harry and perhaps at the moment he felt that even if Harry alone would know about it (before dying) it would be better than nobody knowing.
Why swearing Dumbledore to secrecy? Voldemort aside (IMO DD did not need Snape telling him how dangerous it was to turn against LV and that someone who had been and might one day be again a spy needed secrecy), I think at this moment it is mainly an emotional response from Snape. It is not probable that he was thinking of any of the long-term consequences of keeping the secret. At the moment he may not have got as far as thinking about his own reputation. He had been protecting Lily as a spy and now he had just learned of her death - he may not have had too much time to think about his own future yet. Actually the protection of Harry may well have been the first idea regarding his future life going beyond his attempts to protect Lily. I guess what he could not bear was letting others (and especially Potter's son) know that he agreed to dedicate his life to the protection of the son of his school-enemy and rival who had humiliated and defeated him and married the girl Snape loved and also that he was doing it partly out of guilt and remorse and partly because he loved the rival's wife with undying but ever unreturned love. (Unreturned love may sound very romantic but it is never so to someone who feels it.) But without these, he could not have possibly tell Harry that he was protecting him - it would not have been right, not even very convincing perhaps, given that Harry could and did easily find out about the enmity between Snape and James.
I think Snape felt (even later) that it would be absolutely humiliating and unbearable to tell a teenage boy (who could not have the kind of understanding wisdom that DD had) - or let others tell him - that he loved his mother (who, however, happened to choose James, of all people), that he had caused his parents' death and what remorse he felt after realizing what he had done.
wynnleaf - Mar 15, 2008 4:25 am (#1851 of 2617)
Good posts all.
Two points to emphasize:
Snape believed the info that he imparted to Harry would lead to Harry's death, probably in the immediate future, so he could not have expected that Harry would pass along the truth to others. He might have hoped, but it would be a long shot hope.
Also, I think Harry actually seeing Snape's memories helped to get Harry to accept them and to sympathize, to some degree, with Snape's motivations. If Snape had allowed Dumbledore to tell Harry or others of Snape's motivations regarding loving Lily, it may not have led to the same understanding on Harry's part. There are, after all, many fictional and real life examples of a person's "love" or obsession for another person ultimately leading to that person's death, and it can be seen as a kind of "sick" love. It helps in Harry's understanding (and the reader's), to see Snape's apparently neglected background, that Lily was his friend from childhood, and to see his true distress when she was in danger and grief when she died. If DD had simply told Harry the truth about Snape, Harry's hatred for Snape could easily have twisted it into the story of an obsessed man intentionally trying to get LV to kill James and Harry so that Snape could get Lily, or some other such story. After all, Harry easily twisted the OOTP incidents into Sirius' death being Snape's fault. It wouldn't have been surprising if he had not accepted the truth of Snape's love for Lily and instead seen it quite differently.
Julia H. - Mar 15, 2008 5:57 am (#1852 of 2617)
Yes, it may have been Harry's (not so understanding) reaction that he feared. (Perhaps if he had been able to have a good relationship with Harry, he would have been able to tell him his secret, but he could not have a good relationship with Harry due mainly to his secret, so it was a vicious circle really.) He also feared other people's reaction if his story should become generally known. With people talking about it, the more sensational parts would evidently be twisted and blown up and the story of his deeply felt guilt and remorse and his rejected love could easily turn into some trivial gossip - and that would be unbearable indeed. At the moment of his death, he probably let go of any such fear.
Julia H. - Mar 15, 2008 10:37 am (#1853 of 2617)
"On the other hand, Snape couldn't have known Harry would grow up to have such an animosity toward him."
He could not have known it for certain but this moment was not the moment of objective logic to him. Perhaps because Harry was the son of James who had hated him and the son of Lily who had rejected him and because (and perhaps most importantly) Snape hated himself very much for what he had done and for his failed efforts to save Lily, he never thought of the possibility that Harry might turn to him with understanding anyhow - and especially not so if he knew the reason why Snape had agreed to protect him.
"And again, Snape has no one but himself to blame there, since it was he who set the tone for their relationship on their very first meeting."
Yes, he did but it was again because he could not get rid of his feelings that remained from his past and because he had perhaps expected Harry to hate him just as much as he had expected him to be arrogant and attention-seeking (etc.) even before their first potions class. It may not be an excuse and it is certainly not logical but deep down it was the result of the problems Snape had with himself.
"And, to be fair, Harry knew he was consciously choosing to blame Snape for Sirius's death as a way to ease his own grief, and particularly his own feelings of guilt over having fallen for such an easy deception that drew the Order out, etc."
Yes, but it does not make it any more likely that Harry would have been understanding or forgiving after learning Snape's story.
All in all, it may just be that Snape himself felt what he had done was unforgivable, and that is why he thought he could not expect anything but hatred and contempt from Harry and from others if they knew.
Orion - Mar 15, 2008 12:03 pm (#1854 of 2617)
I always felt that Snape didn't really hate Harry as a real, living person, but that he took his self-hate out on him. Snape never allowed himself to take a clear, objective look at Harry because it would have forced him to see the truth about himself.
The fact that he swore DD to secrecy is really the source of the tragedy. The morality of it is: If you're ashamed of something, just tell everybody and the worst of it is already over. People often are much more understanding than you'd think. Snape should have come clean from the beginning and... the story would have been over in one book, probably.
mona amon - Mar 15, 2008 12:37 pm (#1855 of 2617)
However, it was a more difficult, hence more admirable choice (and because of that, a deeper sacrifice) for him to make if he truly wished he could have a clean reputation and if he truly wished he could have the trust and the respect of those he was fighting for. (Julia)
However, if he also was having to decide whether to allow himself to become possibly forever known as a traitor and coward to those on the good side, when the respect and trust of others was very important to him, then that makes his decision to go ahead with DD's request and plans far more of a sacrifice than it otherwise is. (Wynnleaf)
Julia and Wynnleaf, I feel you are using different standards to judge the two cases- objective standards to judge whether the sacrifice of one's life has more value if the person has more things to live for, and subjective standards to judge whether the sacrifice of one's reputation has more value the more he cares about his reputation, and hence the different conclusions.
I feel that whether he cared or not for his reputation in general is unimportant, because he very clearly did not want to go down in wizarding history as the treacherous, cowardly murderer of Dumbledore. The magnitude of what he is giving up is brought out very well in the 'Don't call me coward' scene with Harry immediately after he has murdered Dumbledore, one of my favourite Snape scenes. It does not need Snape to be yearning for others' respect and trust to make it more of a sacrifice.
Julia H. - Mar 15, 2008 1:52 pm (#1856 of 2617)
"I feel that whether he cared or not for his reputation in general is unimportant, because he very clearly did not want to go down in wizarding history as the treacherous, cowardly murderer of Dumbledore." (Mona)
But, Mona, that is what I am saying as well. If he "did not want to go down in wizarding history as the treacherous, cowardly murderer of Dumbledore", that means he cared for his reputation!
"The magnitude of what he is giving up is brought out very well in the 'Don't call me coward' scene with Harry immediately after he has murdered Dumbledore, one of my favourite Snape scenes."
Exactly. (It is one of my favourite Snape-scenes as well.) What he is giving up is his reputation (in other words the "trust and respect" of people) and it is a huge sacrifice.
(I don't think we are using different standards for the two types of sacrifice: at least I think what matters is not the kind of life or the kind of reputation that is given up but whether the person values it or not and in general I think it should be an absolutely extreme situation - like in the case of a truly suicidal person or someone who does not mind if he becomes known as a "treacherous, cowardly murderer" - where these things (life and reputation) are not valued.)
"Snape should have come clean from the beginning ..." (Orion)
But how can you come clean with a child? How can you expect that he would understand a story like this?
haymoni - Mar 15, 2008 6:11 pm (#1857 of 2617)
If Snape would have spoken to Harry right away during his first year, I think he could have made Harry understand.
He could have started off by telling him that he had known his mother from when they were children and that she was one of his first friends.
He wouldn't have had to launch into the whole "I led Voldy to your mother's doorstep" right off the bat. He could have told him pieces of the story.
However, he would have had to do it before 3rd year. I don't think Harry would have listened to him after the Shrieking Shack.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 15, 2008 6:53 pm (#1858 of 2617)
I think Snape felt (even later) that it would be absolutely humiliating and unbearable to tell a teenage boy (who could not have the kind of understanding wisdom that DD had) - or let others tell him - that he loved his mother (who, however, happened to choose James, of all people), that he had caused his parents' death and what remorse he felt after realizing what he had done. Julia H ?
agree totally
wynnleaf - Mar 15, 2008 7:28 pm (#1859 of 2617)
I imagine that initially, even prior to ever having met Harry, Snape probably thought of Harry as a kind of extension of James, and therefore it would be unbearable to him to give that James-stand-in such information about himself, because it makes Snape so vulnerable - or at least it would probably seem so to him. Of course, seeing Harry this way isn't right, but still I think that's the way Snape always saw him, even before Harry showed up at Hogwarts looking just like James.
mona amon - Mar 15, 2008 11:44 pm (#1860 of 2617)
But, Mona, that is what I am saying as well. If he "did not want to go down in wizarding history as the treacherous, cowardly murderer of Dumbledore", that means he cared for his reputation! (julia)
Not exactly. We both agree about the conclusion (that he made a huge sacrifice)but you are saying he was yearning for trust and respect and therefore he did not want to go down in history as a traitor, coward and murderer, and I'm saying he had turned his back on things like trust and respect, but he did not want to go down in history as a traitor, coward and murderer. I feel he did not care (or did not allow himself to care) about his reputation in general, but not to such an extreme extent that he does not care at all about becoming known as a "treacherous, cowardly murderer". The part I do not agree with is, 'the more he cared about his reputation, the bigger the sacrifice'. when he's already making the biggest sacrifice by agreeing to kill DD whom he loves and becoming an outcast, how can it be made any bigger?
He probably thought he was going to die alone in that Shack.
Here comes Harry - he grabs him and says "Take it all" so that he could know the whole story.
And then, sniff! "Look at me" - green eyes - Lily's eyes - sniff!
Gone...(Haymoni)
I wanted to comment on this earlier, but this thread has once again started moving too fast for me! You've really captured that moment there, Haymoni! **sniff**
Snape, however sacrifices more. I think it is important that he wants to shake off the taint of his dark past and in spite of everything he can have a reasonable hope of succeeding until he agrees to AK Dumbledore. (Julia)
Julia, I feel you are giving him credit for being a more reasonable, mature character than he actually is. You are portraying him as someone who wanted to shake off his past and move on. I never got the impression that he was willing to move on. To me he's an extremely repressed individual who has turned his back on life and retreated to the dungeons.
The fact that he swore DD to secrecy is really the source of the tragedy. (Orion)
I wholeheartedly agree. He should have confessed to Harry, at least the part about giving the prophecy to Voldemort, no matter how repugnant it was for him to do so. There are no excuses. He was the one who set into motion the events leading to the death of Harry's parents, and he owed it to Harry to confess. It may not have made a difference to Harry, but it was something Severus should have done for himself. Only then could he have begun the process of shaking off the past and moving on.
"Regardless of what he might feel about having respect/trust, he never appears to make the connection that these things are not just handed to a person; they need to be earned. Does he realise that through his intimacy with Dumbledore, through opening up and being honest and "real" with Dumbledore that this is how he has earned Dumbledore's trust?" (Zelmia)
I am sure he knows these things need to be earned: as I said before he works hard, does very difficult jobs well and reliably and in the school he participates in all major extra tasks in perfect cooperation with his colleagues (defending the stone, guarding the students, making potions for others). He is actually earning the kind of trust and respect he wants by these things. He cannot be open and "real" with people apart from Dumbledore because of his personality and because of the secrets he must keep and also because in order to deserve Dumbledore's trust he has to do things (at DD's orders) that will necessarily alienate him from everyone else. He has to put up with this but he is indeed earning the right to be respected and trusted. But then again, he will rather earn and deserve trust and respect than actually have these things: this is his choice when he agrees to AK DD. He does a lot to earn and deserve DD's trust (besides just being open and honest).
Once I had a teacher who always said quite straightforwardly exactly what she thought. Not only to students but to her colleagues as well - and she had a rather sarcastic approach to things. The effect could be quite devastating sometimes for people who had just met her. Besides saying what she thought she always showed her impatience and her irritation and one could easily get the impression that she hated beginners for not knowing anything (she is a language teacher). Keeping up with the speed of her classes was like keeping up with an express train (running). However, she was (is) very clever, had a great knowledge and one could learn a lot from her, only it was always something more advanced than what we were supposed to learn. And she (irritated as she was) was always ready to start all over again if the students did not seem to know what she had already told them. At the end of the day, she did a good job, was fairly reliable (except that she was always late for morning classes) and cooperative and - believe it or not - students and teachers all got used to her personal style (she never meant any harm to anyone apart from making "straightforward" remarks) and in spite of her unconventional behaviour she was generally liked by the students and colleagues (not friends) who had known her for a while and her talents were appreciated. (After a while I felt totally relaxed in her classes, while another teacher who taught the same language and wore a friendly smile to her classes managed to totally block my mind just by her presence: there was something beneath the friendly veneer that gave me the shivers.)
Now back to Snape: his colleagues have known him for a while and have probably got used to his behaviour. He has not made any personal friends but he regularly shares their concerns, is given important jobs, which he does well. Lockhart is a good counter-example: he has a surface friendliness but is completely unreliable, shallow and utterly selfish - so he is not accepted by his colleagues as one of their own, as readers can see at the end of CoS. It is probably not an accident that Lockhart is put side by side with Snape at times: the sharp contrast between them is striking.
Students: Young students are afraid of Snape but as they grow, they seem to get used to his style and do not seem to be really afraid any more. (Even in PoA, although he is Neville's Boggart, other students start an open debate with him when he substitutes Lupin.) At the end of the year they pass their exams, even their O.W.L., and they probably learn from him as well. There seem to be quite a few students in Snape's (Gryffindor) class in the sixth year when all classes seem to be elective: if students simply hate him, why don't they just run from his class as soon as they can? (Nobody takes poor Hagrid's classes although he is infinitely friendlier than Snape.) Snape is not liked but perhaps students realize that there are things they can learn from him once they are ready to put up with his personality and his classes may not seem to be so terrible to everyone.
All in all, eccentric as he is, it is not his behaviour that - in the long run - stands between him and a general respect/trust (earned by his work rather than by his personality) but the doubts about him due to his past and that probably becomes a real issue only when Voldemort returns (and it may have been an issue off-page for a while after LV's downfall when his having been a DE and then a spy came out).
I agree with Wynnleaf that it is probable he did not actively want James's and Harry's death (even DD accuses him of "not caring" about it, not of "wanting" it) - he was much too scared for Lily's safety to feel anything else. He does not seem to be someone who is trying to save Lily's life while calculating any advantage for himself. He is scared and desperate and begging DD to protect Lily - nothing else seems to matter to him but keeping Lily out of harm's way. If he wanted to take advantage of Lily's danger, LV's promise would be the perfect chance to him. If he calculates anything at all, then he must know that Dumbledore will try to save the whole family, so going to Dumbledore is against his own "interest" if he wants the death of Lily's family. But his love is not the kind of love that would allow him to take advantage of anything that harms Lily. Has anyone noticed that while he is a pretty advanced potions expert already in his teens, he never seems to try to give love potion to Lily? It would not be very difficult while Lily still trusts him (and the rival is already in sight). In my opinion, he understands the difference between real love and the thing that a love potion does and he does not want forced love even if he cannot get real love. When he goes to DD to save Lily, it it unlikely that he wants to somehow "win" Lily by first making her miserable. It is just totally unlikely to happen once DD is involved. As for asking LV: he asks LV, he asks DD and he would probably go and ask anybody else to help if there were anybody else he could think about - and he is ready to pay any price for Lily's life (including spying, risking his own life and certainly including the survival of the whole Potter-family and even the risk that the role he played in their danger may come out).
A note on Narcissa: Snape seems to be exceptionally kind to her but Narcissa's behaviour is also exceptional. Snape is used to receiving orders and instructions but when do we see people asking him to help and thanking him for his help? DD does that when he asks Snape to save him from pain and humiliation and Narcissa too, when she asks him to save Draco. (It is a bit like Dobby being offered a seat.) I think this is one of the things that makes a real difference to him in these scenes.
Orion - Mar 12, 2008 7:20 am (#1832 of 2617)
Well said, Julia, although I think that his civility towards Narcissa is totally false and just good acting on his part. She is a DE's wife, and Snape has grown to despise DEs and to work against them. I think that his "friendship" with Lucius is false as well and just a facade for the benefit of his role as a spy. In the Spinner's End chapter, I have the strong feeling that all Snape wants is to get Narcissa out of the house safely and without allowing her to cause more harm than necessary.
Apart from that, I agree with everything you say. The students don't seem remotely afraid of Snape, and certainly he doesn't cause any lasting traumas. (Does any teacher, ever?)
And his despair causes him to beg for Lily's life, and the other lives involved do have to take a back seat at that moment, just because the situation is so desperate and the sordid ending is clear - somehow it seems impossible to effectively hide the Potters from LV forever. There might have been a fleeting second when the wild hope crossed his mind - I can have her then - but at practically the same moment it should have dawned on him how ludicrous this hope was and how shameful.
Julia H. - Mar 12, 2008 8:42 am (#1833 of 2617)
"I have the strong feeling that all Snape wants is to get Narcissa out of the house safely and without allowing her to cause more harm than necessary." (Orion)
I agree that he does not feel friendship for any DE's and he cannot very much feel any particular admiration for Narcissa either. Still, it seems to me that on this occasion her despair because of her son genuinely moves him. He is already protecting a boy (precisely of Draco's age) who is in mortal danger - for the memory of his mother. Now another mother comes to him and begs him to protect her son - this is bound to remind him of Lily and he probably thinks how desperate Lily must have been to protect her son from the same Voldemort who is now threatening Draco. (Lily also begged for her son's life as we know from Harry's memories but I don't know if any talk of this may have reached Snape.)
Just to get Narcissa out of his house with as little harm as possible, he does not need to promise anything, much less to take a vow. There is a moment when he could safely put an end to the whole thing: Narcissa starts by saying she knows she must not talk about what she wants to talk about and then Snape says: "If he has forbidden it, you ought not to speak ... The Dark Lord's word is law." Even Bella is satisfied at this point. This is the moment when Snape could put an end to the whole conversation absolutely safely but instead of doing that he mentions that he knows about the plan. The only reason for him to do that (which I can think of) is that he has already resolved to listen to Narcissa in her despair. Later he says the Dark Lord cannot be persuaded and again he could just leave it there and he would even get support from Bella. But Narcissa cries and he can't help being kind to her. Not because he is forced to (he is not forced until the point where the Unbreakable Vow is mentioned) but because he chooses to try and comfort her and this is not a false comfort since he knows he will do the AK instead of Draco only he cannot tell this to Narcissa.
I think it is important that he does something kind and good here because he is asked and not ordered to - it means he has a choice and he does the kind thing not the easy thing. As I said, he is used to acting on command (and faithfully he does) but being asked and thanked is just a different feeling. I don't think he expects that from anybody any more than Dobby expects to be told to sit down but the less he expects it the more it touches him when it happens. In the scene where DD makes him promise the AK, first DD says: "You must kill me." This is a command but Snape reacts as if he thought it was a joke. Total rejection. Then wise and cunning DD realizes that this is not something that can be done on order and changes his tone: "I ask this one great favor of you..." (So this is the first time DD has asked a favour of him - so far it has always been a command.) Then he mentions "pain and humiliation" (DD knows Snape cares for him) and Snape finally agrees. There are things that are sooner done on request than on command. Perhaps Narcissa, with her mother's instinct, somehow feels what would be best for Draco and even though she herself does not care for anyone outside her family, she instinctively knows that she somehow has to appeal to Snape's feelings (of which she knows nothing otherwise), place herself at his feet as a weak and helpless creature begging for help and Snape will not be able to resist.
"There might have been a fleeting second when the wild hope crossed his mind - I can have her then - but at practically the same moment it should have dawned on him how ludicrous this hope was and how shameful." (Orion)
You said this very nicely, Orion. Touching in fact.
Julia H. - Mar 12, 2008 10:08 am (#1834 of 2617)
P.S. Once Snape himself was in a position that he desperately begged someone to protect the one he loved most. This memory may also play a part in his behaviour to Narcissa. He knows how she feels.
mona amon - Mar 12, 2008 11:05 am (#1835 of 2617)
Although Voldemort may have made a mess getting into the grave, I'm sure he cleaned up afterwards. (Ramb)
This is what I too thought. There is no mention of a violated grave.
but I don't think he ever thinks of getting anything beyond respect and trust - or let's call it simply a clean reputation. This, however, seems to be important to him. It is extremely difficult as well - because of his past and also because a large part of his work against the dark side must be kept a secret. (Julia)
But there is also a large part of his work that is not kept a secret, at least from fellow members of the Order. During the OOTP year they all knew (and appreciated) what he was doing. If they continued to have doubts about him due to his past, he has only himself to blame. He never allowed Dumbledore to reveal to the others exactly why he trusted him.
I agree that the areas where Snape probably wanted respect are not in the "how to win friends and influence people" sorts of areas, but simply in the realm of being a person who is committed to working hard for the good side at great personal risk and sacrifice, for having a respectable job at which he works hard, and a person who can be trusted to carry out the duties he's committed to. (wynnleaf)
As far as I can make out, he is respected for all these things, so he does get the respect that he wants (till he AKs DD).
Has anyone noticed that while he is a pretty advanced potions expert already in his teens, he never seems to try to give love potion to Lily? (Julia)
Come on, Julia, you can't go about giving Severus brownie points for all the bad things he didn't do!!!
Good points about Snape and Narcissa.
Edit: Cross posted with Zelmia!
rambkowalczyk - Mar 12, 2008 2:05 pm (#1836 of 2617)
While I agree that it's within the realm of possibility that Snape wished for Harry and James to die, I think it's unlikely that he actively wanted it. He may have some maturity problems emotionally, but you'd have to be brainless to think Lily wouldn't be devastated by their deaths. Would he really want her hurt in that way? The fact that even after Lily was dead, Snape was willing to spend years protecting and risking his life for her son, who he loathed, seems to show that he did realize that Lily's son would be highly important to her. wynnleaf
It wasn't my intention to prove that Snape actively wanted James and Harry dead, but to prove that Snape wanted Harry's respect even though part of him felt he didn't deserve it because of his original reason to save Lily. It would also explain why he had trouble giving Harry respect (because he believes Harry is the cause of all his troubles).
Julia H. - Mar 12, 2008 3:23 pm (#1837 of 2617)
"If that were so, surely at least one colleague would have stood up for him after his apparent murder of Dumbledore, but nobody does. Not one person ever considers the possibility of there being an alternative explanation." (Zelmia)
It is very difficult to think of an alternative explanation in this situation. (Hagrid actually tries at first.) There is an eye-witness to the murder and Snape flees with the DE's. What could they have thought? But his colleagues are shocked and that is something.
I did not say anything about anybody being respectful or otherwise to Snape so I don't know what you mean by this. What I tried to say was that the work he did seemed to be appreciated. This is not the same thing as decent behaviour. (Post-O.W.L. students do not take his class because they want to behave respectfully.) We do not get to see it too much how he is treated by his colleagues prior to DD's death but he does not seem to be treated like Lockhart. By "earning" I mean he is "deserving".
"those doubts linger after all these years precisely because his behaviour does nothing to counteract them" (Zelmia)
"If they continued to have doubts about him due to his past, he has only himself to blame. He never allowed Dumbledore to reveal to the others exactly why he trusted him." (Mona)
I don't know. I am not saying Snape is perfect. He is an introverted person and not exactly open with anyone personally but I don't see why he would deserve more trust if he were a talkative, friendly and easy-going individual. That does not make anybody any more reliable or honest, IMO. Should he really go about telling everyone how he loved Lily and how he wants to protect Harry for her memory or what? Let me refer to Ludo Bagman again. He also gets associated with LV and he also gets a second chance and everybody is willing to grant that to him because he is just SOOOOO nice and open and nobody could really think he ever means any harm. But I would much sooner trust my life to Snape than to Bagman. Outright evil Lucius Malfoy seems to know how to make himself trusted in the ministry after LV's downfall but does that mean he actually deserves this trust? It seems what Snape is missing is all surface phenomena that can be easily faked if someone wants to. Snape's motivations may be too deep for others to see them.
"As far as I can make out, he is respected for all these things, so he does get the respect that he wants (till he AKs DD)." (Mona)
There it is. Not my words.
"In my own experience, I have seen people fired due to precisely to the same kinds of personality quirks as you describe." (Zelmia)
I am sure you did. I don't know what Snape's chances would be outside Hogwarts. However, most wizarding organizations seem to think that someone like Lupin or Hagrid "reflects badly on the organisation as a whole" and only DD is willing to employ them. But Bagman and Umbridge and some absolutely genuine former (and future) DE's make it into the ministry because they know how to behave. I do not doubt that similar standards often apply in the real world as well. One of the things that I really like about Dumbledore is his wise and merciful tolerance and his ability to see beneath the surface.
"The whole redemption arc is that Snape starts off wanting Harry dead but spends the rest of his life doing what he can to protect Harry and aiding him to bring about Voldemort's demise." (Zelmia)
We must agree to differ. IMO Snape's joining Voldemort (and giving him the prophecy) is a perfectly good point of origin for the character arc. There is no need for him to want Harry dead and I see no canon that we are supposed to think this. Some people may think the lowest point in his character is the hilltop scene but my reading is that going to the hilltop is the beginning of rising because it is love and willingness to save someone that makes him do that (not hatred and wanting someone dead).
"Though his behaviour toward Narcissa is the only time we see him acting with anything remotely like compassion, still he isn't exactly comforting or even gentle in his manner." (Zelmia)
He is not supposed to feel sorry for Narcissa either as he really is (Narcissa belongs to the DE's and she herself does not care for anyone else outside her family as we see in DH) or as Voldemort's man (he has to be careful to avoid any traps, especially with Bella and Wormtail present). His job is already dangerous and complicated enough without Narcissa's problem. He knows the "plan" they are talking about is murdering DD, the only living person Snape has a personal relationship with and someone he cares for, someone he respects as a father figure. He also knows that DD will have to die anyway. If this is not enough, he knows he will have to AK him personally. Then Narcissa comes and begs him to help her son who is actually planning to kill DD. He has every reason to frown or to try and resist her plea. Besides, the situation he finds himself in is totally new to him ("clutching hands" and all) and is probably totally new and unexpected behaviour from proud pure-blood Mrs Malfoy too. (Does not she tell Bella that there is nothing she would not do any more? Going to a dilapidated muggle neighbourhood and kissing the hands of a half-blood wizard living there seems to be something totally out of character for Narcissa.) Despite all this, Snape feels genuine compassion for her and tries to comfort her. No, he does not embrace her as soon as she enters (not even later, which is OK I guess) but he listens to her out of compassion, tries to comfort her out of compassion and gives up any advantage of his position which he could use to defend his own safety - out of compassion.
"Snape stooped seized her by the arms, lifted her up, and steered her back onto the sofa. He then poured her more wine and forced the glass into her hand."
I have no problem with that. She seems to be at the end of her strength, so she needs someone else's strength and this is the point where he tells her that he can help her. (He knows all the time that in effect saving Draco is what he is going to do - but he needs some time to think it over how to tell her that without giving away his secret.) If we go on reading the scene, we find that he lets her take his hand, looks into her tear-filled eyes, talks to her quietly and slowly, kneels down by her and takes that very serious vow as she asks him to do. I find it all quite gentle (and if this behaviour is not comforting, I don't know what is) - especially if I consider that Narcissa is not his friend and that Snape himself is or should be just as much in need of comfort as Narcissa at the moment.
"Come on, Julia, you can't go about giving Severus brownie points for all the bad things he didn't do!!!" (Mona)
Clearly not. :-) I was just trying to point it out that his love does not seem to be selfish in any way. (Love potions do come up several times in the series and not only as a source of humour but precisely to indicate what is NOT real love and how harmful a selfish desire to merely possess the admired person can be. Snape's love, however, is real love focusing on the loved person and her well-being.)
PeskyPixie - Mar 12, 2008 8:41 pm (#1838 of 2617)
I think Sev does deserve a few brownie points for not spiking Lily's pumpkin juice with Love Potion. I mean, a Death Nibbler teen (who happens to be a Potions whiz kid) is losing the girl of his dreams to his popular, athletic rival. Since we are ready to believe the worst of him as a youth, I find it quite hopeful that he does not equate potion-induced love with real love, especially since he has never witnessed a healthy, loving relationship. Give the boy some credit for not pulling a Romilda Vane!
Merope Gaunt's use of Love Potion tends to be excusable by many (I'm not suggesting that any of the posters on this thread feel that way) due to the fact that she has endured a loveless existence. If this be the case, then the fact that Severus does not use Love Potion as a desperate last attempt to win Lily is worthy of acknowledgement.
I can not stress enough how important it is that young Severus loves Lily Evans enough to let her go when she no longer wishes to be associated with him. No, he doesn't change himself for her, neither does he care about her husband and child a few years later. However, far too many men would have a much more violent reaction to Lily's rejection. Snape is light years away from being perfect, but he is not wholly evil.
Julia H. - Mar 13, 2008 1:57 am (#1839 of 2617)
"Lucius is the perfect example of someone who knows precisely what appearances need to be kept up if he is to be trusted. Whether or not he deserves that trust - and Arthur Weasley would be the first to point out that he doesn't - is another matter." (Zelmia)
So in the case of Malfoy, the question of appearances and the question whether he truly deserves trust must be kept apart, while in the case of Snape, they are one and the same. I see.
"Even as a child he tries to sabotage Lily's relationship with her sister, albeit not entirely consciously, though he does apparently succeed in that ultimately. "
Sabotage??? Are we talking about a 9-year-old child? He does not like Petunia and Petunia does not like him and she is the first to attack him not vica versa. Petunia is already jealous of Lily's abilities when she does not know what it all means and positively envies her when she finds out that she is a witch and speaks with contempt about the wizarding world out of envy. It is her envy that spoils their relationship. We could just as well say she tries to sabotage Lily's relationship with her first wizarding friend.
"He doesn't care whether her husband and child are killed, as long as he can have what he wants."
I must have done a very bad job with all those long posts. I had the impression that I was saying there is no canon evidence that Snape wanted Harry or James dead or that he wanted to take advantage of Lily's danger. I said precisely that DD accuses Snape of not caring for the death of the other two people not of wanting the death of the other two people. I think "not caring" is not the same as "actively wanting". (I did not even say that not caring is good but it is still not the same as wanting.) What Snape "wants" is saving Lily and this is what he wants "to get". Granted, he does not mind what happens to the rest of the world, himself included. This is a good starting point for the redemption arc because he ends up protecting and saving the lives of whoever needs saving.
"In my view, he does not focus at all on her well-being."
OK. In my view he does. That is what makes him change his whole life, you know.
"But really, he's hardly on the verge of a breakdown, here."
He may not and in fact he cannot show what he feels and he has nobody with whom he can discuss how he feels but he is going to lose the only friend (or the closest thing to this) he has, the only person with whom he can be himself and at the moment they are talking about DD's murder even though the reader does not know it yet. He has already been made to promise the AK, which he does not want to do (perhaps I don't need to give quotes to prove that), the thought of which he rejects in his heart. This will also cost him losing his home, his life as he has lived it so far, the trust and the respect ... (see above). He even endangers his soul, as far as he knows. Since I think that Narcissa reminds him both of Lily (as a mother) and of himself as he was once desperately begging DD to protect the one he loved, IMO this is likely to be an additional source of sorrow and stress to him. (But this is also the reason why he understands Narcissa.) He cannot show himself to be on the verge of breakdown (when can he?) and his case is different from Narcissa's because Narcissa can still hope to save the one she loves, while the choice Snape has is only the mercy killing now. Snape or not, one does not have to be sobbing and actually cracking to be in need of comfort at a given moment, IMO at least - you may disagree. I don't believe that different people will necessarily behave in the same way if they have the same feelings or that there is only one acceptable way for people to act in any given situation, whether we talk about sorrow or love or about wanting respect or about happiness and so on. (Of course, Snape does not expect to be comforted any time by anyone, he has to shoulder it all alone but I don't think that makes it any easier.) I happen to think that lots of things go on in his head in this scene. I agree with Orion that Narcissa and Bella bring him extra trouble. Still he, out of sympathy and compassion, goes all the way from cautious politeness to holding hands with her, kneeling in front of her, making the vow exactly as she wants him to do and practically offering his own life as reassurance in order to comfort her. (The words of the vow are curiously similar to those of a vow at a wedding ceremony, aren't they?) And Narcissa is no one to him, personally, and Narcissa would not care a jot if Snape died or whatever happened to him. It seems he can understand even that. (Wonder why?) You know, I think the fact that Snape has the kind of history he has, that he sinned and went through regret and remorse, that he lost all that he lost (or never had), that he got a second chance, that he has to do without a lot of things that other people may take for granted is essential in his understanding behaviour towards a person like Narcissa in her despair, in spite of everything that separates them and in spite of everything that is painful to him with regard to Draco's mission.
wynnleaf - Mar 13, 2008 10:27 am (#1840 of 2617)
As Julia says, there's no canon evidence that Snape actually wanted LV to kill Harry and James. Only that he was focused on saving Lily without apparently any concern about Harry and James living or dying. Not being concerned isn't at all the same thing as actually wanting LV to go ahead and kill them.
And we have no evidence that Snape wants to "have" Lily in any sense of the word. Yes, he wanted her friendship and was probably in love with her (although we don't even know for certain that it was romantic love). Once again, there's a difference in loving someone and wanting them. We never have any evidence that after the breakup of their friendship Snape did anything to stalk Lily, try to break up a friendship or dating relationship between she and James, try to force her to see him again or anything. As far as we know, he accepted that they were no longer on friendship terms and didn't attempt to change that. So the idea that he wanted her, true or not, isn't supported in canon.
All we know from canon as regards his motives in trying to save Lily is that he loved her and didn't want her to be killed. Nothing about wanting her for himself. Readers may wish to imagine this, and it's not countered by canon, but nor is it supported, so making arguments based on the assumption that Snape was motivated to save her because he wanted Lily for himself is basically working on noncanon assumptions.
So in the case of Malfoy, the question of appearances and the question whether he truly deserves trust must be kept apart, while in the case of Snape, they are one and the same. I see. (Julia)
Yes, this a problem with such an argument. In the HP series we repeatedly have characters who appear nice or at least trustworthy to many, but are in fact just the opposite. Lucius is quite civil to many, but a true "snake in the grass." Lockhart seems likeable if too pretentious, but is in fact dangerous and a thief of the accomplishments of others. Fake-Moody is trusted by staff even though his actions in using and demonstrating unforgiveables on students, or bouncing a 14 year old (in ferret form) from a 10 foot height to the pavement is not seen as out-of-character for the supposedly highly trustworthy person he is impersonating. Umbridge talks in a very civil manner while actually saying things with horrible intent. In POA Lupin appears kind and very nice and trustworthy, but for his own benefit is hiding information that places hundreds of children's lives at risk. Even Tom Riddle, in his early years, insinuates himself into the good graces of many, all because they trust in someone who has the veneer of being nice and trustworthy.
Meanwhile, once Snape turns to the good side, he is extremely trustworthy. Should it truly be necessary to adopt the veneer of "niceness" in order to be trusted by Order members or staff members? Certainly, for some I'm sure the veneer is what they use to judge and therefore to get their trust, that would be needed. Perhaps Snape is not concerned about the kind of trust that is just looking for "niceness." But for those more interested in what a person actually does or accomplishes, I think probably Snape did have the respect and trust of those he worked with.
However, I think he always realized the precariousness of that trust and respect, in that it was partly dependent on Dumbledore's trust in him and Dumbledore's being willing to vouch for Snape's early years.
Because I think we are given canon evidence that Snape valued the trust and respect of others, this makes his willingness to AK Dumbledore and become an apparently completely loyal follower of LV after DD's death (rather than a double agent), far more sacrificial than if Snape never cared at all for the loss of trust and respect that would follow his actions in killing DD.
PeskyPixie - Mar 13, 2008 3:56 pm (#1841 of 2617)
I don't know whether he convinces Lily to read the letter. They are both being brats, snooping around in the older kid's room/part of the room, and come across the envelope. For all we know, they may be equally culpable of invading Petunia's privacy.
PeskyPixie - Mar 13, 2008 7:54 pm (#1842 of 2617)
That's definitely one way to look at it, Zelmia.
I just happen to think that it is just as likely a scenario that both Lily and Severus snoop around for the sheer pleasure younger kids get from peeking into an older sibling's personal space. He sees the envelope and knows its origins and explains the oddness of a Muggle apparently corresponding with Hogwarts. A highly curious situation, though that does not give either of them the right to open another person's mail.
I think Lily looks over at Snape because this is something the two of them are involved in together and, as with many children confronted with their wrongdoing, she gives away her accomplice. Besides, why should she take the heat herself if they are both involved?
mona amon - Mar 13, 2008 9:22 pm (#1843 of 2617)
I just happen to think that it is just as likely a scenario that both Lily and Severus snoop around for the sheer pleasure younger kids get from peeking into an older sibling's personal space. He sees the envelope and knows its origins and explains the oddness of a Muggle apparently corresponding with Hogwarts. (Pesky)
This is how I see it as well. In fact Lily's words give me the impression that she was the one who actually read the letter, while Sev was more interested in the logistics of how a wizarding letter is sent by ordinary post.
Anyway, that little incident cannot possibly be the cause of a life long rift between the two sisters. That happened because Petunia was unrelentingly jealous of Lily's magical abilities
Julia H. - Mar 14, 2008 12:29 am (#1844 of 2617)
"Still, it did seem to end up being the final straw that broke the sisters' relationship." (Zelmia)
"Anyway, that little incident cannot possibly be the cause of a life long rift between the two sisters." (Mona)
If it can happen, the relationship must already be very fragile. (My son with his newly acquired reading skill tries to read his sister's diary every day. It always results in an argument but the relationship between them seems to be in essence OK.) But I think Lily will have tried to make it up with her later if Petunia was important to her. The end of a good relationship (and two sisters of similar age may have plenty of shared experiences, little secrets etc. between them) cannot be blamed on an outsider entirely or even mainly.
Wynnleaf, thanks for the clear summary. I agree that Snape probably got the kind of respect and trust he wanted from the people at least who had the chance (and were willing) to take the results of his work into consideration. After all, being given important responsibilities is in itself a sign of being trusted. However, he probably knew he could not take this for granted as much as people with a clean past could, which explains a certain amount of trust-related anxiety in the GoF-year, when the darkening of the mark coincided with the presence of fake-Moody and Crouch Sr. as well as another former DE in Hogwarts and Snape's office was searched and "Moody" alluded to his past and to the possibility of suspicions and doubts about him. Dumbledore, however, continued to trust him and Snape continued to do his best to deserve his trust. Unfortunately, as he becomes a double-agent, his true allegiance must not appear to be too obvious and at the same time there are people in the Order who may voice doubts about his character (Sirius, who hates him, Moody perhaps, who does not believe in second chances and there are Order members who do not know him very much and only see what appears on the surface). Still, the Order as a whole seems to trust his reports and warnings enough to plan and act in accordance with them but again Dumbledore's trust is essential. In the end, DD asks Snape to AK him and by agreeing to do this, he agrees to sacrifice whatever trust and respect he has earned (or could otherwise earn in the future) with very little hope of ever regaining them.
"I don't think DD told Snape about the Elder wand. Why?
Because Snape wouldn't have gone near LV again. That would have been suicidal." (Orion)
This was a bit of time ago but I would like to add that while there seems to be no evidence that Snape knew anything about the Elder Wand and I think he should have been warned about it, I am not sure how this would have influenced his actions. He might have been even more cautious but I am not sure how. He would not have gone near LV again? I don't think he was very eager to be near LV anyway but if he wanted to find out top-secret information and wanted to plant first-class misinformation in LV's head, he had to talk to him now and then personally. However, on the whole, it was LV who decided to see or not to see any of his DE's. So if Snape was summoned by LV, he could do only one of two things: he either went to him or fled. While it is not exactly wise to get himself killed before accomplishing his task (though this possibility is always there), fleeing would have meant giving up his position as Dumbledore's spy through and through and I don't think he would have done that. As you said, Orion, his life lost any semblance of dignity by the end so he just may not have cared for keeping it that much but perhaps it was still important to him to be able to die (whenever it happened) without abandoning the duty he had been trusted with.
I promise I will not dwell on the Narcissa-theme for ever but the "Spinner's End" chapter is one of my favourite chapters, so let me add a few last (?) thoughts on it:
I'd like to stress again that comforting Narcissa is not included in Snape's job description either with DD or with LV and he could easily have put a safe ending to the whole scene early on. However, he decides to listen to her and his behaviour gradually changes. In comparison with desperate Narcissa, Snape is in a position of relative power and strength. Narcissa looks like a "drowned person" when she enters his house and the words that he seizes her, lifts her and steers her to the sofa, just before starting to tell her that he can help after all, reflect this image. It is as if he was rescuing a drowning person from the water. Then by agreeing to take the vow he gives up his position of relative power and distance completely. Snape lowers himself to kneel by her and they hold hands. In other words, he voluntarily takes a position of humility and reaches for the hand of a fellow human being in distress. A human being who trembles for the life of her son, who is risking her life to save her son and who does not care for other lives (DD's, Snape's) involved in the case and also a human being who has lived supporting the evil side and an ideology of hatred so far and who is now paying a terrible price through the danger of someone she loves. Then in this position, he takes the vow and practically offers his life just to give this human being hope. I think what happens at this moment is that Snape is extending the mercy he once received on the hilltop to someone else who now needs it.
mona amon - Mar 14, 2008 5:13 am (#1845 of 2617)
Because I think we are given canon evidence that Snape valued the trust and respect of others, this makes his willingness to AK Dumbledore and become an apparently completely loyal follower of LV after DD's death (rather than a double agent), far more sacrificial than if Snape never cared at all for the loss of trust and respect that would follow his actions in killing DD. (Wynnleaf)
I don't see why it should make it far more sacrificial. This is similar to the discussion we were having a while back about Snape sacrificing his life for the cause of defeating Voldemort. Some felt that it wasn't much of a sacrifice because his life was so miserable and he had no spouse, children or friends. Others felt he made just as much of a sacrifice as anyone else.
In the same way, I feel that, just as one should not judge the value of the sacrifice of his life based on how miserable or happy that life was, we also should not judge the value of the sacrifice of his reputation based on how much he cared for respect and trust. It is a huge sacrifice, whether he cared for these things or not.
A bit ironic, in my opinion, that the adult Petunia hates Harry for how much he reminds her of Lily, whereas the adult Snape hates Harry because he cannot see Lily in him at all. (Zelmia)
Excellent point, Zelmia. It never occurred to me that Harry must remind Petunia of Lily.
while there seems to be no evidence that Snape knew anything about the Elder Wand and I think he should have been warned about it, I am not sure how this would have influenced his actions. (Julia)
Since there's also no evidence that Dumbledore did not tell Severus about the Elder Wand, I'd like to give DD the benefit of the doubt here. Surely he didn't go about smiling to himself after he'd asked Snape to kill him, "He's signed his own death warrant and little does he know it!"
Julia H. - Mar 14, 2008 6:37 am (#1846 of 2617)
"In the same way, I feel that, just as one should not judge the value of the sacrifice of his life based on how miserable or happy that life was, we also should not judge the value of the sacrifice of his reputation based on how much he cared for respect and trust. It is a huge sacrifice, whether he cared for these things or not." (Mona)
I see what you mean, Mona, and I can agree that from an objective point of view it would be a huge sacrifice in both cases. It it very difficult to imagine that someone who understands that difference between right and wrong and chooses to do the right thing should not care for these things at all. However, most people can take their reputation and this basic kind of trust and respect for granted. Snape could not take it for granted first because it was already his second chance and secondly because he had to agree to play the role of a DE. So perhaps it was just as important to him as to everyone else but even then he had more reasons to be anxious about it. If he had not cared at all what people would think of him to the extent that he would not have cared for the loss of his reputation as an honourable person, he still would have sacrificed it but this sacrifice would not have touched him personally and he would not have considered it a loss when he agreed to the AK. (But here I am beginning to wonder what the word "sacrifice" should mean in this case.) However, it was a more difficult, hence more admirable choice (and because of that, a deeper sacrifice) for him to make if he truly wished he could have a clean reputation and if he truly wished he could have the trust and the respect of those he was fighting for.
I did not take part in the debate about the life sacrifice but I think sacrificing a miserable life can be just as huge a sacrifice as sacrificing a happy one because it is the person's only life and - miserable or not - it can be valued. Even a miserable life can be just as valuable to a person as a happy one. However, this is not the same as someone who is truly suicidal and does not value their life at all (which IMO does not have to mean that others would not find the same life tolerable or even fairly good, so a not valued life is not necessarily the same as a miserable one). A person can be unhappy and still find value in life or a cause to live for. Similarly, in the case of reputation, I think sacrificing a very good reputation or sacrificing a "marked" one (as in the case of Snape) can be just as huge a sacrifice but it is because the person making the sacrifice can be just as unwilling to give up the respect and trust he has earned (regardless how much exactly this respect or trust is) in both cases.
wynnleaf - Mar 14, 2008 12:11 pm (#1847 of 2617)
Mona amon,
I agree that we can't judge the sacrifice of one person's life over another just because one person appears, from the outside, to have more "worth living for" (however one wants to define that). But for Snape himself, I do think it matters as regards his decision to follow DD's request about AKing DD and going very deep under cover. If he doesn't care what anyone else thinks of him, than his decision regarding whether to follow DD's request is primarily one of whether or not he was willing to take the physical risk, undergo the added stress, etc. However, if he also was having to decide whether to allow himself to become possibly forever known as a traitor and coward to those on the good side, when the respect and trust of others was very important to him, then that makes his decision to go ahead with DD's request and plans far more of a sacrifice than it otherwise is.
haymoni - Mar 14, 2008 4:59 pm (#1848 of 2617)
He was supposed to tell Harry about the soul-bit and that he had to die. He probably thought he was going to die alone in that Shack.
Here comes Harry - he grabs him and says "Take it all" so that he could know the whole story.
And then, sniff! "Look at me" - green eyes - Lily's eyes - sniff!
Gone...
I think Snape could not get over his hatred & jealousy of James and what a mouse he was for never telling Lily how he felt.
PeskyPixie - Mar 14, 2008 8:17 pm (#1849 of 2617)
I think that Snape realizes for the first time that his love for Lily will die with him and thus, he releases very personal memories along with the ones Harry needs to fulfill his final task.
Yes, he thinks Harry will die, but at least his memories are 'out there' for anyone who may come across them. I feel Snape does want to be known for who he is, but his rigid personality prevents that during his life.
I'm writing in a rush, so I'm not sure whether this is coherent at all. My apologies if it's gibberish. I'll take another attempt at it on Sunday.
Julia H. - Mar 15, 2008 3:50 am (#1850 of 2617)
Very good observations, everyone.
"Snape's true sacrifice was not his life, his physical being, but any hope of ever completely shaking off the taint of his Dark past. He couldn't possibly have known that this would be rectified posthumously - though it now seems that perhaps some part of him was clinging to that hope as he grabbed Harry by the lapels." (Zelmia)
Very well put, Zelmia, I absolutely AGREE! Actually, this is what I find incredibly touching in the character: that he sacrificed more than his life. I mean the life-sacrifice or at least a very strong possibility of it is always there, since Snape can almost take it for granted that he will be killed sooner or later by someone either on the Light side or on the Dark side (or he might end up in Azkaban) but a lot of other characters sacrifice their lives - it is a constantly recurring theme. Snape, however sacrifices more. I think it is important that he wants to shake off the taint of his dark past and in spite of everything he can have a reasonable hope of succeeding until he agrees to AK Dumbledore. Then he has about a year to think about it but still has the strength to go on with the plan when the final moment comes.
I also agree that he was clinging to this hope as he was giving his memories to Harry and perhaps at the moment he felt that even if Harry alone would know about it (before dying) it would be better than nobody knowing.
Why swearing Dumbledore to secrecy? Voldemort aside (IMO DD did not need Snape telling him how dangerous it was to turn against LV and that someone who had been and might one day be again a spy needed secrecy), I think at this moment it is mainly an emotional response from Snape. It is not probable that he was thinking of any of the long-term consequences of keeping the secret. At the moment he may not have got as far as thinking about his own reputation. He had been protecting Lily as a spy and now he had just learned of her death - he may not have had too much time to think about his own future yet. Actually the protection of Harry may well have been the first idea regarding his future life going beyond his attempts to protect Lily. I guess what he could not bear was letting others (and especially Potter's son) know that he agreed to dedicate his life to the protection of the son of his school-enemy and rival who had humiliated and defeated him and married the girl Snape loved and also that he was doing it partly out of guilt and remorse and partly because he loved the rival's wife with undying but ever unreturned love. (Unreturned love may sound very romantic but it is never so to someone who feels it.) But without these, he could not have possibly tell Harry that he was protecting him - it would not have been right, not even very convincing perhaps, given that Harry could and did easily find out about the enmity between Snape and James.
I think Snape felt (even later) that it would be absolutely humiliating and unbearable to tell a teenage boy (who could not have the kind of understanding wisdom that DD had) - or let others tell him - that he loved his mother (who, however, happened to choose James, of all people), that he had caused his parents' death and what remorse he felt after realizing what he had done.
wynnleaf - Mar 15, 2008 4:25 am (#1851 of 2617)
Good posts all.
Two points to emphasize:
Snape believed the info that he imparted to Harry would lead to Harry's death, probably in the immediate future, so he could not have expected that Harry would pass along the truth to others. He might have hoped, but it would be a long shot hope.
Also, I think Harry actually seeing Snape's memories helped to get Harry to accept them and to sympathize, to some degree, with Snape's motivations. If Snape had allowed Dumbledore to tell Harry or others of Snape's motivations regarding loving Lily, it may not have led to the same understanding on Harry's part. There are, after all, many fictional and real life examples of a person's "love" or obsession for another person ultimately leading to that person's death, and it can be seen as a kind of "sick" love. It helps in Harry's understanding (and the reader's), to see Snape's apparently neglected background, that Lily was his friend from childhood, and to see his true distress when she was in danger and grief when she died. If DD had simply told Harry the truth about Snape, Harry's hatred for Snape could easily have twisted it into the story of an obsessed man intentionally trying to get LV to kill James and Harry so that Snape could get Lily, or some other such story. After all, Harry easily twisted the OOTP incidents into Sirius' death being Snape's fault. It wouldn't have been surprising if he had not accepted the truth of Snape's love for Lily and instead seen it quite differently.
Julia H. - Mar 15, 2008 5:57 am (#1852 of 2617)
Yes, it may have been Harry's (not so understanding) reaction that he feared. (Perhaps if he had been able to have a good relationship with Harry, he would have been able to tell him his secret, but he could not have a good relationship with Harry due mainly to his secret, so it was a vicious circle really.) He also feared other people's reaction if his story should become generally known. With people talking about it, the more sensational parts would evidently be twisted and blown up and the story of his deeply felt guilt and remorse and his rejected love could easily turn into some trivial gossip - and that would be unbearable indeed. At the moment of his death, he probably let go of any such fear.
Julia H. - Mar 15, 2008 10:37 am (#1853 of 2617)
"On the other hand, Snape couldn't have known Harry would grow up to have such an animosity toward him."
He could not have known it for certain but this moment was not the moment of objective logic to him. Perhaps because Harry was the son of James who had hated him and the son of Lily who had rejected him and because (and perhaps most importantly) Snape hated himself very much for what he had done and for his failed efforts to save Lily, he never thought of the possibility that Harry might turn to him with understanding anyhow - and especially not so if he knew the reason why Snape had agreed to protect him.
"And again, Snape has no one but himself to blame there, since it was he who set the tone for their relationship on their very first meeting."
Yes, he did but it was again because he could not get rid of his feelings that remained from his past and because he had perhaps expected Harry to hate him just as much as he had expected him to be arrogant and attention-seeking (etc.) even before their first potions class. It may not be an excuse and it is certainly not logical but deep down it was the result of the problems Snape had with himself.
"And, to be fair, Harry knew he was consciously choosing to blame Snape for Sirius's death as a way to ease his own grief, and particularly his own feelings of guilt over having fallen for such an easy deception that drew the Order out, etc."
Yes, but it does not make it any more likely that Harry would have been understanding or forgiving after learning Snape's story.
All in all, it may just be that Snape himself felt what he had done was unforgivable, and that is why he thought he could not expect anything but hatred and contempt from Harry and from others if they knew.
Orion - Mar 15, 2008 12:03 pm (#1854 of 2617)
I always felt that Snape didn't really hate Harry as a real, living person, but that he took his self-hate out on him. Snape never allowed himself to take a clear, objective look at Harry because it would have forced him to see the truth about himself.
The fact that he swore DD to secrecy is really the source of the tragedy. The morality of it is: If you're ashamed of something, just tell everybody and the worst of it is already over. People often are much more understanding than you'd think. Snape should have come clean from the beginning and... the story would have been over in one book, probably.
mona amon - Mar 15, 2008 12:37 pm (#1855 of 2617)
However, it was a more difficult, hence more admirable choice (and because of that, a deeper sacrifice) for him to make if he truly wished he could have a clean reputation and if he truly wished he could have the trust and the respect of those he was fighting for. (Julia)
However, if he also was having to decide whether to allow himself to become possibly forever known as a traitor and coward to those on the good side, when the respect and trust of others was very important to him, then that makes his decision to go ahead with DD's request and plans far more of a sacrifice than it otherwise is. (Wynnleaf)
Julia and Wynnleaf, I feel you are using different standards to judge the two cases- objective standards to judge whether the sacrifice of one's life has more value if the person has more things to live for, and subjective standards to judge whether the sacrifice of one's reputation has more value the more he cares about his reputation, and hence the different conclusions.
I feel that whether he cared or not for his reputation in general is unimportant, because he very clearly did not want to go down in wizarding history as the treacherous, cowardly murderer of Dumbledore. The magnitude of what he is giving up is brought out very well in the 'Don't call me coward' scene with Harry immediately after he has murdered Dumbledore, one of my favourite Snape scenes. It does not need Snape to be yearning for others' respect and trust to make it more of a sacrifice.
Julia H. - Mar 15, 2008 1:52 pm (#1856 of 2617)
"I feel that whether he cared or not for his reputation in general is unimportant, because he very clearly did not want to go down in wizarding history as the treacherous, cowardly murderer of Dumbledore." (Mona)
But, Mona, that is what I am saying as well. If he "did not want to go down in wizarding history as the treacherous, cowardly murderer of Dumbledore", that means he cared for his reputation!
"The magnitude of what he is giving up is brought out very well in the 'Don't call me coward' scene with Harry immediately after he has murdered Dumbledore, one of my favourite Snape scenes."
Exactly. (It is one of my favourite Snape-scenes as well.) What he is giving up is his reputation (in other words the "trust and respect" of people) and it is a huge sacrifice.
(I don't think we are using different standards for the two types of sacrifice: at least I think what matters is not the kind of life or the kind of reputation that is given up but whether the person values it or not and in general I think it should be an absolutely extreme situation - like in the case of a truly suicidal person or someone who does not mind if he becomes known as a "treacherous, cowardly murderer" - where these things (life and reputation) are not valued.)
"Snape should have come clean from the beginning ..." (Orion)
But how can you come clean with a child? How can you expect that he would understand a story like this?
haymoni - Mar 15, 2008 6:11 pm (#1857 of 2617)
If Snape would have spoken to Harry right away during his first year, I think he could have made Harry understand.
He could have started off by telling him that he had known his mother from when they were children and that she was one of his first friends.
He wouldn't have had to launch into the whole "I led Voldy to your mother's doorstep" right off the bat. He could have told him pieces of the story.
However, he would have had to do it before 3rd year. I don't think Harry would have listened to him after the Shrieking Shack.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 15, 2008 6:53 pm (#1858 of 2617)
I think Snape felt (even later) that it would be absolutely humiliating and unbearable to tell a teenage boy (who could not have the kind of understanding wisdom that DD had) - or let others tell him - that he loved his mother (who, however, happened to choose James, of all people), that he had caused his parents' death and what remorse he felt after realizing what he had done. Julia H ?
agree totally
wynnleaf - Mar 15, 2008 7:28 pm (#1859 of 2617)
I imagine that initially, even prior to ever having met Harry, Snape probably thought of Harry as a kind of extension of James, and therefore it would be unbearable to him to give that James-stand-in such information about himself, because it makes Snape so vulnerable - or at least it would probably seem so to him. Of course, seeing Harry this way isn't right, but still I think that's the way Snape always saw him, even before Harry showed up at Hogwarts looking just like James.
mona amon - Mar 15, 2008 11:44 pm (#1860 of 2617)
But, Mona, that is what I am saying as well. If he "did not want to go down in wizarding history as the treacherous, cowardly murderer of Dumbledore", that means he cared for his reputation! (julia)
Not exactly. We both agree about the conclusion (that he made a huge sacrifice)but you are saying he was yearning for trust and respect and therefore he did not want to go down in history as a traitor, coward and murderer, and I'm saying he had turned his back on things like trust and respect, but he did not want to go down in history as a traitor, coward and murderer. I feel he did not care (or did not allow himself to care) about his reputation in general, but not to such an extreme extent that he does not care at all about becoming known as a "treacherous, cowardly murderer". The part I do not agree with is, 'the more he cared about his reputation, the bigger the sacrifice'. when he's already making the biggest sacrifice by agreeing to kill DD whom he loves and becoming an outcast, how can it be made any bigger?
He probably thought he was going to die alone in that Shack.
Here comes Harry - he grabs him and says "Take it all" so that he could know the whole story.
And then, sniff! "Look at me" - green eyes - Lily's eyes - sniff!
Gone...(Haymoni)
I wanted to comment on this earlier, but this thread has once again started moving too fast for me! You've really captured that moment there, Haymoni! **sniff**
Snape, however sacrifices more. I think it is important that he wants to shake off the taint of his dark past and in spite of everything he can have a reasonable hope of succeeding until he agrees to AK Dumbledore. (Julia)
Julia, I feel you are giving him credit for being a more reasonable, mature character than he actually is. You are portraying him as someone who wanted to shake off his past and move on. I never got the impression that he was willing to move on. To me he's an extremely repressed individual who has turned his back on life and retreated to the dungeons.
The fact that he swore DD to secrecy is really the source of the tragedy. (Orion)
I wholeheartedly agree. He should have confessed to Harry, at least the part about giving the prophecy to Voldemort, no matter how repugnant it was for him to do so. There are no excuses. He was the one who set into motion the events leading to the death of Harry's parents, and he owed it to Harry to confess. It may not have made a difference to Harry, but it was something Severus should have done for himself. Only then could he have begun the process of shaking off the past and moving on.
Last edited by Mona on Sun Nov 23, 2014 12:29 pm; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1861 to 1890
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:47 am
Julia H. - Mar 16, 2008 2:12 am (#1861 of 2617)
Mona,
I don't think I can make a difference between caring for one's reputation "in general" and specifically caring about not being known as a murderer. Why should he care for not being known as a murderer by others (since he himself knew he was not a murderer) if he does not mind what others think of him? When I say trust and respect, I refer to an absolutely basic kind that people with a clean past can take for granted. A murderer, a traitor is not trusted and is not respected.
"'the more he cared about his reputation, the bigger the sacrifice'"
I never meant to say that. I made a difference between caring about his reputation at all and not caring about his reputation at all. In the first case the sacrifice is more difficult to make, so it is a greater and deeper sacrifice. I don't think this thing can really be graded.
"Julia, I feel you are giving him credit for being a more reasonable, mature character than he actually is. You are portraying him as someone who wanted to shake off his past and move on. I never got the impression that he was willing to move on. To me he's an extremely repressed individual who has turned his back on life and retreated to the dungeons."
I don't know. I am not sure how mature and reasonable one must be in order to want to shake off his past. He has turned his back on life and retreated to the dungeons but reputation is precisely something that goes beyond life. Even if he does not care for a lot of things that other people care for, he may still care for the name he leaves behind. Besides, he is not suicidal, so he clearly finds some value in living, however unusual or unconventional this may be.
Despite his maturity problems, Snape is not a child, so I don't think it is fair to say he can never feel or act as an adult because he is not mature or reasonable. After all, he accepts a huge responsibility as a spy and as a protector of life (Harry's and others'). I think just as much as Harry's job in life is to defeat Voldemort, Snape's job in life is to protect other people. Snape carries out his duties with extreme reliability and these duties do not only require abilities (magical and other) and bravery but also a certain level of maturity and a sense of responsibility.
I can accept that confessing his guilt to Harry would have been the best way to shake off his past but on the one hand, I can understand why it was so extremely difficult (not talking about an excuse only a reason) and on the other hand, I think actually "moving on" would also require forgiving himself (as a next step, clearly, once he got Harry's forgiveness) and that would probably have been even more difficult. Trying to shake off his past, yes, but moving on would still be far away. Having said this, I think the fact that he did not have the strength to do this single most important thing in order to shake off his past does not mean that he did not want or that he did not try to shake it off in other ways. After all, he did other things that can be regarded as such attempts.
"It may not have made a difference to Harry, but it was something Severus should have done for himself."
When I come to think about it, he had the strength or bravery to do amazing things, including facing Voldemort, deceiving him for years, confessing his guilt to DD, enduring others' knowledge of his DE past in general, AKing DD and accepting the loss of his reputation. Being regarded as a cowardly traitor and murderer means being regarded as something far, far worse than anything people would have thought him to be on the basis of his secret guilt. Still, he had the strength to endure it all for others: Lily, Harry, DD, the students etc.; but he could not do this single confession of guilt for himself, at least not until he had gone through with all the other things listed above and not until it became a part of something he had to do for others.
mona amon - Mar 16, 2008 11:07 am (#1862 of 2617)
Why should he care for not being known as a murderer by others (since he himself knew he was not a murderer) if he does not mind what others think of him? (Julia)
I never said he absolutely does not care for others opinions (ok, maybe I said it once in a fit of overenthusiasm, but I qualified my words in my next post). let's say he doesn't let people's opinions become an important part of his life, but he draws the line at being considered a murderer, traitor and coward. That's way too extreme. You've said it yourself in the last part of your post.
"'the more he cared about his reputation, the bigger the sacrifice'"
I never meant to say that.
No, I think it was Wynnleaf who said something like that, and since I was answering both your posts together...
I made a difference between caring about his reputation at all and not caring about his reputation at all.
What about the person who does care about his reputation to a certain extent, but not much, for instance? He cannot be classified along with someone who is obsessed with his reputation, yet they both care about their reputation, only in varying degrees.
I am not sure how mature and reasonable one must be in order to want to shake off his past.
Making efforts to shake off one's past and move on is itself a mature and reasonable thing to do. Severus never did it.
Snape is not a child, so I don't think it is fair to say he can never feel or act as an adult because he is not mature or reasonable.
I never said that!
Snape carries out his duties with extreme reliability and these duties do not only require abilities (magical and other) and bravery but also a certain level of maturity and a sense of responsibility.
Well I wasn't accusing him of acting like a six year old in every situation. But he was pretty immature on the whole, holding on to old grudges for dear life, not being able to see beyond Harry's superficial resemblance to James, and so on.
I can accept that confessing his guilt to Harry would have been the best way to shake off his past...
Not just the best way, but the only way (for his own personal redemption). Repaying his debt to society is a different matter.
wynnleaf - Mar 16, 2008 12:31 pm (#1863 of 2617)
I don't think anyone ever said or meant that Snape was "obsessed" with his reputation. Maybe we're getting a bit "obsessed" in talking about it , but I don't think anyone means that Snape was obsessed with it. What I think some of us are trying to say is that Snape doesn't have a great many things he cares about other than fulfilling his duty to Lily, but some things he does seem to value are being respected among the Order for his work in that area, and respect he feels should be his in his job. Further he seems to value the trust Dumbledore has for him and that others realize that Dumbledore trusts him. That being important to him in no way equates to obsessing over it.
In my opinion, Snape makes many sacrifices in his work for the Order. A sacrifice is when you give something up for something else. Every thing Snape gives up in order to fulfill his work is yet another sacrifice. If he values the respect of the rest of the Order, the respect of the world at large for his position at Hogwarts, and that others know he is highly trusted by Dumbledore, then he is making several more sacrifices if he willing gives up those things, than if he in losing those things, he wasn't losing anything of much importance to him. If being call a coward is particularly distressing to Snape, then his willingly doing something that will make others think him a coward is an additional sacrifice than if he didn't care in the first place.
In these ways, Snape's caring about the respect, trust, etc. that others have for him gives him additional sacrifices (because he's giving up things he cares about), when he agrees to kill DD. Every thing that he cares about and yet gives up to help the Order is another sacrifice. In that way, if Snape values the respect of being a professor at Hogwarts, a trusted member of the Order, a trusted confidant of DD, the knowledge that he can show others he's not a coward (like, in his view, Black), then when he gives those things up those are added sacrifices in addition to whatever other sacrifices of physical safety, stress, etc., he's also making.
Julia H. - Mar 16, 2008 4:19 pm (#1864 of 2617)
I agree with Wynleaf. Snape is not obsessed (we clearly are) with his reputation - if he were, he would not sacrifice it for anything - but his life is such that it becomes an issue for him more than for others and not only because of his past but also because he has to make the choice which involves the sacrifice of his reputation. This is far from being an obsession. Actually I don't think that many other characters would be likely to ever be able to make a similar sacrifice, so no, Snape is clearly not obsessed with his reputation. He can give it up for other things. I remember saying it before that in spite of wanting to be trusted, Snape is more willing to deserve DD's trust and to deserve the second chance he got than to keep this second chance. This is why he can agree to AK DD. No obsession here. Still in several scenes it seems (to me at least) that it is very important to him to get people's trust and respect despite his DE past. Not as an obsession but perhaps as something (perhaps the last and only thing) that helps him to live. He does not hope to win happiness, love or friendship but he lives among people and he has to cooperate with them on an everyday basis, so it is not surprising that he wants to be a trusted member of this community rather than a suspected or despised one. I think one of the reasons why he is so much attached to DD is that DD trusts him, understands him and knows him for what he really is. IMO this shows that it is very, very difficult, perhaps next to impossible to completely turn one's back on everything that may be a link to other people and to life and still go on living. (If he does not care for anything at all, he could just as well jump off the Astronomy Tower.) Valuing even just one relationship is valuing a link to life and to other people.
"Making efforts to shake off one's past and move on is itself a mature and reasonable thing to do. Severus never did it."
If the only possible way of making these efforts is making the confession to Harry, then he never did it before the last moments of his life. If we accept that "making efforts" may involve doing other things (even if one does not agree that these other things are the right things), then he certainly made efforts. But I don't think he could ever have really moved on (confession or not) because he would not have been able to get rid of his own guilt. Let's face it: Snape felt a life-long love for a woman who never returned his feelings, who became another man's wife and then died; and many years later he still loved her. Snape became "Dumbledore's man through and through" in his early twenties and after that his loyalties were never shaken despite all the sacrifice that it meant to him and he was still following DD's orders when DD was already dead. The third great feeling/theme in his life was his terrible guilt. Is it really likely that he was ever to let go of it, forgive himself and move on? Not even Harry's forgiveness could undo what happened and Snape knew this.
"Well I wasn't accusing him of acting like a six year old in every situation. But he was pretty immature on the whole, holding on to old grudges for dear life, not being able to see beyond Harry's superficial resemblance to James, and so on."
He was immature in certain (emotional) areas and could act in an immature way but in other areas he acted with an adult's maturity and responsibility and I see no reason to suppose that he was not mature enough to understand or appreciate what it means to be trusted or respected or to be able to wish he could get rid of the shame of his terrible past.
I find it possible that Snape accepted the cruel consequences of AK'ing DD - like being despised and made an outcast for something he had done for the noblest of reasons - as a way of (self-)punishment for his real guilt, which he felt to be unforgivable and which he could not confess. But as I said earlier, he did confess it when the confession was not only about his own redemption but became a part of his duty.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 16, 2008 6:03 pm (#1865 of 2617)
I think Snape felt (even later) that it would be absolutely humiliating and unbearable to tell a teenage boy (who could not have the kind of understanding wisdom that DD had) - or let others tell him - that he loved his mother (who, however, happened to choose James, of all people), that he had caused his parents' death and what remorse he felt after realizing what he had done. Julia H ?
are you saying that Snape thought a teenage boy could not have the kind of understanding wisdom that Dumbledore did? But you don't necessarily think that yourself? It's probably just me, but I'm not sure what you mean. Zelmia
A teenage boy in Harry's position could not be expected to have the wisdom that Dumbledore has. Dumbledore at 17 did not have the wisdom that he acquired later. Harry idolized has parents and hated Snape. It would not be normal for a teenager who has never fallen in love to accept the fact that his parents actually dated other people before they got married. Given that Harry hated Snape, there was no way that he could accept the idea that his mother actually liked Snape. We saw how Harry felt about his father after he found out James was a bully. He wasn't too impressed with Snape calling his mother a mudblood.
Snape believed that if Harry knew the truth that Harry would never forgive him, and I think if Snape just told Harry or allowed Dumbledore to tell Harry it is unlikely that Harry would have forgiven Snape. In part this is because Snape really hasn't forgiven himself so how could anybody else forgive him. I think the only reason Harry has forgiven Snape was because of the memories Snape has shared with Harry before he died.
wynnleaf - Mar 16, 2008 8:37 pm (#1866 of 2617)
Yes, but the examples you mention, zelmia, are Harry being able to understand people either making honest mistakes, or people making not-so-good choices while their motives were at least mostly good. How much would he understand Snape making such horrific choices like having good friends among kids who eventually become Death Eaters, joining Voldemort eventually, taking a prophecy to LV that would surely get LV to target someone, and so on?
And the problem is that Snape wasn't a particularly nice person. Harry (like most readers) quickly forgives Lupin even though Lupin concealed info that could have gotten Harry or other kids killed, mainly because Lupin seems so apologetic and anyhow, Lupin is really nice and supportive of Harry.
Snape is Snape, even if he had allowed Harry to know the past from the beginning. Even if Snape hadn't targeted Harry with sarcasm, insults, etc., he still probably wouldn't have been an especially nice person, and somehow I doubt if he'd ever have been the supportive encourager that Lupin was to Harry.
So even if Snape hadn't decided to loathe Harry because of being James' son, I just can't see Snape being the sympathetic sort of person that Harry would "understand" about Snape joining LV and giving LV the info that got the Potters killed. Nor do I think it nearly so likely that Harry would think the story of Snape loving Lily particularly sympathetic. It's one thing to see the story play out in Snape's memories. It kind of overrode Harry's previous view of Snape. But quite another for just the story told to Harry to override the real-life, in the flesh, harsh and difficult natured teacher Harry experienced daily -- even if that teacher wasn't targeting that harshness at Harry in particular.
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 1:53 am (#1867 of 2617)
On the one hand, perhaps the point is not only what Harry would or would not understand but whether Snape expects him to understand or not. (His expectation influences his decision more than what we, readers, know about Harry.) He does not expect him to understand before even knowing him and he does not get to know him for the sympathetic person Harry can really be. Certainly not all teenage boys would be sympathetic. Besides, again, this is the reason why Snape hates himself, so he expects the same from everyone else.
On the other hand, I agree that Harry would not have been so sympathetic in this case without seeing Snape's memories. (I guess a lot of people in the real world would benefit from the chance of a trip into the minds of people they dislike.) Let's see Zelmia's example: Harry is in a rage and he still listens to Dumbledore, understands and forgives him. To start with, Harry loves Dumbledore very much, which is important in his understanding reaction. Harry can accept most of what DD says and forgive DD for having kept important secrets from him. Then it is rather conspicuous that however hard DD tries to point out Snape's real role in the story: that Snape was not the cause of Sirius's death, that Snape did all he could to save them all, that the occlumency lessons ended because Snape was a seriously wounded person (and Harry actually has some idea of it now), that Snape, in front of Umbridge, could not have shown any understanding of the situation; Harry does not care and keeps blaming Snape for Sirius's death (yes, in order to avoid having to blame himself, but still he does) and the next time he sees Snape, he actually thinks that in spite of what DD says, he will NEVER FORGIVE HIM.
mona amon - Mar 17, 2008 3:57 am (#1868 of 2617)
The point isn't how Harry would have reacted to the news or whether he would have forgiven Snape or not or what reaction Snape expected from Harry. He should have told him anyway, or at least made the decision that he would tell him some day when the time was right. "Despise me if you will, but this is what I did."
He did not have to tell him the minute he set eyes on him. In fact he would have had to discuss with Dumbledore which would be the right time to tell him because it involved the Prophecy information that Dumbledore was keeping from Harry.
He had to tell Harry only the part about being a DE once, and carrying the Prophecy to Voldemort. He didn't have to tell Harry anything about being in love with his mom, if he wanted to keep that private.
I don't think anyone ever said or meant that Snape was "obsessed" with his reputation. (Wynnleaf)
I didn't say that anyone said or meant that Snape was "obsessed" with his reputation. I used 'person obsessed with his reputation' only as an example, it didn't refer to anyone in the HP books.
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 4:25 am (#1869 of 2617)
"The point isn't how Harry would have reacted to the news or whether he would have forgiven Snape or not or what reaction Snape expected from Harry. He should have told him anyway, or at least made the decision that he would tell him some day when the time was right. "Despise me if you will, but this is what I did."" (Mona)
It is one thing to say what Snape should have done and another thing to find (understand) the reason why he did not do it.
Regardless whether we want to excuse Snape or not, we can still talk about his probable reasons for not telling Harry and the possible consequences of telling Harry.
mona amon - Mar 17, 2008 5:16 am (#1870 of 2617)
All right, talk away and I'll continue to find fault with him for not being the person he could have/should have been!
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 5:23 am (#1871 of 2617)
We all know we can find fault with him... Granted, he should have told Harry but it is interesting to know why he did not do it.
mona amon - Mar 17, 2008 5:47 am (#1872 of 2617)
Agreed!
IMO, he didn't tell him because he was too neurotic, too repressed. He didn't want to open up to anyone. He didn't want to have to handle all the emotional issues that a confession would involve.
But I'll have to think about it a bit more.
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 6:00 am (#1873 of 2617)
"He didn't want to have to handle all the emotional issues that a confession would involve." (Mona)
A very good point.
Orion - Mar 17, 2008 6:48 am (#1874 of 2617)
He didn't tell Harry because a chronic, at times acute feeling of shame was a basic component of his personality. First his miserable childhood, then his status as pet victim of the school stars, then his atrocious decision to join LV, then his prophecy blabbing, then his lonely life at Hogwarts (again this place). The last thing he needs is being condemned by a first year brat out of the James gene pool.
I know someone who was regularly beaten by both his parents as a child and who was terribly ashamed of his home and who is still mortally ashamed of his childhood to the point of being incapable of leading a normal life. Snape is too damaged to come clean.
Still, it would have been the best solution, right away in Harry's first year, with DD as a polite mediator. (Would DD have gone to all the trouble to sit down with the two and keep them from going at each other's throats?) First thing DD should have done, sit down with Snape before Harry arrived and set up rules of behaviour. He knew him, he could have intervened before the mutual animosity became so strong that they virtually couldn't talk to each other any more.
DD could have said something to Harry like "Harry, there is something you have to know. Professor Snape is involved in the tragic events which lead to the deaths of your parents. He was, due to an inexcusable youthful stupidity, once a follower of Lord Voldemort, and gave him an information which caused Voldemort to hunt your parents down. You should also know that Professor Snape and your mother were childhood friends, and that he tried to protect your family, but tragically our protection went wrong. He was absolutely shattered by the death of your parents and full of remorse, and he has agreed to try to make up for his terrible mistake by watching over you and to keep you safe from harm."
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 7:33 am (#1875 of 2617)
"He didn't tell Harry because a chronic, at times acute feeling of shame was a basic component of his personality." (Orion)
I see some people are getting to the depth of it. I wholeheartedly agree with you, Orion.
"DD could have said something to Harry like..."
Yes, this would have been a nice and tactful way to handle it. You have captured the tragedy of Snape's story excellently.
Orion - Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm (#1876 of 2617)
But DD didn't do that. He didn't find it necessary to have a very stern word with Snape before Harry's arrival, and he didn't find it necessary to have a word with the two of them. Why? Why does a teacher get away with such an amount of bullying?
First, the parents are far away, or, in Harry's case, nonexistent. Muggle parents would have come down on Snape like a ton of bricks.
Second, because DD is just DD, he lets things run as far as possible without intervening and leaves the day-to-day-business to his heads of house, because he is much too preoccupied with the "greater good" or whatever. DD doesn't get that it's not exactly helpful if he lets the relationship between his two most important allies deteriorate to hate and mutual secrecy. Some more work at the beginning would have done wonders. Something like "and you won't hold it against this boy if he looks or behaves like his father. No, not even if he is the same bully as his father. We have an agreement, dear, and don't you forget it."
wynnleaf - Mar 17, 2008 4:18 pm (#1877 of 2617)
He didn't tell Harry because a chronic, at times acute feeling of shame was a basic component of his personality.
- I don't see any shame in Snape's behaviour at all. On the contrary, I see arrogance and superiority. Yes, one can try to argue that these are to cover up his feelings of inadequacy, but I don't see that at all.
In the Bloomsbury chat, JKR called Snape "insecure and vulnerable." I think that is pretty much the facts and I feel that she does get that across in a very subtle way throughout the series. If Snape was insecure and vulnerable going into the Death Eaters, I don't see anything -- in particular given the remorse he ends up experiencing for his actions -- that would change that insecure and vulnerable person into a person characterized by arrogance and superiority. So I do think, especially given JKR's specific comments about Snape's vulnerability and insecurity, that the words and actions which appear to indicate arrogance are that very typcial cover-up for many insecure, but highly talented people.
PeskyPixie - Mar 17, 2008 4:31 pm (#1878 of 2617)
The man can't manage to take the 'laugh it off' approach when Neville dresses Boggart-Snape is his grandmother's dress, hat and purse. After this incident Snape bullies Neville 'worse than ever', which indicates 'arrogance and superiority', but I think there is a lot of insecurity beneath that.
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 5:32 pm (#1879 of 2617)
If we look at Snape as someone who is entirely dependent on DD for everything he does, that certainly increases DD's responsibility. I do not quite agree with the notion of this total dependence but at least it seems that whatever DD tells Snape to do, he tries to obediently follow his orders and if nobody else, DD can certainly contain Snape. During Snape's tantrum at the end of PoA, a few quiet words from DD are enough to silence him and Snape shakes hands with Sirius on DD's order at the end of GoF and at least tries to cooperate with him later. That makes it unlikely that DD ever tried to discuss Snape's relationship with and behaviour towards Harry with Snape seriously, which seems to be a grave mistake on his part, after all DD is a mentor to both Harry and Snape and of course he also wants them to cooperate for the "greater good". (Perhaps he should have put down "Transfiguration Today", told Snape to sit down and started a serious conversation.) He does say a few words now and then trying to mitigate the animosity between them but it is far from being enough.
"I don't see any shame in Snape's behaviour at all. On the contrary, I see arrogance and superiority." (Zelmia)
I understand if someone does not see this while looking at Snape's behaviour but if one tries to dig a bit deeper and find the probable reasons why he behaves like that, it is quite possible to find things which are not so striking at first sight. It is rather easy to point out Snape's many faults because they are really conspicuous but this is a complicated character and the deeper motivations behind his behaviour can be diverse and worth exploring a bit.
Superiority:
I don't find any sign of a feeling of superiority in Snape's behaviour. If someone really feels superior to others, he will not allow himself to get into numerous arguments about whose fault something was or who is brave or trustworthy, etc. Look at Umbridge: she feels to be superior to everyone at Hogwarts and never tries to argue with anyone or to try to convince anyone that she is right. Snape's various arguments with Harry, who is a student and twenty years younger than Snape, show how insecure Snape is. However hard he perhaps tries, he just cannot treat Harry with anything that remotely resembles superiority.
Arrogance:
I can agree that he is often arrogant. But his arrogance (directed mainly at Harry and Co. and the Marauders) is the sign (rather than the covering up) of his irritation and anxiety. Why is he irritated and anxious? Starting here, it is quite possible to eventually get to feelings like shame and insecurity.
Shame and guilt:
There are aspects of his behaviour (like his decision to agree to make himself an outcast) that can be analyzed as self-punishment, which suggests that he regards himself as someone who deserves to be castigated. His desperate secrecy, when in fact he can bear things that are (from an "objective" point of view) much worse than the probable consequences of a properly made confession, in itself indicates deep-rooted shame and vulnerability.
Victim:
HP is the story of several generations where various plot lines show the reader that everything has a reason and the reasons have their own reasons and so on - and any single incident or situation may have far-reaching consequences. Of course, sooner or later, everybody becomes responsible for their actions and choices but these actions and choices are still dependent on personality traits, which, in turn, are influenced by the person's experiences.
"At some point you have to start taking responsibility for your own actions/choices/behaviour. Snape never really does this until after Dumbledore's death." [/I]
I think he does. He is taking responsibility for his action early on when he tries to apologize for the M-word. This amounts to acknowledging that he did something wrong. (No success, but this is another question.) But the most striking example of Snape taking responsibility for his action is when he goes to DD on the hilltop - on his own account. One might analyze his behaviour in different ways but I don't think it can be denied that he is
1) telling DD exactly what wrong he did and taking the blame entirely 2) acknowledging the consequences of his behaviour 3) trying to prevent the impending tragedy 4) accepting any consequences with regard to himself that may result from his actions.
This is an early example, where DD's or anyone else's influence can be ruled out, and still Snape seems to be perfectly aware of his responsibility and is trying to act in accordance with it.
Of course, he still needs DD's guidance and help after that and he acquires a fully autonomous personality only after DD's death, or rather (in my view) after going through a type of emotional crisis and the realization of being betrayed by a blind trust in DD. But even while DD is alive, Snape is constantly trying to atone for the choices and the actions of his youth and he learns to feel responsibility for the various people whose life or safety is in his hands at a given moment.
PeskyPixie - Mar 17, 2008 7:59 pm (#1880 of 2617)
" ... but we learn from Sirius and Lupin that James only attacked Snape in retaliation, once he and Lily got together ("You couldn't expect James to take that lying down")." -zelmia
Funny, I never got the impression that Snape instigates and James of the recently deflated head only retaliates when attacked. From my understanding of the text, James and Severus each take pleasure in hexing the other.
It's the same thing with Petunia. Severus and Petunia are both prejudiced children who can't stand one another and are equally guilty of their mutual dislike. I wouldn't blame one over the other, although it is true that both James and Petunia instigate their respective troubles with Snape.
ETA: "I passed on some information to my boss a while back. And now he is about to murder the woman I love. Can you fix that for me?" as opposed to "My friend and her family are in terrible danger and it's all down to me. What can I do now to prevent their deaths?" -zelmia
I agree with this. While I commend Snape (as a Death Eater) for still being able to feel some form of love for a Muggleborn woman who rejects him for his rival, he in no way comprehends the emotional turmoil Lily would experience at the loss of her husband and child. Without comprehension, he is incapable of taking responsibility.
Zelmia, I think you imply that Snape passes the mess he creates onto Dumbledore when he should have taken the responsibility of saving Lily and her family onto himself. Is this correct, or a misinterpretation?
mona amon - Mar 18, 2008 12:06 am (#1881 of 2617)
Asking Voldemort to please not kill Lily isn't really "doing something" to protect her.
No, and he knows it, and that's why he comes to Dumbledore.
I don't think it's important that he didn't offer Dumbledore his services as soon as they start speaking, the man was obviously too distraught to string two words together. When Dumbledore asks him what he is prepared to do, he answers with an unconditional 'anything'. This could not have been because of anything Dumbledore said, it was already something he was more than willing to do.
However, I agree with you and Pesky that coming to Dumbledore to save Lily does not mean he was ready to take responsibility for his actions. In a way it is still a selfish request, "I don't want her to die, so you must save her." The turning point comes only after he's met Dumbledore.
He obviously regrets giving Voldemort the prophecy because it sent him after Lily, but there is no sign of general remorse until Dumbledore's "You disgust me!", when he seems to feel ashamed. I suppose that's the beginning of the reformation of Severus Snape.
Julia H. - Mar 18, 2008 12:38 am (#1882 of 2617)
"But whether or not Snape could have done anything to save the Potters himself, whether or not that would have been practical or logical isn't the point." (Zelmia)
I don't see how it cannot be a point. It was a matter of life and death and by turning to DD, he did what was likely to be the surest way to save Lily's life. He could have thought of something (what?) that he would have done alone but it does not seem likely that he would have succeeded. He could have done something heroic but totally impractical to ease his own guilt but it would not have been much good for the Potters. Warning the Potters and the Light side and specifically DD was essential. The last step that led to the Potters' death (and also to Sirius's imprisonment) was the stupid attempt of James and Sirius to outwit Voldemort without DD's help and by leaving DD out of it completely. (With DD as secret keeper, the Potters would have been as safe as possible under the circumstances because Voldemort could not get near DD.) I don't think Snape should have attempted something similar or that it would have been a responsible action if he had. And when DD asked him what he would do "in return", which was really meant as his own contribution, he did say "Anything", so at this point, the latest, he was ready to do something himself and he did take part in the protection of the Potters for a whole year before they were betrayed.
Sure, we can all make various suggestions regarding what he could have done better and taking responsibility was a process rather than an instantaneous reaction by him, but IMO he did attempt in the course of events to take responsibility for what he had done, although he did not and, with any realism, could not try to put things right alone. Of course, a lot depends on how broadly or narrowly we interpret the meaning of "taking responsibility". Later, vowing to protect Harry (and actually protecting Harry) as atonement was also a way of accepting responsibility and doing something about it. That he was motivated by this terrible remorse is also a sign of being motivated by fully felt responsibility. Again, it is possible to point out what he should have done otherwise, what he should have done better and he had a long way to go yet but it still indicates that taking responsibility for his actions/choices is not something that first occurred to him only after DD's death.
Julia H. - Mar 18, 2008 2:12 am (#1883 of 2617)
"In a way it is still a selfish request..." (Mona)
I can agree with most of your post but "selfish" is a strong word. He is motivated by love (and unreturned love as well). True love is not selfish. Snape at the moment is risking his life or freedom. Voldemort would kill him if he found out that he warned DD and for all he knows, DD may take him a prisoner or even kill him. DD is a very powerful wizard, even Voldemort is afraid of him. It is obvious in the book that Snape is terribly afraid as he is waiting for Dumbledore and he actually starts by saying "Don't kill me!", which means he thinks it absolutely possible that DD may want to kill him. In spite of this possibility, Snape takes the risk and goes to Dumbledore because he wants to save Lily. This is not how I imagine a selfish decision.
mona amon - Mar 18, 2008 3:45 am (#1884 of 2617)
Selfish because Voldemort can go about merrily murdering everyone else's loved ones, and Snape will still be a devoted follower. But when he threatens Lily, the woman he loves, he goes running to Dumbledore.
ETA: That means Severus didn't start changing until the encounter with Dumbledore. If Dumbledore had just said, "okee-doke, I'll protect her" and disapparated, Sev would quite possibly have returned to his death eater ways.
Julia H. - Mar 18, 2008 5:11 am (#1885 of 2617)
OK, I see what you mean when you say "selfish"...
I think even if DD had let him go back to his DE ways, he would have watched out for any news concerning Lily and probably would have gone to DD again if he had found out anything that was of importance regarding her safety. In any case, I don't think Snape would have remained a devoted follower of LV, who continued to threaten (and eventually killed) the woman he loved, although leaving LV would have been obviously difficult. (He could easily have ended up dead just like Regulus.) But of course I agree that the chance (and the reproach and the task and everything else) that he got from DD was essential in Snape's true reformation and Snape realized and never forgot this while he lived (and that is why he was willing to sympathize with Narcissa when she was in a similar situation). DD, however, probably gave him this chance because he thought: "This young man's soul is not yet so damaged. I will not have it ripped apart if I have a chance to save it." Ultimately then it was not only Snape's own love but also DD's trust that saved him.
wynnleaf - Mar 18, 2008 6:30 am (#1886 of 2617)
I think it's important to remember what it could have potentially cost Snape just to go to Dumbledore in the first place. This isn't the same as if he just sent DD an anonymous message. By going to DD and confessing that he had taken the prophecy to LV, he was confessing to criminal activity and being a Death Eater. When Dumbledore first appeared, Snape was fearful that he'd be killed outright, and why not? After all, he was a Death Eater. And even if DD didn't kill him, DD was an extremely powerful wizard and easily able to capture Snape and send him to Azkaban. And by the way, Crouch was by that time allowing unforgiveables to be used in the fight against LV. Snape could assume that if DD sent him to the aurors, they might use unforgiveables in order to gain more information from him -- in fact, from what we know of Crouch, they probably would have done so.
So by going to Dumbledore to beg his help, Snape had to assume that he could either be killed, or if not killed, almost certainly captured and imprisoned. Why would he offer his services when one would assume that no right-minded person would trust him to actually help in whatever plan or protection DD devised? How would he be able to help from Azkaban, after all?
Personally, I think Snape's willingness to give up his life or at least his freedom to make sure someone with the power to do it would help protect Lily is quite a "taking responsibility." I think it odd that he's considered not to have taken responsibility because he didn't immediately offer to help out, when he had already offered up what could have been his life or liberty.
I'm sure Snape never had any notion that DD would allow him to go back and serve with LV. This no meeting under a white flag of truce after all. Basically, Snape was turning himself in to Dumbledore and hoping that DD allowed him to live long enough to give the information necessary to protect Lily.
Is that selfish? Well, yes the focus is on Lily, rather than the whole family. But that's the one and only person Snape loves. And James was the guy that persecuted him for years. Sure, Harry was just a baby, but it's not like Snape has some big experience with caring and concern for others. All he knows of that appears to be his love for Lily. It's not good that he doesn't care about the others, but it's rather understandable why he is as he is.
But do I call that selfish? Not exactly. How can it be a selfish motivation when he's, as far as he knows, giving up possibly his life and certainly his liberty in order to do it?
What if he had been sent to Azkaban? Bad ole Snape, selfishly gave himself up to life imprisonment because he only thought about Lily rather than James and Harry. Right, that's so selfish. Selfish is considering or being motivated only by what matters to you. But that's not the same as only acting for those whom one loves. Was Lily selfish in her sacrifice for Harry, just because she did it because she loved him? Is Harry selfish in his motivations to defeat LV, because he is mainly working to keep the people he loves safe? There are certainly people who are willing to risk and sacrifice for people that they don't even know or care about, but a great many people are primarily motivated, when risking their lives, by those that they do love or care for deeply.
Orion - Mar 18, 2008 8:44 am (#1887 of 2617)
"Selfish because Voldemort can go about merrily murdering everyone else's loved ones, and Snape will still be a devoted follower. But when he threatens Lily, the woman he loves, he goes running to Dumbledore. (mona)
But it's normal, isn't it? In all the cultures of the world, in an emergency people grab their loved ones and run, and not complete strangers. It's considered mentally healthy behaviour to prefer family and other close ones.
I've asked that already on another thread - the Slughorn thread: What do you expect, saintliness? (No, not you, mona, it's a general question. ) There will always be people with an infallible moral compass, but very few of the people I know meet such high standards as some forumers demand on this thread, and I know for sure that I don't meet these standards, and I ask myself who does?
mona amon - Mar 18, 2008 9:00 am (#1888 of 2617)
Orion, this is not a natural calamity or accident where people grab their loved ones and run. (And even these people feel sorry afterwards for the people who died, once they've finished feeling thankful that their loved ones are safe.)
Here we have Voldemort cold-bloodedly murdering enough people to make an army of inferi and Snape does not care, until Lily is threatened.
I was trying to show that just the act of coming to Dumbledore with the plea to save Lily is not proof that Severus had changed. I think Julia has understood what I was trying to say.
(Edited)
And good point Pesky.
PeskyPixie - Mar 18, 2008 9:05 am (#1889 of 2617)
Even after Lily is threatened he lacks the ability to comprehend how she will feel once she loses her loved ones.
Julia H. - Mar 18, 2008 1:43 pm (#1890 of 2617)
Great post, Wynnleaf.
"Basically, Snape was turning himself in to Dumbledore and hoping that DD allowed him to live long enough to give the information necessary to protect Lily."
I'm glad you mentioned that because this thought was lurking in the back of my mind when I read this scene. I think Snape was quite surprised when DD in the end let him go free and even trusted him with something to do for the protection of the Potters. Not because he was not ready to do anything but because he expected to end up a prisoner or dead. (This is another thing that makes it unlikely that he wanted to save Lily for himself: he could not very well have taken advantage of her survival if he had been dead or in Azkaban.) But Lily's protection was more important to him than his own life or safety or freedom. Actually, as the meeting started, DD set up the rules quite in accordance with this expectation: He arrived with "a blinding, jagged jet of white light" and "Snape had dropped to his knees and his wand had flown out of his hand". Then DD said it had not been his intention to kill Snape, but it was still not ruled out for the future. Neither was imprisonment ruled out. I don't think DD ruled it out at least for quite a while. JKR usually describes the characters' movements as they talk quite precisely but there is no mention of Snape standing up during the scene, and towards the end of the scene "Snape said nothing, but merely looked up at Dumbledore". Up. The situation indicates that Snape had surrendered completely, wandless and on his knees, begging for someone else's life, while DD was standing above him with his wand ready. Finally, when Snape said "Anything", he still had now idea what that would mean to him, not even whether it was doing something for the Potters or going to the aurors or whatever else DD might want him to do.
"Even after Lily is threatened he lacks the ability to comprehend how she will feel once she loses her loved ones." (Pesky)
I'm not so sure about that. I know he thinks only about Lily and mentions only Lily but perhaps he does not want Lily to be forced to watch the slaughter of her family. After all, Snape has already got LV's promise to spare Lily and the easy thing for him to do would be to be satisfied with this. There must be a reason why he is not satisfied. Voldemort really intends to spare Lily - as long as she is "reasonable", and if he has happened to mention this to Snape (and why not?), it may have dawned on Snape perhaps that Lily might not be "reasonable" in this situation. Why? Because she could not bear to watch while her loved ones are being murdered. If Snape gets as far as that, then he already comprehends at least something of Lily's probable feelings and reactions. With all his bad choices behind him and with LV's promise in his pocket, there must be some reason why Snape chooses the hard way and takes all the risk that going to Dumbledore may mean and there must also be a reason why Dumbledore thinks that this desperate young man with the Dark Mark on his arm can be trusted and is worth saving.
Of course, not everybody is DD and with some effort everything can be explained as due to some ignoble motivation: one can say that instead of risking his life and liberty, "the biggest issue" for him is not to be killed (why is he going there in the first place?) or that he does not really mean 'anything', when he says so (perhaps because he is so bad that we can't believe a word he says) but, as it happens, he is going to live the rest of his life fulfilling that promise. If this does not prove that someone means a promise seriously, I don't know what does.
Mona,
I don't think I can make a difference between caring for one's reputation "in general" and specifically caring about not being known as a murderer. Why should he care for not being known as a murderer by others (since he himself knew he was not a murderer) if he does not mind what others think of him? When I say trust and respect, I refer to an absolutely basic kind that people with a clean past can take for granted. A murderer, a traitor is not trusted and is not respected.
"'the more he cared about his reputation, the bigger the sacrifice'"
I never meant to say that. I made a difference between caring about his reputation at all and not caring about his reputation at all. In the first case the sacrifice is more difficult to make, so it is a greater and deeper sacrifice. I don't think this thing can really be graded.
"Julia, I feel you are giving him credit for being a more reasonable, mature character than he actually is. You are portraying him as someone who wanted to shake off his past and move on. I never got the impression that he was willing to move on. To me he's an extremely repressed individual who has turned his back on life and retreated to the dungeons."
I don't know. I am not sure how mature and reasonable one must be in order to want to shake off his past. He has turned his back on life and retreated to the dungeons but reputation is precisely something that goes beyond life. Even if he does not care for a lot of things that other people care for, he may still care for the name he leaves behind. Besides, he is not suicidal, so he clearly finds some value in living, however unusual or unconventional this may be.
Despite his maturity problems, Snape is not a child, so I don't think it is fair to say he can never feel or act as an adult because he is not mature or reasonable. After all, he accepts a huge responsibility as a spy and as a protector of life (Harry's and others'). I think just as much as Harry's job in life is to defeat Voldemort, Snape's job in life is to protect other people. Snape carries out his duties with extreme reliability and these duties do not only require abilities (magical and other) and bravery but also a certain level of maturity and a sense of responsibility.
I can accept that confessing his guilt to Harry would have been the best way to shake off his past but on the one hand, I can understand why it was so extremely difficult (not talking about an excuse only a reason) and on the other hand, I think actually "moving on" would also require forgiving himself (as a next step, clearly, once he got Harry's forgiveness) and that would probably have been even more difficult. Trying to shake off his past, yes, but moving on would still be far away. Having said this, I think the fact that he did not have the strength to do this single most important thing in order to shake off his past does not mean that he did not want or that he did not try to shake it off in other ways. After all, he did other things that can be regarded as such attempts.
"It may not have made a difference to Harry, but it was something Severus should have done for himself."
When I come to think about it, he had the strength or bravery to do amazing things, including facing Voldemort, deceiving him for years, confessing his guilt to DD, enduring others' knowledge of his DE past in general, AKing DD and accepting the loss of his reputation. Being regarded as a cowardly traitor and murderer means being regarded as something far, far worse than anything people would have thought him to be on the basis of his secret guilt. Still, he had the strength to endure it all for others: Lily, Harry, DD, the students etc.; but he could not do this single confession of guilt for himself, at least not until he had gone through with all the other things listed above and not until it became a part of something he had to do for others.
mona amon - Mar 16, 2008 11:07 am (#1862 of 2617)
Why should he care for not being known as a murderer by others (since he himself knew he was not a murderer) if he does not mind what others think of him? (Julia)
I never said he absolutely does not care for others opinions (ok, maybe I said it once in a fit of overenthusiasm, but I qualified my words in my next post). let's say he doesn't let people's opinions become an important part of his life, but he draws the line at being considered a murderer, traitor and coward. That's way too extreme. You've said it yourself in the last part of your post.
"'the more he cared about his reputation, the bigger the sacrifice'"
I never meant to say that.
No, I think it was Wynnleaf who said something like that, and since I was answering both your posts together...
I made a difference between caring about his reputation at all and not caring about his reputation at all.
What about the person who does care about his reputation to a certain extent, but not much, for instance? He cannot be classified along with someone who is obsessed with his reputation, yet they both care about their reputation, only in varying degrees.
I am not sure how mature and reasonable one must be in order to want to shake off his past.
Making efforts to shake off one's past and move on is itself a mature and reasonable thing to do. Severus never did it.
Snape is not a child, so I don't think it is fair to say he can never feel or act as an adult because he is not mature or reasonable.
I never said that!
Snape carries out his duties with extreme reliability and these duties do not only require abilities (magical and other) and bravery but also a certain level of maturity and a sense of responsibility.
Well I wasn't accusing him of acting like a six year old in every situation. But he was pretty immature on the whole, holding on to old grudges for dear life, not being able to see beyond Harry's superficial resemblance to James, and so on.
I can accept that confessing his guilt to Harry would have been the best way to shake off his past...
Not just the best way, but the only way (for his own personal redemption). Repaying his debt to society is a different matter.
wynnleaf - Mar 16, 2008 12:31 pm (#1863 of 2617)
I don't think anyone ever said or meant that Snape was "obsessed" with his reputation. Maybe we're getting a bit "obsessed" in talking about it , but I don't think anyone means that Snape was obsessed with it. What I think some of us are trying to say is that Snape doesn't have a great many things he cares about other than fulfilling his duty to Lily, but some things he does seem to value are being respected among the Order for his work in that area, and respect he feels should be his in his job. Further he seems to value the trust Dumbledore has for him and that others realize that Dumbledore trusts him. That being important to him in no way equates to obsessing over it.
In my opinion, Snape makes many sacrifices in his work for the Order. A sacrifice is when you give something up for something else. Every thing Snape gives up in order to fulfill his work is yet another sacrifice. If he values the respect of the rest of the Order, the respect of the world at large for his position at Hogwarts, and that others know he is highly trusted by Dumbledore, then he is making several more sacrifices if he willing gives up those things, than if he in losing those things, he wasn't losing anything of much importance to him. If being call a coward is particularly distressing to Snape, then his willingly doing something that will make others think him a coward is an additional sacrifice than if he didn't care in the first place.
In these ways, Snape's caring about the respect, trust, etc. that others have for him gives him additional sacrifices (because he's giving up things he cares about), when he agrees to kill DD. Every thing that he cares about and yet gives up to help the Order is another sacrifice. In that way, if Snape values the respect of being a professor at Hogwarts, a trusted member of the Order, a trusted confidant of DD, the knowledge that he can show others he's not a coward (like, in his view, Black), then when he gives those things up those are added sacrifices in addition to whatever other sacrifices of physical safety, stress, etc., he's also making.
Julia H. - Mar 16, 2008 4:19 pm (#1864 of 2617)
I agree with Wynleaf. Snape is not obsessed (we clearly are) with his reputation - if he were, he would not sacrifice it for anything - but his life is such that it becomes an issue for him more than for others and not only because of his past but also because he has to make the choice which involves the sacrifice of his reputation. This is far from being an obsession. Actually I don't think that many other characters would be likely to ever be able to make a similar sacrifice, so no, Snape is clearly not obsessed with his reputation. He can give it up for other things. I remember saying it before that in spite of wanting to be trusted, Snape is more willing to deserve DD's trust and to deserve the second chance he got than to keep this second chance. This is why he can agree to AK DD. No obsession here. Still in several scenes it seems (to me at least) that it is very important to him to get people's trust and respect despite his DE past. Not as an obsession but perhaps as something (perhaps the last and only thing) that helps him to live. He does not hope to win happiness, love or friendship but he lives among people and he has to cooperate with them on an everyday basis, so it is not surprising that he wants to be a trusted member of this community rather than a suspected or despised one. I think one of the reasons why he is so much attached to DD is that DD trusts him, understands him and knows him for what he really is. IMO this shows that it is very, very difficult, perhaps next to impossible to completely turn one's back on everything that may be a link to other people and to life and still go on living. (If he does not care for anything at all, he could just as well jump off the Astronomy Tower.) Valuing even just one relationship is valuing a link to life and to other people.
"Making efforts to shake off one's past and move on is itself a mature and reasonable thing to do. Severus never did it."
If the only possible way of making these efforts is making the confession to Harry, then he never did it before the last moments of his life. If we accept that "making efforts" may involve doing other things (even if one does not agree that these other things are the right things), then he certainly made efforts. But I don't think he could ever have really moved on (confession or not) because he would not have been able to get rid of his own guilt. Let's face it: Snape felt a life-long love for a woman who never returned his feelings, who became another man's wife and then died; and many years later he still loved her. Snape became "Dumbledore's man through and through" in his early twenties and after that his loyalties were never shaken despite all the sacrifice that it meant to him and he was still following DD's orders when DD was already dead. The third great feeling/theme in his life was his terrible guilt. Is it really likely that he was ever to let go of it, forgive himself and move on? Not even Harry's forgiveness could undo what happened and Snape knew this.
"Well I wasn't accusing him of acting like a six year old in every situation. But he was pretty immature on the whole, holding on to old grudges for dear life, not being able to see beyond Harry's superficial resemblance to James, and so on."
He was immature in certain (emotional) areas and could act in an immature way but in other areas he acted with an adult's maturity and responsibility and I see no reason to suppose that he was not mature enough to understand or appreciate what it means to be trusted or respected or to be able to wish he could get rid of the shame of his terrible past.
I find it possible that Snape accepted the cruel consequences of AK'ing DD - like being despised and made an outcast for something he had done for the noblest of reasons - as a way of (self-)punishment for his real guilt, which he felt to be unforgivable and which he could not confess. But as I said earlier, he did confess it when the confession was not only about his own redemption but became a part of his duty.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 16, 2008 6:03 pm (#1865 of 2617)
I think Snape felt (even later) that it would be absolutely humiliating and unbearable to tell a teenage boy (who could not have the kind of understanding wisdom that DD had) - or let others tell him - that he loved his mother (who, however, happened to choose James, of all people), that he had caused his parents' death and what remorse he felt after realizing what he had done. Julia H ?
are you saying that Snape thought a teenage boy could not have the kind of understanding wisdom that Dumbledore did? But you don't necessarily think that yourself? It's probably just me, but I'm not sure what you mean. Zelmia
A teenage boy in Harry's position could not be expected to have the wisdom that Dumbledore has. Dumbledore at 17 did not have the wisdom that he acquired later. Harry idolized has parents and hated Snape. It would not be normal for a teenager who has never fallen in love to accept the fact that his parents actually dated other people before they got married. Given that Harry hated Snape, there was no way that he could accept the idea that his mother actually liked Snape. We saw how Harry felt about his father after he found out James was a bully. He wasn't too impressed with Snape calling his mother a mudblood.
Snape believed that if Harry knew the truth that Harry would never forgive him, and I think if Snape just told Harry or allowed Dumbledore to tell Harry it is unlikely that Harry would have forgiven Snape. In part this is because Snape really hasn't forgiven himself so how could anybody else forgive him. I think the only reason Harry has forgiven Snape was because of the memories Snape has shared with Harry before he died.
wynnleaf - Mar 16, 2008 8:37 pm (#1866 of 2617)
Yes, but the examples you mention, zelmia, are Harry being able to understand people either making honest mistakes, or people making not-so-good choices while their motives were at least mostly good. How much would he understand Snape making such horrific choices like having good friends among kids who eventually become Death Eaters, joining Voldemort eventually, taking a prophecy to LV that would surely get LV to target someone, and so on?
And the problem is that Snape wasn't a particularly nice person. Harry (like most readers) quickly forgives Lupin even though Lupin concealed info that could have gotten Harry or other kids killed, mainly because Lupin seems so apologetic and anyhow, Lupin is really nice and supportive of Harry.
Snape is Snape, even if he had allowed Harry to know the past from the beginning. Even if Snape hadn't targeted Harry with sarcasm, insults, etc., he still probably wouldn't have been an especially nice person, and somehow I doubt if he'd ever have been the supportive encourager that Lupin was to Harry.
So even if Snape hadn't decided to loathe Harry because of being James' son, I just can't see Snape being the sympathetic sort of person that Harry would "understand" about Snape joining LV and giving LV the info that got the Potters killed. Nor do I think it nearly so likely that Harry would think the story of Snape loving Lily particularly sympathetic. It's one thing to see the story play out in Snape's memories. It kind of overrode Harry's previous view of Snape. But quite another for just the story told to Harry to override the real-life, in the flesh, harsh and difficult natured teacher Harry experienced daily -- even if that teacher wasn't targeting that harshness at Harry in particular.
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 1:53 am (#1867 of 2617)
On the one hand, perhaps the point is not only what Harry would or would not understand but whether Snape expects him to understand or not. (His expectation influences his decision more than what we, readers, know about Harry.) He does not expect him to understand before even knowing him and he does not get to know him for the sympathetic person Harry can really be. Certainly not all teenage boys would be sympathetic. Besides, again, this is the reason why Snape hates himself, so he expects the same from everyone else.
On the other hand, I agree that Harry would not have been so sympathetic in this case without seeing Snape's memories. (I guess a lot of people in the real world would benefit from the chance of a trip into the minds of people they dislike.) Let's see Zelmia's example: Harry is in a rage and he still listens to Dumbledore, understands and forgives him. To start with, Harry loves Dumbledore very much, which is important in his understanding reaction. Harry can accept most of what DD says and forgive DD for having kept important secrets from him. Then it is rather conspicuous that however hard DD tries to point out Snape's real role in the story: that Snape was not the cause of Sirius's death, that Snape did all he could to save them all, that the occlumency lessons ended because Snape was a seriously wounded person (and Harry actually has some idea of it now), that Snape, in front of Umbridge, could not have shown any understanding of the situation; Harry does not care and keeps blaming Snape for Sirius's death (yes, in order to avoid having to blame himself, but still he does) and the next time he sees Snape, he actually thinks that in spite of what DD says, he will NEVER FORGIVE HIM.
mona amon - Mar 17, 2008 3:57 am (#1868 of 2617)
The point isn't how Harry would have reacted to the news or whether he would have forgiven Snape or not or what reaction Snape expected from Harry. He should have told him anyway, or at least made the decision that he would tell him some day when the time was right. "Despise me if you will, but this is what I did."
He did not have to tell him the minute he set eyes on him. In fact he would have had to discuss with Dumbledore which would be the right time to tell him because it involved the Prophecy information that Dumbledore was keeping from Harry.
He had to tell Harry only the part about being a DE once, and carrying the Prophecy to Voldemort. He didn't have to tell Harry anything about being in love with his mom, if he wanted to keep that private.
I don't think anyone ever said or meant that Snape was "obsessed" with his reputation. (Wynnleaf)
I didn't say that anyone said or meant that Snape was "obsessed" with his reputation. I used 'person obsessed with his reputation' only as an example, it didn't refer to anyone in the HP books.
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 4:25 am (#1869 of 2617)
"The point isn't how Harry would have reacted to the news or whether he would have forgiven Snape or not or what reaction Snape expected from Harry. He should have told him anyway, or at least made the decision that he would tell him some day when the time was right. "Despise me if you will, but this is what I did."" (Mona)
It is one thing to say what Snape should have done and another thing to find (understand) the reason why he did not do it.
Regardless whether we want to excuse Snape or not, we can still talk about his probable reasons for not telling Harry and the possible consequences of telling Harry.
mona amon - Mar 17, 2008 5:16 am (#1870 of 2617)
All right, talk away and I'll continue to find fault with him for not being the person he could have/should have been!
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 5:23 am (#1871 of 2617)
We all know we can find fault with him... Granted, he should have told Harry but it is interesting to know why he did not do it.
mona amon - Mar 17, 2008 5:47 am (#1872 of 2617)
Agreed!
IMO, he didn't tell him because he was too neurotic, too repressed. He didn't want to open up to anyone. He didn't want to have to handle all the emotional issues that a confession would involve.
But I'll have to think about it a bit more.
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 6:00 am (#1873 of 2617)
"He didn't want to have to handle all the emotional issues that a confession would involve." (Mona)
A very good point.
Orion - Mar 17, 2008 6:48 am (#1874 of 2617)
He didn't tell Harry because a chronic, at times acute feeling of shame was a basic component of his personality. First his miserable childhood, then his status as pet victim of the school stars, then his atrocious decision to join LV, then his prophecy blabbing, then his lonely life at Hogwarts (again this place). The last thing he needs is being condemned by a first year brat out of the James gene pool.
I know someone who was regularly beaten by both his parents as a child and who was terribly ashamed of his home and who is still mortally ashamed of his childhood to the point of being incapable of leading a normal life. Snape is too damaged to come clean.
Still, it would have been the best solution, right away in Harry's first year, with DD as a polite mediator. (Would DD have gone to all the trouble to sit down with the two and keep them from going at each other's throats?) First thing DD should have done, sit down with Snape before Harry arrived and set up rules of behaviour. He knew him, he could have intervened before the mutual animosity became so strong that they virtually couldn't talk to each other any more.
DD could have said something to Harry like "Harry, there is something you have to know. Professor Snape is involved in the tragic events which lead to the deaths of your parents. He was, due to an inexcusable youthful stupidity, once a follower of Lord Voldemort, and gave him an information which caused Voldemort to hunt your parents down. You should also know that Professor Snape and your mother were childhood friends, and that he tried to protect your family, but tragically our protection went wrong. He was absolutely shattered by the death of your parents and full of remorse, and he has agreed to try to make up for his terrible mistake by watching over you and to keep you safe from harm."
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 7:33 am (#1875 of 2617)
"He didn't tell Harry because a chronic, at times acute feeling of shame was a basic component of his personality." (Orion)
I see some people are getting to the depth of it. I wholeheartedly agree with you, Orion.
"DD could have said something to Harry like..."
Yes, this would have been a nice and tactful way to handle it. You have captured the tragedy of Snape's story excellently.
Orion - Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm (#1876 of 2617)
But DD didn't do that. He didn't find it necessary to have a very stern word with Snape before Harry's arrival, and he didn't find it necessary to have a word with the two of them. Why? Why does a teacher get away with such an amount of bullying?
First, the parents are far away, or, in Harry's case, nonexistent. Muggle parents would have come down on Snape like a ton of bricks.
Second, because DD is just DD, he lets things run as far as possible without intervening and leaves the day-to-day-business to his heads of house, because he is much too preoccupied with the "greater good" or whatever. DD doesn't get that it's not exactly helpful if he lets the relationship between his two most important allies deteriorate to hate and mutual secrecy. Some more work at the beginning would have done wonders. Something like "and you won't hold it against this boy if he looks or behaves like his father. No, not even if he is the same bully as his father. We have an agreement, dear, and don't you forget it."
wynnleaf - Mar 17, 2008 4:18 pm (#1877 of 2617)
He didn't tell Harry because a chronic, at times acute feeling of shame was a basic component of his personality.
- I don't see any shame in Snape's behaviour at all. On the contrary, I see arrogance and superiority. Yes, one can try to argue that these are to cover up his feelings of inadequacy, but I don't see that at all.
In the Bloomsbury chat, JKR called Snape "insecure and vulnerable." I think that is pretty much the facts and I feel that she does get that across in a very subtle way throughout the series. If Snape was insecure and vulnerable going into the Death Eaters, I don't see anything -- in particular given the remorse he ends up experiencing for his actions -- that would change that insecure and vulnerable person into a person characterized by arrogance and superiority. So I do think, especially given JKR's specific comments about Snape's vulnerability and insecurity, that the words and actions which appear to indicate arrogance are that very typcial cover-up for many insecure, but highly talented people.
PeskyPixie - Mar 17, 2008 4:31 pm (#1878 of 2617)
The man can't manage to take the 'laugh it off' approach when Neville dresses Boggart-Snape is his grandmother's dress, hat and purse. After this incident Snape bullies Neville 'worse than ever', which indicates 'arrogance and superiority', but I think there is a lot of insecurity beneath that.
Julia H. - Mar 17, 2008 5:32 pm (#1879 of 2617)
If we look at Snape as someone who is entirely dependent on DD for everything he does, that certainly increases DD's responsibility. I do not quite agree with the notion of this total dependence but at least it seems that whatever DD tells Snape to do, he tries to obediently follow his orders and if nobody else, DD can certainly contain Snape. During Snape's tantrum at the end of PoA, a few quiet words from DD are enough to silence him and Snape shakes hands with Sirius on DD's order at the end of GoF and at least tries to cooperate with him later. That makes it unlikely that DD ever tried to discuss Snape's relationship with and behaviour towards Harry with Snape seriously, which seems to be a grave mistake on his part, after all DD is a mentor to both Harry and Snape and of course he also wants them to cooperate for the "greater good". (Perhaps he should have put down "Transfiguration Today", told Snape to sit down and started a serious conversation.) He does say a few words now and then trying to mitigate the animosity between them but it is far from being enough.
"I don't see any shame in Snape's behaviour at all. On the contrary, I see arrogance and superiority." (Zelmia)
I understand if someone does not see this while looking at Snape's behaviour but if one tries to dig a bit deeper and find the probable reasons why he behaves like that, it is quite possible to find things which are not so striking at first sight. It is rather easy to point out Snape's many faults because they are really conspicuous but this is a complicated character and the deeper motivations behind his behaviour can be diverse and worth exploring a bit.
Superiority:
I don't find any sign of a feeling of superiority in Snape's behaviour. If someone really feels superior to others, he will not allow himself to get into numerous arguments about whose fault something was or who is brave or trustworthy, etc. Look at Umbridge: she feels to be superior to everyone at Hogwarts and never tries to argue with anyone or to try to convince anyone that she is right. Snape's various arguments with Harry, who is a student and twenty years younger than Snape, show how insecure Snape is. However hard he perhaps tries, he just cannot treat Harry with anything that remotely resembles superiority.
Arrogance:
I can agree that he is often arrogant. But his arrogance (directed mainly at Harry and Co. and the Marauders) is the sign (rather than the covering up) of his irritation and anxiety. Why is he irritated and anxious? Starting here, it is quite possible to eventually get to feelings like shame and insecurity.
Shame and guilt:
There are aspects of his behaviour (like his decision to agree to make himself an outcast) that can be analyzed as self-punishment, which suggests that he regards himself as someone who deserves to be castigated. His desperate secrecy, when in fact he can bear things that are (from an "objective" point of view) much worse than the probable consequences of a properly made confession, in itself indicates deep-rooted shame and vulnerability.
Victim:
HP is the story of several generations where various plot lines show the reader that everything has a reason and the reasons have their own reasons and so on - and any single incident or situation may have far-reaching consequences. Of course, sooner or later, everybody becomes responsible for their actions and choices but these actions and choices are still dependent on personality traits, which, in turn, are influenced by the person's experiences.
"At some point you have to start taking responsibility for your own actions/choices/behaviour. Snape never really does this until after Dumbledore's death." [/I]
I think he does. He is taking responsibility for his action early on when he tries to apologize for the M-word. This amounts to acknowledging that he did something wrong. (No success, but this is another question.) But the most striking example of Snape taking responsibility for his action is when he goes to DD on the hilltop - on his own account. One might analyze his behaviour in different ways but I don't think it can be denied that he is
1) telling DD exactly what wrong he did and taking the blame entirely 2) acknowledging the consequences of his behaviour 3) trying to prevent the impending tragedy 4) accepting any consequences with regard to himself that may result from his actions.
This is an early example, where DD's or anyone else's influence can be ruled out, and still Snape seems to be perfectly aware of his responsibility and is trying to act in accordance with it.
Of course, he still needs DD's guidance and help after that and he acquires a fully autonomous personality only after DD's death, or rather (in my view) after going through a type of emotional crisis and the realization of being betrayed by a blind trust in DD. But even while DD is alive, Snape is constantly trying to atone for the choices and the actions of his youth and he learns to feel responsibility for the various people whose life or safety is in his hands at a given moment.
PeskyPixie - Mar 17, 2008 7:59 pm (#1880 of 2617)
" ... but we learn from Sirius and Lupin that James only attacked Snape in retaliation, once he and Lily got together ("You couldn't expect James to take that lying down")." -zelmia
Funny, I never got the impression that Snape instigates and James of the recently deflated head only retaliates when attacked. From my understanding of the text, James and Severus each take pleasure in hexing the other.
It's the same thing with Petunia. Severus and Petunia are both prejudiced children who can't stand one another and are equally guilty of their mutual dislike. I wouldn't blame one over the other, although it is true that both James and Petunia instigate their respective troubles with Snape.
ETA: "I passed on some information to my boss a while back. And now he is about to murder the woman I love. Can you fix that for me?" as opposed to "My friend and her family are in terrible danger and it's all down to me. What can I do now to prevent their deaths?" -zelmia
I agree with this. While I commend Snape (as a Death Eater) for still being able to feel some form of love for a Muggleborn woman who rejects him for his rival, he in no way comprehends the emotional turmoil Lily would experience at the loss of her husband and child. Without comprehension, he is incapable of taking responsibility.
Zelmia, I think you imply that Snape passes the mess he creates onto Dumbledore when he should have taken the responsibility of saving Lily and her family onto himself. Is this correct, or a misinterpretation?
mona amon - Mar 18, 2008 12:06 am (#1881 of 2617)
Asking Voldemort to please not kill Lily isn't really "doing something" to protect her.
No, and he knows it, and that's why he comes to Dumbledore.
I don't think it's important that he didn't offer Dumbledore his services as soon as they start speaking, the man was obviously too distraught to string two words together. When Dumbledore asks him what he is prepared to do, he answers with an unconditional 'anything'. This could not have been because of anything Dumbledore said, it was already something he was more than willing to do.
However, I agree with you and Pesky that coming to Dumbledore to save Lily does not mean he was ready to take responsibility for his actions. In a way it is still a selfish request, "I don't want her to die, so you must save her." The turning point comes only after he's met Dumbledore.
He obviously regrets giving Voldemort the prophecy because it sent him after Lily, but there is no sign of general remorse until Dumbledore's "You disgust me!", when he seems to feel ashamed. I suppose that's the beginning of the reformation of Severus Snape.
Julia H. - Mar 18, 2008 12:38 am (#1882 of 2617)
"But whether or not Snape could have done anything to save the Potters himself, whether or not that would have been practical or logical isn't the point." (Zelmia)
I don't see how it cannot be a point. It was a matter of life and death and by turning to DD, he did what was likely to be the surest way to save Lily's life. He could have thought of something (what?) that he would have done alone but it does not seem likely that he would have succeeded. He could have done something heroic but totally impractical to ease his own guilt but it would not have been much good for the Potters. Warning the Potters and the Light side and specifically DD was essential. The last step that led to the Potters' death (and also to Sirius's imprisonment) was the stupid attempt of James and Sirius to outwit Voldemort without DD's help and by leaving DD out of it completely. (With DD as secret keeper, the Potters would have been as safe as possible under the circumstances because Voldemort could not get near DD.) I don't think Snape should have attempted something similar or that it would have been a responsible action if he had. And when DD asked him what he would do "in return", which was really meant as his own contribution, he did say "Anything", so at this point, the latest, he was ready to do something himself and he did take part in the protection of the Potters for a whole year before they were betrayed.
Sure, we can all make various suggestions regarding what he could have done better and taking responsibility was a process rather than an instantaneous reaction by him, but IMO he did attempt in the course of events to take responsibility for what he had done, although he did not and, with any realism, could not try to put things right alone. Of course, a lot depends on how broadly or narrowly we interpret the meaning of "taking responsibility". Later, vowing to protect Harry (and actually protecting Harry) as atonement was also a way of accepting responsibility and doing something about it. That he was motivated by this terrible remorse is also a sign of being motivated by fully felt responsibility. Again, it is possible to point out what he should have done otherwise, what he should have done better and he had a long way to go yet but it still indicates that taking responsibility for his actions/choices is not something that first occurred to him only after DD's death.
Julia H. - Mar 18, 2008 2:12 am (#1883 of 2617)
"In a way it is still a selfish request..." (Mona)
I can agree with most of your post but "selfish" is a strong word. He is motivated by love (and unreturned love as well). True love is not selfish. Snape at the moment is risking his life or freedom. Voldemort would kill him if he found out that he warned DD and for all he knows, DD may take him a prisoner or even kill him. DD is a very powerful wizard, even Voldemort is afraid of him. It is obvious in the book that Snape is terribly afraid as he is waiting for Dumbledore and he actually starts by saying "Don't kill me!", which means he thinks it absolutely possible that DD may want to kill him. In spite of this possibility, Snape takes the risk and goes to Dumbledore because he wants to save Lily. This is not how I imagine a selfish decision.
mona amon - Mar 18, 2008 3:45 am (#1884 of 2617)
Selfish because Voldemort can go about merrily murdering everyone else's loved ones, and Snape will still be a devoted follower. But when he threatens Lily, the woman he loves, he goes running to Dumbledore.
ETA: That means Severus didn't start changing until the encounter with Dumbledore. If Dumbledore had just said, "okee-doke, I'll protect her" and disapparated, Sev would quite possibly have returned to his death eater ways.
Julia H. - Mar 18, 2008 5:11 am (#1885 of 2617)
OK, I see what you mean when you say "selfish"...
I think even if DD had let him go back to his DE ways, he would have watched out for any news concerning Lily and probably would have gone to DD again if he had found out anything that was of importance regarding her safety. In any case, I don't think Snape would have remained a devoted follower of LV, who continued to threaten (and eventually killed) the woman he loved, although leaving LV would have been obviously difficult. (He could easily have ended up dead just like Regulus.) But of course I agree that the chance (and the reproach and the task and everything else) that he got from DD was essential in Snape's true reformation and Snape realized and never forgot this while he lived (and that is why he was willing to sympathize with Narcissa when she was in a similar situation). DD, however, probably gave him this chance because he thought: "This young man's soul is not yet so damaged. I will not have it ripped apart if I have a chance to save it." Ultimately then it was not only Snape's own love but also DD's trust that saved him.
wynnleaf - Mar 18, 2008 6:30 am (#1886 of 2617)
I think it's important to remember what it could have potentially cost Snape just to go to Dumbledore in the first place. This isn't the same as if he just sent DD an anonymous message. By going to DD and confessing that he had taken the prophecy to LV, he was confessing to criminal activity and being a Death Eater. When Dumbledore first appeared, Snape was fearful that he'd be killed outright, and why not? After all, he was a Death Eater. And even if DD didn't kill him, DD was an extremely powerful wizard and easily able to capture Snape and send him to Azkaban. And by the way, Crouch was by that time allowing unforgiveables to be used in the fight against LV. Snape could assume that if DD sent him to the aurors, they might use unforgiveables in order to gain more information from him -- in fact, from what we know of Crouch, they probably would have done so.
So by going to Dumbledore to beg his help, Snape had to assume that he could either be killed, or if not killed, almost certainly captured and imprisoned. Why would he offer his services when one would assume that no right-minded person would trust him to actually help in whatever plan or protection DD devised? How would he be able to help from Azkaban, after all?
Personally, I think Snape's willingness to give up his life or at least his freedom to make sure someone with the power to do it would help protect Lily is quite a "taking responsibility." I think it odd that he's considered not to have taken responsibility because he didn't immediately offer to help out, when he had already offered up what could have been his life or liberty.
I'm sure Snape never had any notion that DD would allow him to go back and serve with LV. This no meeting under a white flag of truce after all. Basically, Snape was turning himself in to Dumbledore and hoping that DD allowed him to live long enough to give the information necessary to protect Lily.
Is that selfish? Well, yes the focus is on Lily, rather than the whole family. But that's the one and only person Snape loves. And James was the guy that persecuted him for years. Sure, Harry was just a baby, but it's not like Snape has some big experience with caring and concern for others. All he knows of that appears to be his love for Lily. It's not good that he doesn't care about the others, but it's rather understandable why he is as he is.
But do I call that selfish? Not exactly. How can it be a selfish motivation when he's, as far as he knows, giving up possibly his life and certainly his liberty in order to do it?
What if he had been sent to Azkaban? Bad ole Snape, selfishly gave himself up to life imprisonment because he only thought about Lily rather than James and Harry. Right, that's so selfish. Selfish is considering or being motivated only by what matters to you. But that's not the same as only acting for those whom one loves. Was Lily selfish in her sacrifice for Harry, just because she did it because she loved him? Is Harry selfish in his motivations to defeat LV, because he is mainly working to keep the people he loves safe? There are certainly people who are willing to risk and sacrifice for people that they don't even know or care about, but a great many people are primarily motivated, when risking their lives, by those that they do love or care for deeply.
Orion - Mar 18, 2008 8:44 am (#1887 of 2617)
"Selfish because Voldemort can go about merrily murdering everyone else's loved ones, and Snape will still be a devoted follower. But when he threatens Lily, the woman he loves, he goes running to Dumbledore. (mona)
But it's normal, isn't it? In all the cultures of the world, in an emergency people grab their loved ones and run, and not complete strangers. It's considered mentally healthy behaviour to prefer family and other close ones.
I've asked that already on another thread - the Slughorn thread: What do you expect, saintliness? (No, not you, mona, it's a general question. ) There will always be people with an infallible moral compass, but very few of the people I know meet such high standards as some forumers demand on this thread, and I know for sure that I don't meet these standards, and I ask myself who does?
mona amon - Mar 18, 2008 9:00 am (#1888 of 2617)
Orion, this is not a natural calamity or accident where people grab their loved ones and run. (And even these people feel sorry afterwards for the people who died, once they've finished feeling thankful that their loved ones are safe.)
Here we have Voldemort cold-bloodedly murdering enough people to make an army of inferi and Snape does not care, until Lily is threatened.
I was trying to show that just the act of coming to Dumbledore with the plea to save Lily is not proof that Severus had changed. I think Julia has understood what I was trying to say.
(Edited)
And good point Pesky.
PeskyPixie - Mar 18, 2008 9:05 am (#1889 of 2617)
Even after Lily is threatened he lacks the ability to comprehend how she will feel once she loses her loved ones.
Julia H. - Mar 18, 2008 1:43 pm (#1890 of 2617)
Great post, Wynnleaf.
"Basically, Snape was turning himself in to Dumbledore and hoping that DD allowed him to live long enough to give the information necessary to protect Lily."
I'm glad you mentioned that because this thought was lurking in the back of my mind when I read this scene. I think Snape was quite surprised when DD in the end let him go free and even trusted him with something to do for the protection of the Potters. Not because he was not ready to do anything but because he expected to end up a prisoner or dead. (This is another thing that makes it unlikely that he wanted to save Lily for himself: he could not very well have taken advantage of her survival if he had been dead or in Azkaban.) But Lily's protection was more important to him than his own life or safety or freedom. Actually, as the meeting started, DD set up the rules quite in accordance with this expectation: He arrived with "a blinding, jagged jet of white light" and "Snape had dropped to his knees and his wand had flown out of his hand". Then DD said it had not been his intention to kill Snape, but it was still not ruled out for the future. Neither was imprisonment ruled out. I don't think DD ruled it out at least for quite a while. JKR usually describes the characters' movements as they talk quite precisely but there is no mention of Snape standing up during the scene, and towards the end of the scene "Snape said nothing, but merely looked up at Dumbledore". Up. The situation indicates that Snape had surrendered completely, wandless and on his knees, begging for someone else's life, while DD was standing above him with his wand ready. Finally, when Snape said "Anything", he still had now idea what that would mean to him, not even whether it was doing something for the Potters or going to the aurors or whatever else DD might want him to do.
"Even after Lily is threatened he lacks the ability to comprehend how she will feel once she loses her loved ones." (Pesky)
I'm not so sure about that. I know he thinks only about Lily and mentions only Lily but perhaps he does not want Lily to be forced to watch the slaughter of her family. After all, Snape has already got LV's promise to spare Lily and the easy thing for him to do would be to be satisfied with this. There must be a reason why he is not satisfied. Voldemort really intends to spare Lily - as long as she is "reasonable", and if he has happened to mention this to Snape (and why not?), it may have dawned on Snape perhaps that Lily might not be "reasonable" in this situation. Why? Because she could not bear to watch while her loved ones are being murdered. If Snape gets as far as that, then he already comprehends at least something of Lily's probable feelings and reactions. With all his bad choices behind him and with LV's promise in his pocket, there must be some reason why Snape chooses the hard way and takes all the risk that going to Dumbledore may mean and there must also be a reason why Dumbledore thinks that this desperate young man with the Dark Mark on his arm can be trusted and is worth saving.
Of course, not everybody is DD and with some effort everything can be explained as due to some ignoble motivation: one can say that instead of risking his life and liberty, "the biggest issue" for him is not to be killed (why is he going there in the first place?) or that he does not really mean 'anything', when he says so (perhaps because he is so bad that we can't believe a word he says) but, as it happens, he is going to live the rest of his life fulfilling that promise. If this does not prove that someone means a promise seriously, I don't know what does.
Last edited by Mona on Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:59 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1891 to 1910
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 9:01 am
wynnleaf - Mar 18, 2008 3:46 pm (#1891 of 2617)
Snape was by no means "home free" as long as DD didn't kill him. Should he expect DD to let him go? Of course not. Was DD in the habit of letting captured Death Eaters go just to be nice or something? I doubt it. Of course Snape wasn't home free if he wasn't killed. The most obvious next likely thing would be that DD would take his info about the Potters and then turn him over to the aurors to go to Azkaban, where at that time, according to Sirius, many prisoners didn't live very long around the dementors. Honestly, I don't see how anyone could imagine that's being home free.
And then Snape's claim that he'd do "anything" we can be certain was sincere, because he immediately went back to LV, risking his life spying on Voldemort, then later serving under Dumbledore for 16 years or so in an effort to protect Harry and be ready to fight LV when he came back.
I mean, it's not like Snape left after that "anything" remark and showed up at Dumbledore's desk years later saying, "now I'm ready to do 'anything'." He started doing "anything" Dumbledore asked of him immediately. So I guess that's pretty much proof that he did indeed mean it.
PeskyPixie - Mar 18, 2008 10:51 pm (#1892 of 2617)
Hmmm, I both agree and disagree with different parts of everyone's posts.
First of all, I don't feel Severus chooses what is 'easy' over what is 'right' (man, this is getting soooo overused! ) when he decides to get Dumbledore's help. No matter how desperately in love, Snape is a Slytherin and as such he uses his head to make the decision with best outcomes rather than act upon irrational whims of the heart. Although his choice to help Lily may be considered an irrational heart-induced whim for a Slytherin Death Eater, the manner in which he tries to protect Lily is the one which would also have the greatest chance of guaranteeing her safety. Anyone in the Magical world would want Dumbledore's protection if a Dark Lord were to target their loved one(s). Sirius and James' decision to overrule Dumbledore's offer to be secretkeeper in order to cook up their own scheme to outfox the Dark Lord is nothing short of foolish, and Snape is no fool. He is very brave to risk (from his point of view) death/capture at the hands of the Dark Lord's equal in order to plea for protection for the woman he loves. This is an intelligent idea which a high chance of success. I see nothing but true, honest love in Snape's ability to put Lily's safety above his own.
However, I stand by my opinion that apart from his love for Lily, he does not yet possess the ability to comprehend that she will be as distraught at the loss of her family as he is at the potential loss of her. I'm sorry, but I honestly don't feel that he is interested in sparing Lily the horrors of seeing the slaughter of her family. He is fine with sacrificing the 'son in exchange for the mother' after all. James and Harry don't matter to him; Severus feels only for Lily and the past they share and the future for which there might now be a glimmer of hope.
Now, I agree that Snape has no reason to feel love for James. However, if he were emotionally developed enough to truly empathize with Lily, he would know instinctively that the only way to ensure Lily's happiness (and perhaps even regain her love as a friend) would be to value James' life, even though it is not necessary to like him as an individual.
I admire Snape's bravery and capability to love very deeply. This love is the only thing positive within him and I believe that Dumbledore regards it as hope for remorse and change within him and uses Snape's vulnerable state to bargain a promise out of him which slowly pulls him away from the Dark side and eventually (I believe) saves his soul. Logical Severus would just say, "Oh please, Dumby, we both know you're going off to save the Potters even if I skip back to my Master this very instant." I honestly feel that Dumbledore uses Snape's distress (which stems from love) to plant the seeds of change in him. Okay, it's very late and I should get to bed before my writing becomes more flowery!
Julia H. - Mar 19, 2008 1:20 am (#1893 of 2617)
"He is fine with sacrificing the 'son in exchange for the mother' after all." (Pesky)
It seems the only part that supports this is DD's question. (Everything else DD says refers to Snape not caring about James and Harry, only this quote is about "in exchange".)
"Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?"
This, however, sounds as if Snape had told Voldemort that he would only tell him the prophecy if he promised something in return. But this is not how the story is told to us, readers, and it is not even probable that any DE could negotiate with LV like this. Snape gave Voldmort the prophecy - inexcusable, but so it happened - and after that LV was free to do with it whatever he wanted. Snape admits that he indeed asked LV to spare Lily but I don't think he admits having negotiated anything with LV. As for asking LV, this was the most he could ask with any hope of a favourable answer. Sure, he could have tried and asked LV to spare the whole family but then LV would not have wanted to spare anyone. However, if Snape, after getting LV's promise to spare Lily, had left the whole thing there, that would have been IMO sacrificing the son for the mother - because he would not have done anything else beyond something that could spare Lily alone. But this is not what happened. For some unspecified reason, he decided to go to Dumbledore, with this decision risking his own life or freedom but ultimately ensuring the protection of the whole family. Why, why did he do that if he was so bad, if he understood so little and apparently had already got what he wanted?
As for Dumbledore: He is standing there, looking down on a young man who is desperate because he has brought danger on the woman he loves, who is trying to save her but cannot see beyond his love and does not care for others. This is the same DD who once loved someone so much that he could not see beyond this love and in the madness of this relationship, he sacrificed the well-being not of strangers but of his family members, of people he also loved and who were dependent on him. The fact that DD at that time could only care for one person resulted in the death of his own sister. Is it not possible that DD, who by this time has developed the ability to love other people extensively and generally but nobody with a dangerous intensity, is suddenly reminded of his own youthful madness and what it cost him ("in exchange...") and vents the resulting upsurge of emotion (as well as a less personal but still quite strong contempt for DE's in general) on Snape?
Many years later, when DD has had time to get to know Snape better, he says:
"But he did not know - he had no possible way of knowing - which boy Voldemort would hunt from then onwards, or that the parents he would destroy in his murderous quest were people that Professor Snape knew, that they were your mother and father - ... You have no idea of the remorse Professor Snape felt when he realised how Lord Voldemort had interpreted the prophecy, Harry. I believe it to be the greatest regret of his life and the reason that he returned -"
This does not sound as if DD still thought that all those years before Snape had been negotiating a deal with LV.
"There are certainly people who are willing to risk and sacrifice for people that they don't even know or care about, but a great many people are primarily motivated, when risking their lives, by those that they do love or care for deeply." (Wynnleaf)
Interestingly, this is precisely the lesson Snape has to learn in his life: Snape starts by caring only for the life of the only one he loves and ends up habitually saving and protecting the lives of a lot of people, and mostly people he does not love or care for deeply, even people he dislikes, loathes and people who dislike or hate him. Likewise, he initially risks his life to save someone he loves deeply but years later he regularly risks his life and eventually sacrifices more than his life in a fight that is fought for many, many lives.
mona amon - Mar 19, 2008 4:25 am (#1894 of 2617)
"Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?"
I think the 'exchange', was something like Snape telling Voldemort, "you only want the child dead. Please spare the mother for my sake", which implies, "go ahead and kill the child as long as you spare the mother". At least that's the only explanation I can think of for DD's words, and Snape's reply.
However, if Snape, after getting LV's promise to spare Lily, had left the whole thing there, that would have been IMO sacrificing the son for the mother - because he would not have done anything else beyond something that could spare Lily alone. But this is not what happened. For some unspecified reason, he decided to go to Dumbledore, with this decision risking his own life or freedom but ultimately ensuring the protection of the whole family. Why, why did he do that if he was so bad, if he understood so little and apparently had already got what he wanted?
He goes to Dumbledore because he doesn't trust Voldemort. Who in their right mind would? I don't think there was anything more to it than that.
After all, he was a Death Eater. And even if DD didn't kill him, DD was an extremely powerful wizard and easily able to capture Snape and send him to Azkaban. And by the way, Crouch was by that time allowing unforgiveables to be used in the fight against LV. Snape could assume that if DD sent him to the aurors, they might use unforgiveables in order to gain more information from him -- in fact, from what we know of Crouch, they probably would have done so. (Wynnleaf)
I do not think he thought it through to such an extent. He was in a blind panic. First he asks LV to spare Lily (and it was a very brave thing to do). Voldemort agrees, but Severus isn't convinced. Still in a blind panic, he approaches the head of the Order and most powerful wizard in the world, of whom he is mortally afraid. And yes, he thinks he might kill him, but I doubt if he was thinking about imprisonment or other consequences. He was very, very brave, but it was a sort of animal instinct that made him go rushing headlong into danger to save the life of the one he loved.
Good post, Pesky! I agree with all your points.
Julia H. - Mar 19, 2008 7:02 am (#1895 of 2617)
"Severus feels only for Lily and the past they share and the future for which there might now be a glimmer of hope." (Pesky)
If this "glimmer of hope" concerns their future together, he must give it up the instant he goes to DD because he himself might be killed or imprisoned AND because DD will evidently try to save the whole family, not just Lily.
"I think the 'exchange', was something like Snape telling Voldemort, "you only want the child dead. Please spare the mother for my sake", which implies, "go ahead and kill the child as long as you spare the mother". At least that's the only explanation I can think of for DD's words, and Snape's reply." (Mona)
But it is not a real exchange, is it? By the time Snape learns who Voldemort is targeting, he has no other means but begging and Voldemort can decide to say yes or no. It is not like Snape letting Voldemort kill Harry if he spares Lily. At most, Snape has a faint hope that Voldemort might be willing to spare Lily (and only Lily) if he can convince him. Voldemort does not sympathize with Snape's feelings and the only reason why he is willing to spare Lily is that he does not think she is dangerous to him. I imagine Snape thinking at the moment : "The Potters... Lily... no, not her, not her, it can't be..." Then he says "My Lord, ... I have a request, please... Lily Potter... she means no danger to you, she cannot harm you, please, spare her, let her live, let her live, please..."
"He goes to Dumbledore because he doesn't trust Voldemort. Who in their right mind would?"
Yes, but that again makes any notion of a real deal, a real exchange unlikely. For whatever reason he goes to DD, it implies that he is not satisfied with whatever he expects Voldemort to do. But besides the word "exchange", nothing suggests that Snape has no idea how Lily would feel about the loss of her family or that Snape consciously plans and finds it satisfying to sacrifice the son for the mother - and this word just does not seem to refer to a real exchange here. If he did not take the trouble to go to DD, that would indicate that he is "satisfied" but he does go to him.
Let's imagine an extreme situation: There is no DD, there is nobody to resist Voldemort and, for the sake of the example, let's imagine the only thing Snape can do is (perhaps) to save Lily and he has no possibility whatsoever to do anything for the rest of the family, not even if he wants to. Let's suppose he knows, not just thinks but knows it for sure that Lily would not ask for mercy for herself if her family had to die. What is he supposed to do? What is more honourable? Should he go ahead and save Lily's life or not?
I agree that asking LV and going to DD were very, very brave things to do. But if he was in a blind panic without being able to think of the possible consequences for himself, how can we expect him to think cool-headedly of making a deal with LV (or anyone) or to consciously think it over what he would contentedly sacrifice and what not? I think he was pretty much in the emotional state of "anything" from the first moment, trying to find the best and broadest protection for Lily, which includes asking anybody and everybody who can help, risking or giving up his life if necessary or doing whatever more it takes.
Julia H. - Mar 19, 2008 12:45 pm (#1896 of 2617)
"Dumbledore is just emphasising a point here. He is forcing Snape to see what his attitude/behaviour/actions really mean." (Zelmia)
Emphasizing a point, yes. Making Snape understand what he does not understand, yes. I absolutely agree with that. What I don't agree with is any conscious "deal" in Snape's mind or the notion that he could have done or said anything more - as far as LV is concerned - at that point but asking LV to spare Lily. The other option was not asking LV at all just going straight to DD.
"Having said that, we do know that Voldemort thought Snape "desired" Lily, so some sort of conversation about her took place."
This is possible though we don't know how it happened. What Snape felt was true love but he may have told LV something similar to what you say if he thought it would be dangerous if LV saw he really loved someone on the other side. (I guess it really was dangerous.) Alternatively, it may have been simply what LV thought because he had no idea of love so he could not recognize it (after all LV could imagine that a mother would agree to step back while her child was being murdered) - and Snape let him think that. But it is rather strange how we learn what LV thought. LV to Harry: "He desired her, that was all ... but when she had gone, he agreed that there were other women, and of purer blood, worthier of him". Now when exactly did this conversation take place? When Lily "had gone", LV was no longer in a position to discuss anything with Snape, was he? Did they get back to this topic 14 years later? I don't think Snape mentioned it to him but why would LV have wanted to know then what Snape thought about Lily's death? 14 years later? In any case, if they did talk about it after LV's return, then it was another occasion for Snape to tell LV that he had just desired her, no problem.
"There is nothing at all to suggest that Dumbledore "could only care for one person".
OK, maybe I took the analogy a bit far but Ariana was neglected wasn't she? And she was dependent on her brother very much and DD seems to have been somewhat obsessed with Grindelwald, sending him letters at night after spending the whole day with him planning frantically what they were going to do with the Hallows etc.
"So you're suggesting that Dumbledore was simply "projecting" and had no legitimate reason to be appalled and "disgusted" by the very suggestion that "[Harry and James] can die as long as you have what you want?"
No, that is not what I meant. Not "simply projecting", only that it was part of it. "I see you love only her but don't you realize you are responsible for two more people's danger?" It may add to DD's anger at the moment that he has a similar sort of experience. (In the long run however, it may have helped him to be sympathetic towards Snape.) This does not mean that DD had no legitimate reason to castigate Snape and Snape seemed to accept DD's right to do so.
Did Mona really want to say that "Snape took a calculated risk"? I may have misunderstood something but I thought Mona was saying that Snape was not able to calculate anything at all, only ran into danger blindly and without caring about the danger (even though he was afraid of DD) in order to save Lily. This means he may still have known about things like imprisonment and aurors (how could he not know?), only he did not think about them because he only thought about Lily. Mona???
wynnleaf - Mar 19, 2008 1:48 pm (#1897 of 2617)
There's a lot to remember in that first confrontation Snape has with DD. At that point, Dumbledore does not really know much about Snape's concern or care for Lily. His assumption of Snape's motivations, probably that it's some baser motivation regarding Lily, is understandable, but it doesn't really fit exactly what Snape was doing at the moment (risking his life and freedom to go to DD, much less to defy LV), nor does it fit what Snape was willing to do for the next 16 or 17 years.
In other words, I think DD was being quite sincere in his suppositions about Snape, but I imagine he'd have had a very different view of Snape at that moment if he'd known that Snape was willing to lay down the rest of his life, however short or long it was, for this cause.
Some of DD's early comments to Snape don't really fit what we, the readers, learn about Snape and therefore I think DD is sometimes working on either early misunderstandings about Snape's true motivations, or possibly projecting his own past and his own mistakes onto Snape. For instance, later, when he meets with Snape just after the Potter's deaths, he says that the Potters trusted the wrong person with their lives, just as Snape had trusted Voldemort with Lily's life. But that was completely untrue about Snape, since Snape went to DD for help precisely because he knew he couldn't trust LV.
My point isn't that DD shouldn't be trusted, or that he's lying. Of course not. My point is that Dumbledore during these early meetings with Snape doesn't seem to really know and understand his motivations completely. Or possibly, it's that DD is projecting his own failings from the past onto Snape. I'm not saying DD's completely "off" in the way he deals with Snape in these early days. Sure, he does see a lot of what's really going on. But he's not got a perfect understanding of Snape either.
So DD's assumption that Snape somehow set up an "exchange" parley with LV doesn't make it correct. Instead, Snape had already given the prophecy to LV. He had nothing left with which to trade. If he later begged for Lily's life, hoping that LV would grant him a request since he was the one to have brought the prophecy, I see that as the act of a desperate man, not a conniving one.
Zelmia, you comment as though the only risk for Snape was whether or not DD would kill him. You haven't commented at all on the real possibility that DD, if he didn't kill Snape, would have turned him over to the aurors and the oftentimes short life in Azkaban.
Julia H. - Mar 19, 2008 3:45 pm (#1898 of 2617)
"He believed it was a real possibility that Dumbledore might kill him, but that it was also at least as likely that Dumbledore wouldn't: a 50-50 chance, in other words." (Zelmia)
I don't know how this 50-50 can be calculated. I mean why not 60-40? Can such willingness to sacrifice be measured like this? And Wynnleaf is right, if Snape calculates, he must consider Azkaban as a further possibility as well. Besides, if DD did kill Snape, that would be 100 per cent death.
"I don't see the experiences as similar at all."
Snape is responsible for three people's danger but he cares for only one because she is the only one he loves. DD was responsible for two people's lives (his sister and brother) because he was their guardian but he neglected his responsibility because of a third person he loved. Grindelwald was a danger in the house and DD did not think of it, although he got to know Grindelwald's views and ideas and personality. But he did not mind it at all before Ariana's death. Snape did not mind what he knew about LV before Lily was threatened. Of course, there are obvious differences but there are similarities as well and it seems to me that JKR makes an important point of certain similarities between the bad choices of these two men early in their lives.
"My point is that Dumbledore during these early meetings with Snape doesn't seem to really know and understand his motivations completely." (Wynnleaf)
DD is obviously suspicious at first and his stern questions in part serve the purpose of testing Snape's motivations and attitudes. I think Snape's (not at all calculating) behaviour convinces him that Snape is sincere and his despair (as well as his love) is genuine but really understanding Snape does not seem to be an easy job. Some 16 years later, DD appears to be much more sympathetic towards the young Snape.
Julia H. - Mar 20, 2008 2:21 am (#1899 of 2617)
"Actually, I did comment in that I agreed with Mona Amon that Snape was not likely to have been thinking too far beyond not being killed on sight." (Zelmia)
But not thinking about the danger does not mean not knowing about it. If he is only worried about not being killed at sight, it is because the only thing he cares about is being able to make his request to DD. If he does not think about any further danger, it is because Lily is so important to him that he does not care what is going to happen to him. With regard to his willingness to sacrifice himself for Lily's safety, I don't see much difference between 1) thinking over the possibilities of being killed, being captured, taken to the aurors, tortured and locked up in Azkaban and still deciding to go to DD and 2) not thinking about what could happen to him at all (even though he otherwise knows - and I'm sure he does - that these possibilities are real), just going to DD to ensure his protection for Lily.
mona amon - Mar 20, 2008 5:51 am (#1900 of 2617)
If he is only worried about not being killed at sight, it is because the only thing he cares about is being able to make his request to DD. If he does not think about any further danger, it is because Lily is so important to him that he does not care what is going to happen to him.
Julia I agree. But in what way is the whole torture, imprisonment thing relevant then?
Of course, there are obvious differences but there are similarities as well (Julia)
I don't know- Grindelwald was not really a threat to Ariana. Hers was an accidental death, and it was Aberforth who started the brawl. We don't even know if Grindelwald actually caused her death. It could have been Albus or Aberforth.
So DD's assumption that Snape somehow set up an "exchange" parley with LV doesn't make it correct. (Wynnleaf)
Dumbledore doesn't assume. He actually suggests that Snape goes and does it. "Why don't you ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?" (I'm paraphrasing). He's actually testing Snape, trying to find out what he feels about the other two people whose lives are at stake. And he finds him wanting. The proper response (as far as DD is concerned) would have been shock at the thought of exchanging the son for the mother. But Snape replies that he did try to do something like that.
wynnleaf - Mar 20, 2008 7:26 am (#1901 of 2617)
Yes, Snape did say that he did try to get LV to spare Lily, and he agrees with DD's comment. But that doesn't mean that what Snape is agreeing to is specifically what DD seems to suggest. That is, DD seems to suggest that Snape has some kind of bargaining power or bargaining chip. He doesn't. LV already had the info of the partial prophecy. All Snape could do is request that LV spare Lily. He could not offer any "exchange" as LV already had made the decision to go after Harry. "Exchange" implies that Snape had the power to give Harry to LV in "exchange" for Lily's life. He didn't have that power. All Snape could do was make a request.
That's why I'm saying that DD's comment isn't really an accurate picture of what Snape could or did do as regards trying to get LV to spare Lily.
If he is only worried about not being killed at sight, it is because the only thing he cares about is being able to make his request to DD. If he does not think about any further danger, it is because Lily is so important to him that he does not care what is going to happen to him. (julia)
Julia I agree. But in what way is the whole torture, imprisonment thing relevant then? (mona amon)
It's relevant because imprisonment was such a clear and obvious probable option if DD didn't kill Snape, that for Snape to disregard that or not think about it, means that he'd have to be so very, very focused on saving Lily, that he doesn't even think at all about the most obvious ramafications of going to the most powerful wizard opposing LV.
It's like this. When a mother runs out into the road in front of ongoing traffic to save her child who has wandered into the street, does she spend time thinking, "Should I risk death for my child? If I run out there I might get killed." No, she doesn't stop to think. She just does it. But that doesn't mean that the mother has lost all sense of reality and has no idea that traffic is coming her way and could kill her. It's just that at that point, it doesn't matter any more. All that matters is saving her child. She is aware of the danger, but she doesn't need to stop and consider it, because it doesn't matter.
The threat of Azkaban for Death Eaters was well-known. The whole Wizarding World knew and feared the idea of dementors and knew the that a sentence to Azkaban could be horrific. All Death Eaters would know that if they were caught and sent to Azkaban, they could die there.
Snape would have to know these things. But like the mother who runs to rescue her child, he goes to DD uncaring about his personal risk. No, he probably doesn't stop to weight the cost. But that's the point. The cost at that point doesn't matter to him, no matter how great it is.
Do we say that the mother who risks her life to save her child isn't really risking death or grave injury, just because she's so focused on her child that she isn't considering that? Of course not.
If Snape did not think about what he was risking, then the idea that the magnitude of what Snape risked isn't important, just because he was so focused on Lily that he didn't consider it is just amazing to me. What I am struck by is that for him to not consider the magnitude of his risk (if he didn't) only shows the huge depth to which he was focused on saving her. His own life, freedom, etc. meant nothing in comparison, because it wasn't even important enough in comparison for him to give any thought to it.
PeskyPixie - Mar 20, 2008 8:48 am (#1902 of 2617)
Snape did say that he did try to get LV to spare Lily, and he agrees with DD's comment. But that doesn't mean that what Snape is agreeing to is specifically what DD seems to suggest. -wynnleaf
I don't think Dumbledore's expression of disgust is a response to any scenarios between Voldy and Snape which we have not witnessed. Personally, I feel that Dumbledore's disgust stems from Snape's inability to express any concern for a baby's probable death. This in itself is disgusting.
Severus loves Lily self-lessly, but has not matured emotionally to the point of realizing that at the loss of her child (and husband) Lily will feel as he would feel at her loss. Also, by throwing her whole family into the deal (and had Sirius and James not used their own brains to 'outwit, outplay and outlast' the Dark Lord, so Lily could actually have lived to learn of Snape's key role in her family's survival), Snape has a great chance of regaining Lily's love (as a friend) and trust. If only Lily had survived she would despise Snape even more for not doing all in his power to save her family (and yes, when he goes to Dumbledore he has no reason to not ask for protection for his Lily and her family). This is further proof that Sev was clueless and undeveloped in the emotional department and only his deep love for Lily allows for his change to take place.
Orion - Mar 20, 2008 9:41 am (#1903 of 2617)
Great observation, Pesky. So Snape has an additional reason to hate Sirius.
Julia H. - Mar 20, 2008 11:23 am (#1904 of 2617)
"But in what way is the whole torture, imprisonment thing relevant then?" (Mona)
Because it is a real possibility. Only Snape does not care. It is not like he has not heard about aurors or Azkaban. But nothing matters to him now. (On the one hand, it is very sad that he does not think of Harry or James but on the other hand, he does not think of the obvious danger that he is in either. Only Lily.) At the root of it, it is the same kind of sacrifice as if he thought of all of these possibilities and decided to ignore them, only in this case he does not even give a thought to the obvious danger. But Wynnleaf has already answered this question perfectly.
"He's actually testing Snape, trying to find out what he feels about the other two people whose lives are at stake. And he finds him wanting. The proper response (as far as DD is concerned) would have been shock at the thought of exchanging the son for the mother. But Snape replies that he did try to do something like that." (Mona)
I agree that he is testing Snape. He finds him wanting. Snape is after all a DE and guilty. He has just acknowledged it. Still, the problem with DD's test question is that it is not a really good question. Imagine Snape did not ask LV anything. Or imagine the horrifying and strictly theoretical possibility that instead of asking LV to spare someone's life, Snape asked LV to reward him with a thousand galleons. Then he goes to DD, begs him to save Lily and DD asks him the very same question: "Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?" In the above mentioned two examples, Snape could sincerely answer: "Oh no, never, what an idea!" Would he be a better man ? Would his motivation be more noble? I doubt it. Snape answers truthfully, "I have asked him" - but there was no exchange, only a desperate request. At the moment, Snape is not in a state to explain the details. DD's question is somewhat similar to the wrong kind of academic multiple choice questions which are more likely to be answered correctly by those who know less than by those who know more.
Snape does not realize that he is taking an exam. He obviously has not thought about what would be the best way to feed DD the request. He is not trying to explain anything. He does not know about good answers and bad answers. He is guilty and humble and desperate. He is begging and waiting for reassurance that DD will protect Lily. He is ready to accept whatever DD may say or do to him. This is the man who can save Lily. Nothing matters. Only Lily.
"Severus loves Lily self-lessly, but has not matured emotionally to the point of realizing that at the loss of her child (and husband) Lily will feel as he would feel at her loss." (Pesky)
Pesky, how can you know this for sure? Snape begs for Lily's life only but asking DD entails securing protection for the whole family. At the moment, he is almost mad with despair and while it is obvious that he, personally, is only interested in Lily, because it is Lily he loves, that does not mean he cannot comprehend that it would be a grief to Lily if she lost her family. If Snape only asked Voldemort, we could be sure that it never occurs to him how Lily would feel. Since he is almost mad with dispair when we see him, he says only what is deepest in his heart and nothing else but when he can think about things calmly (in a different state of mind), why could he not understand that Lily probably loves her family?
I don't think he hopes to ever become friends with Lily again. He probably has not seen her for years. Being a DE, he can have no hope to ever regain her friendship. But he loves her and now she is in danger and he is ready to give anything for her safety. Yes, it is a selfless love. What difference has it made to him, personally, over the past few years that Lily was alive and safe? It is nothing else but the knowledge that the woman he loves is walking this earth somewhere, the knowledge that she exists in the world. This knowledge is all he, personally, can cling to. Her life and safety that his tragic mistake has endangered, her life and safety somewhere far away is the treasure that is worth sacrificing his life for. This is beyond reason, beyond basic instincts, beyond any selfish thought or hope, beyond past and future, beyond right or wrong. There is nothing else but Lily.
wynnleaf - Mar 20, 2008 2:17 pm (#1905 of 2617)
Does anyone else find that you kind of lose track of exactly what we're agreeing and disagreeing about?
1. We all agree (I think) that Snape only left LV and went to DD because it was Lily that was threatened. If LV had gone after Neville and the Longbottoms, Snape may not have ever left LV's service.
2. Do any of us believe that DD actually thought Snape could have bargained or even asked LV to spare the whole family? If not, do any of us believe that DD would consider it wrong or bad to at least ask LV to spare one person, since it was certain that LV had every intention of killing at least Harry and probably James. So that would mean that DD's question was not asked literally -- that is, he didn't truly think Snape should go back and ask LV to spare the whole family. He only asked that to see if Snape's focus was just on Lily.
3. Some people think that Snape being so caught up in Lily's life/death was selfish. Why "selfish" in particular? If LV had targeted the Longbottoms, would Snape's unconcern for their fate be "selfish" or simply show his unconcern and lack of care for the deaths of people he doesn't know or doesn't like. Do you think that's one and the same thing? - that is, being unconcerned about certain people's fate and being "selfish" is the same thing?
4. How does anyone "know" (since canon doesn't say), that Snape had no understanding that her family's death would be horrible for Lily? Is this really what people think? Or do you just think that Snape really wasn't thinking about it one way or the other? In other words, if Snape had stopped to wonder how Lily would have felt about James and Harry's deaths, do you truly think he wouldn't understand that she'd be devistated? What evidence do we have of this?
5. Was Snape completely unthinking about all possible consequences to his going to DD? If he was completely unthinking (versus uncaring), about any consequences, then he must not have even considered how Lily would feel about James and Harry's deaths, one way or the other, nor would he have been thinking about someone regaining Lily for himself. On the other hand, if he was thinking of possible consequences, why would he think about getting Lily for himself and so on, but not think about the likelihood of getting captured and thrown in Azkaban? And what canon evidence do we have of any of it, one way or the other?
PeskyPixie - Mar 20, 2008 9:00 pm (#1906 of 2617)
Yes, thanks, Wynnleaf. I was getting dizzy for a while there!
And, Sirius is in no way to blame for the Potters' deaths - though surely he, himself would disagree. Nor is James. I mean, you might as well blame Lily for her own death since, if she had not ended her friendship with Snape, he might not have become a Death Eater, then he wouldn't have overheard the Prophecy, yadda yadda yadda. The plan to use Peter, the most unlikely Secret Keeper ever, was actually a good one. -zelmia
Although this hardly belongs on Snape's thread, I just can't resist adding my two knuts. I disagree that the Pettigrew scheme is a better strategy than gaining Albus Dumbledore's direct involvement in the protection of one's loved ones from Lord Voldemort. James's and Sirius's actions are typical Gryffindor bravery: very foolish, but highly noble when/if it works out. In this case Dumbledore is told by his spy (I assume he refers to Snape here, but of course I may be completely off) that someone near the Potters is leaking information about them to the Dark Lord. In this scenario, yes, I do find it extremely foolish for James and Sirius to gloriously demonstrate the trust they have in one another and refuse Dumbledore's protection in order to follow their own hunches to make their own plans. Honestly, in Sirius's shoes, I would tell my best friend that if Albee says there's a spy among, there is most certainly a spy among us and there is no way that they should even trust me with the life of my godchild until the spy has been detected by the Order. But that's just me.
Also, I in no way equate James's and Sirius's lack of judgement in this situation with Lily's choice to break off her friendship with Snape - IMO this is pushing it a bit and in no way follows the logic behind my original comments on this topic. James and Sirius make a very foolish tactical decision; Lily breaks off a friendship with a friend who obviously wishes to be a Death Eater. I honestly don't see the similarity.
Hah! I added in 'selfless' before 'love' and I just knew someone was going to pounce on it! I am a bit more lenient with this term than Zelmia as I always picture the worst-case scenario first. Snape's deep love for Lily just seems very hopeful to me, although I agree that at the time of his meeting with Dumbledore on the hilltop it is not as evolved as it needs to be to be truly selfless.
PeskyPixie - Mar 20, 2008 10:58 pm (#1907 of 2617)
I want to reply to Julia's comments, but before doing so I'm posting an excerpt from Snape's meeting with Dumbledore on the hilltop. I think it may be helpful to our discussions.
'The - the prophecy ... the prediction ... Trelawney ...'
'Ah, yes,' said Dumbledore. 'How much did you relay to Lord Voldemort?'
'Everything - everything I heard!' said Snape. 'That is why - it is for that reason - he thinks it means Lily Evans!'
'The prophecy did not refer to a woman,' said Dumbledore. 'It spoke of a boy born at the end of July -'
'You know what I mean! He thinks it means her son, he is going to hunt her down - kill them all -'
'If she means so much to you,' said Dumbledore, 'surely Lord Voldemort will spare her? Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?'
'I have - I have asked him -'
'You disgust me,' said Dumbledore, and Harry had never heard so much contempt in his voice. Snape seemed to shrink a little.
'You do not care, then, about the deaths of her husband and child? They can die, as long as you have what you want?'
Snape said nothing, but merely looked up at Dumbledore.
'Hide them all, then,' he croaked. 'Keep her - them - safe. Please.'
Julia H. - Mar 20, 2008 11:42 pm (#1908 of 2617)
Yes, Wynnleaf, it is good to stop and think over what we are discussing.
Pesky, you get my support for using the word "selfless". Someone is "selfish" when they concentrate on themselves and on their own interest. Risking so much as Snape is risking for someone else's life and concentrating so much on another person without any real hope of benefit for himself is selfless. Snape's love for Lily is selfless also because he left her alone when she wanted him to, apparently never tried to "take revenge" or undermine her relationship with James but when she was in danger, he was ready to do and risk anything for her exactly as if she was still his friend (or more).
"That he asks for protection only for the person he cares about when there is not any reason to exclude the others." (Zelmia)
I think if there was a reason to exclude others, excluding them would be more selfish. I don't think that by saying "save Lily" Snape meant to say "save the whole family" but in fact he was warning them all and I'm sure he knew it - even if he did not think or talk about it. Can we perhaps say that Snape's love for Lily was selfless but it was the only positive feeling in him at that time and he could do just as much good as this love made him do?
"In this scenario, yes, I do find it extremely foolish for James and Sirius to gloriously demonstrate the trust they have in one another and refuse Dumbledore's protection in order to follow their own hunches to make their own plans." (Pesky)
I totally agree. DD could have kept the secret perfectly and it would not even have been extra trouble to him. Anyway: to think that the weakest is the strongest? Even if the "weakest" does not willfully become a traitor, he may be captured accidentally and crack. He may be tricked into telling the secret (not a very intelligent guy, this Pettigrew). I mean they should have known this "friend" quite well after all those years... and yes, they did know (from Snape, no doubt) that there was a traitor among them. And not even mentioning their plan to DD? James could have been as foolishly heroic (or whatever) as he wanted if it had been only about himself but he was risking Lily's and Harry's safety as well. IMO it indicates a bit that James was still more of a Marauder (and defined himself as his friends' friend through and through) than a responsible family man. I understand if it added to Snape's anger at him. He probably felt James had been irresponsible and that he (Snape) would have put Lily's safety above all, as indeed he did, and would not have exchanged the best protection available for anything else. (Perhaps that was the main reason why he could never forgive James... rather than their schoolboy enmity -?)
mona amon - Mar 21, 2008 6:40 am (#1909 of 2617)
Lol, Wynnleaf, I really was losing track. Thanks for that neat summary. Now to reply to some of your points-
3. Some people think that Snape being so caught up in Lily's life/death was selfish. Why "selfish" in particular? If LV had targeted the Longbottoms, would Snape's unconcern for their fate be "selfish" or simply show his unconcern and lack of care for the deaths of people he doesn't know or doesn't like. Do you think that's one and the same thing? - that is, being unconcerned about certain people's fate and being "selfish" is the same thing?
I do think it's selfish in a way. In Snape's case it wasn't 'certain people' but everyone other than Lily. When you care only for the life of a person dear to your own heart and don't care a jot when you know others are being murdered, that sounds pretty selfish to me. I'm not trying to show how evil Snape was, I'm trying to show that coming to Dumbledore in an attempt to save Lily does not show that he was remorseful. That was not his 'road to Damascus' moment. If he had come to Dumbledore because he was sorry about all those strangers being murdered, that would have been truly unselfish and noble.
4. How does anyone "know" (since canon doesn't say), that Snape had no understanding that her family's death would be horrible for Lily?
5. Was Snape completely unthinking about all possible consequences to his going to DD? If he was completely unthinking (versus uncaring), about any consequences, then he must not have even considered how Lily would feel about James and Harry's deaths, one way or the other,...
I feel he didn't consider the consequences to himself, just rushed off to Dumbledore even though he was mortally afraid of him. This shows that he cared more about Lily's life than his own (and yes, he was being unselfish or even selfless here). And even if he'd had room in his overwrought mind to consider the possible consequences, he would still have gone to Dumbledore.
As for James and Harry, yes he must have been too distraught to think of them. But he would not have cared about them anyway. I think that comes out very clearly in the excerpt that Pesky has quoted. And he would surely have been worried about them if he had even the faintest idea of how Lily would feel when her husband and child were murdered before her eyes. But he is completely clueless. Even after Dumbledore has spelled it out for him.
Julia H. - Mar 21, 2008 9:11 am (#1910 of 2617)
As for James and Harry, yes he must have been too distraught too think of them." (Mona)
Yes, Snape was too distraught to think of a lot of things and was also too distraught to speak properly. To me what really comes out of it is just this "save her, save her, save her", nothing else. I don't think his behaviour at this moment can be judged exactly as the behaviour of someone in their normal mind.
"But he is completely clueless. Even after Dumbledore has spelled it out for him."
There is again so little said, I am not convinced that, as he looks at DD and answers him, he is still clueless. "Snape seemed to shrink a little." Why? I think he is ashamed here. And: "Snape said nothing, but merely looked up at Dumbledore." Why is it not possible that he does not say anything because he is thinking of something? Because something is dawning on him? When someone is confronted with an idea that strikes him as new or shocking, why is it not possible that the person is silent for a moment or two? And if it is a new realization, it may be very difficult to put it into words right then. 'Hide them all, then,' he croaked. 'Keep her - them - safe. Please.' Why can't this sentence be a sign of Snape understanding what DD is saying? No, it is not an eloquent speech, just a first reaction but he is not in the emotional state of saying even coherent sentences, so how could he be expected to suddenly change his way of talking in a radical way? Understanding happens deep down first, not on the surface. I think what he says (together with body language such as shrinking and looking at DD), can be interpreted as a surface sign of understanding what DD is saying.
My problem with his cluelessness is that Snape knows Lily. He may have very little idea of a loving family (he never saw one) but he knows Lily. Lily in school argued with him about Mulciber and Mary, and Lily argued with James because of his bullying behaviour. Snape does not trust Voldemort. Yes, Voldemort is Voldemort, on the one hand, but on the other hand, Snape must know that even if the Dark Lord is willing to spare Lily, it will be only if Lily does not interfere. But knowing Lily, it is impossible that he does not know she will interfere. I find it possible that this is (also) at the root of Snape's distrust regarding LV. I think he can picture LV attacking the Potters, giving Lily the chance to flee but he can also picture that Lily will not go. Lily was known as a cheeky, brave girl at school, even Slughorn can tell that. So I think Snape may well realize that Voldemort must be kept away from Lily completely and that means away from her family as well. He does not necessarily formulate this realization in so many words even for himself but it still may be behind the fact that he does not trust Voldemort and rushes to Dumbledore. Snape's concern for Lily's family ends here and he does not think about mentioning them to DD (but again there is a lot he does not think about on the hilltop). He still wants to save Lily in the first place but he wants her to avoid all contact with Voldemort and he does not want her to have any reason to fight against him.
Finally, some questions: If he is, on the hilltop, selfish and clueless, disgusting, without remorse and still totally dark, then what does DD see in him? Why does DD think that Snape can be saved and is worth saving? How many other DE's do we know DD tried to save or took into his confidence? Why Snape? What started his redemption? I refuse to believe that redemption may come from outside only. Yes, Snape needs help but nobody can be redeemed in spite of themselves. There must be something in Snape that makes him different from Voldemort, who could not change for the better, even though he took Lily's (Harry's) blood (I don't quite understand why this cruel act gives him more chance for redemption but that is what JKR said) and Harry told him to try for some remorse. LV would not and could not be redeemed because he lacked something that Snape had. (I, personally, think what makes eventual redemption possible for Snape is his selfless love - if only for one person - and the ability to place someone else's interest way above his own and the willingness to put something right that he did wrong. What is your opinion?) It is on the hilltop that DD decides to give a chance to Snape, so there must be something that happens there, not later. And where is "his 'road to Damascus' moment"?
Snape was by no means "home free" as long as DD didn't kill him. Should he expect DD to let him go? Of course not. Was DD in the habit of letting captured Death Eaters go just to be nice or something? I doubt it. Of course Snape wasn't home free if he wasn't killed. The most obvious next likely thing would be that DD would take his info about the Potters and then turn him over to the aurors to go to Azkaban, where at that time, according to Sirius, many prisoners didn't live very long around the dementors. Honestly, I don't see how anyone could imagine that's being home free.
And then Snape's claim that he'd do "anything" we can be certain was sincere, because he immediately went back to LV, risking his life spying on Voldemort, then later serving under Dumbledore for 16 years or so in an effort to protect Harry and be ready to fight LV when he came back.
I mean, it's not like Snape left after that "anything" remark and showed up at Dumbledore's desk years later saying, "now I'm ready to do 'anything'." He started doing "anything" Dumbledore asked of him immediately. So I guess that's pretty much proof that he did indeed mean it.
PeskyPixie - Mar 18, 2008 10:51 pm (#1892 of 2617)
Hmmm, I both agree and disagree with different parts of everyone's posts.
First of all, I don't feel Severus chooses what is 'easy' over what is 'right' (man, this is getting soooo overused! ) when he decides to get Dumbledore's help. No matter how desperately in love, Snape is a Slytherin and as such he uses his head to make the decision with best outcomes rather than act upon irrational whims of the heart. Although his choice to help Lily may be considered an irrational heart-induced whim for a Slytherin Death Eater, the manner in which he tries to protect Lily is the one which would also have the greatest chance of guaranteeing her safety. Anyone in the Magical world would want Dumbledore's protection if a Dark Lord were to target their loved one(s). Sirius and James' decision to overrule Dumbledore's offer to be secretkeeper in order to cook up their own scheme to outfox the Dark Lord is nothing short of foolish, and Snape is no fool. He is very brave to risk (from his point of view) death/capture at the hands of the Dark Lord's equal in order to plea for protection for the woman he loves. This is an intelligent idea which a high chance of success. I see nothing but true, honest love in Snape's ability to put Lily's safety above his own.
However, I stand by my opinion that apart from his love for Lily, he does not yet possess the ability to comprehend that she will be as distraught at the loss of her family as he is at the potential loss of her. I'm sorry, but I honestly don't feel that he is interested in sparing Lily the horrors of seeing the slaughter of her family. He is fine with sacrificing the 'son in exchange for the mother' after all. James and Harry don't matter to him; Severus feels only for Lily and the past they share and the future for which there might now be a glimmer of hope.
Now, I agree that Snape has no reason to feel love for James. However, if he were emotionally developed enough to truly empathize with Lily, he would know instinctively that the only way to ensure Lily's happiness (and perhaps even regain her love as a friend) would be to value James' life, even though it is not necessary to like him as an individual.
I admire Snape's bravery and capability to love very deeply. This love is the only thing positive within him and I believe that Dumbledore regards it as hope for remorse and change within him and uses Snape's vulnerable state to bargain a promise out of him which slowly pulls him away from the Dark side and eventually (I believe) saves his soul. Logical Severus would just say, "Oh please, Dumby, we both know you're going off to save the Potters even if I skip back to my Master this very instant." I honestly feel that Dumbledore uses Snape's distress (which stems from love) to plant the seeds of change in him. Okay, it's very late and I should get to bed before my writing becomes more flowery!
Julia H. - Mar 19, 2008 1:20 am (#1893 of 2617)
"He is fine with sacrificing the 'son in exchange for the mother' after all." (Pesky)
It seems the only part that supports this is DD's question. (Everything else DD says refers to Snape not caring about James and Harry, only this quote is about "in exchange".)
"Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?"
This, however, sounds as if Snape had told Voldemort that he would only tell him the prophecy if he promised something in return. But this is not how the story is told to us, readers, and it is not even probable that any DE could negotiate with LV like this. Snape gave Voldmort the prophecy - inexcusable, but so it happened - and after that LV was free to do with it whatever he wanted. Snape admits that he indeed asked LV to spare Lily but I don't think he admits having negotiated anything with LV. As for asking LV, this was the most he could ask with any hope of a favourable answer. Sure, he could have tried and asked LV to spare the whole family but then LV would not have wanted to spare anyone. However, if Snape, after getting LV's promise to spare Lily, had left the whole thing there, that would have been IMO sacrificing the son for the mother - because he would not have done anything else beyond something that could spare Lily alone. But this is not what happened. For some unspecified reason, he decided to go to Dumbledore, with this decision risking his own life or freedom but ultimately ensuring the protection of the whole family. Why, why did he do that if he was so bad, if he understood so little and apparently had already got what he wanted?
As for Dumbledore: He is standing there, looking down on a young man who is desperate because he has brought danger on the woman he loves, who is trying to save her but cannot see beyond his love and does not care for others. This is the same DD who once loved someone so much that he could not see beyond this love and in the madness of this relationship, he sacrificed the well-being not of strangers but of his family members, of people he also loved and who were dependent on him. The fact that DD at that time could only care for one person resulted in the death of his own sister. Is it not possible that DD, who by this time has developed the ability to love other people extensively and generally but nobody with a dangerous intensity, is suddenly reminded of his own youthful madness and what it cost him ("in exchange...") and vents the resulting upsurge of emotion (as well as a less personal but still quite strong contempt for DE's in general) on Snape?
Many years later, when DD has had time to get to know Snape better, he says:
"But he did not know - he had no possible way of knowing - which boy Voldemort would hunt from then onwards, or that the parents he would destroy in his murderous quest were people that Professor Snape knew, that they were your mother and father - ... You have no idea of the remorse Professor Snape felt when he realised how Lord Voldemort had interpreted the prophecy, Harry. I believe it to be the greatest regret of his life and the reason that he returned -"
This does not sound as if DD still thought that all those years before Snape had been negotiating a deal with LV.
"There are certainly people who are willing to risk and sacrifice for people that they don't even know or care about, but a great many people are primarily motivated, when risking their lives, by those that they do love or care for deeply." (Wynnleaf)
Interestingly, this is precisely the lesson Snape has to learn in his life: Snape starts by caring only for the life of the only one he loves and ends up habitually saving and protecting the lives of a lot of people, and mostly people he does not love or care for deeply, even people he dislikes, loathes and people who dislike or hate him. Likewise, he initially risks his life to save someone he loves deeply but years later he regularly risks his life and eventually sacrifices more than his life in a fight that is fought for many, many lives.
mona amon - Mar 19, 2008 4:25 am (#1894 of 2617)
"Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?"
I think the 'exchange', was something like Snape telling Voldemort, "you only want the child dead. Please spare the mother for my sake", which implies, "go ahead and kill the child as long as you spare the mother". At least that's the only explanation I can think of for DD's words, and Snape's reply.
However, if Snape, after getting LV's promise to spare Lily, had left the whole thing there, that would have been IMO sacrificing the son for the mother - because he would not have done anything else beyond something that could spare Lily alone. But this is not what happened. For some unspecified reason, he decided to go to Dumbledore, with this decision risking his own life or freedom but ultimately ensuring the protection of the whole family. Why, why did he do that if he was so bad, if he understood so little and apparently had already got what he wanted?
He goes to Dumbledore because he doesn't trust Voldemort. Who in their right mind would? I don't think there was anything more to it than that.
After all, he was a Death Eater. And even if DD didn't kill him, DD was an extremely powerful wizard and easily able to capture Snape and send him to Azkaban. And by the way, Crouch was by that time allowing unforgiveables to be used in the fight against LV. Snape could assume that if DD sent him to the aurors, they might use unforgiveables in order to gain more information from him -- in fact, from what we know of Crouch, they probably would have done so. (Wynnleaf)
I do not think he thought it through to such an extent. He was in a blind panic. First he asks LV to spare Lily (and it was a very brave thing to do). Voldemort agrees, but Severus isn't convinced. Still in a blind panic, he approaches the head of the Order and most powerful wizard in the world, of whom he is mortally afraid. And yes, he thinks he might kill him, but I doubt if he was thinking about imprisonment or other consequences. He was very, very brave, but it was a sort of animal instinct that made him go rushing headlong into danger to save the life of the one he loved.
Good post, Pesky! I agree with all your points.
Julia H. - Mar 19, 2008 7:02 am (#1895 of 2617)
"Severus feels only for Lily and the past they share and the future for which there might now be a glimmer of hope." (Pesky)
If this "glimmer of hope" concerns their future together, he must give it up the instant he goes to DD because he himself might be killed or imprisoned AND because DD will evidently try to save the whole family, not just Lily.
"I think the 'exchange', was something like Snape telling Voldemort, "you only want the child dead. Please spare the mother for my sake", which implies, "go ahead and kill the child as long as you spare the mother". At least that's the only explanation I can think of for DD's words, and Snape's reply." (Mona)
But it is not a real exchange, is it? By the time Snape learns who Voldemort is targeting, he has no other means but begging and Voldemort can decide to say yes or no. It is not like Snape letting Voldemort kill Harry if he spares Lily. At most, Snape has a faint hope that Voldemort might be willing to spare Lily (and only Lily) if he can convince him. Voldemort does not sympathize with Snape's feelings and the only reason why he is willing to spare Lily is that he does not think she is dangerous to him. I imagine Snape thinking at the moment : "The Potters... Lily... no, not her, not her, it can't be..." Then he says "My Lord, ... I have a request, please... Lily Potter... she means no danger to you, she cannot harm you, please, spare her, let her live, let her live, please..."
"He goes to Dumbledore because he doesn't trust Voldemort. Who in their right mind would?"
Yes, but that again makes any notion of a real deal, a real exchange unlikely. For whatever reason he goes to DD, it implies that he is not satisfied with whatever he expects Voldemort to do. But besides the word "exchange", nothing suggests that Snape has no idea how Lily would feel about the loss of her family or that Snape consciously plans and finds it satisfying to sacrifice the son for the mother - and this word just does not seem to refer to a real exchange here. If he did not take the trouble to go to DD, that would indicate that he is "satisfied" but he does go to him.
Let's imagine an extreme situation: There is no DD, there is nobody to resist Voldemort and, for the sake of the example, let's imagine the only thing Snape can do is (perhaps) to save Lily and he has no possibility whatsoever to do anything for the rest of the family, not even if he wants to. Let's suppose he knows, not just thinks but knows it for sure that Lily would not ask for mercy for herself if her family had to die. What is he supposed to do? What is more honourable? Should he go ahead and save Lily's life or not?
I agree that asking LV and going to DD were very, very brave things to do. But if he was in a blind panic without being able to think of the possible consequences for himself, how can we expect him to think cool-headedly of making a deal with LV (or anyone) or to consciously think it over what he would contentedly sacrifice and what not? I think he was pretty much in the emotional state of "anything" from the first moment, trying to find the best and broadest protection for Lily, which includes asking anybody and everybody who can help, risking or giving up his life if necessary or doing whatever more it takes.
Julia H. - Mar 19, 2008 12:45 pm (#1896 of 2617)
"Dumbledore is just emphasising a point here. He is forcing Snape to see what his attitude/behaviour/actions really mean." (Zelmia)
Emphasizing a point, yes. Making Snape understand what he does not understand, yes. I absolutely agree with that. What I don't agree with is any conscious "deal" in Snape's mind or the notion that he could have done or said anything more - as far as LV is concerned - at that point but asking LV to spare Lily. The other option was not asking LV at all just going straight to DD.
"Having said that, we do know that Voldemort thought Snape "desired" Lily, so some sort of conversation about her took place."
This is possible though we don't know how it happened. What Snape felt was true love but he may have told LV something similar to what you say if he thought it would be dangerous if LV saw he really loved someone on the other side. (I guess it really was dangerous.) Alternatively, it may have been simply what LV thought because he had no idea of love so he could not recognize it (after all LV could imagine that a mother would agree to step back while her child was being murdered) - and Snape let him think that. But it is rather strange how we learn what LV thought. LV to Harry: "He desired her, that was all ... but when she had gone, he agreed that there were other women, and of purer blood, worthier of him". Now when exactly did this conversation take place? When Lily "had gone", LV was no longer in a position to discuss anything with Snape, was he? Did they get back to this topic 14 years later? I don't think Snape mentioned it to him but why would LV have wanted to know then what Snape thought about Lily's death? 14 years later? In any case, if they did talk about it after LV's return, then it was another occasion for Snape to tell LV that he had just desired her, no problem.
"There is nothing at all to suggest that Dumbledore "could only care for one person".
OK, maybe I took the analogy a bit far but Ariana was neglected wasn't she? And she was dependent on her brother very much and DD seems to have been somewhat obsessed with Grindelwald, sending him letters at night after spending the whole day with him planning frantically what they were going to do with the Hallows etc.
"So you're suggesting that Dumbledore was simply "projecting" and had no legitimate reason to be appalled and "disgusted" by the very suggestion that "[Harry and James] can die as long as you have what you want?"
No, that is not what I meant. Not "simply projecting", only that it was part of it. "I see you love only her but don't you realize you are responsible for two more people's danger?" It may add to DD's anger at the moment that he has a similar sort of experience. (In the long run however, it may have helped him to be sympathetic towards Snape.) This does not mean that DD had no legitimate reason to castigate Snape and Snape seemed to accept DD's right to do so.
Did Mona really want to say that "Snape took a calculated risk"? I may have misunderstood something but I thought Mona was saying that Snape was not able to calculate anything at all, only ran into danger blindly and without caring about the danger (even though he was afraid of DD) in order to save Lily. This means he may still have known about things like imprisonment and aurors (how could he not know?), only he did not think about them because he only thought about Lily. Mona???
wynnleaf - Mar 19, 2008 1:48 pm (#1897 of 2617)
There's a lot to remember in that first confrontation Snape has with DD. At that point, Dumbledore does not really know much about Snape's concern or care for Lily. His assumption of Snape's motivations, probably that it's some baser motivation regarding Lily, is understandable, but it doesn't really fit exactly what Snape was doing at the moment (risking his life and freedom to go to DD, much less to defy LV), nor does it fit what Snape was willing to do for the next 16 or 17 years.
In other words, I think DD was being quite sincere in his suppositions about Snape, but I imagine he'd have had a very different view of Snape at that moment if he'd known that Snape was willing to lay down the rest of his life, however short or long it was, for this cause.
Some of DD's early comments to Snape don't really fit what we, the readers, learn about Snape and therefore I think DD is sometimes working on either early misunderstandings about Snape's true motivations, or possibly projecting his own past and his own mistakes onto Snape. For instance, later, when he meets with Snape just after the Potter's deaths, he says that the Potters trusted the wrong person with their lives, just as Snape had trusted Voldemort with Lily's life. But that was completely untrue about Snape, since Snape went to DD for help precisely because he knew he couldn't trust LV.
My point isn't that DD shouldn't be trusted, or that he's lying. Of course not. My point is that Dumbledore during these early meetings with Snape doesn't seem to really know and understand his motivations completely. Or possibly, it's that DD is projecting his own failings from the past onto Snape. I'm not saying DD's completely "off" in the way he deals with Snape in these early days. Sure, he does see a lot of what's really going on. But he's not got a perfect understanding of Snape either.
So DD's assumption that Snape somehow set up an "exchange" parley with LV doesn't make it correct. Instead, Snape had already given the prophecy to LV. He had nothing left with which to trade. If he later begged for Lily's life, hoping that LV would grant him a request since he was the one to have brought the prophecy, I see that as the act of a desperate man, not a conniving one.
Zelmia, you comment as though the only risk for Snape was whether or not DD would kill him. You haven't commented at all on the real possibility that DD, if he didn't kill Snape, would have turned him over to the aurors and the oftentimes short life in Azkaban.
Julia H. - Mar 19, 2008 3:45 pm (#1898 of 2617)
"He believed it was a real possibility that Dumbledore might kill him, but that it was also at least as likely that Dumbledore wouldn't: a 50-50 chance, in other words." (Zelmia)
I don't know how this 50-50 can be calculated. I mean why not 60-40? Can such willingness to sacrifice be measured like this? And Wynnleaf is right, if Snape calculates, he must consider Azkaban as a further possibility as well. Besides, if DD did kill Snape, that would be 100 per cent death.
"I don't see the experiences as similar at all."
Snape is responsible for three people's danger but he cares for only one because she is the only one he loves. DD was responsible for two people's lives (his sister and brother) because he was their guardian but he neglected his responsibility because of a third person he loved. Grindelwald was a danger in the house and DD did not think of it, although he got to know Grindelwald's views and ideas and personality. But he did not mind it at all before Ariana's death. Snape did not mind what he knew about LV before Lily was threatened. Of course, there are obvious differences but there are similarities as well and it seems to me that JKR makes an important point of certain similarities between the bad choices of these two men early in their lives.
"My point is that Dumbledore during these early meetings with Snape doesn't seem to really know and understand his motivations completely." (Wynnleaf)
DD is obviously suspicious at first and his stern questions in part serve the purpose of testing Snape's motivations and attitudes. I think Snape's (not at all calculating) behaviour convinces him that Snape is sincere and his despair (as well as his love) is genuine but really understanding Snape does not seem to be an easy job. Some 16 years later, DD appears to be much more sympathetic towards the young Snape.
Julia H. - Mar 20, 2008 2:21 am (#1899 of 2617)
"Actually, I did comment in that I agreed with Mona Amon that Snape was not likely to have been thinking too far beyond not being killed on sight." (Zelmia)
But not thinking about the danger does not mean not knowing about it. If he is only worried about not being killed at sight, it is because the only thing he cares about is being able to make his request to DD. If he does not think about any further danger, it is because Lily is so important to him that he does not care what is going to happen to him. With regard to his willingness to sacrifice himself for Lily's safety, I don't see much difference between 1) thinking over the possibilities of being killed, being captured, taken to the aurors, tortured and locked up in Azkaban and still deciding to go to DD and 2) not thinking about what could happen to him at all (even though he otherwise knows - and I'm sure he does - that these possibilities are real), just going to DD to ensure his protection for Lily.
mona amon - Mar 20, 2008 5:51 am (#1900 of 2617)
If he is only worried about not being killed at sight, it is because the only thing he cares about is being able to make his request to DD. If he does not think about any further danger, it is because Lily is so important to him that he does not care what is going to happen to him.
Julia I agree. But in what way is the whole torture, imprisonment thing relevant then?
Of course, there are obvious differences but there are similarities as well (Julia)
I don't know- Grindelwald was not really a threat to Ariana. Hers was an accidental death, and it was Aberforth who started the brawl. We don't even know if Grindelwald actually caused her death. It could have been Albus or Aberforth.
So DD's assumption that Snape somehow set up an "exchange" parley with LV doesn't make it correct. (Wynnleaf)
Dumbledore doesn't assume. He actually suggests that Snape goes and does it. "Why don't you ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?" (I'm paraphrasing). He's actually testing Snape, trying to find out what he feels about the other two people whose lives are at stake. And he finds him wanting. The proper response (as far as DD is concerned) would have been shock at the thought of exchanging the son for the mother. But Snape replies that he did try to do something like that.
wynnleaf - Mar 20, 2008 7:26 am (#1901 of 2617)
Yes, Snape did say that he did try to get LV to spare Lily, and he agrees with DD's comment. But that doesn't mean that what Snape is agreeing to is specifically what DD seems to suggest. That is, DD seems to suggest that Snape has some kind of bargaining power or bargaining chip. He doesn't. LV already had the info of the partial prophecy. All Snape could do is request that LV spare Lily. He could not offer any "exchange" as LV already had made the decision to go after Harry. "Exchange" implies that Snape had the power to give Harry to LV in "exchange" for Lily's life. He didn't have that power. All Snape could do was make a request.
That's why I'm saying that DD's comment isn't really an accurate picture of what Snape could or did do as regards trying to get LV to spare Lily.
If he is only worried about not being killed at sight, it is because the only thing he cares about is being able to make his request to DD. If he does not think about any further danger, it is because Lily is so important to him that he does not care what is going to happen to him. (julia)
Julia I agree. But in what way is the whole torture, imprisonment thing relevant then? (mona amon)
It's relevant because imprisonment was such a clear and obvious probable option if DD didn't kill Snape, that for Snape to disregard that or not think about it, means that he'd have to be so very, very focused on saving Lily, that he doesn't even think at all about the most obvious ramafications of going to the most powerful wizard opposing LV.
It's like this. When a mother runs out into the road in front of ongoing traffic to save her child who has wandered into the street, does she spend time thinking, "Should I risk death for my child? If I run out there I might get killed." No, she doesn't stop to think. She just does it. But that doesn't mean that the mother has lost all sense of reality and has no idea that traffic is coming her way and could kill her. It's just that at that point, it doesn't matter any more. All that matters is saving her child. She is aware of the danger, but she doesn't need to stop and consider it, because it doesn't matter.
The threat of Azkaban for Death Eaters was well-known. The whole Wizarding World knew and feared the idea of dementors and knew the that a sentence to Azkaban could be horrific. All Death Eaters would know that if they were caught and sent to Azkaban, they could die there.
Snape would have to know these things. But like the mother who runs to rescue her child, he goes to DD uncaring about his personal risk. No, he probably doesn't stop to weight the cost. But that's the point. The cost at that point doesn't matter to him, no matter how great it is.
Do we say that the mother who risks her life to save her child isn't really risking death or grave injury, just because she's so focused on her child that she isn't considering that? Of course not.
If Snape did not think about what he was risking, then the idea that the magnitude of what Snape risked isn't important, just because he was so focused on Lily that he didn't consider it is just amazing to me. What I am struck by is that for him to not consider the magnitude of his risk (if he didn't) only shows the huge depth to which he was focused on saving her. His own life, freedom, etc. meant nothing in comparison, because it wasn't even important enough in comparison for him to give any thought to it.
PeskyPixie - Mar 20, 2008 8:48 am (#1902 of 2617)
Snape did say that he did try to get LV to spare Lily, and he agrees with DD's comment. But that doesn't mean that what Snape is agreeing to is specifically what DD seems to suggest. -wynnleaf
I don't think Dumbledore's expression of disgust is a response to any scenarios between Voldy and Snape which we have not witnessed. Personally, I feel that Dumbledore's disgust stems from Snape's inability to express any concern for a baby's probable death. This in itself is disgusting.
Severus loves Lily self-lessly, but has not matured emotionally to the point of realizing that at the loss of her child (and husband) Lily will feel as he would feel at her loss. Also, by throwing her whole family into the deal (and had Sirius and James not used their own brains to 'outwit, outplay and outlast' the Dark Lord, so Lily could actually have lived to learn of Snape's key role in her family's survival), Snape has a great chance of regaining Lily's love (as a friend) and trust. If only Lily had survived she would despise Snape even more for not doing all in his power to save her family (and yes, when he goes to Dumbledore he has no reason to not ask for protection for his Lily and her family). This is further proof that Sev was clueless and undeveloped in the emotional department and only his deep love for Lily allows for his change to take place.
Orion - Mar 20, 2008 9:41 am (#1903 of 2617)
Great observation, Pesky. So Snape has an additional reason to hate Sirius.
Julia H. - Mar 20, 2008 11:23 am (#1904 of 2617)
"But in what way is the whole torture, imprisonment thing relevant then?" (Mona)
Because it is a real possibility. Only Snape does not care. It is not like he has not heard about aurors or Azkaban. But nothing matters to him now. (On the one hand, it is very sad that he does not think of Harry or James but on the other hand, he does not think of the obvious danger that he is in either. Only Lily.) At the root of it, it is the same kind of sacrifice as if he thought of all of these possibilities and decided to ignore them, only in this case he does not even give a thought to the obvious danger. But Wynnleaf has already answered this question perfectly.
"He's actually testing Snape, trying to find out what he feels about the other two people whose lives are at stake. And he finds him wanting. The proper response (as far as DD is concerned) would have been shock at the thought of exchanging the son for the mother. But Snape replies that he did try to do something like that." (Mona)
I agree that he is testing Snape. He finds him wanting. Snape is after all a DE and guilty. He has just acknowledged it. Still, the problem with DD's test question is that it is not a really good question. Imagine Snape did not ask LV anything. Or imagine the horrifying and strictly theoretical possibility that instead of asking LV to spare someone's life, Snape asked LV to reward him with a thousand galleons. Then he goes to DD, begs him to save Lily and DD asks him the very same question: "Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?" In the above mentioned two examples, Snape could sincerely answer: "Oh no, never, what an idea!" Would he be a better man ? Would his motivation be more noble? I doubt it. Snape answers truthfully, "I have asked him" - but there was no exchange, only a desperate request. At the moment, Snape is not in a state to explain the details. DD's question is somewhat similar to the wrong kind of academic multiple choice questions which are more likely to be answered correctly by those who know less than by those who know more.
Snape does not realize that he is taking an exam. He obviously has not thought about what would be the best way to feed DD the request. He is not trying to explain anything. He does not know about good answers and bad answers. He is guilty and humble and desperate. He is begging and waiting for reassurance that DD will protect Lily. He is ready to accept whatever DD may say or do to him. This is the man who can save Lily. Nothing matters. Only Lily.
"Severus loves Lily self-lessly, but has not matured emotionally to the point of realizing that at the loss of her child (and husband) Lily will feel as he would feel at her loss." (Pesky)
Pesky, how can you know this for sure? Snape begs for Lily's life only but asking DD entails securing protection for the whole family. At the moment, he is almost mad with despair and while it is obvious that he, personally, is only interested in Lily, because it is Lily he loves, that does not mean he cannot comprehend that it would be a grief to Lily if she lost her family. If Snape only asked Voldemort, we could be sure that it never occurs to him how Lily would feel. Since he is almost mad with dispair when we see him, he says only what is deepest in his heart and nothing else but when he can think about things calmly (in a different state of mind), why could he not understand that Lily probably loves her family?
I don't think he hopes to ever become friends with Lily again. He probably has not seen her for years. Being a DE, he can have no hope to ever regain her friendship. But he loves her and now she is in danger and he is ready to give anything for her safety. Yes, it is a selfless love. What difference has it made to him, personally, over the past few years that Lily was alive and safe? It is nothing else but the knowledge that the woman he loves is walking this earth somewhere, the knowledge that she exists in the world. This knowledge is all he, personally, can cling to. Her life and safety that his tragic mistake has endangered, her life and safety somewhere far away is the treasure that is worth sacrificing his life for. This is beyond reason, beyond basic instincts, beyond any selfish thought or hope, beyond past and future, beyond right or wrong. There is nothing else but Lily.
wynnleaf - Mar 20, 2008 2:17 pm (#1905 of 2617)
Does anyone else find that you kind of lose track of exactly what we're agreeing and disagreeing about?
1. We all agree (I think) that Snape only left LV and went to DD because it was Lily that was threatened. If LV had gone after Neville and the Longbottoms, Snape may not have ever left LV's service.
2. Do any of us believe that DD actually thought Snape could have bargained or even asked LV to spare the whole family? If not, do any of us believe that DD would consider it wrong or bad to at least ask LV to spare one person, since it was certain that LV had every intention of killing at least Harry and probably James. So that would mean that DD's question was not asked literally -- that is, he didn't truly think Snape should go back and ask LV to spare the whole family. He only asked that to see if Snape's focus was just on Lily.
3. Some people think that Snape being so caught up in Lily's life/death was selfish. Why "selfish" in particular? If LV had targeted the Longbottoms, would Snape's unconcern for their fate be "selfish" or simply show his unconcern and lack of care for the deaths of people he doesn't know or doesn't like. Do you think that's one and the same thing? - that is, being unconcerned about certain people's fate and being "selfish" is the same thing?
4. How does anyone "know" (since canon doesn't say), that Snape had no understanding that her family's death would be horrible for Lily? Is this really what people think? Or do you just think that Snape really wasn't thinking about it one way or the other? In other words, if Snape had stopped to wonder how Lily would have felt about James and Harry's deaths, do you truly think he wouldn't understand that she'd be devistated? What evidence do we have of this?
5. Was Snape completely unthinking about all possible consequences to his going to DD? If he was completely unthinking (versus uncaring), about any consequences, then he must not have even considered how Lily would feel about James and Harry's deaths, one way or the other, nor would he have been thinking about someone regaining Lily for himself. On the other hand, if he was thinking of possible consequences, why would he think about getting Lily for himself and so on, but not think about the likelihood of getting captured and thrown in Azkaban? And what canon evidence do we have of any of it, one way or the other?
PeskyPixie - Mar 20, 2008 9:00 pm (#1906 of 2617)
Yes, thanks, Wynnleaf. I was getting dizzy for a while there!
And, Sirius is in no way to blame for the Potters' deaths - though surely he, himself would disagree. Nor is James. I mean, you might as well blame Lily for her own death since, if she had not ended her friendship with Snape, he might not have become a Death Eater, then he wouldn't have overheard the Prophecy, yadda yadda yadda. The plan to use Peter, the most unlikely Secret Keeper ever, was actually a good one. -zelmia
Although this hardly belongs on Snape's thread, I just can't resist adding my two knuts. I disagree that the Pettigrew scheme is a better strategy than gaining Albus Dumbledore's direct involvement in the protection of one's loved ones from Lord Voldemort. James's and Sirius's actions are typical Gryffindor bravery: very foolish, but highly noble when/if it works out. In this case Dumbledore is told by his spy (I assume he refers to Snape here, but of course I may be completely off) that someone near the Potters is leaking information about them to the Dark Lord. In this scenario, yes, I do find it extremely foolish for James and Sirius to gloriously demonstrate the trust they have in one another and refuse Dumbledore's protection in order to follow their own hunches to make their own plans. Honestly, in Sirius's shoes, I would tell my best friend that if Albee says there's a spy among, there is most certainly a spy among us and there is no way that they should even trust me with the life of my godchild until the spy has been detected by the Order. But that's just me.
Also, I in no way equate James's and Sirius's lack of judgement in this situation with Lily's choice to break off her friendship with Snape - IMO this is pushing it a bit and in no way follows the logic behind my original comments on this topic. James and Sirius make a very foolish tactical decision; Lily breaks off a friendship with a friend who obviously wishes to be a Death Eater. I honestly don't see the similarity.
Hah! I added in 'selfless' before 'love' and I just knew someone was going to pounce on it! I am a bit more lenient with this term than Zelmia as I always picture the worst-case scenario first. Snape's deep love for Lily just seems very hopeful to me, although I agree that at the time of his meeting with Dumbledore on the hilltop it is not as evolved as it needs to be to be truly selfless.
PeskyPixie - Mar 20, 2008 10:58 pm (#1907 of 2617)
I want to reply to Julia's comments, but before doing so I'm posting an excerpt from Snape's meeting with Dumbledore on the hilltop. I think it may be helpful to our discussions.
'The - the prophecy ... the prediction ... Trelawney ...'
'Ah, yes,' said Dumbledore. 'How much did you relay to Lord Voldemort?'
'Everything - everything I heard!' said Snape. 'That is why - it is for that reason - he thinks it means Lily Evans!'
'The prophecy did not refer to a woman,' said Dumbledore. 'It spoke of a boy born at the end of July -'
'You know what I mean! He thinks it means her son, he is going to hunt her down - kill them all -'
'If she means so much to you,' said Dumbledore, 'surely Lord Voldemort will spare her? Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?'
'I have - I have asked him -'
'You disgust me,' said Dumbledore, and Harry had never heard so much contempt in his voice. Snape seemed to shrink a little.
'You do not care, then, about the deaths of her husband and child? They can die, as long as you have what you want?'
Snape said nothing, but merely looked up at Dumbledore.
'Hide them all, then,' he croaked. 'Keep her - them - safe. Please.'
Julia H. - Mar 20, 2008 11:42 pm (#1908 of 2617)
Yes, Wynnleaf, it is good to stop and think over what we are discussing.
Pesky, you get my support for using the word "selfless". Someone is "selfish" when they concentrate on themselves and on their own interest. Risking so much as Snape is risking for someone else's life and concentrating so much on another person without any real hope of benefit for himself is selfless. Snape's love for Lily is selfless also because he left her alone when she wanted him to, apparently never tried to "take revenge" or undermine her relationship with James but when she was in danger, he was ready to do and risk anything for her exactly as if she was still his friend (or more).
"That he asks for protection only for the person he cares about when there is not any reason to exclude the others." (Zelmia)
I think if there was a reason to exclude others, excluding them would be more selfish. I don't think that by saying "save Lily" Snape meant to say "save the whole family" but in fact he was warning them all and I'm sure he knew it - even if he did not think or talk about it. Can we perhaps say that Snape's love for Lily was selfless but it was the only positive feeling in him at that time and he could do just as much good as this love made him do?
"In this scenario, yes, I do find it extremely foolish for James and Sirius to gloriously demonstrate the trust they have in one another and refuse Dumbledore's protection in order to follow their own hunches to make their own plans." (Pesky)
I totally agree. DD could have kept the secret perfectly and it would not even have been extra trouble to him. Anyway: to think that the weakest is the strongest? Even if the "weakest" does not willfully become a traitor, he may be captured accidentally and crack. He may be tricked into telling the secret (not a very intelligent guy, this Pettigrew). I mean they should have known this "friend" quite well after all those years... and yes, they did know (from Snape, no doubt) that there was a traitor among them. And not even mentioning their plan to DD? James could have been as foolishly heroic (or whatever) as he wanted if it had been only about himself but he was risking Lily's and Harry's safety as well. IMO it indicates a bit that James was still more of a Marauder (and defined himself as his friends' friend through and through) than a responsible family man. I understand if it added to Snape's anger at him. He probably felt James had been irresponsible and that he (Snape) would have put Lily's safety above all, as indeed he did, and would not have exchanged the best protection available for anything else. (Perhaps that was the main reason why he could never forgive James... rather than their schoolboy enmity -?)
mona amon - Mar 21, 2008 6:40 am (#1909 of 2617)
Lol, Wynnleaf, I really was losing track. Thanks for that neat summary. Now to reply to some of your points-
3. Some people think that Snape being so caught up in Lily's life/death was selfish. Why "selfish" in particular? If LV had targeted the Longbottoms, would Snape's unconcern for their fate be "selfish" or simply show his unconcern and lack of care for the deaths of people he doesn't know or doesn't like. Do you think that's one and the same thing? - that is, being unconcerned about certain people's fate and being "selfish" is the same thing?
I do think it's selfish in a way. In Snape's case it wasn't 'certain people' but everyone other than Lily. When you care only for the life of a person dear to your own heart and don't care a jot when you know others are being murdered, that sounds pretty selfish to me. I'm not trying to show how evil Snape was, I'm trying to show that coming to Dumbledore in an attempt to save Lily does not show that he was remorseful. That was not his 'road to Damascus' moment. If he had come to Dumbledore because he was sorry about all those strangers being murdered, that would have been truly unselfish and noble.
4. How does anyone "know" (since canon doesn't say), that Snape had no understanding that her family's death would be horrible for Lily?
5. Was Snape completely unthinking about all possible consequences to his going to DD? If he was completely unthinking (versus uncaring), about any consequences, then he must not have even considered how Lily would feel about James and Harry's deaths, one way or the other,...
I feel he didn't consider the consequences to himself, just rushed off to Dumbledore even though he was mortally afraid of him. This shows that he cared more about Lily's life than his own (and yes, he was being unselfish or even selfless here). And even if he'd had room in his overwrought mind to consider the possible consequences, he would still have gone to Dumbledore.
As for James and Harry, yes he must have been too distraught to think of them. But he would not have cared about them anyway. I think that comes out very clearly in the excerpt that Pesky has quoted. And he would surely have been worried about them if he had even the faintest idea of how Lily would feel when her husband and child were murdered before her eyes. But he is completely clueless. Even after Dumbledore has spelled it out for him.
Julia H. - Mar 21, 2008 9:11 am (#1910 of 2617)
As for James and Harry, yes he must have been too distraught too think of them." (Mona)
Yes, Snape was too distraught to think of a lot of things and was also too distraught to speak properly. To me what really comes out of it is just this "save her, save her, save her", nothing else. I don't think his behaviour at this moment can be judged exactly as the behaviour of someone in their normal mind.
"But he is completely clueless. Even after Dumbledore has spelled it out for him."
There is again so little said, I am not convinced that, as he looks at DD and answers him, he is still clueless. "Snape seemed to shrink a little." Why? I think he is ashamed here. And: "Snape said nothing, but merely looked up at Dumbledore." Why is it not possible that he does not say anything because he is thinking of something? Because something is dawning on him? When someone is confronted with an idea that strikes him as new or shocking, why is it not possible that the person is silent for a moment or two? And if it is a new realization, it may be very difficult to put it into words right then. 'Hide them all, then,' he croaked. 'Keep her - them - safe. Please.' Why can't this sentence be a sign of Snape understanding what DD is saying? No, it is not an eloquent speech, just a first reaction but he is not in the emotional state of saying even coherent sentences, so how could he be expected to suddenly change his way of talking in a radical way? Understanding happens deep down first, not on the surface. I think what he says (together with body language such as shrinking and looking at DD), can be interpreted as a surface sign of understanding what DD is saying.
My problem with his cluelessness is that Snape knows Lily. He may have very little idea of a loving family (he never saw one) but he knows Lily. Lily in school argued with him about Mulciber and Mary, and Lily argued with James because of his bullying behaviour. Snape does not trust Voldemort. Yes, Voldemort is Voldemort, on the one hand, but on the other hand, Snape must know that even if the Dark Lord is willing to spare Lily, it will be only if Lily does not interfere. But knowing Lily, it is impossible that he does not know she will interfere. I find it possible that this is (also) at the root of Snape's distrust regarding LV. I think he can picture LV attacking the Potters, giving Lily the chance to flee but he can also picture that Lily will not go. Lily was known as a cheeky, brave girl at school, even Slughorn can tell that. So I think Snape may well realize that Voldemort must be kept away from Lily completely and that means away from her family as well. He does not necessarily formulate this realization in so many words even for himself but it still may be behind the fact that he does not trust Voldemort and rushes to Dumbledore. Snape's concern for Lily's family ends here and he does not think about mentioning them to DD (but again there is a lot he does not think about on the hilltop). He still wants to save Lily in the first place but he wants her to avoid all contact with Voldemort and he does not want her to have any reason to fight against him.
Finally, some questions: If he is, on the hilltop, selfish and clueless, disgusting, without remorse and still totally dark, then what does DD see in him? Why does DD think that Snape can be saved and is worth saving? How many other DE's do we know DD tried to save or took into his confidence? Why Snape? What started his redemption? I refuse to believe that redemption may come from outside only. Yes, Snape needs help but nobody can be redeemed in spite of themselves. There must be something in Snape that makes him different from Voldemort, who could not change for the better, even though he took Lily's (Harry's) blood (I don't quite understand why this cruel act gives him more chance for redemption but that is what JKR said) and Harry told him to try for some remorse. LV would not and could not be redeemed because he lacked something that Snape had. (I, personally, think what makes eventual redemption possible for Snape is his selfless love - if only for one person - and the ability to place someone else's interest way above his own and the willingness to put something right that he did wrong. What is your opinion?) It is on the hilltop that DD decides to give a chance to Snape, so there must be something that happens there, not later. And where is "his 'road to Damascus' moment"?
Last edited by Mona on Mon Nov 24, 2014 7:52 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1911 to 1930
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 9:07 am
Julia H. - Mar 21, 2008 2:40 pm (#1911 of 2617)
"For himself." (Zelmia)
What do you mean by this? Did he want Lily for himself? As for that, he could have no real hope for several reasons, after deciding to go to DD and it was his decision to go to DD. The knowledge that she lived? I can agree with that. But he was ready to risk his life for that knowledge. No, he did not want to save her because of a general respect for life. That is something Snape will do later. But loving and risking one's life for our loved one is not a bad thing to do. I agree that it is not good that he does not want to save James and Harry as well. But trying to save Lily at least is still good.
"Why can't this sentence be a sign of Snape understanding what DD is saying? - It is. But only after Dumbledore has spelled it all out for him." (Zelmia)
I responded to a comment that said he did not even understand it then. But most people seem to agree that Snape did not really sit down to think over anything in his distress. Just an instinct to save her. So thinking over and understanding the larger picture after DD's answer is not that terrible. Besides, DD does not see everything exactly as it is because he is suspicious of Snape, as you also said. 16 years later DD seems to have a somewhat different opinion of the same event.
"He still wants to save Lily in the first place but he wants her to avoid all contact with Voldemort and he does not want her to have any reason to fight against him. - A very nice interpretation and I can even agree with it. But it's still just Lily." (Zelmia)
I think all of us agree that it is just Lily. What I tried to point out is that the fact that Snape knows Lily and that he goes to DD instead of being satisfied with LV's promise may suggest that Snape does understand how Lily would feel about and react to the danger of her family and that completely saving Lily entails saving the whole family because Lily would not stand by and watch. Which, in turn, excludes any possibility of trying to save Lily for himself.
"My personal opinion is that Dumbledore would have done the same for anyone, any Death Eater, who had approached him in this way. I don't think his attitude was unique to Snape specifically." (Zelmia)
You say "in this way". So there must be something in Snape's way that makes him worthy of DD's benevolence.
"Though we're not given any specific information about other Death Eaters who may have defected, Dumbledore does make reference to "a number of useful spies". Some of these may have once been Death Eaters. And we certainly know that he tried to save Draco." (Zelmia)
We don't know much about the other spies. None of them seems to be a teacher at Hogwarts. DD tried to save Draco because he thought "That boy's soul is not yet so damaged." He must have thought the same of Snape. Which is exactly the point I am trying to make.
"To my mind, Dumbledore is already showing Snape that one cannot expect to just be given what they want. One must work for it, earn it. All the more so if what one wants is redemption or even simple forgiveness.To me this echoes Lily's refusal to accept his apology because in that situation, Snape failed to understand that, for some things, one cannot simply utter the magic words "I'm sorry" and have everything go back to the way it was. In other words, he needed to work to earn her forgiveness, but apparently he never did anything beyond that initial attempt at an apology." (Zelmia)
Good point. I guess it would have been easier if Lily had accepted the apology as such but made it clear that she expected something more as well. She was not half as encouraging as DD on the hilltop, who, after all, listened to Snape and asked him what he would do in return. But I also think that Snape did learn Lily's lesson about "I'm sorry" not being enough and that can be one of the reasons (IMO) why he can never bring himself to say "I'm sorry" to Harry and this is why I cannot condemn him for that. He has learned that he must do (not say) something as atonement and he does a lot but cannot verbalize how he feels about it.
mona amon - Mar 22, 2008 5:29 am (#1912 of 2617)
If he is, on the hilltop, selfish and clueless, disgusting, without remorse and still totally dark, then what does DD see in him? (Julia)
I suppose each person will interpret it differently. I imagine he was impressed by his courage and his deep love for Lily, and decided he could be saved.
And where is "his 'road to Damascus' moment"?
Good question. I like to think it was the meeting with Dumbledore on the windy hilltop. It even has similarities with what happened on the original road to Damascus.
'As he [Saul] neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. He fell to the ground...'(Acts: 9, 3 and 4)
'Then a blinding, jagged jet of white light flew through the air: ...Snape had dropped to his knees...(DH chapter 33)
But I'd like to give Snape a little credit here. His salvation didn't drop out of heaven. Remorseful or not, it was he who made the first move towards his own salvation by rejecting Voldemort and seeking out Dumbledore.
But I also think that Snape did learn Lily's lesson about "I'm sorry" not being enough and that can be one of the reasons (IMO) why he can never bring himself to say "I'm sorry" to Harry and this is why I cannot condemn him for that. He has learned that he must do (not say) something as atonement and he does a lot but cannot verbalize how he feels about it.
I don't think I agree with you here. He didn't have to say sorry if he found it so difficult, just give him the story of his role in Harry's parents' deaths.
Julia H. - Mar 22, 2008 7:12 am (#1913 of 2617)
"He didn't have to say sorry if he found it so difficult, just give him the story of his role in Harry's parents' deaths." (Mona)
Of course, he could have done that. But we would still find fault with him if he had told Harry the story but had not said he was sorry. It seems he always finds it difficult to put his deepest feelings into words. He never tells Lily about his love and on the hilltop he can hardly talk. That is why gestures are often so important.
"I like to think it was the meeting with Dumbledore on the windy hilltop. It even has similarities with what happened on the original road to Damascus." (Mona)
That is what I have always thought. I like the way you point out the similarities. And Saul is also given a task he has to do. Snape drops on his knees: On the one hand, it is DD making his conditions clear but on the other hand, this has important symbolic meanings, too. It can refer both to begging and to remorse. There are four scenes in which Snape kneels, all of them have important references to life and death: This is the first one, and here he is begging for protection to save Lily's life and is also about to change his own life (even if he does not realize it yet). Secondly, it happens when he takes the vow with Narcissa. As I have already said, that scene has direct connections with the hilltop scene. Narcissa is begging on her knees and Snape (while taking the vow) takes over her position. It is about saving Draco's life and about Dumbledore's death, which means something very different to Snape and Narcissa. Snape offers his life as reassurance. Thirdly, he is saving Draco's life after the Sectumsempra. He is kneeling by him and healing his wounds. These are potentially mortal wounds caused by a spell Snape invented long before his "road to Damascus moment". Now, he is saying/singing the counterspell, healing wounds caused by his own invention, "reversing" in a way something that he did in his youth. That his counterspell sounds almost like a song, IMO, means that it is a special spell, something that must be "felt" more strongly than the usual spells, something that needs more concentration, more emotional involvement. It is songlike and repetitive, possibly performed in a special state of mind, which reminds me of traditional healing magic found in various parts of the world. The fourth scene is where Snape is kneeling in Sirius's room (after the chase), crying, and is reading Lily's letter. A letter form someone who has been dead for a long time, from someone who has been involved in everything that is important in Snape's life. He is facing the mistakes and regrets and the tragedies of his life.
"His salvation didn't drop out of heaven. Remorseful or not, it was he who made the first move towards his own salvation by rejecting Voldemort and seeking out Dumbledore." (Mona)
I absolutely agree. It is also important that he is asking for help. DD often emphasizes that help is given to those who ask for it.
wynnleaf - Mar 22, 2008 7:29 am (#1914 of 2617)
What I tried to point out is that the fact that Snape knows Lily and that he goes to DD instead of being satisfied with LV's promise may suggest that Snape does understand how Lily would feel about and react to the danger of her family and that completely saving Lily entails saving the whole family because Lily would not stand by and watch. Which, in turn, excludes any possibility of trying to save Lily for himself. (julia)
I was thinking last night about a couple of instances where I have been in real life-and-death situations, where one of my children was also involved or my husband. (This was years ago.) What I remembered is that even though my paramount focus and really only interest was on what was going on with myself and those I cared about, I certainly never lost the reality of what was really going on -- that is, the real risks involved in the crisis or various other ramifications. How far gone and "out of it" would Snape have to be to not realize that if he brought Dumbledore news that the Potters were being targeted, Dumbledore wasn't just going to protect Lily, but the whole family?
This is Snape, after all, who within only days or weeks of this event was a spy, who had to deal with deeply fearful situations while at the same time thinking and being aware of consequences, ramifications of what is being said and done, etc.
So yes, Snape's focus is on Lily, but I don't see how he can be so blind that he'd think DD would only be interested in saving her and wouldn't bother to protect James and the baby as well.
Sure, DD is "disgusted" that Snape doesn't have any concern for the other two, and I don't think he does. But that doesn't mean that Snape doesn't realize in some way that if he brings the info to DD, all of the Potters would be involved in whatever solution DD came up with. I just know from my own experience that even a life and death crisis with danger to yourself and those you love doesn't wipe out reality from your mind, and especially if it's Snape who must have the ability to deal with crisis, danger, fear and still think at the same time.
On the selfishly risking your life to save someone, I don't think, in my opinion, that it is even possible. I consider it a contradiction in terms. I realize it's possible to go through the actions that work to save someone, where the person's motivation, even if they are risking their life, is not to save the other person, but to accomplish something for themselves. Personally, that's the way I see DD's confrontation with Grindelwald. GG had killed and tortured many many people, but Dumbledore said that even though he was the only person who (he thought) could defeat GG, he only went after him because the "shame became too great." It seems to me that DD, although his actions ultimately prevented more people from seeing death or torture, he didn't do it for them. He did it because he didn't like feeling shamed and he wanted to get rid of the shame.
Snape, on the other hand, risks his life because he wants to save Lily, not so that he can feel better about himself or otherwise gain something for himself. We have no evidence that he thought he'd gain Lily, especially since he had apparently left her alone for years after she broke off the friendship.
So Snape risked his life to save another person (even if it would have been better if he'd risked it to save 3 people). I don't think it's possible to selfishly be willing to "give up his life for a friend," even if it is only because he cares about that person.
Julia H. - Mar 22, 2008 2:38 pm (#1915 of 2617)
"He is only interested in her being killed as it relates to him personally." (Zelmia)
How does it relate to him personally? And how do you know this?
"He didn't want her to be spared because it was the right thing to do, he wanted what he wanted, regardless of how that might affect others (James/Harry)." (Zelmia)
I guess everybody wants what they want. Perhaps Snape should have wanted what he did not want or should not have wanted what he wanted but it is getting a bit too philosophical for me. It kind of reminds me of a discussion concerning whether the board can still be regarded as green when nobody sees it. I think it is a noble thing that Snape watches over Harry and protects his life for years. But does the fact that he loathes him make it all more noble than it were if he actually loved him? Does Snape still want what he wants? I think the main question is wanting something good or wanting something bad.
"Well, that's assuming he has these "deepest feelings" to begin with." (Zelmia)
No deep feelings? Come on, Zelmia, not even you can seriously deny him everything!
BTW, as you say, in the hilltop scene, he does not act on principle. Right. So what sends him there at all? It is feelings, very deep feelings and he pours them out in front of DD without pretence or without considering what would be the most appropriate way to make the request.
"I think his RtD moment actually comes when he learns that Lily and James have been killed." (Zelmia)
It is possible and I see why you think that. But I like the way Mona showed the similarities between the hilltop scene and the biblical scene. And I think there is a recognition that happens or at the very least starts there.
wynnleaf - Mar 22, 2008 5:35 pm (#1916 of 2617)
It seems to me that JKR's whole point is that whatever Snape's other faults were, he did love very, very deeply. Zelmia may disagree with JKR, but I do think it came through load and clear in DH that Snape didn't start loving Lily deeply sometime after her death, but that instead it was the entire reason he went to DD.
He didn't want her to be spared because it was the right thing to do, he wanted what he wanted, regardless of how that might affect others (James/Harry)." (Zelmia)
I realize that some may believe that it is somehow more noble or righteous to do things because it's the right thing, than to do it from love, but I don't think doing something because you love someone is somehow a lesser motivation. Snape's love is not broad -- it was only focused on Lily at least before her death -- but it was just as strong and perhaps even stronger than some other good character's motivations to do what's "right."
Did Lily choose to die for Harry because it was right or because she loved him? Because she loved him of course. And what is love anyway? Just a feeling? Or a decision to act in certain ways toward others and do what is right as regards them? Snape did do what was right in trying to save Lily. It certainly wasn't wrong, after all. No, his action wasn't perfect in it's rightness. He didn't rush out to try to get the whole family saved, even though only an idiot would think that DD wouldn't try to save them all, and Snape was no idiot. But what he did, at least to the degree he did it, was right.
His motivation was out of love for Lily.
He is only interested in her being killed as it relates to him personally.
What do you mean? Canon evidence of it? I just saw your "rant" above. Many of us don't always put our evidence in with our opinions, but when asked, we don't usually rant about being asked, but just give what we felt was the evidence in our answering post. If you haven't got any, okay. If you do, can't we comment on it? We see plenty of evidence that he loved her. I see no particular evidence that he loved her selfishly. Surely if he loved her selfishly, he wouldn't have gone along with her decision to end the friendship, instead he'd have kept trying to start it up again. We're not shown that he stalked her, or tried to stop her dating James, or anything that shows a selfish love. He may or may not have understood her love for James, but really Snape wasn't stupid, so it seems unlikely that he wouldn't realize she probably would care for her own baby. And even if he didn't understand these things (his parents didn't appear to care much for him, so perhaps he really didn't understand parental love), that doesn't mean he loved her selfishly, only that he didn't understand her love for his hated enemy or a baby. Not understanding her love for her family (and remember he may have had little exposure to loving families), doesn't mean that his love for her was selfish.
As I've said numerous times, I don't think willingness to give your life to save someone is compatible with "selfish" motivations. It's kind of the "greater love hath no man" sort of thing, this willingness to give up one's life for a friend. That in and of itself, in my opinion, denotes great love, and certainly not selfishness.
wynnleaf - Mar 22, 2008 5:57 pm (#1917 of 2617)
Oh I wanted to comment on the whole "road to Damascus" idea. I've noticed that many people (not on this forum), tend to assume that major shifts in a person's viewpoint tend to happen during some specific climactic decision-making point, a kind of moment of epiphany.
But for many, many people, great changes in viewpoint, perspective, ethics, etcs., occur slowly over a long time.
As I've shown in other posts, I think Snape already loved Lily very deeply before he went to DD, and that his love for her is what drove him to DD. But I don't think there's any one specific road to Damascus point. I think instead Snape changes over the years. I think that his changing was complete before DH. After all, JKR didn't show us anything different about Snape in DH than we saw about him in the time period of HBP. By the year of HBP, Snape was already commenting that he would only stand by and allow people to die if he couldn't save them. We never get to see a particular point where Snape came to this attitude. So I don't think Snape has some specific redemptive moment, but that instead he gradually changes over 17 years, to the point where he is willing to risk his life to save Lupin, a man he appears to have despised.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 22, 2008 8:18 pm (#1918 of 2617)
I am not sure that selfish should be the word when describing Snape's motivation for saving Lily.
yes, I agree that Snape went to Dumbledore because he didn't want Lily to die. He would not have done the same for Alice Longbottom. And his initial idea did not include saving James or Harry.
So in a small narrow sense his motive might have been selfish but he changed. Someone previously pointed out that Snape must have sought out Dumbledore because he recognized that Lily would not just stand by and watch/let her baby or husband die. Snape loved the real Lily, not the Lily of his daydreams (the one that might love him as a Death Eater) and he knew the real Lily loved James and Harry.
Snape's love was imperfect but what he had for Lily was love in the more Christian sense of the word.
Snape's love for Lily can be compared to Dumbledore's love for Ariana. Both were distracted by grand schemes for what was considered a better wizarding world. Both had to abandon their schemes when it was realized that this grand scheme could not include the one that they loved.
I never saw Snape meeting with Dumbledore as his road to Damascus moment.
First Saul had no intentions of changing his life until he was struck by lightning. Snape however had already decided to turn to Dumbledore when he appeared as a flash of white light.
But when Saul was knocked down, he did hear a voice that said why are you persecuting me. Maybe Snape's conscience told him he was persecuting Lily.
Snape's actions do not really follow Saul's. Snape didn't change his name. He was not sent to the equivalent of Peter.
But both felt anguish about their past behavior. ( Though I think Saul felt forgiveness and accepted it. Saul was more open about his past behavior than Snape was.)
Both felt alone at times. Saul was in prison. Snape in his own prison?
It is Saul writing as Paul who describes love as gentle, kind, patient, doesn't put on airs etc. He also says that many great things can be done but if it is done with out love it is meaningless. What has bothered me about Snape was that if he did all these things (protecting Harry) without love, then his life would have been wasted.
Jo has described Snape as being redeemed and I hope that it is because before he died he stopped loathing Harry.
Julia H. - Mar 23, 2008 1:39 am (#1919 of 2617)
Snape's "Road to Damascus" moment:
Very good observations. Yes, there are similarities and differences and it is interesting to explore them.
"I think instead Snape changes over the years." (Wynnleaf)
Of course he does. The extent we can talk about a "Road to Damascus" moment is that it is a special landmark in his redemption, a moment when the long process starts and which later events can be related to and it is indeed connected to Snape's own decision rather than to external help only - though he did get external help of course. BTW I thought about this "asking DD instead of doing something on his own" idea and I think it was the right decision to make and sometimes it is indeed important to acknowledge "I cannot solve this problem alone, I need help" and then to be able to ask for help and in the right place, too. Snape does not do that very often in his life. (Maybe this is the only time, I don't know.)
"It is Saul writing as Paul who describes love as gentle, kind, patient, doesn't put on airs etc. He also says that many great things can be done but if it is done with out love it is meaningless. What has bothered me about Snape was that if he did all these things (protecting Harry) without love, then his life would have been wasted." (Ramb)
Yes, but Snape still did everything ultimately because of love. Because of his love for Lily. He was not without love at all. I think the point about Snape and also a point about LV (and that relates somehow to what Paul writes about love) is that when there is love (even if only for one person), selfless, deep love, then and only then salvation is possible. Because of this, I cannot see Snape's change as a mere accident. He would not have tried to save Alice Longbottom but as long as he kept this strong love at least for Lily, he was (IMO only, no canon) bound to realize that Voldemort's world excludes and threatens something that is very, very important to him. (Granted though, if the realization comes too late, love itself may lose its strength as a consequence of the evil around and inside him.) I also think that along the way somewhere Snape learned to feel the kind of "broad" love that DD felt for people in general - for the students he had to protect, for example (even if not necessarily for Harry), for life as such. This love was not so intensive or personal as his love for Lily but it included more people, ultimately at some level even some of those he did not like in particular (Narcissa, Lupin) and it still made him risk and sacrifice or at least care for the protection of these people. And he did love Dumbledore as well.
"Jo has described Snape as being redeemed and I hope that it is because before he died he stopped loathing Harry." (Ramb)
I like to think that, too.
mona amon - Mar 23, 2008 5:33 am (#1920 of 2617)
On the selfishly risking your life to save someone, I don't think, in my opinion, that it is even possible. (Wynnleaf)
Risking your life to save someone is unselfish, even selfless. I've always agreed to that. So I will leave out the word selfish since it is causing all the confusion.
What I'm trying to say is, Snape coming to Dumbledore in an attempt to save Lily does not show that he was remorseful, because he only rejects Voldemort when the evil that he does affects him personally. And anyone would do that if they were personally affected, though they may not have been as brave as him. Narcissa also defies the Dark Lord and comes running to Severus when her child is threatened. That does not prove that there was any fundamental change in her.
GG had killed and tortured many many people, but Dumbledore said that even though he was the only person who (he thought) could defeat GG, he only went after him because the "shame became too great." It seems to me that DD, although his actions ultimately prevented more people from seeing death or torture, he didn't do it for them. He did it because he didn't like feeling shamed and he wanted to get rid of the shame.
Dumbledore did not really owe it to all those strangers to risk his life for them. They had nothing to do with him. He did not have to feel guilty about them, because he was not a follower or supporter of Grindelwald. But all the same he feels he has it in him to defeat Grindelwald, but due to various personal reasons, he is unable to act. And he is ashamed of himself for this paralysis. Finally, when the shame overcomes the paralysis he goes after GG. He does not do it for glory. he does not do it because those people mean anything to him personally. IMO, it's a totally unselfish act.
Nice post, Ramb, even if I don't agree with some of the points!
rambkowalczyk - Mar 23, 2008 5:28 pm (#1921 of 2617)
Dumbledore did not really owe it to all those strangers to risk his life for them. Mona Amon
Excuse me for nitpicking, but if Dumbledore doesn't owe it to all those strangers, why then be critical of Snape when he would not stop Voldemort for targeting Alice Longbottom?
It's not that I excuse him for being a Death Eater, but why should he have tried to save Alice when he didn't know her?
Yes, I do realize Snape was a Death Eater and Dumbledore wasn't a Grindelwald supporter but evil or bad things happen when good people do nothing.
wynnleaf - Mar 23, 2008 7:03 pm (#1922 of 2617)
In the case of Dumbledore, I brought him up because whether or not we the readers think Dumbledore had a responsibility to do something about Grendelwald, DD himself did seem to think he had such a responsibility, both because of his part in getting GG started on with his ideas and because DD felt he was the only person who had any hope of stopping GG. Because DD felt it was his responsibility, and yet still didn't act even though many many people were being tortured and killed, and only finally acted in order to alleviate his own shame, I count that as someone acting for his own interests (alleviating his shame), rather than for the interests of others. Whether or not you might call that selfish, I tend to think if it's possible to risk one's life selfishly to save others, it would only be if your purpose wasn't to save the lives, but to do something for yourself. If DD's primary purpose was to alleviate his sense of guilt, then that seems to me more "selfish" than someone willing to die because they so strongly wanted to save another person's life.
The comparison between DD and Snape, I believe, is intentional in JKR's writing of DH. DD, in his youth, is drawn into Dark paths. Because of his misplaced love for Grindelwald, he helps GG develop these ideas which GG later uses to attempt some kind of world domination. DD does not see the danger in GG, even though GG had already developed a somewhat bad reputation before DD met him. DD only feels remorse when his sister is killed. Still, DD does not immediately seek any justice. In fact, he never seeks justice for his sister's death, instead covering up the cause of her death from the Wizarding World. Remorse? Kind of. But just as Snape refuses to tell Harry his part in the Potter's deaths, DD covers up his part in his sister's death from the authorities as well as anyone else.
We have commented on Snape's inability or refusal to face his degree of guilt (whether or not people believe he did or didn't face it varies). But we know that DD didn't want to face his degree of guilt in his sister's death, because he specifically points out that he couldn't bear to go back and discover exactly who cast the killing spell.
For both, the catalyst in seeing their mistakes is the death or risk of death of their loved one. DD, however, even when he sees his error, doesn't do anything to try and make up for it. Even though he believes himself culpable in GG's later actions, and even though he believes he has a responsibility to stop GG because he's the only wizard who can stop him, he still does nothing while many, many people are tortured and killed. It is only his shame growing more and more acute that moves him to face GG and finally address the responsibility he believe he has.
Snape, immediately upon learning of Lily's danger, risks his life to go to a wizard for whom he is not a match and who could and probably would (as far as Snape knew) either kill him or send him to the aurors, in order to try to save Lily. No, Snape doesn't pay a lot of attention to the two other people whose lives are at risk. Nor did DD pay a lot of attention to the many killed and tortured under GG. Still, at least Snape didn't spend years and years burying his own guilt, shame, and uncertainty before he'd finally do something. At least Snape acts immediately, even if imperfectly.
mona amon - Mar 24, 2008 3:36 am (#1923 of 2617)
Yes, I do realize Snape was a Death Eater and Dumbledore wasn't a Grindelwald supporter but evil or bad things happen when good people do nothing. (Ramb)
But that's the whole point, isn't it? Snape was a DE. If Alice Longbottom had been targetted, it would have been Snape's fault, just as it was his fault that the Potters were targetted. To then sit by and do nothing is evil.
And if Snape could willingly serve a master who has killed a number of people, it shows that he does not care about those people and is tacitly condoning their murders. That is evil. Not caring about human life to the extent that you can continue to be a faithful servant to the murderer is completely different from not risking your life to save strangers when you are in no way resposible for the mess they are in.
In the case of Dumbledore, I brought him up because whether or not we the readers think Dumbledore had a responsibility to do something about Grendelwald, DD himself did seem to think he had such a responsibility, both because of his part in getting GG started on with his ideas and because DD felt he was the only person who had any hope of stopping GG. (Wynnleaf)
Wynnleaf, as far as I can make out, DD's only mistake here is in having an overactive conscience. Does that make him as guilty as Snape?
his part in getting GG started on with his ideas
Dumbledore does not accuse himself of getting GG started on his ideas. In fact it was the opposite, "his ideas inflamed me". From DD's midnight note to Grindelwald, it is clear that he was the more resposible of the two and that he was trying to restrain him.
and yet still didn't act even though many many people were being tortured and killed, and only finally acted in order to alleviate his own shame, I count that as someone acting for his own interests (alleviating his shame), rather than for the interests of others.
Then, if he had not felt ashamed at all would that make his act unselfish?
The reason he was feeling ashamed was because he did care about those people (though not personally), yet found himself unable to act. I don't see why finally overcoming his paralysis and risking his life to save those people is selfish just because he is able to get rid of his (self imposed) feelings of shame in the process.
Still, DD does not immediately seek any justice. In fact, he never seeks justice for his sister's death, instead covering up the cause of her death from the Wizarding World.
But Arianna's death was an accident, not murder. I don't see what sort of justice he could have got. If he had called for an enquiry, either he, Aberforth or GG could have been sent to Azkaban, and that's no justice. I don't blame him for hushing it up.
I don't think the comparison with Snape works. Snape covers up information from someone to whom he owes an explanation.
wynnleaf - Mar 24, 2008 4:20 am (#1924 of 2617)
Mona amon,
Different people have different views of what is right or wrong for them to do. If DD believed that he was in part responsible for the advent of GG's ideas (and he may have been right for all we know), or that he was the only person who could stop him (he likely was right about this), and that he therefore had a responsibility to stop him, it really doesn't matter -- in terms of DD's own decisions -- whether he was right or wrong about that responsibility. The point is that he was, internally, making a decision to not do what he himself believed to be the right thing, because he was afraid to discover the degree of his culpability in his sister's death. It's DD's internal motivation here that's important in analyzing why he made his decisions. DD believed that he had a responsibility to act, and yet he waited years and years while people died and did nothing.
As regards the shame, yes I think it's important. DD pinpointed the his motivation to act as being because of the shame he was experiencing, not the concern over other people's welfare. Shame could be caused by all sorts of things, but shame is basically what one feels about oneself, not about other people. We have no idea why DD was ashamed. And he never says, "Finally so many people were dying that I just couldn't stand it any more." He says the shame was so great -- nothing about what was happening to other people at all.
As regards Arianna's death, it was only "accidental" in the same way manslaughter might be accidental. If I were to equate it to a real life incident, I'd imagine a brother with the responsibility to care for a younger brother and a mentally disabled sister. The oldest brother develops a very bad friendship with a particularly dangerous young man and brings him to visit. During an argument between the 2 brothers and the Bad visitor, weapons are brought out and begin to be used around the younger sister. Her mental disability comes into play, as her reactions cause the situation to become even more volatile and one of the weapons goes off and she is killed. The Bad visitor runs off. The oldest brother covers it all up and allows the authorities to believe the younger sister somehow died due to her own mental difficulties and never mentions the fight the brothers and visitor were having. In real life, the death would very likely have been determined to be some sort of manslaughter. And yes, that's a crime. And yes, DD covered it up and never even tried to find out who cast the killing spell.
So I think there are correlations to Snape. Sure, they aren't exact by any means. But both men made major mistakes with the Dark in their late teens which caused people they loved to die. Both men covered up, in one degree of another, their culpability, although Snape at least told DD and made himself accountable to DD about the whole thing. Both men ultimately tried to make up for their mistakes, although Snape started immediately and DD waited many decades.
Julia H. - Mar 24, 2008 6:13 am (#1925 of 2617)
On another thread, we were talking about mirror images. But perhaps what JKR gives us is not always or only mirror images but variations on a theme. I feel the stories of Snape's and DD's youth are variations on the theme of guilt and responsibility. Snape and DD had different types of responsibility regarding the death of the Potters and the death of Grindelwald's victims, respectively. Certainly, DD did not give a reason to Grindelwald to kill and torture all those people. (He seems to have invented the slogan of the "greater good" and may have done some research together with GG concerning the Hallows, including the Elder Wand, which became GG's weapon, but this is not the point I want to make.) Knowing yourself to be the only one who can stop the evil affecting a lot of people's lives is a type of responsibility, though of course different from Snape's. Neglecting his duties as a guardian to Ariana and to Aberforth as well is neglecting a type of responsibility, though again it is a different type of responsibility that Snape had. DD, while he did not directly cause these deaths, did not act only after people he alone could have saved had died.
Snape's responsibility: we sometimes talk about it as if Snape had killed the Potters but of course he did not. Not only because it was not Snape who did the AK but because he also tried to prevent the consequences of the terrible wrong he had done, first by informing DD and secondly by spying on LV. He tried to do that while it was not too late, when nobody died yet. It required a great deal of determination and commitment and courage to go back and start spying on LV. If it had not been for Pettigrew's betrayal and/or the folly of James and Sirius, Snape could even have come out of it with a relatively clean conscience, knowing that he had managed to put the wrong right. It did not happen so and Snape was left with a terrible guilt he tried to atone for desperately for the rest of his life.
Both men inadvertently and more or less indirectly caused the death of someone they loved. Neither of them went to Azkaban for that, although Snape confessed what he had done to DD, who could have acted as a kind of authority and could have started a legal process against Snape but he chose not to do so. Snape did not confess his guilt to Harry to whom he owed an explanation - though actually he did at the end of his life. True. DD did not owe an explanation to anyone: I'm not sure about that. If DD had found it out that he himself had cast the curse that killed Ariana, he would have owed this confession to Aberforth, who was also Ariana'a brother, loved her deeply and had his own share of guilt in her death. But DD never wanted to find it out and here is IMO a fundamental difference in the two stories: Snape faced his own guilt and was aware of the full extent of his responsibility. DD did not dare to truly face the real extent of his responsibility with regard to Ariana's death. It is possible that it was not DD who cast the fatal curse. But he never tried to discover the truth.
Both men tried to make up for the mistakes of their youth later in their lives. Here DD was fortunate enough to have the advantage of a very long life, so that in spite of his initial long hesitation, he still had plenty of time to do good and to fight against the dark side. In light of his later achievements, it seems most readers tend to be rather forgiving towards the early mistakes of DD. Snape had less than twenty years to live after the realization of his guilt (how long was DD's hesitation period?). During this short time Snape got quite far down the road towards his redemption: he, who once had endangered the lives of several people, who had indirectly caused the death of someone he loved and of someone he hated, who had only cared for the life of the one he loved, ultimately became a general protector of life, one who saved people from death and danger as a duty and even if he did not like or specifically disliked them, risking his life and even accepting people's hatred and contempt when he did not deserve it. During this short time Snape also accomplished his duty concerning the protection of Harry and the fight against LV and finally in the very end he did get over his secrecy and let Harry know his full story. How far could he have got if he had had another hundred years to live?
wynnleaf - Mar 24, 2008 5:43 pm (#1926 of 2617)
In case people haven't noticed, all of zelmia's posts in this entire section of the Snape threads appear to be gone. I find this very sad.
Potteraholic - Mar 24, 2008 5:52 pm (#1927 of 2617)
I'm just a lurker on this thread, but haven't read it for the past 2-3 days. What happened lately with the the turn of the discussion that might have led to this situation? And I agree, wynnleaf. I find this strange trun of events sad, too.
PeskyPixie - Mar 24, 2008 7:46 pm (#1928 of 2617)
I responded to Zelmia's post (formerly #1906) and was checking for a response today (I adore Zelig's adorable, expressive face staring at me from Zelmia's avatar) and hadn't realized that all of her posts had been deleted. I'm a relative newcomer to the Lexicon; this is the first time I've witnessed such an event and am deeply saddened by it.
Zelmia, in the chance that you are reading this, I hope everything is alright in your personal life. Also, I hope you haven't left this thread on account of something I said, and if this be the case, I am truly sorry.
I think I speak for all Snapers when I say, please come back and join us. The Snape thread isn't the same without you.
Hope to hear from you soon.
Julia H. - Mar 25, 2008 4:21 am (#1929 of 2617)
Pesky said it very well, I agree. Zelmia, if I said anything that offended you, I'd like you to know I never meant it like that and I never thought it could be interpreted like that.
mona amon - Mar 25, 2008 7:26 am (#1930 of 2617)
Yes, Zelmia, please come back! This thread will not be the same without you!
"For himself." (Zelmia)
What do you mean by this? Did he want Lily for himself? As for that, he could have no real hope for several reasons, after deciding to go to DD and it was his decision to go to DD. The knowledge that she lived? I can agree with that. But he was ready to risk his life for that knowledge. No, he did not want to save her because of a general respect for life. That is something Snape will do later. But loving and risking one's life for our loved one is not a bad thing to do. I agree that it is not good that he does not want to save James and Harry as well. But trying to save Lily at least is still good.
"Why can't this sentence be a sign of Snape understanding what DD is saying? - It is. But only after Dumbledore has spelled it all out for him." (Zelmia)
I responded to a comment that said he did not even understand it then. But most people seem to agree that Snape did not really sit down to think over anything in his distress. Just an instinct to save her. So thinking over and understanding the larger picture after DD's answer is not that terrible. Besides, DD does not see everything exactly as it is because he is suspicious of Snape, as you also said. 16 years later DD seems to have a somewhat different opinion of the same event.
"He still wants to save Lily in the first place but he wants her to avoid all contact with Voldemort and he does not want her to have any reason to fight against him. - A very nice interpretation and I can even agree with it. But it's still just Lily." (Zelmia)
I think all of us agree that it is just Lily. What I tried to point out is that the fact that Snape knows Lily and that he goes to DD instead of being satisfied with LV's promise may suggest that Snape does understand how Lily would feel about and react to the danger of her family and that completely saving Lily entails saving the whole family because Lily would not stand by and watch. Which, in turn, excludes any possibility of trying to save Lily for himself.
"My personal opinion is that Dumbledore would have done the same for anyone, any Death Eater, who had approached him in this way. I don't think his attitude was unique to Snape specifically." (Zelmia)
You say "in this way". So there must be something in Snape's way that makes him worthy of DD's benevolence.
"Though we're not given any specific information about other Death Eaters who may have defected, Dumbledore does make reference to "a number of useful spies". Some of these may have once been Death Eaters. And we certainly know that he tried to save Draco." (Zelmia)
We don't know much about the other spies. None of them seems to be a teacher at Hogwarts. DD tried to save Draco because he thought "That boy's soul is not yet so damaged." He must have thought the same of Snape. Which is exactly the point I am trying to make.
"To my mind, Dumbledore is already showing Snape that one cannot expect to just be given what they want. One must work for it, earn it. All the more so if what one wants is redemption or even simple forgiveness.To me this echoes Lily's refusal to accept his apology because in that situation, Snape failed to understand that, for some things, one cannot simply utter the magic words "I'm sorry" and have everything go back to the way it was. In other words, he needed to work to earn her forgiveness, but apparently he never did anything beyond that initial attempt at an apology." (Zelmia)
Good point. I guess it would have been easier if Lily had accepted the apology as such but made it clear that she expected something more as well. She was not half as encouraging as DD on the hilltop, who, after all, listened to Snape and asked him what he would do in return. But I also think that Snape did learn Lily's lesson about "I'm sorry" not being enough and that can be one of the reasons (IMO) why he can never bring himself to say "I'm sorry" to Harry and this is why I cannot condemn him for that. He has learned that he must do (not say) something as atonement and he does a lot but cannot verbalize how he feels about it.
mona amon - Mar 22, 2008 5:29 am (#1912 of 2617)
If he is, on the hilltop, selfish and clueless, disgusting, without remorse and still totally dark, then what does DD see in him? (Julia)
I suppose each person will interpret it differently. I imagine he was impressed by his courage and his deep love for Lily, and decided he could be saved.
And where is "his 'road to Damascus' moment"?
Good question. I like to think it was the meeting with Dumbledore on the windy hilltop. It even has similarities with what happened on the original road to Damascus.
'As he [Saul] neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. He fell to the ground...'(Acts: 9, 3 and 4)
'Then a blinding, jagged jet of white light flew through the air: ...Snape had dropped to his knees...(DH chapter 33)
But I'd like to give Snape a little credit here. His salvation didn't drop out of heaven. Remorseful or not, it was he who made the first move towards his own salvation by rejecting Voldemort and seeking out Dumbledore.
But I also think that Snape did learn Lily's lesson about "I'm sorry" not being enough and that can be one of the reasons (IMO) why he can never bring himself to say "I'm sorry" to Harry and this is why I cannot condemn him for that. He has learned that he must do (not say) something as atonement and he does a lot but cannot verbalize how he feels about it.
I don't think I agree with you here. He didn't have to say sorry if he found it so difficult, just give him the story of his role in Harry's parents' deaths.
Julia H. - Mar 22, 2008 7:12 am (#1913 of 2617)
"He didn't have to say sorry if he found it so difficult, just give him the story of his role in Harry's parents' deaths." (Mona)
Of course, he could have done that. But we would still find fault with him if he had told Harry the story but had not said he was sorry. It seems he always finds it difficult to put his deepest feelings into words. He never tells Lily about his love and on the hilltop he can hardly talk. That is why gestures are often so important.
"I like to think it was the meeting with Dumbledore on the windy hilltop. It even has similarities with what happened on the original road to Damascus." (Mona)
That is what I have always thought. I like the way you point out the similarities. And Saul is also given a task he has to do. Snape drops on his knees: On the one hand, it is DD making his conditions clear but on the other hand, this has important symbolic meanings, too. It can refer both to begging and to remorse. There are four scenes in which Snape kneels, all of them have important references to life and death: This is the first one, and here he is begging for protection to save Lily's life and is also about to change his own life (even if he does not realize it yet). Secondly, it happens when he takes the vow with Narcissa. As I have already said, that scene has direct connections with the hilltop scene. Narcissa is begging on her knees and Snape (while taking the vow) takes over her position. It is about saving Draco's life and about Dumbledore's death, which means something very different to Snape and Narcissa. Snape offers his life as reassurance. Thirdly, he is saving Draco's life after the Sectumsempra. He is kneeling by him and healing his wounds. These are potentially mortal wounds caused by a spell Snape invented long before his "road to Damascus moment". Now, he is saying/singing the counterspell, healing wounds caused by his own invention, "reversing" in a way something that he did in his youth. That his counterspell sounds almost like a song, IMO, means that it is a special spell, something that must be "felt" more strongly than the usual spells, something that needs more concentration, more emotional involvement. It is songlike and repetitive, possibly performed in a special state of mind, which reminds me of traditional healing magic found in various parts of the world. The fourth scene is where Snape is kneeling in Sirius's room (after the chase), crying, and is reading Lily's letter. A letter form someone who has been dead for a long time, from someone who has been involved in everything that is important in Snape's life. He is facing the mistakes and regrets and the tragedies of his life.
"His salvation didn't drop out of heaven. Remorseful or not, it was he who made the first move towards his own salvation by rejecting Voldemort and seeking out Dumbledore." (Mona)
I absolutely agree. It is also important that he is asking for help. DD often emphasizes that help is given to those who ask for it.
wynnleaf - Mar 22, 2008 7:29 am (#1914 of 2617)
What I tried to point out is that the fact that Snape knows Lily and that he goes to DD instead of being satisfied with LV's promise may suggest that Snape does understand how Lily would feel about and react to the danger of her family and that completely saving Lily entails saving the whole family because Lily would not stand by and watch. Which, in turn, excludes any possibility of trying to save Lily for himself. (julia)
I was thinking last night about a couple of instances where I have been in real life-and-death situations, where one of my children was also involved or my husband. (This was years ago.) What I remembered is that even though my paramount focus and really only interest was on what was going on with myself and those I cared about, I certainly never lost the reality of what was really going on -- that is, the real risks involved in the crisis or various other ramifications. How far gone and "out of it" would Snape have to be to not realize that if he brought Dumbledore news that the Potters were being targeted, Dumbledore wasn't just going to protect Lily, but the whole family?
This is Snape, after all, who within only days or weeks of this event was a spy, who had to deal with deeply fearful situations while at the same time thinking and being aware of consequences, ramifications of what is being said and done, etc.
So yes, Snape's focus is on Lily, but I don't see how he can be so blind that he'd think DD would only be interested in saving her and wouldn't bother to protect James and the baby as well.
Sure, DD is "disgusted" that Snape doesn't have any concern for the other two, and I don't think he does. But that doesn't mean that Snape doesn't realize in some way that if he brings the info to DD, all of the Potters would be involved in whatever solution DD came up with. I just know from my own experience that even a life and death crisis with danger to yourself and those you love doesn't wipe out reality from your mind, and especially if it's Snape who must have the ability to deal with crisis, danger, fear and still think at the same time.
On the selfishly risking your life to save someone, I don't think, in my opinion, that it is even possible. I consider it a contradiction in terms. I realize it's possible to go through the actions that work to save someone, where the person's motivation, even if they are risking their life, is not to save the other person, but to accomplish something for themselves. Personally, that's the way I see DD's confrontation with Grindelwald. GG had killed and tortured many many people, but Dumbledore said that even though he was the only person who (he thought) could defeat GG, he only went after him because the "shame became too great." It seems to me that DD, although his actions ultimately prevented more people from seeing death or torture, he didn't do it for them. He did it because he didn't like feeling shamed and he wanted to get rid of the shame.
Snape, on the other hand, risks his life because he wants to save Lily, not so that he can feel better about himself or otherwise gain something for himself. We have no evidence that he thought he'd gain Lily, especially since he had apparently left her alone for years after she broke off the friendship.
So Snape risked his life to save another person (even if it would have been better if he'd risked it to save 3 people). I don't think it's possible to selfishly be willing to "give up his life for a friend," even if it is only because he cares about that person.
Julia H. - Mar 22, 2008 2:38 pm (#1915 of 2617)
"He is only interested in her being killed as it relates to him personally." (Zelmia)
How does it relate to him personally? And how do you know this?
"He didn't want her to be spared because it was the right thing to do, he wanted what he wanted, regardless of how that might affect others (James/Harry)." (Zelmia)
I guess everybody wants what they want. Perhaps Snape should have wanted what he did not want or should not have wanted what he wanted but it is getting a bit too philosophical for me. It kind of reminds me of a discussion concerning whether the board can still be regarded as green when nobody sees it. I think it is a noble thing that Snape watches over Harry and protects his life for years. But does the fact that he loathes him make it all more noble than it were if he actually loved him? Does Snape still want what he wants? I think the main question is wanting something good or wanting something bad.
"Well, that's assuming he has these "deepest feelings" to begin with." (Zelmia)
No deep feelings? Come on, Zelmia, not even you can seriously deny him everything!
BTW, as you say, in the hilltop scene, he does not act on principle. Right. So what sends him there at all? It is feelings, very deep feelings and he pours them out in front of DD without pretence or without considering what would be the most appropriate way to make the request.
"I think his RtD moment actually comes when he learns that Lily and James have been killed." (Zelmia)
It is possible and I see why you think that. But I like the way Mona showed the similarities between the hilltop scene and the biblical scene. And I think there is a recognition that happens or at the very least starts there.
wynnleaf - Mar 22, 2008 5:35 pm (#1916 of 2617)
It seems to me that JKR's whole point is that whatever Snape's other faults were, he did love very, very deeply. Zelmia may disagree with JKR, but I do think it came through load and clear in DH that Snape didn't start loving Lily deeply sometime after her death, but that instead it was the entire reason he went to DD.
He didn't want her to be spared because it was the right thing to do, he wanted what he wanted, regardless of how that might affect others (James/Harry)." (Zelmia)
I realize that some may believe that it is somehow more noble or righteous to do things because it's the right thing, than to do it from love, but I don't think doing something because you love someone is somehow a lesser motivation. Snape's love is not broad -- it was only focused on Lily at least before her death -- but it was just as strong and perhaps even stronger than some other good character's motivations to do what's "right."
Did Lily choose to die for Harry because it was right or because she loved him? Because she loved him of course. And what is love anyway? Just a feeling? Or a decision to act in certain ways toward others and do what is right as regards them? Snape did do what was right in trying to save Lily. It certainly wasn't wrong, after all. No, his action wasn't perfect in it's rightness. He didn't rush out to try to get the whole family saved, even though only an idiot would think that DD wouldn't try to save them all, and Snape was no idiot. But what he did, at least to the degree he did it, was right.
His motivation was out of love for Lily.
He is only interested in her being killed as it relates to him personally.
What do you mean? Canon evidence of it? I just saw your "rant" above. Many of us don't always put our evidence in with our opinions, but when asked, we don't usually rant about being asked, but just give what we felt was the evidence in our answering post. If you haven't got any, okay. If you do, can't we comment on it? We see plenty of evidence that he loved her. I see no particular evidence that he loved her selfishly. Surely if he loved her selfishly, he wouldn't have gone along with her decision to end the friendship, instead he'd have kept trying to start it up again. We're not shown that he stalked her, or tried to stop her dating James, or anything that shows a selfish love. He may or may not have understood her love for James, but really Snape wasn't stupid, so it seems unlikely that he wouldn't realize she probably would care for her own baby. And even if he didn't understand these things (his parents didn't appear to care much for him, so perhaps he really didn't understand parental love), that doesn't mean he loved her selfishly, only that he didn't understand her love for his hated enemy or a baby. Not understanding her love for her family (and remember he may have had little exposure to loving families), doesn't mean that his love for her was selfish.
As I've said numerous times, I don't think willingness to give your life to save someone is compatible with "selfish" motivations. It's kind of the "greater love hath no man" sort of thing, this willingness to give up one's life for a friend. That in and of itself, in my opinion, denotes great love, and certainly not selfishness.
wynnleaf - Mar 22, 2008 5:57 pm (#1917 of 2617)
Oh I wanted to comment on the whole "road to Damascus" idea. I've noticed that many people (not on this forum), tend to assume that major shifts in a person's viewpoint tend to happen during some specific climactic decision-making point, a kind of moment of epiphany.
But for many, many people, great changes in viewpoint, perspective, ethics, etcs., occur slowly over a long time.
As I've shown in other posts, I think Snape already loved Lily very deeply before he went to DD, and that his love for her is what drove him to DD. But I don't think there's any one specific road to Damascus point. I think instead Snape changes over the years. I think that his changing was complete before DH. After all, JKR didn't show us anything different about Snape in DH than we saw about him in the time period of HBP. By the year of HBP, Snape was already commenting that he would only stand by and allow people to die if he couldn't save them. We never get to see a particular point where Snape came to this attitude. So I don't think Snape has some specific redemptive moment, but that instead he gradually changes over 17 years, to the point where he is willing to risk his life to save Lupin, a man he appears to have despised.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 22, 2008 8:18 pm (#1918 of 2617)
I am not sure that selfish should be the word when describing Snape's motivation for saving Lily.
yes, I agree that Snape went to Dumbledore because he didn't want Lily to die. He would not have done the same for Alice Longbottom. And his initial idea did not include saving James or Harry.
So in a small narrow sense his motive might have been selfish but he changed. Someone previously pointed out that Snape must have sought out Dumbledore because he recognized that Lily would not just stand by and watch/let her baby or husband die. Snape loved the real Lily, not the Lily of his daydreams (the one that might love him as a Death Eater) and he knew the real Lily loved James and Harry.
Snape's love was imperfect but what he had for Lily was love in the more Christian sense of the word.
Snape's love for Lily can be compared to Dumbledore's love for Ariana. Both were distracted by grand schemes for what was considered a better wizarding world. Both had to abandon their schemes when it was realized that this grand scheme could not include the one that they loved.
I never saw Snape meeting with Dumbledore as his road to Damascus moment.
First Saul had no intentions of changing his life until he was struck by lightning. Snape however had already decided to turn to Dumbledore when he appeared as a flash of white light.
But when Saul was knocked down, he did hear a voice that said why are you persecuting me. Maybe Snape's conscience told him he was persecuting Lily.
Snape's actions do not really follow Saul's. Snape didn't change his name. He was not sent to the equivalent of Peter.
But both felt anguish about their past behavior. ( Though I think Saul felt forgiveness and accepted it. Saul was more open about his past behavior than Snape was.)
Both felt alone at times. Saul was in prison. Snape in his own prison?
It is Saul writing as Paul who describes love as gentle, kind, patient, doesn't put on airs etc. He also says that many great things can be done but if it is done with out love it is meaningless. What has bothered me about Snape was that if he did all these things (protecting Harry) without love, then his life would have been wasted.
Jo has described Snape as being redeemed and I hope that it is because before he died he stopped loathing Harry.
Julia H. - Mar 23, 2008 1:39 am (#1919 of 2617)
Snape's "Road to Damascus" moment:
Very good observations. Yes, there are similarities and differences and it is interesting to explore them.
"I think instead Snape changes over the years." (Wynnleaf)
Of course he does. The extent we can talk about a "Road to Damascus" moment is that it is a special landmark in his redemption, a moment when the long process starts and which later events can be related to and it is indeed connected to Snape's own decision rather than to external help only - though he did get external help of course. BTW I thought about this "asking DD instead of doing something on his own" idea and I think it was the right decision to make and sometimes it is indeed important to acknowledge "I cannot solve this problem alone, I need help" and then to be able to ask for help and in the right place, too. Snape does not do that very often in his life. (Maybe this is the only time, I don't know.)
"It is Saul writing as Paul who describes love as gentle, kind, patient, doesn't put on airs etc. He also says that many great things can be done but if it is done with out love it is meaningless. What has bothered me about Snape was that if he did all these things (protecting Harry) without love, then his life would have been wasted." (Ramb)
Yes, but Snape still did everything ultimately because of love. Because of his love for Lily. He was not without love at all. I think the point about Snape and also a point about LV (and that relates somehow to what Paul writes about love) is that when there is love (even if only for one person), selfless, deep love, then and only then salvation is possible. Because of this, I cannot see Snape's change as a mere accident. He would not have tried to save Alice Longbottom but as long as he kept this strong love at least for Lily, he was (IMO only, no canon) bound to realize that Voldemort's world excludes and threatens something that is very, very important to him. (Granted though, if the realization comes too late, love itself may lose its strength as a consequence of the evil around and inside him.) I also think that along the way somewhere Snape learned to feel the kind of "broad" love that DD felt for people in general - for the students he had to protect, for example (even if not necessarily for Harry), for life as such. This love was not so intensive or personal as his love for Lily but it included more people, ultimately at some level even some of those he did not like in particular (Narcissa, Lupin) and it still made him risk and sacrifice or at least care for the protection of these people. And he did love Dumbledore as well.
"Jo has described Snape as being redeemed and I hope that it is because before he died he stopped loathing Harry." (Ramb)
I like to think that, too.
mona amon - Mar 23, 2008 5:33 am (#1920 of 2617)
On the selfishly risking your life to save someone, I don't think, in my opinion, that it is even possible. (Wynnleaf)
Risking your life to save someone is unselfish, even selfless. I've always agreed to that. So I will leave out the word selfish since it is causing all the confusion.
What I'm trying to say is, Snape coming to Dumbledore in an attempt to save Lily does not show that he was remorseful, because he only rejects Voldemort when the evil that he does affects him personally. And anyone would do that if they were personally affected, though they may not have been as brave as him. Narcissa also defies the Dark Lord and comes running to Severus when her child is threatened. That does not prove that there was any fundamental change in her.
GG had killed and tortured many many people, but Dumbledore said that even though he was the only person who (he thought) could defeat GG, he only went after him because the "shame became too great." It seems to me that DD, although his actions ultimately prevented more people from seeing death or torture, he didn't do it for them. He did it because he didn't like feeling shamed and he wanted to get rid of the shame.
Dumbledore did not really owe it to all those strangers to risk his life for them. They had nothing to do with him. He did not have to feel guilty about them, because he was not a follower or supporter of Grindelwald. But all the same he feels he has it in him to defeat Grindelwald, but due to various personal reasons, he is unable to act. And he is ashamed of himself for this paralysis. Finally, when the shame overcomes the paralysis he goes after GG. He does not do it for glory. he does not do it because those people mean anything to him personally. IMO, it's a totally unselfish act.
Nice post, Ramb, even if I don't agree with some of the points!
rambkowalczyk - Mar 23, 2008 5:28 pm (#1921 of 2617)
Dumbledore did not really owe it to all those strangers to risk his life for them. Mona Amon
Excuse me for nitpicking, but if Dumbledore doesn't owe it to all those strangers, why then be critical of Snape when he would not stop Voldemort for targeting Alice Longbottom?
It's not that I excuse him for being a Death Eater, but why should he have tried to save Alice when he didn't know her?
Yes, I do realize Snape was a Death Eater and Dumbledore wasn't a Grindelwald supporter but evil or bad things happen when good people do nothing.
wynnleaf - Mar 23, 2008 7:03 pm (#1922 of 2617)
In the case of Dumbledore, I brought him up because whether or not we the readers think Dumbledore had a responsibility to do something about Grendelwald, DD himself did seem to think he had such a responsibility, both because of his part in getting GG started on with his ideas and because DD felt he was the only person who had any hope of stopping GG. Because DD felt it was his responsibility, and yet still didn't act even though many many people were being tortured and killed, and only finally acted in order to alleviate his own shame, I count that as someone acting for his own interests (alleviating his shame), rather than for the interests of others. Whether or not you might call that selfish, I tend to think if it's possible to risk one's life selfishly to save others, it would only be if your purpose wasn't to save the lives, but to do something for yourself. If DD's primary purpose was to alleviate his sense of guilt, then that seems to me more "selfish" than someone willing to die because they so strongly wanted to save another person's life.
The comparison between DD and Snape, I believe, is intentional in JKR's writing of DH. DD, in his youth, is drawn into Dark paths. Because of his misplaced love for Grindelwald, he helps GG develop these ideas which GG later uses to attempt some kind of world domination. DD does not see the danger in GG, even though GG had already developed a somewhat bad reputation before DD met him. DD only feels remorse when his sister is killed. Still, DD does not immediately seek any justice. In fact, he never seeks justice for his sister's death, instead covering up the cause of her death from the Wizarding World. Remorse? Kind of. But just as Snape refuses to tell Harry his part in the Potter's deaths, DD covers up his part in his sister's death from the authorities as well as anyone else.
We have commented on Snape's inability or refusal to face his degree of guilt (whether or not people believe he did or didn't face it varies). But we know that DD didn't want to face his degree of guilt in his sister's death, because he specifically points out that he couldn't bear to go back and discover exactly who cast the killing spell.
For both, the catalyst in seeing their mistakes is the death or risk of death of their loved one. DD, however, even when he sees his error, doesn't do anything to try and make up for it. Even though he believes himself culpable in GG's later actions, and even though he believes he has a responsibility to stop GG because he's the only wizard who can stop him, he still does nothing while many, many people are tortured and killed. It is only his shame growing more and more acute that moves him to face GG and finally address the responsibility he believe he has.
Snape, immediately upon learning of Lily's danger, risks his life to go to a wizard for whom he is not a match and who could and probably would (as far as Snape knew) either kill him or send him to the aurors, in order to try to save Lily. No, Snape doesn't pay a lot of attention to the two other people whose lives are at risk. Nor did DD pay a lot of attention to the many killed and tortured under GG. Still, at least Snape didn't spend years and years burying his own guilt, shame, and uncertainty before he'd finally do something. At least Snape acts immediately, even if imperfectly.
mona amon - Mar 24, 2008 3:36 am (#1923 of 2617)
Yes, I do realize Snape was a Death Eater and Dumbledore wasn't a Grindelwald supporter but evil or bad things happen when good people do nothing. (Ramb)
But that's the whole point, isn't it? Snape was a DE. If Alice Longbottom had been targetted, it would have been Snape's fault, just as it was his fault that the Potters were targetted. To then sit by and do nothing is evil.
And if Snape could willingly serve a master who has killed a number of people, it shows that he does not care about those people and is tacitly condoning their murders. That is evil. Not caring about human life to the extent that you can continue to be a faithful servant to the murderer is completely different from not risking your life to save strangers when you are in no way resposible for the mess they are in.
In the case of Dumbledore, I brought him up because whether or not we the readers think Dumbledore had a responsibility to do something about Grendelwald, DD himself did seem to think he had such a responsibility, both because of his part in getting GG started on with his ideas and because DD felt he was the only person who had any hope of stopping GG. (Wynnleaf)
Wynnleaf, as far as I can make out, DD's only mistake here is in having an overactive conscience. Does that make him as guilty as Snape?
his part in getting GG started on with his ideas
Dumbledore does not accuse himself of getting GG started on his ideas. In fact it was the opposite, "his ideas inflamed me". From DD's midnight note to Grindelwald, it is clear that he was the more resposible of the two and that he was trying to restrain him.
and yet still didn't act even though many many people were being tortured and killed, and only finally acted in order to alleviate his own shame, I count that as someone acting for his own interests (alleviating his shame), rather than for the interests of others.
Then, if he had not felt ashamed at all would that make his act unselfish?
The reason he was feeling ashamed was because he did care about those people (though not personally), yet found himself unable to act. I don't see why finally overcoming his paralysis and risking his life to save those people is selfish just because he is able to get rid of his (self imposed) feelings of shame in the process.
Still, DD does not immediately seek any justice. In fact, he never seeks justice for his sister's death, instead covering up the cause of her death from the Wizarding World.
But Arianna's death was an accident, not murder. I don't see what sort of justice he could have got. If he had called for an enquiry, either he, Aberforth or GG could have been sent to Azkaban, and that's no justice. I don't blame him for hushing it up.
I don't think the comparison with Snape works. Snape covers up information from someone to whom he owes an explanation.
wynnleaf - Mar 24, 2008 4:20 am (#1924 of 2617)
Mona amon,
Different people have different views of what is right or wrong for them to do. If DD believed that he was in part responsible for the advent of GG's ideas (and he may have been right for all we know), or that he was the only person who could stop him (he likely was right about this), and that he therefore had a responsibility to stop him, it really doesn't matter -- in terms of DD's own decisions -- whether he was right or wrong about that responsibility. The point is that he was, internally, making a decision to not do what he himself believed to be the right thing, because he was afraid to discover the degree of his culpability in his sister's death. It's DD's internal motivation here that's important in analyzing why he made his decisions. DD believed that he had a responsibility to act, and yet he waited years and years while people died and did nothing.
As regards the shame, yes I think it's important. DD pinpointed the his motivation to act as being because of the shame he was experiencing, not the concern over other people's welfare. Shame could be caused by all sorts of things, but shame is basically what one feels about oneself, not about other people. We have no idea why DD was ashamed. And he never says, "Finally so many people were dying that I just couldn't stand it any more." He says the shame was so great -- nothing about what was happening to other people at all.
As regards Arianna's death, it was only "accidental" in the same way manslaughter might be accidental. If I were to equate it to a real life incident, I'd imagine a brother with the responsibility to care for a younger brother and a mentally disabled sister. The oldest brother develops a very bad friendship with a particularly dangerous young man and brings him to visit. During an argument between the 2 brothers and the Bad visitor, weapons are brought out and begin to be used around the younger sister. Her mental disability comes into play, as her reactions cause the situation to become even more volatile and one of the weapons goes off and she is killed. The Bad visitor runs off. The oldest brother covers it all up and allows the authorities to believe the younger sister somehow died due to her own mental difficulties and never mentions the fight the brothers and visitor were having. In real life, the death would very likely have been determined to be some sort of manslaughter. And yes, that's a crime. And yes, DD covered it up and never even tried to find out who cast the killing spell.
So I think there are correlations to Snape. Sure, they aren't exact by any means. But both men made major mistakes with the Dark in their late teens which caused people they loved to die. Both men covered up, in one degree of another, their culpability, although Snape at least told DD and made himself accountable to DD about the whole thing. Both men ultimately tried to make up for their mistakes, although Snape started immediately and DD waited many decades.
Julia H. - Mar 24, 2008 6:13 am (#1925 of 2617)
On another thread, we were talking about mirror images. But perhaps what JKR gives us is not always or only mirror images but variations on a theme. I feel the stories of Snape's and DD's youth are variations on the theme of guilt and responsibility. Snape and DD had different types of responsibility regarding the death of the Potters and the death of Grindelwald's victims, respectively. Certainly, DD did not give a reason to Grindelwald to kill and torture all those people. (He seems to have invented the slogan of the "greater good" and may have done some research together with GG concerning the Hallows, including the Elder Wand, which became GG's weapon, but this is not the point I want to make.) Knowing yourself to be the only one who can stop the evil affecting a lot of people's lives is a type of responsibility, though of course different from Snape's. Neglecting his duties as a guardian to Ariana and to Aberforth as well is neglecting a type of responsibility, though again it is a different type of responsibility that Snape had. DD, while he did not directly cause these deaths, did not act only after people he alone could have saved had died.
Snape's responsibility: we sometimes talk about it as if Snape had killed the Potters but of course he did not. Not only because it was not Snape who did the AK but because he also tried to prevent the consequences of the terrible wrong he had done, first by informing DD and secondly by spying on LV. He tried to do that while it was not too late, when nobody died yet. It required a great deal of determination and commitment and courage to go back and start spying on LV. If it had not been for Pettigrew's betrayal and/or the folly of James and Sirius, Snape could even have come out of it with a relatively clean conscience, knowing that he had managed to put the wrong right. It did not happen so and Snape was left with a terrible guilt he tried to atone for desperately for the rest of his life.
Both men inadvertently and more or less indirectly caused the death of someone they loved. Neither of them went to Azkaban for that, although Snape confessed what he had done to DD, who could have acted as a kind of authority and could have started a legal process against Snape but he chose not to do so. Snape did not confess his guilt to Harry to whom he owed an explanation - though actually he did at the end of his life. True. DD did not owe an explanation to anyone: I'm not sure about that. If DD had found it out that he himself had cast the curse that killed Ariana, he would have owed this confession to Aberforth, who was also Ariana'a brother, loved her deeply and had his own share of guilt in her death. But DD never wanted to find it out and here is IMO a fundamental difference in the two stories: Snape faced his own guilt and was aware of the full extent of his responsibility. DD did not dare to truly face the real extent of his responsibility with regard to Ariana's death. It is possible that it was not DD who cast the fatal curse. But he never tried to discover the truth.
Both men tried to make up for the mistakes of their youth later in their lives. Here DD was fortunate enough to have the advantage of a very long life, so that in spite of his initial long hesitation, he still had plenty of time to do good and to fight against the dark side. In light of his later achievements, it seems most readers tend to be rather forgiving towards the early mistakes of DD. Snape had less than twenty years to live after the realization of his guilt (how long was DD's hesitation period?). During this short time Snape got quite far down the road towards his redemption: he, who once had endangered the lives of several people, who had indirectly caused the death of someone he loved and of someone he hated, who had only cared for the life of the one he loved, ultimately became a general protector of life, one who saved people from death and danger as a duty and even if he did not like or specifically disliked them, risking his life and even accepting people's hatred and contempt when he did not deserve it. During this short time Snape also accomplished his duty concerning the protection of Harry and the fight against LV and finally in the very end he did get over his secrecy and let Harry know his full story. How far could he have got if he had had another hundred years to live?
wynnleaf - Mar 24, 2008 5:43 pm (#1926 of 2617)
In case people haven't noticed, all of zelmia's posts in this entire section of the Snape threads appear to be gone. I find this very sad.
Potteraholic - Mar 24, 2008 5:52 pm (#1927 of 2617)
I'm just a lurker on this thread, but haven't read it for the past 2-3 days. What happened lately with the the turn of the discussion that might have led to this situation? And I agree, wynnleaf. I find this strange trun of events sad, too.
PeskyPixie - Mar 24, 2008 7:46 pm (#1928 of 2617)
I responded to Zelmia's post (formerly #1906) and was checking for a response today (I adore Zelig's adorable, expressive face staring at me from Zelmia's avatar) and hadn't realized that all of her posts had been deleted. I'm a relative newcomer to the Lexicon; this is the first time I've witnessed such an event and am deeply saddened by it.
Zelmia, in the chance that you are reading this, I hope everything is alright in your personal life. Also, I hope you haven't left this thread on account of something I said, and if this be the case, I am truly sorry.
I think I speak for all Snapers when I say, please come back and join us. The Snape thread isn't the same without you.
Hope to hear from you soon.
Julia H. - Mar 25, 2008 4:21 am (#1929 of 2617)
Pesky said it very well, I agree. Zelmia, if I said anything that offended you, I'd like you to know I never meant it like that and I never thought it could be interpreted like that.
mona amon - Mar 25, 2008 7:26 am (#1930 of 2617)
Yes, Zelmia, please come back! This thread will not be the same without you!
Last edited by Mona on Mon Nov 24, 2014 10:35 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1931 to 1960
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:52 pm
mona amon - Mar 25, 2008 11:27 am (#1931 of 2617)
So I think there are correlations to Snape. Sure, they aren't exact by any means. But both men made major mistakes with the Dark in their late teens which caused people they loved to die. Both men covered up, in one degree of another, their culpability, although Snape at least told DD and made himself accountable to DD about the whole thing. (Wynnleaf)
I agree that 'both men made mistakes with the dark in their late teens', and they were both brought back to their senses by the death of a loved one, but I think the similarity ends there.
Is a barely two month old flirtation with ideas like Wizard Dominance, revolution and Hallows to be compared with actually joining an evil organization and remaining a faithful servant for at least three years?
And was Albus really responsible for Arianna's death? His only mistake here was in being infatuated with an evil and potentially violent person. But he did not consciously know he was evil or potentially violent. Like Bathilda (who thought he was a charming lad), like Harry (who thought he had a miscievous Fred and George-ish air about him) Albus was also charmed by Grindelwald.
Both men ultimately tried to make up for their mistakes, although Snape started immediately and DD waited many decades.
Yes Snape immediately tried to make up for his mistakes, but so did Dumbledore. I mean there was no dramatic opportunity to make up for his mistakes, but he gave up all his Wizard Dominance ideas, became a champion for muggle rights, rejected offers for the post of Minister for Magic, etc?
Snape faced his own guilt and was aware of the full extent of his responsibility. (Julia)
Do we really know this?
Or am I just too sleepy? I better go to bed!
Julia H. - Mar 25, 2008 4:24 pm (#1932 of 2617)
"Snape faced his own guilt and was aware of the full extent of his responsibility. (Julia)
Do we really know this?" (Mona)
Nothing metaphorical was meant here. What I wanted to point out is that Snape knows he was a DE, he knows he took the prophecy to LV and that this was the reason why LV killed the Potters. (It is not even a special merit, he has to know this.) Then he feels remorse (even if we do not exactly know when he starts feeling remorse, perhaps we agree that sooner or later he does, don't we?), which is a way of acknowledging guilt and responsibility (to himself) and also makes the confession to DD. So, in the literal sense of the word, he knows what he did. DD, however, perhaps dies without knowing whether it was he or someone else who cast the spell that killed Ariana. (I guess a simple "Priori Incantatem" would have been enough to find it out.) DD says that the reason why he delayed the confrontation with Grindelwald was that he did not want to find it out. "I dreaded beyond all things the knowledge that it had been I who brought about her death, not merely through my arrogance and stupidity, but that I actually struck the blow that snuffed out her life." This fear was the reason why he did not stop the killing that he alone could have stopped for quite a long time. In order to save those people he had to risk finding out the truth he did not want to find out. Snape, of course, knows what he did but in order to save Lily, he has to go one step further and tell his guilt to DD and that is what he does without hesitation.
Their responsibilities are different but still comparable:
Snape has an "active" responsibility, originating in something he did and resulting in the death of two people.
DD has a "passive" responsibility, originating in something he did not do and resulting in the death of a lot of people.
DD has to be able to face the degree of his own guilt regarding Ariana's death in order to save the people he alone can save. He waits for years and finally acts when a lot of people have already died but still more are likely to die.
Snape has to reveal his guilt to another person, to someone who has the power to judge him, in order to save someone he loves and he acts without hesitation.
Snape knows he has caused a situation of mortal danger.
DD knows he could stop a situation of mortal danger.
Snape's response is immediate and ultimately one life is saved (Harry's).
DD's response is delayed but when he does act, a lot of lives are saved.
It is true that Snape acts for someone he loves, while DD does not act for people he does not know. But the scale of the responsibility is also different in the two cases and the specific tasks relate to the two men's personal history. Snape has to be able to put his love (the most valuable thing he had in his youth/childhood, if you like, in his time of "innocence") above his personal interests and fears. At the same time he has to overcome the alienating influence of a totalitarian ideology by means of a deeply personal feeling. DD has to be able to put the idea of the "greater good" (a cherished idea from the "innocent" dream-period of his youth) above his personal "interests" and fears. At the same time, he has to overcome the harmful influence of a deeply personal but mistaken feeling by means of an ideology of the universal good.
mona amon - Mar 26, 2008 7:17 am (#1933 of 2617)
At the same time he has to overcome the alienating influence of a totalitarian ideology by means of a deeply personal feeling. DD has to be able to put the idea of the "greater good" (a cherished idea from the "innocent" dream-period of his youth) above his personal "interests" and fears. At the same time, he has to overcome the harmful influence of a deeply personal but mistaken feeling by means of an ideology of the universal good. (Julia)
That was insightful, and very well put!
"I dreaded beyond all things the knowledge that it had been I who brought about her death, not merely through my arrogance and stupidity, but that I actually struck the blow that snuffed out her life."
Perhaps this belongs on the Things Which Struck You As Odd thread, but I never understood this reason that Dumbledore gives for putting off the confrontation with Grindelwald. Does GG alone know who struck the blow that killed Ariana and does DD know that he knows?
As for the rest of your post, Julia, You are taking Snape's atonement for the evil that he has done and comparing it to Dumbledore's procrastination when he feels it is his duty to stop Grindelwald, and you are giving the benefit of the comparison to Snape. Are two such different situations really comparable? If you compare someone's procrastination to someone's atonement, naturally they are going to come off worse in the comparison.
Julia H. - Mar 26, 2008 9:11 am (#1934 of 2617)
"Does GG alone know who struck the blow that killed Ariana and does DD know that he knows?" (Mona)
Perhaps it is only a faint possibility that GG might confront DD with the truth somehow and DD fears this faint possibility. What matters is how strongly DD wants to avoid learning the truth.
"Are two such different situations really comparable?" (Mona)
That is what I was trying hard to show. :-) It seems to me that there is a certain symmetry between the two cases. So perhaps it is still a kind of "mirror image thing".
"You are taking Snape's atonement for the evil that he has done and comparing it to Dumbledore's procrastination when he feels it is his duty to stop Grindelwald, and you are giving the benefit of the comparison to Snape." (Mona)
I must admit I had to think about that one. Perhaps I am but perhaps not in an absolute sense. Perhaps I only wanted to show that they are closer to each other than it may seem at first sight and since this first sight shows DD as way above Snape (in a moral sense), putting them a bit closer to each other necessarily results in making DD look worse than before and Snape look better than before. This may seem to be the "benefit of the comparison", what do you think?
As far as I can remember, originally I wanted to say that while DD certainly made his own mistakes when he was young, his later achievements, everything that he does in front of our eyes, the considerable time that has passed since his youth, the fact that we have seen him in a very different light and as a very different person for six books all count as very important mitigating circumstances (when speaking about the mistakes of his youth). He even "relapses" now and then a little bit into his old ways (I'm referring to his fascination with the Hallows when he borrows the cloak or when he wants to use the stone) but he can "afford" to do that for various reasons. Snape, however, we get to know in the process of his transformation, when he is not at all "ready" and does not have the benefit of old age, of many decades' experience and achievement, of the ability to "bury" and hide his guilt deep inside. Still, I feel that there are mitigating circumstances (different from DD's) as well and it is fair to take them into consideration.
I did not intend to compare someone's procrastination to someone's atonement. I wanted to say that DD and Snape are both responsible in different ways. Having an "active" type of responsibility (like Snape's) is worse than having a "passive" type of responsibility (like DD's). However, if we look at what is at stake, then we find that DD's "passive" responsibility has graver, larger scale results (much more deaths) than Snape's "active" responsibility.
Their responses are also different, though equally appropriate. There are a lot things that go to DD's credit during his long life and I do not list them because I think all of us know what they are. What goes to Snape's credit is really the quickness and the intensity of his response. DD's atonement is extensive rather than intensive. Perhaps the same applies to their guilt; maybe DD' guilt is an extensive one as is his response (large-scale plans for the universal greater good), while Snape's guilt is an intensive one just like his response (resulting ultimately in great personal sacrifices).
Then, when I finish a post, the original idea I started with may seem to be almost irrelevant in comparison with something that has come to my mind as a result of writing about the topic. Now I think my main point about the two men is what you also seemed to like: DD has to make an "outward" spiritual journey towards the "greater good", giving up personal feelings and taking care of many people extensively; while Snape has to make an "inward" spiritual journey to find or rediscover something deeply personal in himself - love and caring in a personal and intensive way.
tandaradei - Mar 26, 2008 3:11 pm (#1935 of 2617)
Julia H. said:
...[cut]...It is true that Snape acts for someone he loves, while DD does not act for people he does not know. But the scale of the responsibility is also different in the two cases and the specific tasks relate to the two men's personal history. Snape has to be able to put his love (the most valuable thing he had in his youth/childhood, if you like, in his time of "innocence") above his personal interests and fears. At the same time he has to overcome the alienating influence of a totalitarian ideology by means of a deeply personal feeling. DD has to be able to put the idea of the "greater good" (a cherished idea from the "innocent" dream-period of his youth) above his personal "interests" and fears. At the same time, he has to overcome the harmful influence of a deeply personal but mistaken feeling by means of an ideology of the universal good. ...[cut]...
This sounds like thesis material. Truly.
How about adding the tendencies of addictive personalities to this? I see them both in a more unifying light in that way. For the moment I'll call their crisis points their desires to unite with lost loved ones; and certain flaws in their personalities as leading them in faulty directions. Their "addictions" IMO are how they engaged in certain tendencies that overloaded common sense (I'm just looking for a usable templete here).
DD seems have parenting/SuperEgo/controlling-type power tendencies, which are probably natural to him, but are revealed most nakedly (i.e., toward evil) in his sophistries in his dealings with Grindelwald. Snape appears to have more blatant and less righteousness-oriented power-tendencies, maybe more comparable to Grindelwald or Voldy. Both, however simply allow power-needs to overwhelm ethics; both seem addicted towards ends over means, let's say; they tended to overlook paths down unappetizingly immoral pathways, in their desire to reach their end. And both would eventially see the error of their ways at least once by the destruction of someone they loved, while they were walking down such paths.
I'll consider DD the "elder addict," literally; and too, as one possibly fearing what he sees in Snape as a "younger addict." By not allowing Snape to teach Dark Arts, and also by not letting Snape into the qualities of the resurrection stone, I think DD was worried here more about Snape's soul in these things, in the way an addict would worry about another addict ... than by in any general concerns in DD's mind over ongoing strategies against Voldemort. I think DD saw both Snape's needs, and also his weaknesses, precisely because of similar concerns in his own life.
As to "atonement for sins," how about rather some recovery rhetoric? Maybe neither recovered totally, inasmuch as DD even near the end of his life still put on a ring of temptation from his desire; and Snape never got over certain attitudes, and probably also would have put on a ring of temptation if made aware of it. But one might nonetheless say they made strides towards recovery in their day-to-day walks; as in the example of DD's eventual confrontation with Grindelwald, and Snape's continual dangers in working as a spy.
I saw in both of them progress, if not yet perfection.
wynnleaf - Mar 27, 2008 6:47 am (#1936 of 2617)
tandaradei,
Those are very interesting thoughts. Personally, I don't think Dumbledore or Snape were particularly focused on recovery. I do think both were more focused, in terms of dealing with their past mistakes, on atonement. That is, "making amends" or "reparation" for wrong that they felt they'd done. Even if we the readers believe they should also have been committed to recovery, I still don't think that the characters paid much attention to that. It was more a focus on making up for past wrong actions. In the process, I do think they changed somewhat -- there was some "recovery" -- it's just that I think it was not their conscious intent.
Mona amon, I realize that Dumbledore and Snape's actions, mistakes, circumstances, etc. have many differences. But that doesn't mean there's no intent of a literary comparison. JKR had Harry make a comparison of the "lost boys" but clearly none of those characters were a lot like each other in either personality or actions.
Julia H. - Mar 27, 2008 10:22 pm (#1937 of 2617)
Perhaps the best way to recovery for Snape and also for Dumbledore is to focus on atonement and on helping others rather than focusing on any of their own needs, even if this need concerns recovery. DD's attempt to use the Resurrection Stone may be an instance of focusing on his own "recovery" (I would think he wants to call the dead back to hear they have forgiven him) and it turns out to be a false temptation. Perhaps the reason why DD arranges the situation so that Snape should realize the only way to fulfill his task (to deliver the most important final message to Harry) is to win Harry's trust by confessing his secrets to him is that DD knows Snape would never make the confession for the purpose of his own "recovery" but would do even that as part of duty and atonement.
mona amon - Mar 28, 2008 10:49 pm (#1938 of 2617)
Good posts, everyone!
I'm in a rush so this is probably going to be incoherent-
Wynnleaf, I did not mean we cannot compare the two at all, in fact I shall be presently doing just that.
Perhaps I only wanted to show that they are closer to each other than it may seem at first sight and since this first sight shows DD as way above Snape (in a moral sense), putting them a bit closer to each other necessarily results in making DD look worse than before and Snape look better than before. (Julia)
Somehow I never thought of DD as way above Snape in a moral sense, (at least after Snape's return to Dumbledore), even at the end of HBP and before I read DH. DD was just the better adjusted of the two, the 'bigger man'.
Both men never get over the person they fell in love with but never see again after the age of 17. To me, that's a terrible lack of progress. But Dumbledore is able to develop wider interests. After Grindelwald he never concentrates his love on any one person, but develops a general love for humanity. With Snape it's always only Lily, though after a while he does seem to care for Dumbledore. Who knows what would have happened if he'd had enough time to grow and evolve after the death of Voldemort?
Personally, I don't think Dumbledore or Snape were particularly focused on recovery. I do think both were more focused, in terms of dealing with their past mistakes, on atonement. That is, "making amends" or "reparation" for wrong that they felt they'd done. (Wynnleaf)
I agree. Neither of them seems to have come to terms with their greif and their guilt. But Dumbledore seems to have pushed it to a corner and carried on with his life. Snape's whole life is consumed by his guilt. He unswervingly follows the straight and narrow path, and allows himself to be guided completely by Dumbledore. It seems like he's no longer able to trust his own judgement.
Dumbledore does not have a guide or mentor. Of course he has a lot less to atone for than Severus. But his reformation is also not as dramatic or complete. He faces a life long temptation from the Hallows, to which he succumbs twice. He often puts the greater good before the individual good (though whether that's a good or bad thing is debatable). He suspects others of having similar temptations. He feels Harry might be as tempted by the hallows as he was. And jinxed or not, he would not have let Severus anywhere near the DADA post if he could help it.
Dumbledore might suffer from intellectual lonliness, but he allows himself to feel warmth towards his fellow human beings. His eyes twinkle. Severus's are like dark, cold empty tunnels.
Orion - Mar 29, 2008 3:43 am (#1939 of 2617)
I agree. How would DD have looked exactly if he had died at 39?
Julia H. - Mar 29, 2008 6:38 am (#1940 of 2617)
"How would DD have looked exactly if he had died at 39?" (Orion)
That is what I always say. When comparing DD and Snape it is fair to consider the time and opportunity each had for atonement. I think Snape used his time and opportunity quite well (even if not perfectly well) in comparison with DD.
"DD was just the better adjusted of the two, the 'bigger man'." (Mona)
I agree.
"He unswervingly follows the straight and narrow path, and allows himself to be guided completely by Dumbledore. It seems like he's no longer able to trust his own judgement." (Mona)
Maybe this is also behind it all and if he is guilty and remorseful and on bad terms with himself, it is not surprising. Still I think, in the end he gets over this at least: he seems to have learned to trust his own judgement when he refuses portrait-DD's advice.
"Both men never get over the person they fell in love with but never see again after the age of 17. To me, that's a terrible lack of progress." (Mona)
But it can be called loyalty as well... Actually, in the case of DD, I'm not sure whether it is his love for GG or his disappointment in his own judgement that he cannot get over. After all, he does take up the fight against GG eventually and it seems he understands how misplaced his love was. As for Snape, "getting over his love" would be recovery perhaps but again, he focuses on atonement and I guess, recovery or not, he values this feeling and does not try to get over it. But it is difficult too: What links him to Lily is not only love but guilt and the two feelings probably mutually strengthen each other all the time. People who need to get over something are often advised to go to a new place, find a new hobby, get to know new people: Snape, however, goes back to Hogwarts, where he is surrounded with people who permanently remind him of the past, and accepts a job that means life-long atonement for the guilt that is deeply connected with the love he is supposed to get over. (Even his specific task - protecting Harry and later others - is basically the imitation of the very last thing Lily did in her life.) It is also a question of personality and Snape seems to be the kind of person who is loyal by nature and whose feelings - whether it is hatred or love - are very strong and deep and difficult to change.
From another point of view, I still think it is DD's job to have this great goal of defeating the evil (GG, Voldemort) that threatens society and human life in general and to focus on the general good of a lot of people and to be satisfied with this "general love for humanity". I also think that it is Snape's job to love a specific person and to be guided by this love and to learn to care for the people around him - more and more people but still specific people - and to protect them. It seems these two men complement each other and both of them (and what they represent) are necessary to help Harry towards his victory. DD has the plans, Snape risks his life to carry them out. DD can see the final goal beyond individual lives, Snape can see the individual lives to be saved on specific occasions. DD can see the bigger picture, Snape can see the details. Both are important. Sometimes the viewpoints clash, as we see when they talk about Harry's death or during the chase, when Snape chooses to risk the general goal in order to save one particular life right in front of him.
In the HP series, love and courage are the two most important qualities that help to overcome evil. Harry eventually defeats Voldemort in the outside world by means of these two things. I think Snape also defeats Voldemort by means of these two things only not in the outside world but inside himself. Again, these are complementary aspects of the same idea.
"Who knows what would have happened if he'd had enough time to grow and evolve after the death of Voldemort?" (Mona)
As regards that, I have lots of ideas... :-) (But I don't write fanfiction.)
Kip Carter - Mar 30, 2008 7:03 am (#1941 of 2617)
On March 22 (8 days ago), zelmia deleted 363 of her posts on this thread. Due to her actions, I have changed her status to No Access on all Harry Potter Lexicon Forums. I apologize to each of you, who continue to discuss Severus Snape, for not being aware of her action sooner. I have sent her an email informing her of my action and have not had a response as of this post. A duplicate of this post will appear as an added edit on the original post that established this thread.
If you have any comments or questions, please address them to me via email at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
Please do not allow my post to disrupt the discussion in progress and definitely do not use this thread to discuss my actions or those of zelmia; however I would definitely appreciate any thoughts that you may have concerning these issues as long as you present them through the email system and not on this thread or any other thread.
I thank you ahead of time for your cooperation.
In case you have concerns that my action was harsh, please refer to my comments in the Jan 18, 2007 Edited Jan 23, 2007 post referred to in the opening post that established this thread.
mona amon - Mar 30, 2008 9:42 pm (#1942 of 2617)
As regards that, I have lots of ideas... :-) (Julia)
So do I. I'll just mention one, don't you think he could have become a great Healer at St. Mungo's? **sigh**
I think Snape used his time and opportunity quite well (even if not perfectly well) in comparison with DD. (Julia)
Snape had to atone for becoming a DE and being directly responsible for causing the deaths of two people, one of whom he loved. DD points out the path to atonement- protect Lily's son, and Severus obeys.
I'm a bit muddled as to what exactly DD had to atone for. I suppose the main thing would be dreaming of Muggle subservience and finding the Hallows with Grindelwald while he neglected his two younger siblings. To atone, he 1) avoids all further contact with Grindelwald 2) avoids all posts where he will have a great deal of power over others 3) becomes an active champion for the rights of muggles.
I don't see why this compares unfavourably with Severus's atonement if we remember that he 1)had a lot less to atone for, 2) had no guide or mentor, unlike Severus 3)had a much longer life in which to make further (small) mistakes and have occasional (small) relapses.
Still I think, in the end he gets over this at least: he seems to have learned to trust his own judgement when he refuses portrait-DD's advice.
I don't think I agree. He always uses his own judgment in how he is to carry out DD's instructions. It is he who decides what to tell Voldemort and how best to do it. He is doing basically the same thing here. He follows Dumbledore's instructions to the letter (give Harry the sword) even though he does not know why, but he decides which is the best way to do it.
But it can be called loyalty as well... Actually, in the case of DD, I'm not sure whether it is his love for GG or his disappointment in his own judgment that he cannot get over.
Well, it's a loyalty that would have to be dispensed with, if he was to make any progress. Similarly, he'd have had to find some way of dealing with his guilt. As for Dumbledore, you are right. I'd like to quote JKR's recent interview-
"It was just that from the outset obviously I knew he had this big, hidden secret, and that he flirted with the idea of exactly what Voldemort goes on to do, he flirted with the idea of racial domination, that he was going to subjugate the Muggles. So that was Dumbledore's big secret.
Why did did he flirt with that?" she asks. "He's an innately good man, what would make him do that. I didnt even think it through that way, it just seemed to come to me, I thought 'I know why he did it, he fell in love.' And whether they physically consummated this infatuation or not is not the issue. The issue is love. It's not about sex. So that's what I knew about Dumbledore. And it's relevant only in so much as he fell in love and was made an utter fool of by love. He lost his moral compass completely when he fell in love and I think subsequently became very mistrusting of his own judgment in those matters so became quite asexual. He led a celibate and bookish life."
So here we have Dumbledore mistrusting his own judgment in matters of love to such an extent that he never allows himself to fall in love again. That's sad. These two men really should have moved on.
PeskyPixie - Mar 30, 2008 10:10 pm (#1943 of 2617)
I don't think they would be as interesting to read if they had moved on.
Julia H. - Mar 31, 2008 1:58 pm (#1944 of 2617)
[I]"I'll just mention one, don't you think he could have become a great Healer at St. Mungo's?" (Mona)
A great healer, definitely! (I'm not sure if he would have wanted to exchange Hogwarts for another workplace though...) He had the talent, the knowledge, the experience and the willingness to learn more. This would have made it possible for him to continue being a protector of life (and in a Lily-independent way, too!) - the best and most important part of all of his "jobs".
"I don't see why this compares unfavourably with Severus's atonement..." (Mona)
Did I say DD's atonement compares unfavourably with Snape's atonement? I thought I said (more or less) that Snape's atonement compares well if we compare it to DD's.
"It is he who decides what to tell Voldemort and how best to do it."
My guess is that DD likes to tell Snape what to tell Voldemort, though Snape probably decides how to do it and there must be unexpected situations where Snape has to decide everything and on the spot. (That is quite a responsibility.)
"He follows Dumbledore's instructions to the letter (give Harry the sword) even though he does not know why, but he decides which is the best way to do it." (Mona)
I would say he still follows DD's plan rather than his instructions (and still uses DD's name as password to his office) but in this scene he twice interrupts DD (as he interrupts Phineas as well), saying "I know" and "Don't worry" and even "I have a plan". He does not seem to have said these things to DD earlier and to me these things mean one or more of the following: "I'm in charge, I know what to do, you can leave it to me, I can handle it, trust my judgement, I'm not a puppet in this office, I'm responsible".
"I don't think they would be as interesting to read if they had moved on." (Pesky)
I must agree! :-)
PeskyPixie - Apr 1, 2008 10:14 am (#1945 of 2617)
"It's coming back ... Karkaroff's too ... stronger and clearer than ever ..." -Severus Snape in GoF, re: his Dark Mark tattoo (***snickers*** Professor Snape has a tattoo!)
Giggling about our stern professor's secret tattoo aside, this quote implies that each time Voldy is on the verge of returning to a body, the Dark Mark has prickled and faintly appeared on the forearms of his followers. Wouldn't this make Snape's claim of not knowing Quirrell's true allegiance even more difficult to sell to Big V?
Orion - Apr 1, 2008 11:04 am (#1946 of 2617)
In what state of undressedness should Snape have seen Quirrell to watch that?
PeskyPixie - Apr 1, 2008 11:12 am (#1947 of 2617)
I don't understand what you mean, Orion.
Orion - Apr 1, 2008 11:23 am (#1948 of 2617)
The Dark Mark had to be under Quirrell's sleeve all the time, so Snape could hardly ever see it, so he didn't have to lie about it to LV.
PeskyPixie - Apr 1, 2008 11:37 am (#1949 of 2617)
LOL, is that what I managed to imply with my original post?! Let me clarify.
First of all, I don't think Quirrell is a 'branded' Death Eater, so there is no question of the Dark Mark reappearing on his arm. However, if GoF is not the first time since Voldy's downfall that Snape experiences prickling on his forearm and his tattoo faintly reappearing, then I think it not too far-fetched to assume that all Death Eaters (who once bore Voldy's mark on their forearms) experience this sensation. If such a great hint of Voldy's possible return exists, Snape must have an extraordinarily convincing story to persuade Voldy that he indeed has no idea of Quirrell's allegiance as Quirrell desperately attempts to steal the Philosopher's Stone. Or he's an even greater Occlumens than I ever imagined.
ETA: Severus is also quite fortunate that Trixie doesn't bring up this point when she grills him at Spinner's End.
Orion - Apr 1, 2008 11:57 am (#1950 of 2617)
Ah, now I understand. So you think that Snape sat there at the High Table at the beginning of PS/SS with an itching arm? Possible.
SHUDDER!!!
Julia H. - Apr 1, 2008 2:13 pm (#1951 of 2617)
Such turns of conversation... LOL, both of you!
So the Dark Mark in PS: So far I have thought it becomes relevant only in GOF but now Pesky has mentioned it, I think that is an interesting idea.
What do we know? The darkening of the Mark signals LV's return to power, doesn't it? Still, both Snape and Karkaroff can see (feel?) it months before LV's real return. What has LV done that might be reflected by the darkening of the Mark? He has returned to Britain from Albania; found someone (Wormtail and Crouch Jr.) to help him; they have a plan; LV is fed by something Nagini produces; LV has done magic - AK, for example (how?).
Which of these apply in PS? LV is in Britain; is being helped by Quirrell (I don't think he has the Mark either); they have a plan; Quirrell (at some point) starts drinking Unicorn blood to feed LV. Has LV done any magic? All we know is that he has moved into Quirrell's head and occasionally torments him. (Does that count as doing magic?) Also, if I am right, Quirrell tells Harry that Voldemort helps him, so LV may participate in some of the magic Quirrell does. (Like jinxing Harry's broom? Was Snape countercursing a spell cast by Voldemort?)
I guess the comparison makes it possible that the Dark Mark darkened in PS as well. Would that explain why DD and N. F. decided to move the Stone to a safer location just then? BTW it seems having Snape around is very useful already in the "quiet years": as long as the Mark is OK, DD knows there is no immediate danger. (LV did not think about that, did he?)
"Wouldn't this make Snape's claim of not knowing Quirrell's true allegiance even more difficult to sell to Big V?" (Pesky)
Not necessarily. I think Snape only said that he did not know Quirrell wanted the Stone for LV and why should he have known? Just because the Mark was getting darker, he did not have to know how close LV was exactly. (But it must have been a difficult explanation anyway. Everything together.)
Orion - Apr 1, 2008 2:20 pm (#1952 of 2617)
Snape as a walking Petri dish. You people get ideas, not even Rowling gets them. (I hope.)
Julia H. - Apr 1, 2008 2:36 pm (#1953 of 2617)
Another topic: Orion, I liked your comment on the "saddest moment poll", which started like this:
"The saddest moment of this book, for me, isn't on the poll, and that is the terrible conversation between Snape and McGonagall in "The Sacking of Severus Snape", in which Snape can't tell what he's up to and McGonagall can't know and it all goes horribly wrong."
I brought it over here because I'd like to share some thoughts with you (more relevant on this thread). I think this is perhaps where the worst part starts for Snape (though he might say the worst part started a long time ago) leading to his terrible death in the shack. This chapter shows his complete isolation from everyone on the good side and it shows how difficult it must have been to carry on doing the right thing protecting all those people who are so hostile towards him and never to forget that he is there to protect them all - even if they attack him, he must not strike back. Anyway, Snape has the chance, for the last time, to demonstrate his superb duelling skills - maybe for the first time as well, since defending himself against Harry at the end of HBP seems to be rather easy for him and so is the participation in Lockhart's ridiculous duelling club in CoS. However, the way he fights against four of his colleagues, two of whom actively attack him while two are in the background but probably ready to attack if there is a chance, reminds me how he seems to have fought against the Marauders a long time ago in the same place. It is "four on one" again in a similar way but these four now represent the whole school (Snape is being attacked by the heads of the four houses). Then they shout the word "coward" at him and Snape leaves knowing that there is one more thing he still has to do: he must find a way to Harry and he must tell the boy whose life he has been protecting all these years that he must die.
He is just so brave.
mona amon - Apr 2, 2008 7:02 am (#1954 of 2617)
I do not think that the Death eaters' marks would have become darker or prickled back in PS because for all the unicorn blood Voldy was swigging, he was still powerless, wandless vapomort at that stage. I feel it was only at the beginning of GOF when he gets a rudimentary body with Wormtail's help, and a wand in his hand that he is able to signal to the DEs that he is returning to power.
"I don't think they would be as interesting to read if they had moved on." (Pesky)
I've not really thought about Albus either way, but as far as Severus is concerned, I agree. If he had undergone a revolutionary transformation, gotten over Lily, confessed to Harry and made it up to him by being really kind to him, he would have been just another Great Guy, (yawn).
But I still can't help wishing that at some stage (and not just in his dying moments) he had achieved some sort of reconciliation with his fellow human beings, some respite from the miserable, despised state he was in, at least one moment of pure joy!
Orion - Apr 2, 2008 8:06 am (#1955 of 2617)
Julia, don't you have the impression that Rowling is a bit sadistic? I didn't mind so much the look at me scene because it was quite soppy, but well written, and great for the film (if they do it justice). But how she makes situations deteriorate to absolute disasters, that is really evil. It wasn't so bad to read at the first time because I didn't know what Snape wanted, of course, but when I read it for the second time it was torture.
And the mistake was from the beginning that Snape himself swore DD to secrecy. He builds himself a house of horrors of his own making, and he doesn't find the exit until so many people are after his scalp that finally one of them takes him down.
Maybe this is a minority vote, but I was furious after DH after all those unnecessary deaths. I really minded Snape, Fred, Remus and Tonks. What FOR? It reminds me so of Marthy Grimes, and also Elizabeth George, who often kill off their characters in the last two pages. I never get that. What's it good for?
Julia H. - Apr 2, 2008 3:06 pm (#1956 of 2617)
"I feel it was only at the beginning of GOF when he gets a rudimentary body with Wormtail's help, and a wand in his hand that he is able to signal to the DEs that he is returning to power." (Mona)
You are right. I never completely understood this "rudimentary body" thing and that may be the reason why I forgot about it but this is an important difference between PS and GoF. OK, so the Mark darkens in GoF only. All the more dramatic.
"Julia, don't you have the impression that Rowling is a bit sadistic?" (Orion)
I see what you mean, Orion. She is very good at writing plot parts where everything goes wrong, good at making us readers sympathize with different characters who mutually hate each other and making us see how someone ruins his life systematically and without seeing the way out of the situation (though readers may see it). It seems Snape's generation as a whole is a "lost generation". Everybody we get to know enough to care for them meets a tragic end, starting with Harry's parents (and quite a lot is needed, plot-wise, to kill them). Then Sirius's life is totally wasted: not only is his death useless and unnecessary but his whole life as well, as he lived it. (OK, he did have some friends and some people knew that he was not a murderer after all but that was the top, really.) There is unhappy Lupin and with Lupin suddenly a silver lining: it seems Happiness is banging on his door, breaks the door on him in spite of all his reluctance - and then they die. As for Snape, after HBP a lot of readers expected him to die - what could such a character do? - but not like this, definitely not like this. I, at least, expected him to die a heroic, meaningful death, one that makes it absolutely clear that he was a hero all the time - but no. And yes, there are lots of deaths (Fred etc.): victory does not come easily, says Jo, sacrifice is needed but we might have understood the message with fewer deaths perhaps just as well. So everybody in the parents' generation ruins their lives (or suffers their lives ruined) - I could mention a few more names - and then suddenly JKR laughs at us: Lucius Malfoy survives them all! (My children love the first few HP books but I don't know how they will react later: after GoF it is not really children's material, is it?)
There could have been a little more comfort and reward at least for some of the people in this generation but there was not any and it was clearly intentional: only the children's generation is truly saved (but there is still Fred and there is Colin Creevey). It is sad, I agree.
Back to Snape: I think one of the many ways to look at the end (maybe the last two years) of Snape's life is comparing it to a spiritual journey in which he gives up or loses things he values or things that link him to life. Finally he is alone and isolated and despised and hated and he still must stay on the good side (though nobody knows) and he still must fight for the people who hate him, face Voldemort and remember what he has to do and do it without mistakes. He may be blamed for ending up in this situation but it is still a great test of his determination and of his loyalty (and he deserves an "Outstanding") as much as a way of atonement and self-punishment perhaps. And if it is a spiritual journey then it is a way to self-knowledge too. Then he gives up his life - and he probably knows it all the time if Voldemort one day really wants to kill him, there may not be much he can do (and Voldemort wants to kill him at the end of GoF before he goes back to him). The result is that we know very little about how this "spiritual journey" influences his personality: he gives up his secrecy in the last minutes and is able to ask Harry to look at him - and it may indicate that there are... there may be important changes (what do you think?) but that is all we, readers, get. Snape is a character who clearly needs to develop and change and is capable of very exciting development and then he is in a situation which seems to be bound to bring about changes or to reveal what is deep inside his soul - and when the "spiritual journey" seems to be completed or almost completed, he dies and never reaches what could be the spiritual goal of such a journey. I know Snape's goal, personally, is helping Harry and doing his duty but the literary goal of a journey like this could be something different, perhaps something more and we never get there because he dies in that cruel way.
"But I still can't help wishing that at some stage (and not just in his dying moments) he had achieved some sort of reconciliation with his fellow human beings, some respite from the miserable, despised state he was in, at least one moment of pure joy!" (Mona)
I could not say it so well as Mona can but this is how I feel too.
PeskyPixie - Apr 2, 2008 7:56 pm (#1957 of 2617)
"I feel it was only at the beginning of GOF when he gets a rudimentary body with Wormtail's help, and a wand in his hand that he is able to signal to the DEs that he is returning to power." -mona amon
"You are right. I never completely understood this "rudimentary body" thing and that may be the reason why I forgot about it but this is an important difference between PS and GoF. OK, so the Mark darkens in GoF only. All the more dramatic." -Julia H.
I don't see how the above explanation gels with Snape's, "It's coming back ... Karkaroff's too ... stronger and clearer than ever ...". Sev's use of the words 'stronger and clearer' indicate that the Mark has tingled on occasion in the past few years and is steadily coming back - it's not going away as it has in the past.
I wasn't under the impression that Voldy needs a wand to cause the tattoo to reappear on the forearms of his followers. When he is defeated, barely alive, the mark disappears, but once he is on his comeback it reappears. I would assume the reaction may be similar when he shares a body with Quirrell (whom he also has drinking unicorn blood), and when Riddle gains strength from feeding on Ginny. Let's not forget that when Voldy touches Wormtail's Mark (GoF) it (and all others) burn black but remain visible even when the Death Eaters are not being summoned. I think the gradual appearance of the Dark mark on Snape's arm indicates that Voldy is trying a comeback, and the fact that the Mark keeps getting stronger rather than fading away after a growth spurt indicates that the Dark Lord is gaining strength once again.
tandaradei - Apr 2, 2008 8:35 pm (#1958 of 2617)
mona amon said:
...[cut]...But I still can't help wishing that at some stage (and not just in his dying moments) he had acheived some sort of reconcilliation with his fellow human beings, some respite from the miserable, despised state he was in, at least one moment of pure joy!...[cut]...
hmmmm .... sounds like Snape needs to meet his long lost brother Angel, from the Josh Whedon series!
will anyone get this???
Orion - Apr 3, 2008 3:34 am (#1959 of 2617)
No.
Julia, your post makes it clear to me, again, that Snape's worst character trait is his misguided heroism. Sorry, but a spiritual journey which causes social ruin and subsequent death is rubbish. Snape was brainwashed by DD and should have got out of this monster guilt trip (drawn-out suicide in disguise) ASAP. JM2K. Survival is all that counts, not what people say about you when you're dead.
Julia H. - Apr 3, 2008 5:40 am (#1960 of 2617)
"Julia, your post makes it clear to me, again, that Snape's worst character trait is his misguided heroism." (Orion)
Interesting conclusion, Orion, I'll have to think about it.
"Survival is all that counts, not what people say about you when you're dead." (Orion)
Snape does not care too much for his survival (I'm sure he knows what to expect all the time) but the point is that he cannot even find comfort in what people will say about him when he is dead. He does not do it for any personal glory, now or in the future. As far as he knows now, he cannot even keep Harry alive. (That is why I once called his self-sacrifice "almost super-human" and his heroism is of the same kind.) He is driven by his conscience, which he follows to extremes. As Hogwarts headmaster and Voldemort's supposed "right-hand man", his soul is in a very dangerous situation: if he just once allowed his pride or his anger or his feeling of being unjustly hated/despised to take control and get stronger than his loyalty just for a moment, he could easily find himself guilty once again with more remorse and self-loathing added to what he already feels. I think it is a spiritual journey in the sense that he discovers how much he can endure and how much he can give up while remaining loyal - but you are right, a spiritual journey makes more sense if the hero survives and can do something with the self-knowledge and spiritual growth gained during the "journey".
Would he ever be able to forgive himself? Would he ever feel that he has done enough to atone for his guilt?
"Such idle dreams allure me now no more.
The goal, I know I shall not reach, although
A hundred times to gain it I should strive.
It matters nothing. And what is the goal?
It is the ceasing of a worthy fight,
The goal is death, the battle is the life.
The fight itself the goal the man doth seek."
So I think there are correlations to Snape. Sure, they aren't exact by any means. But both men made major mistakes with the Dark in their late teens which caused people they loved to die. Both men covered up, in one degree of another, their culpability, although Snape at least told DD and made himself accountable to DD about the whole thing. (Wynnleaf)
I agree that 'both men made mistakes with the dark in their late teens', and they were both brought back to their senses by the death of a loved one, but I think the similarity ends there.
Is a barely two month old flirtation with ideas like Wizard Dominance, revolution and Hallows to be compared with actually joining an evil organization and remaining a faithful servant for at least three years?
And was Albus really responsible for Arianna's death? His only mistake here was in being infatuated with an evil and potentially violent person. But he did not consciously know he was evil or potentially violent. Like Bathilda (who thought he was a charming lad), like Harry (who thought he had a miscievous Fred and George-ish air about him) Albus was also charmed by Grindelwald.
Both men ultimately tried to make up for their mistakes, although Snape started immediately and DD waited many decades.
Yes Snape immediately tried to make up for his mistakes, but so did Dumbledore. I mean there was no dramatic opportunity to make up for his mistakes, but he gave up all his Wizard Dominance ideas, became a champion for muggle rights, rejected offers for the post of Minister for Magic, etc?
Snape faced his own guilt and was aware of the full extent of his responsibility. (Julia)
Do we really know this?
Or am I just too sleepy? I better go to bed!
Julia H. - Mar 25, 2008 4:24 pm (#1932 of 2617)
"Snape faced his own guilt and was aware of the full extent of his responsibility. (Julia)
Do we really know this?" (Mona)
Nothing metaphorical was meant here. What I wanted to point out is that Snape knows he was a DE, he knows he took the prophecy to LV and that this was the reason why LV killed the Potters. (It is not even a special merit, he has to know this.) Then he feels remorse (even if we do not exactly know when he starts feeling remorse, perhaps we agree that sooner or later he does, don't we?), which is a way of acknowledging guilt and responsibility (to himself) and also makes the confession to DD. So, in the literal sense of the word, he knows what he did. DD, however, perhaps dies without knowing whether it was he or someone else who cast the spell that killed Ariana. (I guess a simple "Priori Incantatem" would have been enough to find it out.) DD says that the reason why he delayed the confrontation with Grindelwald was that he did not want to find it out. "I dreaded beyond all things the knowledge that it had been I who brought about her death, not merely through my arrogance and stupidity, but that I actually struck the blow that snuffed out her life." This fear was the reason why he did not stop the killing that he alone could have stopped for quite a long time. In order to save those people he had to risk finding out the truth he did not want to find out. Snape, of course, knows what he did but in order to save Lily, he has to go one step further and tell his guilt to DD and that is what he does without hesitation.
Their responsibilities are different but still comparable:
Snape has an "active" responsibility, originating in something he did and resulting in the death of two people.
DD has a "passive" responsibility, originating in something he did not do and resulting in the death of a lot of people.
DD has to be able to face the degree of his own guilt regarding Ariana's death in order to save the people he alone can save. He waits for years and finally acts when a lot of people have already died but still more are likely to die.
Snape has to reveal his guilt to another person, to someone who has the power to judge him, in order to save someone he loves and he acts without hesitation.
Snape knows he has caused a situation of mortal danger.
DD knows he could stop a situation of mortal danger.
Snape's response is immediate and ultimately one life is saved (Harry's).
DD's response is delayed but when he does act, a lot of lives are saved.
It is true that Snape acts for someone he loves, while DD does not act for people he does not know. But the scale of the responsibility is also different in the two cases and the specific tasks relate to the two men's personal history. Snape has to be able to put his love (the most valuable thing he had in his youth/childhood, if you like, in his time of "innocence") above his personal interests and fears. At the same time he has to overcome the alienating influence of a totalitarian ideology by means of a deeply personal feeling. DD has to be able to put the idea of the "greater good" (a cherished idea from the "innocent" dream-period of his youth) above his personal "interests" and fears. At the same time, he has to overcome the harmful influence of a deeply personal but mistaken feeling by means of an ideology of the universal good.
mona amon - Mar 26, 2008 7:17 am (#1933 of 2617)
At the same time he has to overcome the alienating influence of a totalitarian ideology by means of a deeply personal feeling. DD has to be able to put the idea of the "greater good" (a cherished idea from the "innocent" dream-period of his youth) above his personal "interests" and fears. At the same time, he has to overcome the harmful influence of a deeply personal but mistaken feeling by means of an ideology of the universal good. (Julia)
That was insightful, and very well put!
"I dreaded beyond all things the knowledge that it had been I who brought about her death, not merely through my arrogance and stupidity, but that I actually struck the blow that snuffed out her life."
Perhaps this belongs on the Things Which Struck You As Odd thread, but I never understood this reason that Dumbledore gives for putting off the confrontation with Grindelwald. Does GG alone know who struck the blow that killed Ariana and does DD know that he knows?
As for the rest of your post, Julia, You are taking Snape's atonement for the evil that he has done and comparing it to Dumbledore's procrastination when he feels it is his duty to stop Grindelwald, and you are giving the benefit of the comparison to Snape. Are two such different situations really comparable? If you compare someone's procrastination to someone's atonement, naturally they are going to come off worse in the comparison.
Julia H. - Mar 26, 2008 9:11 am (#1934 of 2617)
"Does GG alone know who struck the blow that killed Ariana and does DD know that he knows?" (Mona)
Perhaps it is only a faint possibility that GG might confront DD with the truth somehow and DD fears this faint possibility. What matters is how strongly DD wants to avoid learning the truth.
"Are two such different situations really comparable?" (Mona)
That is what I was trying hard to show. :-) It seems to me that there is a certain symmetry between the two cases. So perhaps it is still a kind of "mirror image thing".
"You are taking Snape's atonement for the evil that he has done and comparing it to Dumbledore's procrastination when he feels it is his duty to stop Grindelwald, and you are giving the benefit of the comparison to Snape." (Mona)
I must admit I had to think about that one. Perhaps I am but perhaps not in an absolute sense. Perhaps I only wanted to show that they are closer to each other than it may seem at first sight and since this first sight shows DD as way above Snape (in a moral sense), putting them a bit closer to each other necessarily results in making DD look worse than before and Snape look better than before. This may seem to be the "benefit of the comparison", what do you think?
As far as I can remember, originally I wanted to say that while DD certainly made his own mistakes when he was young, his later achievements, everything that he does in front of our eyes, the considerable time that has passed since his youth, the fact that we have seen him in a very different light and as a very different person for six books all count as very important mitigating circumstances (when speaking about the mistakes of his youth). He even "relapses" now and then a little bit into his old ways (I'm referring to his fascination with the Hallows when he borrows the cloak or when he wants to use the stone) but he can "afford" to do that for various reasons. Snape, however, we get to know in the process of his transformation, when he is not at all "ready" and does not have the benefit of old age, of many decades' experience and achievement, of the ability to "bury" and hide his guilt deep inside. Still, I feel that there are mitigating circumstances (different from DD's) as well and it is fair to take them into consideration.
I did not intend to compare someone's procrastination to someone's atonement. I wanted to say that DD and Snape are both responsible in different ways. Having an "active" type of responsibility (like Snape's) is worse than having a "passive" type of responsibility (like DD's). However, if we look at what is at stake, then we find that DD's "passive" responsibility has graver, larger scale results (much more deaths) than Snape's "active" responsibility.
Their responses are also different, though equally appropriate. There are a lot things that go to DD's credit during his long life and I do not list them because I think all of us know what they are. What goes to Snape's credit is really the quickness and the intensity of his response. DD's atonement is extensive rather than intensive. Perhaps the same applies to their guilt; maybe DD' guilt is an extensive one as is his response (large-scale plans for the universal greater good), while Snape's guilt is an intensive one just like his response (resulting ultimately in great personal sacrifices).
Then, when I finish a post, the original idea I started with may seem to be almost irrelevant in comparison with something that has come to my mind as a result of writing about the topic. Now I think my main point about the two men is what you also seemed to like: DD has to make an "outward" spiritual journey towards the "greater good", giving up personal feelings and taking care of many people extensively; while Snape has to make an "inward" spiritual journey to find or rediscover something deeply personal in himself - love and caring in a personal and intensive way.
tandaradei - Mar 26, 2008 3:11 pm (#1935 of 2617)
Julia H. said:
...[cut]...It is true that Snape acts for someone he loves, while DD does not act for people he does not know. But the scale of the responsibility is also different in the two cases and the specific tasks relate to the two men's personal history. Snape has to be able to put his love (the most valuable thing he had in his youth/childhood, if you like, in his time of "innocence") above his personal interests and fears. At the same time he has to overcome the alienating influence of a totalitarian ideology by means of a deeply personal feeling. DD has to be able to put the idea of the "greater good" (a cherished idea from the "innocent" dream-period of his youth) above his personal "interests" and fears. At the same time, he has to overcome the harmful influence of a deeply personal but mistaken feeling by means of an ideology of the universal good. ...[cut]...
This sounds like thesis material. Truly.
How about adding the tendencies of addictive personalities to this? I see them both in a more unifying light in that way. For the moment I'll call their crisis points their desires to unite with lost loved ones; and certain flaws in their personalities as leading them in faulty directions. Their "addictions" IMO are how they engaged in certain tendencies that overloaded common sense (I'm just looking for a usable templete here).
DD seems have parenting/SuperEgo/controlling-type power tendencies, which are probably natural to him, but are revealed most nakedly (i.e., toward evil) in his sophistries in his dealings with Grindelwald. Snape appears to have more blatant and less righteousness-oriented power-tendencies, maybe more comparable to Grindelwald or Voldy. Both, however simply allow power-needs to overwhelm ethics; both seem addicted towards ends over means, let's say; they tended to overlook paths down unappetizingly immoral pathways, in their desire to reach their end. And both would eventially see the error of their ways at least once by the destruction of someone they loved, while they were walking down such paths.
I'll consider DD the "elder addict," literally; and too, as one possibly fearing what he sees in Snape as a "younger addict." By not allowing Snape to teach Dark Arts, and also by not letting Snape into the qualities of the resurrection stone, I think DD was worried here more about Snape's soul in these things, in the way an addict would worry about another addict ... than by in any general concerns in DD's mind over ongoing strategies against Voldemort. I think DD saw both Snape's needs, and also his weaknesses, precisely because of similar concerns in his own life.
As to "atonement for sins," how about rather some recovery rhetoric? Maybe neither recovered totally, inasmuch as DD even near the end of his life still put on a ring of temptation from his desire; and Snape never got over certain attitudes, and probably also would have put on a ring of temptation if made aware of it. But one might nonetheless say they made strides towards recovery in their day-to-day walks; as in the example of DD's eventual confrontation with Grindelwald, and Snape's continual dangers in working as a spy.
I saw in both of them progress, if not yet perfection.
wynnleaf - Mar 27, 2008 6:47 am (#1936 of 2617)
tandaradei,
Those are very interesting thoughts. Personally, I don't think Dumbledore or Snape were particularly focused on recovery. I do think both were more focused, in terms of dealing with their past mistakes, on atonement. That is, "making amends" or "reparation" for wrong that they felt they'd done. Even if we the readers believe they should also have been committed to recovery, I still don't think that the characters paid much attention to that. It was more a focus on making up for past wrong actions. In the process, I do think they changed somewhat -- there was some "recovery" -- it's just that I think it was not their conscious intent.
Mona amon, I realize that Dumbledore and Snape's actions, mistakes, circumstances, etc. have many differences. But that doesn't mean there's no intent of a literary comparison. JKR had Harry make a comparison of the "lost boys" but clearly none of those characters were a lot like each other in either personality or actions.
Julia H. - Mar 27, 2008 10:22 pm (#1937 of 2617)
Perhaps the best way to recovery for Snape and also for Dumbledore is to focus on atonement and on helping others rather than focusing on any of their own needs, even if this need concerns recovery. DD's attempt to use the Resurrection Stone may be an instance of focusing on his own "recovery" (I would think he wants to call the dead back to hear they have forgiven him) and it turns out to be a false temptation. Perhaps the reason why DD arranges the situation so that Snape should realize the only way to fulfill his task (to deliver the most important final message to Harry) is to win Harry's trust by confessing his secrets to him is that DD knows Snape would never make the confession for the purpose of his own "recovery" but would do even that as part of duty and atonement.
mona amon - Mar 28, 2008 10:49 pm (#1938 of 2617)
Good posts, everyone!
I'm in a rush so this is probably going to be incoherent-
Wynnleaf, I did not mean we cannot compare the two at all, in fact I shall be presently doing just that.
Perhaps I only wanted to show that they are closer to each other than it may seem at first sight and since this first sight shows DD as way above Snape (in a moral sense), putting them a bit closer to each other necessarily results in making DD look worse than before and Snape look better than before. (Julia)
Somehow I never thought of DD as way above Snape in a moral sense, (at least after Snape's return to Dumbledore), even at the end of HBP and before I read DH. DD was just the better adjusted of the two, the 'bigger man'.
Both men never get over the person they fell in love with but never see again after the age of 17. To me, that's a terrible lack of progress. But Dumbledore is able to develop wider interests. After Grindelwald he never concentrates his love on any one person, but develops a general love for humanity. With Snape it's always only Lily, though after a while he does seem to care for Dumbledore. Who knows what would have happened if he'd had enough time to grow and evolve after the death of Voldemort?
Personally, I don't think Dumbledore or Snape were particularly focused on recovery. I do think both were more focused, in terms of dealing with their past mistakes, on atonement. That is, "making amends" or "reparation" for wrong that they felt they'd done. (Wynnleaf)
I agree. Neither of them seems to have come to terms with their greif and their guilt. But Dumbledore seems to have pushed it to a corner and carried on with his life. Snape's whole life is consumed by his guilt. He unswervingly follows the straight and narrow path, and allows himself to be guided completely by Dumbledore. It seems like he's no longer able to trust his own judgement.
Dumbledore does not have a guide or mentor. Of course he has a lot less to atone for than Severus. But his reformation is also not as dramatic or complete. He faces a life long temptation from the Hallows, to which he succumbs twice. He often puts the greater good before the individual good (though whether that's a good or bad thing is debatable). He suspects others of having similar temptations. He feels Harry might be as tempted by the hallows as he was. And jinxed or not, he would not have let Severus anywhere near the DADA post if he could help it.
Dumbledore might suffer from intellectual lonliness, but he allows himself to feel warmth towards his fellow human beings. His eyes twinkle. Severus's are like dark, cold empty tunnels.
Orion - Mar 29, 2008 3:43 am (#1939 of 2617)
I agree. How would DD have looked exactly if he had died at 39?
Julia H. - Mar 29, 2008 6:38 am (#1940 of 2617)
"How would DD have looked exactly if he had died at 39?" (Orion)
That is what I always say. When comparing DD and Snape it is fair to consider the time and opportunity each had for atonement. I think Snape used his time and opportunity quite well (even if not perfectly well) in comparison with DD.
"DD was just the better adjusted of the two, the 'bigger man'." (Mona)
I agree.
"He unswervingly follows the straight and narrow path, and allows himself to be guided completely by Dumbledore. It seems like he's no longer able to trust his own judgement." (Mona)
Maybe this is also behind it all and if he is guilty and remorseful and on bad terms with himself, it is not surprising. Still I think, in the end he gets over this at least: he seems to have learned to trust his own judgement when he refuses portrait-DD's advice.
"Both men never get over the person they fell in love with but never see again after the age of 17. To me, that's a terrible lack of progress." (Mona)
But it can be called loyalty as well... Actually, in the case of DD, I'm not sure whether it is his love for GG or his disappointment in his own judgement that he cannot get over. After all, he does take up the fight against GG eventually and it seems he understands how misplaced his love was. As for Snape, "getting over his love" would be recovery perhaps but again, he focuses on atonement and I guess, recovery or not, he values this feeling and does not try to get over it. But it is difficult too: What links him to Lily is not only love but guilt and the two feelings probably mutually strengthen each other all the time. People who need to get over something are often advised to go to a new place, find a new hobby, get to know new people: Snape, however, goes back to Hogwarts, where he is surrounded with people who permanently remind him of the past, and accepts a job that means life-long atonement for the guilt that is deeply connected with the love he is supposed to get over. (Even his specific task - protecting Harry and later others - is basically the imitation of the very last thing Lily did in her life.) It is also a question of personality and Snape seems to be the kind of person who is loyal by nature and whose feelings - whether it is hatred or love - are very strong and deep and difficult to change.
From another point of view, I still think it is DD's job to have this great goal of defeating the evil (GG, Voldemort) that threatens society and human life in general and to focus on the general good of a lot of people and to be satisfied with this "general love for humanity". I also think that it is Snape's job to love a specific person and to be guided by this love and to learn to care for the people around him - more and more people but still specific people - and to protect them. It seems these two men complement each other and both of them (and what they represent) are necessary to help Harry towards his victory. DD has the plans, Snape risks his life to carry them out. DD can see the final goal beyond individual lives, Snape can see the individual lives to be saved on specific occasions. DD can see the bigger picture, Snape can see the details. Both are important. Sometimes the viewpoints clash, as we see when they talk about Harry's death or during the chase, when Snape chooses to risk the general goal in order to save one particular life right in front of him.
In the HP series, love and courage are the two most important qualities that help to overcome evil. Harry eventually defeats Voldemort in the outside world by means of these two things. I think Snape also defeats Voldemort by means of these two things only not in the outside world but inside himself. Again, these are complementary aspects of the same idea.
"Who knows what would have happened if he'd had enough time to grow and evolve after the death of Voldemort?" (Mona)
As regards that, I have lots of ideas... :-) (But I don't write fanfiction.)
Kip Carter - Mar 30, 2008 7:03 am (#1941 of 2617)
On March 22 (8 days ago), zelmia deleted 363 of her posts on this thread. Due to her actions, I have changed her status to No Access on all Harry Potter Lexicon Forums. I apologize to each of you, who continue to discuss Severus Snape, for not being aware of her action sooner. I have sent her an email informing her of my action and have not had a response as of this post. A duplicate of this post will appear as an added edit on the original post that established this thread.
If you have any comments or questions, please address them to me via email at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
Please do not allow my post to disrupt the discussion in progress and definitely do not use this thread to discuss my actions or those of zelmia; however I would definitely appreciate any thoughts that you may have concerning these issues as long as you present them through the email system and not on this thread or any other thread.
I thank you ahead of time for your cooperation.
In case you have concerns that my action was harsh, please refer to my comments in the Jan 18, 2007 Edited Jan 23, 2007 post referred to in the opening post that established this thread.
mona amon - Mar 30, 2008 9:42 pm (#1942 of 2617)
As regards that, I have lots of ideas... :-) (Julia)
So do I. I'll just mention one, don't you think he could have become a great Healer at St. Mungo's? **sigh**
I think Snape used his time and opportunity quite well (even if not perfectly well) in comparison with DD. (Julia)
Snape had to atone for becoming a DE and being directly responsible for causing the deaths of two people, one of whom he loved. DD points out the path to atonement- protect Lily's son, and Severus obeys.
I'm a bit muddled as to what exactly DD had to atone for. I suppose the main thing would be dreaming of Muggle subservience and finding the Hallows with Grindelwald while he neglected his two younger siblings. To atone, he 1) avoids all further contact with Grindelwald 2) avoids all posts where he will have a great deal of power over others 3) becomes an active champion for the rights of muggles.
I don't see why this compares unfavourably with Severus's atonement if we remember that he 1)had a lot less to atone for, 2) had no guide or mentor, unlike Severus 3)had a much longer life in which to make further (small) mistakes and have occasional (small) relapses.
Still I think, in the end he gets over this at least: he seems to have learned to trust his own judgement when he refuses portrait-DD's advice.
I don't think I agree. He always uses his own judgment in how he is to carry out DD's instructions. It is he who decides what to tell Voldemort and how best to do it. He is doing basically the same thing here. He follows Dumbledore's instructions to the letter (give Harry the sword) even though he does not know why, but he decides which is the best way to do it.
But it can be called loyalty as well... Actually, in the case of DD, I'm not sure whether it is his love for GG or his disappointment in his own judgment that he cannot get over.
Well, it's a loyalty that would have to be dispensed with, if he was to make any progress. Similarly, he'd have had to find some way of dealing with his guilt. As for Dumbledore, you are right. I'd like to quote JKR's recent interview-
"It was just that from the outset obviously I knew he had this big, hidden secret, and that he flirted with the idea of exactly what Voldemort goes on to do, he flirted with the idea of racial domination, that he was going to subjugate the Muggles. So that was Dumbledore's big secret.
Why did did he flirt with that?" she asks. "He's an innately good man, what would make him do that. I didnt even think it through that way, it just seemed to come to me, I thought 'I know why he did it, he fell in love.' And whether they physically consummated this infatuation or not is not the issue. The issue is love. It's not about sex. So that's what I knew about Dumbledore. And it's relevant only in so much as he fell in love and was made an utter fool of by love. He lost his moral compass completely when he fell in love and I think subsequently became very mistrusting of his own judgment in those matters so became quite asexual. He led a celibate and bookish life."
So here we have Dumbledore mistrusting his own judgment in matters of love to such an extent that he never allows himself to fall in love again. That's sad. These two men really should have moved on.
PeskyPixie - Mar 30, 2008 10:10 pm (#1943 of 2617)
I don't think they would be as interesting to read if they had moved on.
Julia H. - Mar 31, 2008 1:58 pm (#1944 of 2617)
[I]"I'll just mention one, don't you think he could have become a great Healer at St. Mungo's?" (Mona)
A great healer, definitely! (I'm not sure if he would have wanted to exchange Hogwarts for another workplace though...) He had the talent, the knowledge, the experience and the willingness to learn more. This would have made it possible for him to continue being a protector of life (and in a Lily-independent way, too!) - the best and most important part of all of his "jobs".
"I don't see why this compares unfavourably with Severus's atonement..." (Mona)
Did I say DD's atonement compares unfavourably with Snape's atonement? I thought I said (more or less) that Snape's atonement compares well if we compare it to DD's.
"It is he who decides what to tell Voldemort and how best to do it."
My guess is that DD likes to tell Snape what to tell Voldemort, though Snape probably decides how to do it and there must be unexpected situations where Snape has to decide everything and on the spot. (That is quite a responsibility.)
"He follows Dumbledore's instructions to the letter (give Harry the sword) even though he does not know why, but he decides which is the best way to do it." (Mona)
I would say he still follows DD's plan rather than his instructions (and still uses DD's name as password to his office) but in this scene he twice interrupts DD (as he interrupts Phineas as well), saying "I know" and "Don't worry" and even "I have a plan". He does not seem to have said these things to DD earlier and to me these things mean one or more of the following: "I'm in charge, I know what to do, you can leave it to me, I can handle it, trust my judgement, I'm not a puppet in this office, I'm responsible".
"I don't think they would be as interesting to read if they had moved on." (Pesky)
I must agree! :-)
PeskyPixie - Apr 1, 2008 10:14 am (#1945 of 2617)
"It's coming back ... Karkaroff's too ... stronger and clearer than ever ..." -Severus Snape in GoF, re: his Dark Mark tattoo (***snickers*** Professor Snape has a tattoo!)
Giggling about our stern professor's secret tattoo aside, this quote implies that each time Voldy is on the verge of returning to a body, the Dark Mark has prickled and faintly appeared on the forearms of his followers. Wouldn't this make Snape's claim of not knowing Quirrell's true allegiance even more difficult to sell to Big V?
Orion - Apr 1, 2008 11:04 am (#1946 of 2617)
In what state of undressedness should Snape have seen Quirrell to watch that?
PeskyPixie - Apr 1, 2008 11:12 am (#1947 of 2617)
I don't understand what you mean, Orion.
Orion - Apr 1, 2008 11:23 am (#1948 of 2617)
The Dark Mark had to be under Quirrell's sleeve all the time, so Snape could hardly ever see it, so he didn't have to lie about it to LV.
PeskyPixie - Apr 1, 2008 11:37 am (#1949 of 2617)
LOL, is that what I managed to imply with my original post?! Let me clarify.
First of all, I don't think Quirrell is a 'branded' Death Eater, so there is no question of the Dark Mark reappearing on his arm. However, if GoF is not the first time since Voldy's downfall that Snape experiences prickling on his forearm and his tattoo faintly reappearing, then I think it not too far-fetched to assume that all Death Eaters (who once bore Voldy's mark on their forearms) experience this sensation. If such a great hint of Voldy's possible return exists, Snape must have an extraordinarily convincing story to persuade Voldy that he indeed has no idea of Quirrell's allegiance as Quirrell desperately attempts to steal the Philosopher's Stone. Or he's an even greater Occlumens than I ever imagined.
ETA: Severus is also quite fortunate that Trixie doesn't bring up this point when she grills him at Spinner's End.
Orion - Apr 1, 2008 11:57 am (#1950 of 2617)
Ah, now I understand. So you think that Snape sat there at the High Table at the beginning of PS/SS with an itching arm? Possible.
SHUDDER!!!
Julia H. - Apr 1, 2008 2:13 pm (#1951 of 2617)
Such turns of conversation... LOL, both of you!
So the Dark Mark in PS: So far I have thought it becomes relevant only in GOF but now Pesky has mentioned it, I think that is an interesting idea.
What do we know? The darkening of the Mark signals LV's return to power, doesn't it? Still, both Snape and Karkaroff can see (feel?) it months before LV's real return. What has LV done that might be reflected by the darkening of the Mark? He has returned to Britain from Albania; found someone (Wormtail and Crouch Jr.) to help him; they have a plan; LV is fed by something Nagini produces; LV has done magic - AK, for example (how?).
Which of these apply in PS? LV is in Britain; is being helped by Quirrell (I don't think he has the Mark either); they have a plan; Quirrell (at some point) starts drinking Unicorn blood to feed LV. Has LV done any magic? All we know is that he has moved into Quirrell's head and occasionally torments him. (Does that count as doing magic?) Also, if I am right, Quirrell tells Harry that Voldemort helps him, so LV may participate in some of the magic Quirrell does. (Like jinxing Harry's broom? Was Snape countercursing a spell cast by Voldemort?)
I guess the comparison makes it possible that the Dark Mark darkened in PS as well. Would that explain why DD and N. F. decided to move the Stone to a safer location just then? BTW it seems having Snape around is very useful already in the "quiet years": as long as the Mark is OK, DD knows there is no immediate danger. (LV did not think about that, did he?)
"Wouldn't this make Snape's claim of not knowing Quirrell's true allegiance even more difficult to sell to Big V?" (Pesky)
Not necessarily. I think Snape only said that he did not know Quirrell wanted the Stone for LV and why should he have known? Just because the Mark was getting darker, he did not have to know how close LV was exactly. (But it must have been a difficult explanation anyway. Everything together.)
Orion - Apr 1, 2008 2:20 pm (#1952 of 2617)
Snape as a walking Petri dish. You people get ideas, not even Rowling gets them. (I hope.)
Julia H. - Apr 1, 2008 2:36 pm (#1953 of 2617)
Another topic: Orion, I liked your comment on the "saddest moment poll", which started like this:
"The saddest moment of this book, for me, isn't on the poll, and that is the terrible conversation between Snape and McGonagall in "The Sacking of Severus Snape", in which Snape can't tell what he's up to and McGonagall can't know and it all goes horribly wrong."
I brought it over here because I'd like to share some thoughts with you (more relevant on this thread). I think this is perhaps where the worst part starts for Snape (though he might say the worst part started a long time ago) leading to his terrible death in the shack. This chapter shows his complete isolation from everyone on the good side and it shows how difficult it must have been to carry on doing the right thing protecting all those people who are so hostile towards him and never to forget that he is there to protect them all - even if they attack him, he must not strike back. Anyway, Snape has the chance, for the last time, to demonstrate his superb duelling skills - maybe for the first time as well, since defending himself against Harry at the end of HBP seems to be rather easy for him and so is the participation in Lockhart's ridiculous duelling club in CoS. However, the way he fights against four of his colleagues, two of whom actively attack him while two are in the background but probably ready to attack if there is a chance, reminds me how he seems to have fought against the Marauders a long time ago in the same place. It is "four on one" again in a similar way but these four now represent the whole school (Snape is being attacked by the heads of the four houses). Then they shout the word "coward" at him and Snape leaves knowing that there is one more thing he still has to do: he must find a way to Harry and he must tell the boy whose life he has been protecting all these years that he must die.
He is just so brave.
mona amon - Apr 2, 2008 7:02 am (#1954 of 2617)
I do not think that the Death eaters' marks would have become darker or prickled back in PS because for all the unicorn blood Voldy was swigging, he was still powerless, wandless vapomort at that stage. I feel it was only at the beginning of GOF when he gets a rudimentary body with Wormtail's help, and a wand in his hand that he is able to signal to the DEs that he is returning to power.
"I don't think they would be as interesting to read if they had moved on." (Pesky)
I've not really thought about Albus either way, but as far as Severus is concerned, I agree. If he had undergone a revolutionary transformation, gotten over Lily, confessed to Harry and made it up to him by being really kind to him, he would have been just another Great Guy, (yawn).
But I still can't help wishing that at some stage (and not just in his dying moments) he had achieved some sort of reconciliation with his fellow human beings, some respite from the miserable, despised state he was in, at least one moment of pure joy!
Orion - Apr 2, 2008 8:06 am (#1955 of 2617)
Julia, don't you have the impression that Rowling is a bit sadistic? I didn't mind so much the look at me scene because it was quite soppy, but well written, and great for the film (if they do it justice). But how she makes situations deteriorate to absolute disasters, that is really evil. It wasn't so bad to read at the first time because I didn't know what Snape wanted, of course, but when I read it for the second time it was torture.
And the mistake was from the beginning that Snape himself swore DD to secrecy. He builds himself a house of horrors of his own making, and he doesn't find the exit until so many people are after his scalp that finally one of them takes him down.
Maybe this is a minority vote, but I was furious after DH after all those unnecessary deaths. I really minded Snape, Fred, Remus and Tonks. What FOR? It reminds me so of Marthy Grimes, and also Elizabeth George, who often kill off their characters in the last two pages. I never get that. What's it good for?
Julia H. - Apr 2, 2008 3:06 pm (#1956 of 2617)
"I feel it was only at the beginning of GOF when he gets a rudimentary body with Wormtail's help, and a wand in his hand that he is able to signal to the DEs that he is returning to power." (Mona)
You are right. I never completely understood this "rudimentary body" thing and that may be the reason why I forgot about it but this is an important difference between PS and GoF. OK, so the Mark darkens in GoF only. All the more dramatic.
"Julia, don't you have the impression that Rowling is a bit sadistic?" (Orion)
I see what you mean, Orion. She is very good at writing plot parts where everything goes wrong, good at making us readers sympathize with different characters who mutually hate each other and making us see how someone ruins his life systematically and without seeing the way out of the situation (though readers may see it). It seems Snape's generation as a whole is a "lost generation". Everybody we get to know enough to care for them meets a tragic end, starting with Harry's parents (and quite a lot is needed, plot-wise, to kill them). Then Sirius's life is totally wasted: not only is his death useless and unnecessary but his whole life as well, as he lived it. (OK, he did have some friends and some people knew that he was not a murderer after all but that was the top, really.) There is unhappy Lupin and with Lupin suddenly a silver lining: it seems Happiness is banging on his door, breaks the door on him in spite of all his reluctance - and then they die. As for Snape, after HBP a lot of readers expected him to die - what could such a character do? - but not like this, definitely not like this. I, at least, expected him to die a heroic, meaningful death, one that makes it absolutely clear that he was a hero all the time - but no. And yes, there are lots of deaths (Fred etc.): victory does not come easily, says Jo, sacrifice is needed but we might have understood the message with fewer deaths perhaps just as well. So everybody in the parents' generation ruins their lives (or suffers their lives ruined) - I could mention a few more names - and then suddenly JKR laughs at us: Lucius Malfoy survives them all! (My children love the first few HP books but I don't know how they will react later: after GoF it is not really children's material, is it?)
There could have been a little more comfort and reward at least for some of the people in this generation but there was not any and it was clearly intentional: only the children's generation is truly saved (but there is still Fred and there is Colin Creevey). It is sad, I agree.
Back to Snape: I think one of the many ways to look at the end (maybe the last two years) of Snape's life is comparing it to a spiritual journey in which he gives up or loses things he values or things that link him to life. Finally he is alone and isolated and despised and hated and he still must stay on the good side (though nobody knows) and he still must fight for the people who hate him, face Voldemort and remember what he has to do and do it without mistakes. He may be blamed for ending up in this situation but it is still a great test of his determination and of his loyalty (and he deserves an "Outstanding") as much as a way of atonement and self-punishment perhaps. And if it is a spiritual journey then it is a way to self-knowledge too. Then he gives up his life - and he probably knows it all the time if Voldemort one day really wants to kill him, there may not be much he can do (and Voldemort wants to kill him at the end of GoF before he goes back to him). The result is that we know very little about how this "spiritual journey" influences his personality: he gives up his secrecy in the last minutes and is able to ask Harry to look at him - and it may indicate that there are... there may be important changes (what do you think?) but that is all we, readers, get. Snape is a character who clearly needs to develop and change and is capable of very exciting development and then he is in a situation which seems to be bound to bring about changes or to reveal what is deep inside his soul - and when the "spiritual journey" seems to be completed or almost completed, he dies and never reaches what could be the spiritual goal of such a journey. I know Snape's goal, personally, is helping Harry and doing his duty but the literary goal of a journey like this could be something different, perhaps something more and we never get there because he dies in that cruel way.
"But I still can't help wishing that at some stage (and not just in his dying moments) he had achieved some sort of reconciliation with his fellow human beings, some respite from the miserable, despised state he was in, at least one moment of pure joy!" (Mona)
I could not say it so well as Mona can but this is how I feel too.
PeskyPixie - Apr 2, 2008 7:56 pm (#1957 of 2617)
"I feel it was only at the beginning of GOF when he gets a rudimentary body with Wormtail's help, and a wand in his hand that he is able to signal to the DEs that he is returning to power." -mona amon
"You are right. I never completely understood this "rudimentary body" thing and that may be the reason why I forgot about it but this is an important difference between PS and GoF. OK, so the Mark darkens in GoF only. All the more dramatic." -Julia H.
I don't see how the above explanation gels with Snape's, "It's coming back ... Karkaroff's too ... stronger and clearer than ever ...". Sev's use of the words 'stronger and clearer' indicate that the Mark has tingled on occasion in the past few years and is steadily coming back - it's not going away as it has in the past.
I wasn't under the impression that Voldy needs a wand to cause the tattoo to reappear on the forearms of his followers. When he is defeated, barely alive, the mark disappears, but once he is on his comeback it reappears. I would assume the reaction may be similar when he shares a body with Quirrell (whom he also has drinking unicorn blood), and when Riddle gains strength from feeding on Ginny. Let's not forget that when Voldy touches Wormtail's Mark (GoF) it (and all others) burn black but remain visible even when the Death Eaters are not being summoned. I think the gradual appearance of the Dark mark on Snape's arm indicates that Voldy is trying a comeback, and the fact that the Mark keeps getting stronger rather than fading away after a growth spurt indicates that the Dark Lord is gaining strength once again.
tandaradei - Apr 2, 2008 8:35 pm (#1958 of 2617)
mona amon said:
...[cut]...But I still can't help wishing that at some stage (and not just in his dying moments) he had acheived some sort of reconcilliation with his fellow human beings, some respite from the miserable, despised state he was in, at least one moment of pure joy!...[cut]...
hmmmm .... sounds like Snape needs to meet his long lost brother Angel, from the Josh Whedon series!
will anyone get this???
Orion - Apr 3, 2008 3:34 am (#1959 of 2617)
No.
Julia, your post makes it clear to me, again, that Snape's worst character trait is his misguided heroism. Sorry, but a spiritual journey which causes social ruin and subsequent death is rubbish. Snape was brainwashed by DD and should have got out of this monster guilt trip (drawn-out suicide in disguise) ASAP. JM2K. Survival is all that counts, not what people say about you when you're dead.
Julia H. - Apr 3, 2008 5:40 am (#1960 of 2617)
"Julia, your post makes it clear to me, again, that Snape's worst character trait is his misguided heroism." (Orion)
Interesting conclusion, Orion, I'll have to think about it.
"Survival is all that counts, not what people say about you when you're dead." (Orion)
Snape does not care too much for his survival (I'm sure he knows what to expect all the time) but the point is that he cannot even find comfort in what people will say about him when he is dead. He does not do it for any personal glory, now or in the future. As far as he knows now, he cannot even keep Harry alive. (That is why I once called his self-sacrifice "almost super-human" and his heroism is of the same kind.) He is driven by his conscience, which he follows to extremes. As Hogwarts headmaster and Voldemort's supposed "right-hand man", his soul is in a very dangerous situation: if he just once allowed his pride or his anger or his feeling of being unjustly hated/despised to take control and get stronger than his loyalty just for a moment, he could easily find himself guilty once again with more remorse and self-loathing added to what he already feels. I think it is a spiritual journey in the sense that he discovers how much he can endure and how much he can give up while remaining loyal - but you are right, a spiritual journey makes more sense if the hero survives and can do something with the self-knowledge and spiritual growth gained during the "journey".
Would he ever be able to forgive himself? Would he ever feel that he has done enough to atone for his guilt?
"Such idle dreams allure me now no more.
The goal, I know I shall not reach, although
A hundred times to gain it I should strive.
It matters nothing. And what is the goal?
It is the ceasing of a worthy fight,
The goal is death, the battle is the life.
The fight itself the goal the man doth seek."
Last edited by Mona on Mon Nov 24, 2014 12:49 pm; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1961 to 1990
Mona Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:55 pm
mona amon - Apr 3, 2008 10:43 am (#1961 of 2617)
I wasn't under the impression that Voldy needs a wand to cause the tattoo to reappear on the forearms of his followers. (Pesky)
I worded my post too carelessly. What I meant was, it's only when Voldemort gets back his wand (and a rudimentary body) that he can be said to be regaining power, and so the DEs would have got the signal. As long as he was Wandless Vapomort, whatever grand schemes he may have had, he was still in the same state as when he first disappeared.
I don't see how the above explanation gels with Snape's, "It's coming back ... Karkaroff's too ... stronger and clearer than ever ...". Sev's use of the words 'stronger and clearer' indicate that the Mark has tingled on occasion in the past few years and is steadily coming back - it's not going away as it has in the past.
You could be right of course. The reason why I feel the mark did not darken earlier is because we never hear of it for one thing, and would Lucius dare to use the diary for his own purposes if he'd had even the slightest indication that his boss might one day return? Could Severus's 'stronger and clearer' mean 'stronger and clearer than when I first mentioned it to you at the beginning of the summer holidays'?
will anyone get this??? (Tandaradei)
Not me, Tandaradei! My son tells me that Angel is a TV series that aired here sometime back, but I hardly watch TV. Can you explain a bit more?
and then suddenly JKR laughs at us: Lucius Malfoy survives them all! (Julia)
The other day when I was watching the COS movie, my son, who hasn't yet got down to reading DH, asked me what happened to Lucius Malfoy, and I had fun watching his astounded reaction when I told him he becomes a grandpa and lives happily ever after!
As for Snape, after HBP a lot of readers expected him to die - what could such a character do? - but not like this, definitely not like this. I, at least, expected him to die a heroic, meaningful death, one that makes it absolutely clear that he was a hero all the time - (Julia)
I was one of the readers who expected him to die after HBP, because after the Tower scene and the flight from Hogwarts I thought wow! A character almost straight out of a Shakespearean tragedy! And I knew he was doomed. But like you I also expected him to die a heroic death, and could only stare at the page in blank disbelief the first time I read the death scene.
But I liked it much better on a second reading and I now feel it's a masterstroke on JKR's part. She gives everyone else a heroic death and even those who did not die were very brave. From Horace Slughorn to Colin Creevey, from Sybil Trelawney to Molly Weasley, from Aberforth to Parvathi Patil, who does not fight bravely in the battle of Hogwarts? And if Severus had died fighting heroically just like them, Harry's 'probably the bravest man I ever knew' would have entirely lost its punch. She had to make us understand that there was something in Severus that was not just the courage needed to fight bravely in battle, but something beyond and greater than that.
Oh dear, I have to go, and no time to edit. Julia is that poem yours? Or is it something so well known that I ought to recognise it?
Julia H. - Apr 3, 2008 11:15 am (#1962 of 2617)
Mona, oh, no, neither! But whoever can tell me what it is will get 50 points from me. (I think it fits what I am trying to say in that post - otherwise I enjoy connecting things that are NOT connected at all.)
"She had to make us understand that there was something in Severus that was not just the courage needed to fight bravely in battle, but something beyond and greater than that." (Mona)
Good point.
Julia H. - Apr 4, 2008 8:40 am (#1963 of 2617)
Mona, I've had some time to think about your post and to try and read the death scene in your way.
"A character almost straight out of a Shakespearean tragedy!"
Definitely.
"And if Severus had died fighting heroically just like them, Harry's 'probably the bravest man I ever knew' would have entirely lost its punch. "
That may very well be true though I am not sure JKR could not have written something else that I would happily exchange that punch for. I mean I do like this line but at first reading I still had an "Is that all?" feeling after this line. Maybe the reason is that I would have liked to see the reaction of the wider wizarding world but at least that of the people at Hogwarts. (It is perhaps because I think, as you know, that their opinion would have been important to Snape as well.) I understand that from a literary point of view and from the viewpoint of redemption/forgiveness Harry's opinion is the most important opinion about Snape and that the fact that Harry tells his son - and not someone else - that Snape was "probably the bravest man I ever knew" indicates that this is what he truly thinks. Still I would have liked to see how his colleagues responded to the revelation about Snape - we did see their reaction at the end of HBP after all. (And what about the students he was trying to protect in the DH year?) So the punch-line is good but a bit dearly bought.
"She had to make us understand that there was something in Severus that was not just the courage needed to fight bravely in battle, but something beyond and greater than that."
I like this observation. I confess it has thrown new light upon the scene for me: not letting Snape die a heroic death underlines that he was heroic and brave in another - greater - way. Very good. Actually I am not any more sure if it was not - in a sense - still a heroic death. Certainly it was not a glorious death. But Snape died as he was trying to do his duty and though he was begging he did not beg for his life but was simply clinging to the last chance to be allowed to find Harry.
I have two observations regarding this scene. One is that Snape begging LV to let him go to Harry may be a reference to Snape begging LV to spare Lily. The latter marks the beginning of the path Snape is going to walk for the rest of his life, while the former marks the end of his life and I think it is interesting to compare the two situations.
My other observation is that we never really see Snape fight in a battle (although we see most other characters do that). We do see him try to save Lupin during the chase but that is all. Of course the obvious plot reason is that he is a spy and most of the time nobody wants him to fight openly. But then we see him duel and still it is always in a situation where he only defends himself (against Harry at the end of HBP and against his colleagues in DH) and does not fight back (for obvious reasons but I can think of a symbolic interpretation, too). Then JKR does not let him die fighting and revealing his true allegiance. I think one possible literary reason is that JKR does not let Snape kill anyone - not even the enemy - because that makes his AK-ing DD much more dramatic. It is the only time he "kills" someone - and it is hard enough for him. Just as JKR carefully avoids letting Harry kill anyone (Harry needs to be "pure" when he faces LV and even then he uses the "Expelliarmus" spell, not the Killing Curse or something similar), she does not let Snape kill anyone either, not even in a battle or a duel because "killing" DD (for mercy) must be done by someone who otherwise does not kill. Another possible reason why Snape does not fight to kill is that it highlights that Snape's assigned duty is to protect lives (and to risk his own life rather than take the lives of others) and we may say that he dies trying to protect others until the end.
Soul Search - Apr 4, 2008 9:01 am (#1964 of 2617)
Julia H.
"I think one possible literary reason is that JKR does not let Snape kill anyone - not even the enemy - because that makes his AK-ing DD much more dramatic. It is the only time he "kills" someone - and it is hard enough for him."
Very good. I liked that whole paragraph, but especially that observation. I was a bit disappointed that DH didn't give Snape more time, but you have hit on a reason why JKR didn't portray a more active Snape.
Your observation suggests that Snape wasn't really ever cut out to be a Death Eater.
Orion - Apr 4, 2008 10:08 am (#1965 of 2617)
"But then we see him duel and still it is always in a situation where he only defends himself (against Harry at the end of HBP and against his colleagues in DH) and does not fight back (for obvious reasons but I can think of a symbolic interpretation, too)." *cough* DOE *cough*
wynnleaf - Apr 4, 2008 1:37 pm (#1966 of 2617)
Julia, your post with The Tragedy of Man was wonderful. For those who don't know, the poem was from The Tragedy of Man by Hungarian author Imre Madách. You can find that part here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (hope that link is okay to use)
Wow, that was an excellent piece to use considering Snape!
Mona, Your comments about JKR needing to have Snape die in such a way are interesting. I do agree that the particular way she went about it creates even more pathos/tragedy than a good satisfying heroic and meaningful death. Actually, the pointlessness of his death, while very, very sad, doesn't bother me as a reader. What I find much more difficult is the way she uses it later. I felt that in order to get the punch line at the end and make it a "surprise," she had to leave out any kind of, I believe, needed scene about how this revelation of Snape is viewed by others or how it affects them.
See, after The Prince's Tale, there's no more surprise about whether Snape is loyal or not, or why DD trusted him. The only remaining question is how all this information should be viewed by both Harry and the reader, and perhaps by other characters. The only thing we get that answers that is Harry's statement about "bravest man I ever knew" and making his second son's middle name "Severus." But it doesn't really answer the question except to say that 19 years later, Harry thought Snape was really brave.
So in order to get this last page "surprise" -- do we need to be surprised that Harry thought Snape was brave? -- we miss out on finding out how Harry really dealt with those revelations, much less how anyone else dealt with it.
After DD's death, we get to see many character's responses and we understand how they were moved by his death. But Snape was an extremely important character and all of the good guys had understandably misjudged him. And yet we don't get to see any of their reactions about that.
And as mentioned earlier, while we get the closure of seeing other characters funerals or their bodies laid out respectfully, or at least the closure of Harry mourning them or other characters commenting on their lives/deaths (like Cedric or Sirius), we get nothing like that sort of closure for Snape. The last we see of him is Harry leaving the Shrieking Shack and Snape's body in a pool of blood on the floor. Harry views the memories, but that's in the past. We don't see any of Harry's internal response to those memories. We see Harry's comments to Voldemort and DD's "poor Severus" (not even sure what the "poor" was about - all he'd been through? his death? the pointlessness?). Then that's it until "bravest man I ever knew."
Orion - Apr 4, 2008 1:46 pm (#1967 of 2617)
Can it be that Rowling keeps shooting herself in the foot whenever Snape is concerned? Everything she does to make this character miserable, ridiculous, nasty and despised seems to have the opposite effect. She can't stand him, but she is rubbish at it.
Julia H. - Apr 5, 2008 5:04 am (#1968 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, you get the 50 points and many thanks for taking the trouble to answer the question and so precisely too!
I agree that some acknowledgement of Snape's real role in bringing down Voldemort would have been necessary. I missed a few words "in memoriam" or at least some reference to an honourable funeral (if only one sentence) more than the portrait in the Headmaster's office (and it did not need to spoil "the bravest man" line). But Snape is left in a pool of his own blood in the Shack and it seems he is somehow forgotten in the euphoria of victory.
"Your observation suggests that Snape wasn't really ever cut out to be a Death Eater." (Soul Search)
This is indeed what I think.
"*cough* DOE *cough*" (Orion)
LOL! Orion, I think I know what you mean but I don't think this is exactly the symbolism I had in mind. Talking about the duels, I think Snape is able to strike back (he is the guy who invented Sectumsempra!) but he knows that he must not. In other words, it is his decision rather than some inability that keeps him from fighting back and it is important, especially if we consider how impulsive and easily provoked he can be in everyday situations; still, when he is seriously attacked by some of the people he is fighting for, he must be and is able to remain calm enough not to strike back and not to harm them. Otherwise you are probably right: the doe can be a symbol of the essentially non-violent and sacrificial nature of Snape's fight. An example of that is at the end of HBP: when the DE's invade Hogwarts, Snape, who does not fight in a word by word sense, in effect saves everyone in the castle first by making the sacrifice that AK-ing DD means to him and secondly by putting an end to the fight (driving the DE's out of the castle). From this point of view, the fact that it is Snape who teaches Harry Expelliarmus - the Disarming Spell -, which Harry uses to defeat Voldemort, may have extra significance.
Perhaps when Snape dies, he does what Harry will also want to do - he lets Voldemort kill him without fighting for his life. He may not make a conscious decision (like Harry) right then but in a more general sense, he probably knows that each time he appears in front of Voldemort, it may be the last thing he does in life and he is still willing to do it. Of course, he is not the "Chosen One", his sacrifice does not save everyone else but it is a completed sacrifice (unlike Harry, he really dies). Would it be too much to say that he "goes before Harry" and his "non-fighting" death, which is a part of his atonement, indicates the way Harry will have to go - with the important difference that Harry does not atone for anything when he is willing to sacrifice his life, so his guiltless sacrifice is able to save everyone else?
Or maybe: "Deep magic from the Dawn of Time"? Except, of course, that Snape is not a real traitor...
Another similarity between the actions of Snape and Harry is that both save Draco at some point in the story, i.e., they do not only save the good ones but both of them save someone who belongs to the enemy, someone who is "bad".
"Can it be that Rowling keeps shooting herself in the foot whenever Snape is concerned? Everything she does to make this character miserable, ridiculous, nasty and despised seems to have the opposite effect." (Orion)
Yes, it can be....
Orion - Apr 5, 2008 6:48 am (#1969 of 2617)
"Of course, he is not the "Chosen One", his sacrifice does not save everyone else but it is a completed sacrifice (unlike Harry, he really dies). Would it be too much to say that he "goes before Harry" and his "non-fighting" death, which is a part of his atonement, indicates the way Harry will have to go - with the important difference that Harry does not atone for anything when he is willing to sacrifice his life, so his guiltless sacrifice is able to save everyone else?" As far as the structure of this complicated novel is concerned, the knot can only be solved, or is practically solved in the moment when Snape dies, as if his life had been the spanner in the works all the time. (Fair enough, this is how novels works. It's only mean if you happen to like that particular sacrificial lamb character.)
As for the symbolism That Must Not Be Named, DD plays an important role in that as all powerful Über-father-figure, like that big lorry in front of you that you can't overtake by any means. (And you can't see anything.)
Julia H. - Apr 5, 2008 8:54 am (#1970 of 2617)
"As far as the structure of this complicated novel is concerned, the knot can only be solved, or is practically solved in the moment when Snape dies, as if his life had been the spanner in the works all the time." (Orion)
I'm interested in this, could you elaborate a bit?
"all powerful Über-father-figure" (Orion)
Yes, DD is the kind of father figure that you have described but this is not all. Snape is basically in the middle of the fight between the two most powerful wizards alive. He has to work with both DD and LV, trying to carry out DD's increasingly difficult orders and pretending to serve LV, which clearly involves actually doing certain things on LV's orders - e.g., he has to go to him when LV summons him (or leave when LV tells him to). His loyalty and his promise bind him to DD and his duty is to face LV again and again. I think Snape is a very powerful wizard and is talented in various ways (and he could not do these things if he were not) but between these two most powerful and formidable wizards he probably has little chance to feel his real powers. He is also responsible for the protection of the "Chosen One", who is getting more and more important for the wizarding community. The result is that neither his life nor his talents are really his.
Orion - Apr 5, 2008 11:11 am (#1971 of 2617)
Answer to Julia:
I don't know, I'm not an expert in literary theory, but it was a very strong feeling I had. You know, as if the world, when the odd little black thing was born (looking like a crumpled up black umbrella) looked nonplussed and tried to get rid of it. Daddy (presumably) beat the odd thing up, schoolmate Sirius tried to feed it to a werewolf, a three-headed dog tried to eat it, its boss forced it onto a suicide mission as a spy, and finally LV took pity on the world and took the odd thing down like a sick animal. The world exhaled. All was well.
wynnleaf - Apr 5, 2008 3:14 pm (#1972 of 2617)
I don't look at it quite that way, Orion.
As I see it, Snape is the linchpin of the story. His actions, from befriending and loving Lily, to his hatred for James, to joining the DEs, to taking the prophecy to LV, to asking LV to spare Lily, then going back to DD, set up the entire backstory scenario. Without Snape, there'd be no one to love Lily, no one to ask that she be spared, no one to go to DD. I won't say there'd be no one to spy on DD, because LV could easily have sent another DE to spy on DD and end up hearing the prophecy. But because of Snape, Lily is given a choice and DD is alerted to the situation. Because of Snape, there's someone protecting Harry on a number of occasions when he might otherwise have died. Because of Snape, there's someone there to protect students in DH, carry out DD's orders, and give crucial info to Harry. No other character on the good side both starts the plot (gets it going) as well as acts in resolving the plot. It fits from a literary perspective for the reader to get these end-of-story surprises about Snape. But I do not think that the last pages "surprise" was necessary at all, and in fact, I think it diminished the resolution of the Snape-Harry tension because it didn't offer the degree of closure for that tension that a great many readers were looking for.
Soul Search - Apr 5, 2008 4:07 pm (#1973 of 2617)
"... didn't offer the degree of closure for that tension that a great many readers were looking for." (wynnleaf)
Here, here. I agree.
Along those same lines, Pettigrew had a similar key role in the major HP events in betraying the Potters and bringing back Voldemort. Yet he also received an ignominious death, although it was fitting that it was by Voldemort.
Julia H. - Apr 6, 2008 5:15 am (#1974 of 2617)
Orion, you do seem to have strong feelings about Snape! :-) (Needless to say, you are not the only one...)
I like Wynnleaf's summary of Snape's role in the plot and I agree that the relationship between Harry and Snape would have deserved a better solution. (I would have willingly read any number of pages concerning a real one-to-one talk between the two characters but even after Snape's death there were various ways to resolve the tension.)
Soul Search, I don't see Pettigrew as a key figure in the same way as Snape. The difference is that Pettigrew has a key role only with regard to the promotion of the bad side: he always helps Voldemort. It is true that just before his death he shows that he too has some kind of conscience but I don't think he would have actively helped Harry survive or escape had he survived that moment. On the whole, Pettigrew deserves that ignominious death, even though he may least deserve it at the moment when it actually happens.
Snape, however, does not only set the story into motion but he also helps to resolve the conflict in many ways, as Wynnleaf has pointed out. In fact, Snape has to reverse the actions of his youth one by one before Harry's story reaches conclusion. First he joins the DE's, then he joins the Order. First he spies on DD for Voldemort, then he becomes DD's spy against Voldemort. His actions put Harry and his family into mortal danger but later he dedicates his life to the protection of Harry's life and he also protects the students of Hogwarts (and Hogwarts is Harry's new home), including Ginny, and by protecting Ginny, he protects a future family for Harry. He experiments with the dark arts and invents dangerous spells in his youth but as an adult he uses his dark arts knowledge to heal people who suffer from dark arts injuries (including healing Draco, who is injured by Snape's own invention). We see how his attitude towards the use of the M-word changes. At the age of eleven, he chooses Slytherin but later he demonstrates courage worthy of Gryffindor and helps a Gryffindor to victory (among other things by delivering the sword of Gryffindor to him). There are probably more examples but my point is that Snape reverses the original bad situation he brought about by reversing his early mistakes one by one and - from a literary point of view - his actions turn the balance.
Orion - Apr 6, 2008 6:35 am (#1975 of 2617)
Well, yes, of course Snape is the prime mover of the story. But he is also a kind of Norbert - that is, a problem which has to be removed.
wynnleaf - Apr 6, 2008 6:54 am (#1976 of 2617)
I don't think I understand what you mean, Orion.
After taking the prophecy to LV, which definitely starts a problem, how is Snape a problem in the storyline? Yes, he's a source of tension for Harry, but that's not the same as a problem. He doesn't present anything that Harry has to solve or resolve in order to defeat LV, survive the books, enable those he cares for to live, get the girl (Ginny), or anything else that are Harry's goals. So how is Snape a problem for the storyline?
Orion - Apr 6, 2008 7:57 am (#1977 of 2617)
I just wish I could make sentences which make sense. I'm not very good at it and apologize, and try better.
Snape is not a problem for the storyline. But some day, if you grow up with movies at the cinema and on tv, and novels, and drama and everything which has a plot, so to speak, you get a feeling for the "intended victim", or "guy who's gonna die at the last possible moment". It's not something you learn when you study literature (we didn't learn it, anyway, can't remember anything of that sort, not even in creative writing), but there are seminars in screen-play-writing (which you have to pay for), and the screenwriters probably learn it there, and there are probably similar seminars for novelists.
In the last novel I read, it was clear for me who was going to die. It was the alcohol addict who painted and whose mother had all these feelings of guilt. In the novel before last, I just knew that the autistic young man would die in the end. If I was a professional scriptwriter, I could certainly point out the exact mechanisms of such (often rather predictable and dreary) plot devices. It has something to do with emotions (LOL Julia!), and the chronology of scenes, and whatever, but it's rather complicated. I could never write a novel, could you? And I'm full of awe for everybody who can. (Nevertheless, DH is rotten from the core, awe or not.)
Julia H. - Apr 6, 2008 9:05 am (#1978 of 2617)
Snape is not a problem (for the storyline or in any other way) but perhaps we can say that he has a problem that is solved (from a plot point of view) when the character dies. Is that more or less what you are saying, Orion? You used the term "sacrificial lamb character" - :-) - but in this case we have a sacrificial black lamb, don't we? This is one of the reasons that make the sacrifice especially interesting.
PeskyPixie - Apr 6, 2008 9:14 am (#1979 of 2617)
I think Orion means that death is expected for a character like Snape?
I've mentioned the following many times on other threads, but as it's been a while, I think I'll go for it again. I too was dismayed by the fact that the Hogwarts army is in a celebration frenzy while Severus Snape is lying dead and alone, in a pool of his own blood in the Shrieking Shack. It would be a completely Harry thing to do if he muttered to Prof. McGonagall, "By the way, someone should see to (Professor) Snape's body. It's in the Shrieking Shack," on his way to Dumbledore's study.
OR,
While Harry thinks of how he needs time to register the deaths of his friends (on the way up to the Headmaster's study), there need only be one line about how he'll need time to fully comprehend Snape's great love for his mother and his complicated relationship with him (Lily's son). Something about how Harry might still have conflicting feelings about Snape would be interesting.
IMO, that's all that's needed - and it doesn't take away from the 'Albus Severus' bit. If anything, I find that the second scenario would add to the resolution in the epilogue. The way it is, Snape's true allegiance doesn't have an effect on anybody on his team, and that's just plain sad.
Julia H. - Apr 6, 2008 2:48 pm (#1980 of 2617)
PeskyPixie, I wish Jo would rewrite DH in accordance with your suggestions! That line about Professor Snape's body in the Shrieking Shack is sadly missing. It would really be in character with Harry and after all only HRH know where Snape died - and they don't seem to mention it to anyone. It would only be just basic respect that Snape deserves regardless how far Harry or anyone else will get later understanding or appreciating Snape's story. (Especially since it is mentioned that the bodies of the others are taken care of.) Apart from that, Snape also deserves to be accepted back - after his death - into the community that he belongs to and his body being placed among the bodies of the other heroes (for example) would be a clear indication of that. And yes, Harry thinking a bit about Snape: Snape and Lily or Snape and Dumbledore or Snape saving Harry's life on various occasions that Harry never really seemed to fully realize.
haymoni - Apr 6, 2008 4:04 pm (#1981 of 2617)
Harry has to convince a lot of folks that Snape was actually a good guy - Minerva, the other Heads of House, the Order Members. I think he would have had to use the Pensieve to do it.
I just don't think all of that could have happened right after his victory. If he had mentioned that Snape was lying in the Shrieking Shack, I think all of Hogsmeade would have set the place on fire.
Once he was able to tell the truth and convince those that really mattered, I would imagine a simple, yet dignified, ceremony would have taken place. Nothing big - Order Members, the Trio, perhaps a handful of Hogwarts Staff.
Maybe Snape would have gotten his Order of Merlin, First Class post-humously.
Sniff!
Julia H. - Apr 7, 2008 2:46 am (#1982 of 2617)
Edited Apr 7, 2008 3:42 am
Of course, we can all comfort ourselves imagining what could happen between the last chapter and the epilogue. But the novel would be better if something about the immediate effects of the astonishing discovery were mentioned somehow - the preparations for a dignified funeral at least (if not the Order of Merlin). If Harry thought the others were not convinced by his words to Voldemort, Jo could have at least had him think about how he would sit down with certain people the next day to show them the evidence about Snape's loyalty. By the way, Pensieve or not, DD's portrait could also have said a few words to Hogwarts staff and/or to Order members to convince them. Meanwhile it is still a sad idea that Snape's dead body should be left there alone until some unspecified time in the future when people find the time to think about him seriously and it seems to be intentional on JKR's part: it is mentioned how the rest of the dead are tended but no mention of Snape; Harry reveals Snape's true story to LV and in front of hundreds of people but there is no reaction from anyone (belief or disbelief, not counting LV's reaction); the headmasters' portraits are mentioned and no portrait of Snape; Harry talks to DD once again after the victory - no mention of Snape. It is intentional and it has a purpose but it is not good in this way. The problem with this is that Snape is a very important character in the series and the question of his allegiance and by extension his relationship with the various people on the good side (not only Harry but also colleagues, students, Order members) is too important to be left half-resolved.
wynnleaf - Apr 7, 2008 4:47 am (#1983 of 2617)
Unfortunately, the way the last chapter before the epilogue ends, one is given the distinct impression that Harry had by that time completely forgotten about Snape. His last thoughts are of getting a sandwich and going to bed, which is understandable, but considering that Snape's body is still lying in his blood in the Shrieking Shack, it really leaves the reader as though Snape's sacrifice and death isn't really all that important other than as a kind of afterthought.
Even in the epilogue -- and yes, I realize JKR was going for a surprise -- it almost comes across as though Harry is telling Albus Severus for the very first time about the man he was named after. Harry tells AS that he was named after a past headmaster of Hogwarts. Shouldn't the child already know this? And Harry tells him that Snape was the bravest man Harry already knew. But if Snape was so important to Harry that he'd name his child after him, one can't help but wonder why Albus Severus hadn't known for years that Snape was a Slytherin, a past Headmaster, and exceedingly brave.
mona amon - Apr 7, 2008 7:46 am (#1984 of 2617)
That may very well be true though I am not sure JKR could not have written something else that I would happily exchange that punch for. (Julia)
It's not just the punch. Wouldn't we have missed the whole point? Oh, Harry thinks he's such a hero and named one of his sons after him because he saved his life, or his friends' lives, you know what I mean. She has already proved that he is skillful and courageous and heroic. In his death scene she shows us how vulnerable and human he is. No other character is given such a long drawn out death scene, or suffers quite as much. His obvious and uncharacteristic panic, his pleas to be allowed to escape to do the thing he most wants to do, his frantic attempt to close his mind to Voldemort, "Snape's face was like a death mask. It was marble white and so still that when he spoke it was a shock to see that anyone lived behind those blank eyes." No virtuoso performance of occlumency here. Severus is trying too hard. If Voldemort hadn't been so preoccupied, he'd have immediately realised what Snape was upto. And his terrified scream...**sniff**
Actually I am not any more sure if it was not - in a sense - still a heroic death.
I agree. It was heroic in it's own way. When LV finally comes to the point, he protests and raises his wand. Like Harry in the graveyard at Little Hangleton he wants to die fighting, even when he knows no defence is possible. But he still has a job to do. Casting a spell would mean instant death, so he waits to see what will happen, and in the end it pays off. And even just keeping himself alive until he has done his duty, when his blood was flowing out like that requires a supreme effort of will. **sniff** again!
We see Harry's comments to Voldemort and DD's "poor Severus" (not even sure what the "poor" was about - all he'd been through? his death? the pointlessness?). (Wynnleaf)
I don't think Dumbledore's 'poor Severus' was an important comment about his life or his death. He was just reflecting about what a pity it was that Voldemort's obsession with the Elder Wand ended in Snape getting killed. We didn't really need a whole lot of tributes from DD. After all he's the one with the constant refrain, "I trust Severus completely"!
But I do not think that the last pages "surprise" was necessary at all, and in fact, I think it diminished the resolution of the Snape-Harry tension because it didn't offer the degree of closure for that tension that a great many readers were looking for. (Wynnleaf)
The way it is, Snape's true allegiance doesn't have an effect on anybody on his team, and that's just plain sad. (Pesky)
I don't know, it all worked beautifully for me, the line in the epilogue providing more closure than I expected. Maybe my expectations were low to start off with.
For one thing I got the feeling that Harry forgives and understands Severus instantly and completely on viewing the Pensieve memories. It wasn't a complicated process. Perhaps the feeling of incompleteness is due to the fact that Severus himself dies without knowing that he has been forgiven and accepted.
As for Severus's body being left in the shreiking shack in a pool of blood, we know at some level that it couldn't have been that way, that Harry would never have left him lying there, that he must have been one of the '50 others' and that he wasn't mentioned by name solely because of the Albus Severus punchline. But it makes literary sense as well. Severus had tragic flaws (like a Shakespearean character) which led to his downfall, both by making him the sacrificial black sheep (LOL, Julia, thanks for that!) and by denying him even posthumous adulation and acceptance. I feel the lack of closure is intentional. The reader's feelings of incompleteness and loss heighten the sense of tragedy.
So that makes what he does get all the more poignant. Harry 'avenging' Severus by taunting Voldemort with his loyalty to Dumbledore, and immortalizing his great love for his mom by declaring it to a hall full of attentive people at the most climactic moment of the battle.
And then the Albus Severus line of the epilogue. The man who never forgave anyone gets forgiveness. The one who never loved (except once) and who never allowed himself to be loved gets a child named in honour of him, the one who did what he did with no thought of glory or recognition has at least one person who appreciates and admires him, who recognizes what he has done and is willing to do the work to convince others.
The only thing we get that answers that is Harry's statement about "bravest man I ever knew" and making his second son's middle name "Severus." But it doesn't really answer the question except to say that 19 years later, Harry thought Snape was really brave. (Wynnleaf)
I think a lot more can be read into that line than 'really brave'. People name their kids only for people who played a very important role in their lives, people who are their heroes. It also shows that Harry thought he was probably 'the bravest', not just very brave, and he knew a whole lot of brave people. There is a complete acceptance of Snape's 'Slytherin-ness' and his recognition of Severus as a true Headmaster of Hogwarts (this was important for me), and there's also something symbolic about the child who resembles Harry and the only one who had Lily's eyes being named after Severus. He may have lost Lily to his rival. But Lily's grandchild still ends up with his name.
Julia H. - Apr 7, 2008 4:02 pm (#1985 of 2617)
"And even just keeping himself alive until he has done his duty, when his blood was flowing out like that requires a supreme effort of will" (Mona)
Oh, yes, it does. It is really poignant that a gravely injured, dying man is giving help to the strong and healthy one leaning above him. Then there is the way Snape is giving the memories: so far we have seen that normally a wand is used to extract a memory from a wizard's head. But this is not how Snape does it. This means that he must be concentrating all his magic power (will power) to perform wand magic without using a wand, which in turn implies that wands only make it easier to perform magic but it is really the wizard that counts not the wand. (LV knows very little...) Another way to look at it is Snape really opening up his soul at the sight of Harry, the second time already (the first time being the Doe Patronus), which again can imply various things - emotions in the first place and a serious, permanent change in his attitude to Harry.
Mona, your post on the whole could be the basis of a beautiful funeral speech for Snape, but I will add my comments only to those parts where my view is slightly different.
"The reader's feelings of incompleteness and loss heighten the sense of tragedy." (Mona)
They do heighten the sense of tragedy but for me the chapters "The Sacking of Severus Snape", "The Elder Wand" and "The Prince's Tale" created a high enough sense of tragedy. I really did not want it to be any higher than that. I wanted him to be accepted and appreciated (and forgiven if need be) post-humously and on the pages of the book. It is bad enough "that Severus himself dies without knowing that he has been forgiven and accepted", at least the reader should know it.
"he must have been one of the '50 others' and that he wasn't mentioned by name solely because of the Albus Severus punchline" (Mona)
I don't think mentioning his name here would spoil the punchline. And even if I know that this is the technical reason, the internal logic of a novel cannot be explained by external, technical reasons. Perhaps my problem here is that I know it from experience how emotionally important some very basic, simple and sincere gestures can be at a funeral or when somebody is dead and that is why I find it cruel that in Snape's case we do not know anything about any of these gestures at all.
"Harry 'avenging' Severus by taunting Voldemort" (Mona)
Yes, it is great but saying a few words exclusively for the memory of Snape and not in order to taunt Voldemort is a different thing.
"Severus had tragic flaws (like a Shakespearean character) which led to his downfall" (Mona)
I don't quite understand this. I mean I know he had tragic flaws but what do you mean by "his downfall"? His death? Is it really any of his tragic flaws that led there? In a way, maybe, but Dumbledore's plan and the task he gave Snape were just as important reasons. So were his sense of duty and his heroism. We know very little about Snape in the DH year but I have a feeling that he really grew after DD's death. His responsibility is greater than ever and his concentration on his duty seems to be so as well. It seems the more isolated he gets, the more he gives himself up to his duty, to serving the cause he finds worthy of risking and giving up everything for. And sincerely: alone, fighting and sacrificing and dying for people who hate and despise him and going through it all not just at a moment's impulse but over months on a daily basis IMO requires incomparable greatness and the fact that it is a man of many faults who is able to do that makes his heroism even more admirable.
"The man who never forgave anyone gets forgiveness." (Mona)
I think he had to learn a certain type of forgiveness or tolerance in his year as a headmaster while he was protecting the kids who were rebelling (as they thought) against him. I don't know how it affected, if at all, his old, deep-rooted feelings, but he must have learned how to put aside personal grudges and how to pay for hostility with caring and protection and this is certainly improvement.
"The one who never loved (except once)" (Mona)
But "once" means practically his whole life. Besides, I think his love for Lily changed in a certain way over the years. On the hilltop, as we know, it was concentrated exclusively on Lily. Towards the end of Snape's life, however, I think this love may have broadened: I think through his love for Lily he learned to love others in a less personal way: students he was protecting, people who were in need of his help or maybe just life in general, life for other people, not for himself. Something that made him endure the attack by his colleagues without attacking back, for example. Maybe these are things that can be called by various different names, not love - but when they are taken together, they seem to add up to something that is a type of love. Also, we often say that DD is a mentor, a father figure to him. I think this involves Snape feeling a son's respect and love towards DD - that is what makes DD a father figure to him (at least it seems to be much more probable than a decided paternal feeling on DD's part towards Snape). This is how it seems to me when DD persuades Snape to AK him: it is not DD's order or any logical reason that convinces him but DD's request "to help an old man avoid pain and humiliation". Is this not a form of love?
It is beautiful and important that Snape gets forgiveness, respect and perhaps even admiration from Harry. But I don't think he wins these things in spite of his faults. I think he wins them because he deserves them, because in order to protect and help others, he willingly and with determination goes down a path in which he both has to give up things he values and has to leave behind many of his faults, like his pride, his easily-provoked, angry and unforgiving temper, and finally his secrecy, as he opens up to Harry and unconditionally gives him the secrets of his life.
tandaradei - Apr 7, 2008 6:26 pm (#1986 of 2617)
Just a quick observation in relation to these ideas.
...[cut]...and Phineas Nigellus called, in his high, reedy voice, "And let it be noted that Slytherin House played its part! Let our contribution not be forgotten!"...[cut]...
DH,Ch36,"The Flaw in the Plan," p.747 US.
On almost every reading I was struck by Nigelus's use of the singular for the word "contribution." I assumed Nigellus was speaking rather specifically of Snape's contribution; which information probably came from what the Hogwarts portraits in other parts of the castle had overheard.... I rather assumed, possibly thru editing, that a fair amount of this stuff had been removed?
PeskyPixie - Apr 7, 2008 6:31 pm (#1987 of 2617)
I assumed that Phineas talks about Snape here, but then someone (perhaps JKR herself?) pointed out that this also includes Slughorn and the majority of Slytherin students who supposedly return to fight for Hogwarts.
tandaradei - Apr 7, 2008 6:33 pm (#1988 of 2617)
... those would be contributions....
Honestly, I cannot stress enough, how I feel about that significance here. I'd have thought Phineas would have naturally used the plural, but didn't. He is somewhat singular-minded, yes; but I'm rather thinking he was thinking about the recent headship, on of account of how he thinks (We leaders vs them, the followers) etc....
PeskyPixie - Apr 8, 2008 9:15 pm (#1989 of 2617)
I personally feel that he does refer to Snape here, at least, the line is more significant in this interpretation. Amidst the 'Gryffindor Power' Phineas reminds everyone (in his dry, reedy way) to not forget the crucial role (and sacrifice) of a Slytherin in the attainment of this victory.
Julia H. - Apr 9, 2008 2:07 am (#1990 of 2617)
Yes, it makes more sense if Phineas is referring to Snape. After all Slughorn's contribution is not likely to be any more forgotten than, for example, Sprout's. Snape's "contribution" was, however, not only crucial but also very different from what Gryffindors typically consider to be contribution to a fight and very different from what everyone else did. Besides, though Phineas may well have seen Slughorn and the Slytherin students fight, he had been actively working with Snape and helping him in his fight for almost a whole school-year and he understood his actions and intentions and must have known that nobody among the living had ever suspected what Snape was really doing. We know that he "venerated Snape". (Portrait DD, portrait Phineas and Snape: the secret trio assisting the Trio?) Yet, whether Phineas is referring to Snape or not, the way the novel is written implies that the Gryffindors do not listen and, for the time being at least, they do forget about the most important contribution of Slytherin.
"I rather assumed, possibly thru editing, that a fair amount of this stuff had been removed?" (Tandaradei)
That is interesting, what kind of things do you think may have been removed?
I wasn't under the impression that Voldy needs a wand to cause the tattoo to reappear on the forearms of his followers. (Pesky)
I worded my post too carelessly. What I meant was, it's only when Voldemort gets back his wand (and a rudimentary body) that he can be said to be regaining power, and so the DEs would have got the signal. As long as he was Wandless Vapomort, whatever grand schemes he may have had, he was still in the same state as when he first disappeared.
I don't see how the above explanation gels with Snape's, "It's coming back ... Karkaroff's too ... stronger and clearer than ever ...". Sev's use of the words 'stronger and clearer' indicate that the Mark has tingled on occasion in the past few years and is steadily coming back - it's not going away as it has in the past.
You could be right of course. The reason why I feel the mark did not darken earlier is because we never hear of it for one thing, and would Lucius dare to use the diary for his own purposes if he'd had even the slightest indication that his boss might one day return? Could Severus's 'stronger and clearer' mean 'stronger and clearer than when I first mentioned it to you at the beginning of the summer holidays'?
will anyone get this??? (Tandaradei)
Not me, Tandaradei! My son tells me that Angel is a TV series that aired here sometime back, but I hardly watch TV. Can you explain a bit more?
and then suddenly JKR laughs at us: Lucius Malfoy survives them all! (Julia)
The other day when I was watching the COS movie, my son, who hasn't yet got down to reading DH, asked me what happened to Lucius Malfoy, and I had fun watching his astounded reaction when I told him he becomes a grandpa and lives happily ever after!
As for Snape, after HBP a lot of readers expected him to die - what could such a character do? - but not like this, definitely not like this. I, at least, expected him to die a heroic, meaningful death, one that makes it absolutely clear that he was a hero all the time - (Julia)
I was one of the readers who expected him to die after HBP, because after the Tower scene and the flight from Hogwarts I thought wow! A character almost straight out of a Shakespearean tragedy! And I knew he was doomed. But like you I also expected him to die a heroic death, and could only stare at the page in blank disbelief the first time I read the death scene.
But I liked it much better on a second reading and I now feel it's a masterstroke on JKR's part. She gives everyone else a heroic death and even those who did not die were very brave. From Horace Slughorn to Colin Creevey, from Sybil Trelawney to Molly Weasley, from Aberforth to Parvathi Patil, who does not fight bravely in the battle of Hogwarts? And if Severus had died fighting heroically just like them, Harry's 'probably the bravest man I ever knew' would have entirely lost its punch. She had to make us understand that there was something in Severus that was not just the courage needed to fight bravely in battle, but something beyond and greater than that.
Oh dear, I have to go, and no time to edit. Julia is that poem yours? Or is it something so well known that I ought to recognise it?
Julia H. - Apr 3, 2008 11:15 am (#1962 of 2617)
Mona, oh, no, neither! But whoever can tell me what it is will get 50 points from me. (I think it fits what I am trying to say in that post - otherwise I enjoy connecting things that are NOT connected at all.)
"She had to make us understand that there was something in Severus that was not just the courage needed to fight bravely in battle, but something beyond and greater than that." (Mona)
Good point.
Julia H. - Apr 4, 2008 8:40 am (#1963 of 2617)
Mona, I've had some time to think about your post and to try and read the death scene in your way.
"A character almost straight out of a Shakespearean tragedy!"
Definitely.
"And if Severus had died fighting heroically just like them, Harry's 'probably the bravest man I ever knew' would have entirely lost its punch. "
That may very well be true though I am not sure JKR could not have written something else that I would happily exchange that punch for. I mean I do like this line but at first reading I still had an "Is that all?" feeling after this line. Maybe the reason is that I would have liked to see the reaction of the wider wizarding world but at least that of the people at Hogwarts. (It is perhaps because I think, as you know, that their opinion would have been important to Snape as well.) I understand that from a literary point of view and from the viewpoint of redemption/forgiveness Harry's opinion is the most important opinion about Snape and that the fact that Harry tells his son - and not someone else - that Snape was "probably the bravest man I ever knew" indicates that this is what he truly thinks. Still I would have liked to see how his colleagues responded to the revelation about Snape - we did see their reaction at the end of HBP after all. (And what about the students he was trying to protect in the DH year?) So the punch-line is good but a bit dearly bought.
"She had to make us understand that there was something in Severus that was not just the courage needed to fight bravely in battle, but something beyond and greater than that."
I like this observation. I confess it has thrown new light upon the scene for me: not letting Snape die a heroic death underlines that he was heroic and brave in another - greater - way. Very good. Actually I am not any more sure if it was not - in a sense - still a heroic death. Certainly it was not a glorious death. But Snape died as he was trying to do his duty and though he was begging he did not beg for his life but was simply clinging to the last chance to be allowed to find Harry.
I have two observations regarding this scene. One is that Snape begging LV to let him go to Harry may be a reference to Snape begging LV to spare Lily. The latter marks the beginning of the path Snape is going to walk for the rest of his life, while the former marks the end of his life and I think it is interesting to compare the two situations.
My other observation is that we never really see Snape fight in a battle (although we see most other characters do that). We do see him try to save Lupin during the chase but that is all. Of course the obvious plot reason is that he is a spy and most of the time nobody wants him to fight openly. But then we see him duel and still it is always in a situation where he only defends himself (against Harry at the end of HBP and against his colleagues in DH) and does not fight back (for obvious reasons but I can think of a symbolic interpretation, too). Then JKR does not let him die fighting and revealing his true allegiance. I think one possible literary reason is that JKR does not let Snape kill anyone - not even the enemy - because that makes his AK-ing DD much more dramatic. It is the only time he "kills" someone - and it is hard enough for him. Just as JKR carefully avoids letting Harry kill anyone (Harry needs to be "pure" when he faces LV and even then he uses the "Expelliarmus" spell, not the Killing Curse or something similar), she does not let Snape kill anyone either, not even in a battle or a duel because "killing" DD (for mercy) must be done by someone who otherwise does not kill. Another possible reason why Snape does not fight to kill is that it highlights that Snape's assigned duty is to protect lives (and to risk his own life rather than take the lives of others) and we may say that he dies trying to protect others until the end.
Soul Search - Apr 4, 2008 9:01 am (#1964 of 2617)
Julia H.
"I think one possible literary reason is that JKR does not let Snape kill anyone - not even the enemy - because that makes his AK-ing DD much more dramatic. It is the only time he "kills" someone - and it is hard enough for him."
Very good. I liked that whole paragraph, but especially that observation. I was a bit disappointed that DH didn't give Snape more time, but you have hit on a reason why JKR didn't portray a more active Snape.
Your observation suggests that Snape wasn't really ever cut out to be a Death Eater.
Orion - Apr 4, 2008 10:08 am (#1965 of 2617)
"But then we see him duel and still it is always in a situation where he only defends himself (against Harry at the end of HBP and against his colleagues in DH) and does not fight back (for obvious reasons but I can think of a symbolic interpretation, too)." *cough* DOE *cough*
wynnleaf - Apr 4, 2008 1:37 pm (#1966 of 2617)
Julia, your post with The Tragedy of Man was wonderful. For those who don't know, the poem was from The Tragedy of Man by Hungarian author Imre Madách. You can find that part here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (hope that link is okay to use)
Wow, that was an excellent piece to use considering Snape!
Mona, Your comments about JKR needing to have Snape die in such a way are interesting. I do agree that the particular way she went about it creates even more pathos/tragedy than a good satisfying heroic and meaningful death. Actually, the pointlessness of his death, while very, very sad, doesn't bother me as a reader. What I find much more difficult is the way she uses it later. I felt that in order to get the punch line at the end and make it a "surprise," she had to leave out any kind of, I believe, needed scene about how this revelation of Snape is viewed by others or how it affects them.
See, after The Prince's Tale, there's no more surprise about whether Snape is loyal or not, or why DD trusted him. The only remaining question is how all this information should be viewed by both Harry and the reader, and perhaps by other characters. The only thing we get that answers that is Harry's statement about "bravest man I ever knew" and making his second son's middle name "Severus." But it doesn't really answer the question except to say that 19 years later, Harry thought Snape was really brave.
So in order to get this last page "surprise" -- do we need to be surprised that Harry thought Snape was brave? -- we miss out on finding out how Harry really dealt with those revelations, much less how anyone else dealt with it.
After DD's death, we get to see many character's responses and we understand how they were moved by his death. But Snape was an extremely important character and all of the good guys had understandably misjudged him. And yet we don't get to see any of their reactions about that.
And as mentioned earlier, while we get the closure of seeing other characters funerals or their bodies laid out respectfully, or at least the closure of Harry mourning them or other characters commenting on their lives/deaths (like Cedric or Sirius), we get nothing like that sort of closure for Snape. The last we see of him is Harry leaving the Shrieking Shack and Snape's body in a pool of blood on the floor. Harry views the memories, but that's in the past. We don't see any of Harry's internal response to those memories. We see Harry's comments to Voldemort and DD's "poor Severus" (not even sure what the "poor" was about - all he'd been through? his death? the pointlessness?). Then that's it until "bravest man I ever knew."
Orion - Apr 4, 2008 1:46 pm (#1967 of 2617)
Can it be that Rowling keeps shooting herself in the foot whenever Snape is concerned? Everything she does to make this character miserable, ridiculous, nasty and despised seems to have the opposite effect. She can't stand him, but she is rubbish at it.
Julia H. - Apr 5, 2008 5:04 am (#1968 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, you get the 50 points and many thanks for taking the trouble to answer the question and so precisely too!
I agree that some acknowledgement of Snape's real role in bringing down Voldemort would have been necessary. I missed a few words "in memoriam" or at least some reference to an honourable funeral (if only one sentence) more than the portrait in the Headmaster's office (and it did not need to spoil "the bravest man" line). But Snape is left in a pool of his own blood in the Shack and it seems he is somehow forgotten in the euphoria of victory.
"Your observation suggests that Snape wasn't really ever cut out to be a Death Eater." (Soul Search)
This is indeed what I think.
"*cough* DOE *cough*" (Orion)
LOL! Orion, I think I know what you mean but I don't think this is exactly the symbolism I had in mind. Talking about the duels, I think Snape is able to strike back (he is the guy who invented Sectumsempra!) but he knows that he must not. In other words, it is his decision rather than some inability that keeps him from fighting back and it is important, especially if we consider how impulsive and easily provoked he can be in everyday situations; still, when he is seriously attacked by some of the people he is fighting for, he must be and is able to remain calm enough not to strike back and not to harm them. Otherwise you are probably right: the doe can be a symbol of the essentially non-violent and sacrificial nature of Snape's fight. An example of that is at the end of HBP: when the DE's invade Hogwarts, Snape, who does not fight in a word by word sense, in effect saves everyone in the castle first by making the sacrifice that AK-ing DD means to him and secondly by putting an end to the fight (driving the DE's out of the castle). From this point of view, the fact that it is Snape who teaches Harry Expelliarmus - the Disarming Spell -, which Harry uses to defeat Voldemort, may have extra significance.
Perhaps when Snape dies, he does what Harry will also want to do - he lets Voldemort kill him without fighting for his life. He may not make a conscious decision (like Harry) right then but in a more general sense, he probably knows that each time he appears in front of Voldemort, it may be the last thing he does in life and he is still willing to do it. Of course, he is not the "Chosen One", his sacrifice does not save everyone else but it is a completed sacrifice (unlike Harry, he really dies). Would it be too much to say that he "goes before Harry" and his "non-fighting" death, which is a part of his atonement, indicates the way Harry will have to go - with the important difference that Harry does not atone for anything when he is willing to sacrifice his life, so his guiltless sacrifice is able to save everyone else?
Or maybe: "Deep magic from the Dawn of Time"? Except, of course, that Snape is not a real traitor...
Another similarity between the actions of Snape and Harry is that both save Draco at some point in the story, i.e., they do not only save the good ones but both of them save someone who belongs to the enemy, someone who is "bad".
"Can it be that Rowling keeps shooting herself in the foot whenever Snape is concerned? Everything she does to make this character miserable, ridiculous, nasty and despised seems to have the opposite effect." (Orion)
Yes, it can be....
Orion - Apr 5, 2008 6:48 am (#1969 of 2617)
"Of course, he is not the "Chosen One", his sacrifice does not save everyone else but it is a completed sacrifice (unlike Harry, he really dies). Would it be too much to say that he "goes before Harry" and his "non-fighting" death, which is a part of his atonement, indicates the way Harry will have to go - with the important difference that Harry does not atone for anything when he is willing to sacrifice his life, so his guiltless sacrifice is able to save everyone else?" As far as the structure of this complicated novel is concerned, the knot can only be solved, or is practically solved in the moment when Snape dies, as if his life had been the spanner in the works all the time. (Fair enough, this is how novels works. It's only mean if you happen to like that particular sacrificial lamb character.)
As for the symbolism That Must Not Be Named, DD plays an important role in that as all powerful Über-father-figure, like that big lorry in front of you that you can't overtake by any means. (And you can't see anything.)
Julia H. - Apr 5, 2008 8:54 am (#1970 of 2617)
"As far as the structure of this complicated novel is concerned, the knot can only be solved, or is practically solved in the moment when Snape dies, as if his life had been the spanner in the works all the time." (Orion)
I'm interested in this, could you elaborate a bit?
"all powerful Über-father-figure" (Orion)
Yes, DD is the kind of father figure that you have described but this is not all. Snape is basically in the middle of the fight between the two most powerful wizards alive. He has to work with both DD and LV, trying to carry out DD's increasingly difficult orders and pretending to serve LV, which clearly involves actually doing certain things on LV's orders - e.g., he has to go to him when LV summons him (or leave when LV tells him to). His loyalty and his promise bind him to DD and his duty is to face LV again and again. I think Snape is a very powerful wizard and is talented in various ways (and he could not do these things if he were not) but between these two most powerful and formidable wizards he probably has little chance to feel his real powers. He is also responsible for the protection of the "Chosen One", who is getting more and more important for the wizarding community. The result is that neither his life nor his talents are really his.
Orion - Apr 5, 2008 11:11 am (#1971 of 2617)
Answer to Julia:
I don't know, I'm not an expert in literary theory, but it was a very strong feeling I had. You know, as if the world, when the odd little black thing was born (looking like a crumpled up black umbrella) looked nonplussed and tried to get rid of it. Daddy (presumably) beat the odd thing up, schoolmate Sirius tried to feed it to a werewolf, a three-headed dog tried to eat it, its boss forced it onto a suicide mission as a spy, and finally LV took pity on the world and took the odd thing down like a sick animal. The world exhaled. All was well.
wynnleaf - Apr 5, 2008 3:14 pm (#1972 of 2617)
I don't look at it quite that way, Orion.
As I see it, Snape is the linchpin of the story. His actions, from befriending and loving Lily, to his hatred for James, to joining the DEs, to taking the prophecy to LV, to asking LV to spare Lily, then going back to DD, set up the entire backstory scenario. Without Snape, there'd be no one to love Lily, no one to ask that she be spared, no one to go to DD. I won't say there'd be no one to spy on DD, because LV could easily have sent another DE to spy on DD and end up hearing the prophecy. But because of Snape, Lily is given a choice and DD is alerted to the situation. Because of Snape, there's someone protecting Harry on a number of occasions when he might otherwise have died. Because of Snape, there's someone there to protect students in DH, carry out DD's orders, and give crucial info to Harry. No other character on the good side both starts the plot (gets it going) as well as acts in resolving the plot. It fits from a literary perspective for the reader to get these end-of-story surprises about Snape. But I do not think that the last pages "surprise" was necessary at all, and in fact, I think it diminished the resolution of the Snape-Harry tension because it didn't offer the degree of closure for that tension that a great many readers were looking for.
Soul Search - Apr 5, 2008 4:07 pm (#1973 of 2617)
"... didn't offer the degree of closure for that tension that a great many readers were looking for." (wynnleaf)
Here, here. I agree.
Along those same lines, Pettigrew had a similar key role in the major HP events in betraying the Potters and bringing back Voldemort. Yet he also received an ignominious death, although it was fitting that it was by Voldemort.
Julia H. - Apr 6, 2008 5:15 am (#1974 of 2617)
Orion, you do seem to have strong feelings about Snape! :-) (Needless to say, you are not the only one...)
I like Wynnleaf's summary of Snape's role in the plot and I agree that the relationship between Harry and Snape would have deserved a better solution. (I would have willingly read any number of pages concerning a real one-to-one talk between the two characters but even after Snape's death there were various ways to resolve the tension.)
Soul Search, I don't see Pettigrew as a key figure in the same way as Snape. The difference is that Pettigrew has a key role only with regard to the promotion of the bad side: he always helps Voldemort. It is true that just before his death he shows that he too has some kind of conscience but I don't think he would have actively helped Harry survive or escape had he survived that moment. On the whole, Pettigrew deserves that ignominious death, even though he may least deserve it at the moment when it actually happens.
Snape, however, does not only set the story into motion but he also helps to resolve the conflict in many ways, as Wynnleaf has pointed out. In fact, Snape has to reverse the actions of his youth one by one before Harry's story reaches conclusion. First he joins the DE's, then he joins the Order. First he spies on DD for Voldemort, then he becomes DD's spy against Voldemort. His actions put Harry and his family into mortal danger but later he dedicates his life to the protection of Harry's life and he also protects the students of Hogwarts (and Hogwarts is Harry's new home), including Ginny, and by protecting Ginny, he protects a future family for Harry. He experiments with the dark arts and invents dangerous spells in his youth but as an adult he uses his dark arts knowledge to heal people who suffer from dark arts injuries (including healing Draco, who is injured by Snape's own invention). We see how his attitude towards the use of the M-word changes. At the age of eleven, he chooses Slytherin but later he demonstrates courage worthy of Gryffindor and helps a Gryffindor to victory (among other things by delivering the sword of Gryffindor to him). There are probably more examples but my point is that Snape reverses the original bad situation he brought about by reversing his early mistakes one by one and - from a literary point of view - his actions turn the balance.
Orion - Apr 6, 2008 6:35 am (#1975 of 2617)
Well, yes, of course Snape is the prime mover of the story. But he is also a kind of Norbert - that is, a problem which has to be removed.
wynnleaf - Apr 6, 2008 6:54 am (#1976 of 2617)
I don't think I understand what you mean, Orion.
After taking the prophecy to LV, which definitely starts a problem, how is Snape a problem in the storyline? Yes, he's a source of tension for Harry, but that's not the same as a problem. He doesn't present anything that Harry has to solve or resolve in order to defeat LV, survive the books, enable those he cares for to live, get the girl (Ginny), or anything else that are Harry's goals. So how is Snape a problem for the storyline?
Orion - Apr 6, 2008 7:57 am (#1977 of 2617)
I just wish I could make sentences which make sense. I'm not very good at it and apologize, and try better.
Snape is not a problem for the storyline. But some day, if you grow up with movies at the cinema and on tv, and novels, and drama and everything which has a plot, so to speak, you get a feeling for the "intended victim", or "guy who's gonna die at the last possible moment". It's not something you learn when you study literature (we didn't learn it, anyway, can't remember anything of that sort, not even in creative writing), but there are seminars in screen-play-writing (which you have to pay for), and the screenwriters probably learn it there, and there are probably similar seminars for novelists.
In the last novel I read, it was clear for me who was going to die. It was the alcohol addict who painted and whose mother had all these feelings of guilt. In the novel before last, I just knew that the autistic young man would die in the end. If I was a professional scriptwriter, I could certainly point out the exact mechanisms of such (often rather predictable and dreary) plot devices. It has something to do with emotions (LOL Julia!), and the chronology of scenes, and whatever, but it's rather complicated. I could never write a novel, could you? And I'm full of awe for everybody who can. (Nevertheless, DH is rotten from the core, awe or not.)
Julia H. - Apr 6, 2008 9:05 am (#1978 of 2617)
Snape is not a problem (for the storyline or in any other way) but perhaps we can say that he has a problem that is solved (from a plot point of view) when the character dies. Is that more or less what you are saying, Orion? You used the term "sacrificial lamb character" - :-) - but in this case we have a sacrificial black lamb, don't we? This is one of the reasons that make the sacrifice especially interesting.
PeskyPixie - Apr 6, 2008 9:14 am (#1979 of 2617)
I think Orion means that death is expected for a character like Snape?
I've mentioned the following many times on other threads, but as it's been a while, I think I'll go for it again. I too was dismayed by the fact that the Hogwarts army is in a celebration frenzy while Severus Snape is lying dead and alone, in a pool of his own blood in the Shrieking Shack. It would be a completely Harry thing to do if he muttered to Prof. McGonagall, "By the way, someone should see to (Professor) Snape's body. It's in the Shrieking Shack," on his way to Dumbledore's study.
OR,
While Harry thinks of how he needs time to register the deaths of his friends (on the way up to the Headmaster's study), there need only be one line about how he'll need time to fully comprehend Snape's great love for his mother and his complicated relationship with him (Lily's son). Something about how Harry might still have conflicting feelings about Snape would be interesting.
IMO, that's all that's needed - and it doesn't take away from the 'Albus Severus' bit. If anything, I find that the second scenario would add to the resolution in the epilogue. The way it is, Snape's true allegiance doesn't have an effect on anybody on his team, and that's just plain sad.
Julia H. - Apr 6, 2008 2:48 pm (#1980 of 2617)
PeskyPixie, I wish Jo would rewrite DH in accordance with your suggestions! That line about Professor Snape's body in the Shrieking Shack is sadly missing. It would really be in character with Harry and after all only HRH know where Snape died - and they don't seem to mention it to anyone. It would only be just basic respect that Snape deserves regardless how far Harry or anyone else will get later understanding or appreciating Snape's story. (Especially since it is mentioned that the bodies of the others are taken care of.) Apart from that, Snape also deserves to be accepted back - after his death - into the community that he belongs to and his body being placed among the bodies of the other heroes (for example) would be a clear indication of that. And yes, Harry thinking a bit about Snape: Snape and Lily or Snape and Dumbledore or Snape saving Harry's life on various occasions that Harry never really seemed to fully realize.
haymoni - Apr 6, 2008 4:04 pm (#1981 of 2617)
Harry has to convince a lot of folks that Snape was actually a good guy - Minerva, the other Heads of House, the Order Members. I think he would have had to use the Pensieve to do it.
I just don't think all of that could have happened right after his victory. If he had mentioned that Snape was lying in the Shrieking Shack, I think all of Hogsmeade would have set the place on fire.
Once he was able to tell the truth and convince those that really mattered, I would imagine a simple, yet dignified, ceremony would have taken place. Nothing big - Order Members, the Trio, perhaps a handful of Hogwarts Staff.
Maybe Snape would have gotten his Order of Merlin, First Class post-humously.
Sniff!
Julia H. - Apr 7, 2008 2:46 am (#1982 of 2617)
Edited Apr 7, 2008 3:42 am
Of course, we can all comfort ourselves imagining what could happen between the last chapter and the epilogue. But the novel would be better if something about the immediate effects of the astonishing discovery were mentioned somehow - the preparations for a dignified funeral at least (if not the Order of Merlin). If Harry thought the others were not convinced by his words to Voldemort, Jo could have at least had him think about how he would sit down with certain people the next day to show them the evidence about Snape's loyalty. By the way, Pensieve or not, DD's portrait could also have said a few words to Hogwarts staff and/or to Order members to convince them. Meanwhile it is still a sad idea that Snape's dead body should be left there alone until some unspecified time in the future when people find the time to think about him seriously and it seems to be intentional on JKR's part: it is mentioned how the rest of the dead are tended but no mention of Snape; Harry reveals Snape's true story to LV and in front of hundreds of people but there is no reaction from anyone (belief or disbelief, not counting LV's reaction); the headmasters' portraits are mentioned and no portrait of Snape; Harry talks to DD once again after the victory - no mention of Snape. It is intentional and it has a purpose but it is not good in this way. The problem with this is that Snape is a very important character in the series and the question of his allegiance and by extension his relationship with the various people on the good side (not only Harry but also colleagues, students, Order members) is too important to be left half-resolved.
wynnleaf - Apr 7, 2008 4:47 am (#1983 of 2617)
Unfortunately, the way the last chapter before the epilogue ends, one is given the distinct impression that Harry had by that time completely forgotten about Snape. His last thoughts are of getting a sandwich and going to bed, which is understandable, but considering that Snape's body is still lying in his blood in the Shrieking Shack, it really leaves the reader as though Snape's sacrifice and death isn't really all that important other than as a kind of afterthought.
Even in the epilogue -- and yes, I realize JKR was going for a surprise -- it almost comes across as though Harry is telling Albus Severus for the very first time about the man he was named after. Harry tells AS that he was named after a past headmaster of Hogwarts. Shouldn't the child already know this? And Harry tells him that Snape was the bravest man Harry already knew. But if Snape was so important to Harry that he'd name his child after him, one can't help but wonder why Albus Severus hadn't known for years that Snape was a Slytherin, a past Headmaster, and exceedingly brave.
mona amon - Apr 7, 2008 7:46 am (#1984 of 2617)
That may very well be true though I am not sure JKR could not have written something else that I would happily exchange that punch for. (Julia)
It's not just the punch. Wouldn't we have missed the whole point? Oh, Harry thinks he's such a hero and named one of his sons after him because he saved his life, or his friends' lives, you know what I mean. She has already proved that he is skillful and courageous and heroic. In his death scene she shows us how vulnerable and human he is. No other character is given such a long drawn out death scene, or suffers quite as much. His obvious and uncharacteristic panic, his pleas to be allowed to escape to do the thing he most wants to do, his frantic attempt to close his mind to Voldemort, "Snape's face was like a death mask. It was marble white and so still that when he spoke it was a shock to see that anyone lived behind those blank eyes." No virtuoso performance of occlumency here. Severus is trying too hard. If Voldemort hadn't been so preoccupied, he'd have immediately realised what Snape was upto. And his terrified scream...**sniff**
Actually I am not any more sure if it was not - in a sense - still a heroic death.
I agree. It was heroic in it's own way. When LV finally comes to the point, he protests and raises his wand. Like Harry in the graveyard at Little Hangleton he wants to die fighting, even when he knows no defence is possible. But he still has a job to do. Casting a spell would mean instant death, so he waits to see what will happen, and in the end it pays off. And even just keeping himself alive until he has done his duty, when his blood was flowing out like that requires a supreme effort of will. **sniff** again!
We see Harry's comments to Voldemort and DD's "poor Severus" (not even sure what the "poor" was about - all he'd been through? his death? the pointlessness?). (Wynnleaf)
I don't think Dumbledore's 'poor Severus' was an important comment about his life or his death. He was just reflecting about what a pity it was that Voldemort's obsession with the Elder Wand ended in Snape getting killed. We didn't really need a whole lot of tributes from DD. After all he's the one with the constant refrain, "I trust Severus completely"!
But I do not think that the last pages "surprise" was necessary at all, and in fact, I think it diminished the resolution of the Snape-Harry tension because it didn't offer the degree of closure for that tension that a great many readers were looking for. (Wynnleaf)
The way it is, Snape's true allegiance doesn't have an effect on anybody on his team, and that's just plain sad. (Pesky)
I don't know, it all worked beautifully for me, the line in the epilogue providing more closure than I expected. Maybe my expectations were low to start off with.
For one thing I got the feeling that Harry forgives and understands Severus instantly and completely on viewing the Pensieve memories. It wasn't a complicated process. Perhaps the feeling of incompleteness is due to the fact that Severus himself dies without knowing that he has been forgiven and accepted.
As for Severus's body being left in the shreiking shack in a pool of blood, we know at some level that it couldn't have been that way, that Harry would never have left him lying there, that he must have been one of the '50 others' and that he wasn't mentioned by name solely because of the Albus Severus punchline. But it makes literary sense as well. Severus had tragic flaws (like a Shakespearean character) which led to his downfall, both by making him the sacrificial black sheep (LOL, Julia, thanks for that!) and by denying him even posthumous adulation and acceptance. I feel the lack of closure is intentional. The reader's feelings of incompleteness and loss heighten the sense of tragedy.
So that makes what he does get all the more poignant. Harry 'avenging' Severus by taunting Voldemort with his loyalty to Dumbledore, and immortalizing his great love for his mom by declaring it to a hall full of attentive people at the most climactic moment of the battle.
And then the Albus Severus line of the epilogue. The man who never forgave anyone gets forgiveness. The one who never loved (except once) and who never allowed himself to be loved gets a child named in honour of him, the one who did what he did with no thought of glory or recognition has at least one person who appreciates and admires him, who recognizes what he has done and is willing to do the work to convince others.
The only thing we get that answers that is Harry's statement about "bravest man I ever knew" and making his second son's middle name "Severus." But it doesn't really answer the question except to say that 19 years later, Harry thought Snape was really brave. (Wynnleaf)
I think a lot more can be read into that line than 'really brave'. People name their kids only for people who played a very important role in their lives, people who are their heroes. It also shows that Harry thought he was probably 'the bravest', not just very brave, and he knew a whole lot of brave people. There is a complete acceptance of Snape's 'Slytherin-ness' and his recognition of Severus as a true Headmaster of Hogwarts (this was important for me), and there's also something symbolic about the child who resembles Harry and the only one who had Lily's eyes being named after Severus. He may have lost Lily to his rival. But Lily's grandchild still ends up with his name.
Julia H. - Apr 7, 2008 4:02 pm (#1985 of 2617)
"And even just keeping himself alive until he has done his duty, when his blood was flowing out like that requires a supreme effort of will" (Mona)
Oh, yes, it does. It is really poignant that a gravely injured, dying man is giving help to the strong and healthy one leaning above him. Then there is the way Snape is giving the memories: so far we have seen that normally a wand is used to extract a memory from a wizard's head. But this is not how Snape does it. This means that he must be concentrating all his magic power (will power) to perform wand magic without using a wand, which in turn implies that wands only make it easier to perform magic but it is really the wizard that counts not the wand. (LV knows very little...) Another way to look at it is Snape really opening up his soul at the sight of Harry, the second time already (the first time being the Doe Patronus), which again can imply various things - emotions in the first place and a serious, permanent change in his attitude to Harry.
Mona, your post on the whole could be the basis of a beautiful funeral speech for Snape, but I will add my comments only to those parts where my view is slightly different.
"The reader's feelings of incompleteness and loss heighten the sense of tragedy." (Mona)
They do heighten the sense of tragedy but for me the chapters "The Sacking of Severus Snape", "The Elder Wand" and "The Prince's Tale" created a high enough sense of tragedy. I really did not want it to be any higher than that. I wanted him to be accepted and appreciated (and forgiven if need be) post-humously and on the pages of the book. It is bad enough "that Severus himself dies without knowing that he has been forgiven and accepted", at least the reader should know it.
"he must have been one of the '50 others' and that he wasn't mentioned by name solely because of the Albus Severus punchline" (Mona)
I don't think mentioning his name here would spoil the punchline. And even if I know that this is the technical reason, the internal logic of a novel cannot be explained by external, technical reasons. Perhaps my problem here is that I know it from experience how emotionally important some very basic, simple and sincere gestures can be at a funeral or when somebody is dead and that is why I find it cruel that in Snape's case we do not know anything about any of these gestures at all.
"Harry 'avenging' Severus by taunting Voldemort" (Mona)
Yes, it is great but saying a few words exclusively for the memory of Snape and not in order to taunt Voldemort is a different thing.
"Severus had tragic flaws (like a Shakespearean character) which led to his downfall" (Mona)
I don't quite understand this. I mean I know he had tragic flaws but what do you mean by "his downfall"? His death? Is it really any of his tragic flaws that led there? In a way, maybe, but Dumbledore's plan and the task he gave Snape were just as important reasons. So were his sense of duty and his heroism. We know very little about Snape in the DH year but I have a feeling that he really grew after DD's death. His responsibility is greater than ever and his concentration on his duty seems to be so as well. It seems the more isolated he gets, the more he gives himself up to his duty, to serving the cause he finds worthy of risking and giving up everything for. And sincerely: alone, fighting and sacrificing and dying for people who hate and despise him and going through it all not just at a moment's impulse but over months on a daily basis IMO requires incomparable greatness and the fact that it is a man of many faults who is able to do that makes his heroism even more admirable.
"The man who never forgave anyone gets forgiveness." (Mona)
I think he had to learn a certain type of forgiveness or tolerance in his year as a headmaster while he was protecting the kids who were rebelling (as they thought) against him. I don't know how it affected, if at all, his old, deep-rooted feelings, but he must have learned how to put aside personal grudges and how to pay for hostility with caring and protection and this is certainly improvement.
"The one who never loved (except once)" (Mona)
But "once" means practically his whole life. Besides, I think his love for Lily changed in a certain way over the years. On the hilltop, as we know, it was concentrated exclusively on Lily. Towards the end of Snape's life, however, I think this love may have broadened: I think through his love for Lily he learned to love others in a less personal way: students he was protecting, people who were in need of his help or maybe just life in general, life for other people, not for himself. Something that made him endure the attack by his colleagues without attacking back, for example. Maybe these are things that can be called by various different names, not love - but when they are taken together, they seem to add up to something that is a type of love. Also, we often say that DD is a mentor, a father figure to him. I think this involves Snape feeling a son's respect and love towards DD - that is what makes DD a father figure to him (at least it seems to be much more probable than a decided paternal feeling on DD's part towards Snape). This is how it seems to me when DD persuades Snape to AK him: it is not DD's order or any logical reason that convinces him but DD's request "to help an old man avoid pain and humiliation". Is this not a form of love?
It is beautiful and important that Snape gets forgiveness, respect and perhaps even admiration from Harry. But I don't think he wins these things in spite of his faults. I think he wins them because he deserves them, because in order to protect and help others, he willingly and with determination goes down a path in which he both has to give up things he values and has to leave behind many of his faults, like his pride, his easily-provoked, angry and unforgiving temper, and finally his secrecy, as he opens up to Harry and unconditionally gives him the secrets of his life.
tandaradei - Apr 7, 2008 6:26 pm (#1986 of 2617)
Just a quick observation in relation to these ideas.
...[cut]...and Phineas Nigellus called, in his high, reedy voice, "And let it be noted that Slytherin House played its part! Let our contribution not be forgotten!"...[cut]...
DH,Ch36,"The Flaw in the Plan," p.747 US.
On almost every reading I was struck by Nigelus's use of the singular for the word "contribution." I assumed Nigellus was speaking rather specifically of Snape's contribution; which information probably came from what the Hogwarts portraits in other parts of the castle had overheard.... I rather assumed, possibly thru editing, that a fair amount of this stuff had been removed?
PeskyPixie - Apr 7, 2008 6:31 pm (#1987 of 2617)
I assumed that Phineas talks about Snape here, but then someone (perhaps JKR herself?) pointed out that this also includes Slughorn and the majority of Slytherin students who supposedly return to fight for Hogwarts.
tandaradei - Apr 7, 2008 6:33 pm (#1988 of 2617)
... those would be contributions....
Honestly, I cannot stress enough, how I feel about that significance here. I'd have thought Phineas would have naturally used the plural, but didn't. He is somewhat singular-minded, yes; but I'm rather thinking he was thinking about the recent headship, on of account of how he thinks (We leaders vs them, the followers) etc....
PeskyPixie - Apr 8, 2008 9:15 pm (#1989 of 2617)
I personally feel that he does refer to Snape here, at least, the line is more significant in this interpretation. Amidst the 'Gryffindor Power' Phineas reminds everyone (in his dry, reedy way) to not forget the crucial role (and sacrifice) of a Slytherin in the attainment of this victory.
Julia H. - Apr 9, 2008 2:07 am (#1990 of 2617)
Yes, it makes more sense if Phineas is referring to Snape. After all Slughorn's contribution is not likely to be any more forgotten than, for example, Sprout's. Snape's "contribution" was, however, not only crucial but also very different from what Gryffindors typically consider to be contribution to a fight and very different from what everyone else did. Besides, though Phineas may well have seen Slughorn and the Slytherin students fight, he had been actively working with Snape and helping him in his fight for almost a whole school-year and he understood his actions and intentions and must have known that nobody among the living had ever suspected what Snape was really doing. We know that he "venerated Snape". (Portrait DD, portrait Phineas and Snape: the secret trio assisting the Trio?) Yet, whether Phineas is referring to Snape or not, the way the novel is written implies that the Gryffindors do not listen and, for the time being at least, they do forget about the most important contribution of Slytherin.
"I rather assumed, possibly thru editing, that a fair amount of this stuff had been removed?" (Tandaradei)
That is interesting, what kind of things do you think may have been removed?
Last edited by Mona on Tue Nov 25, 2014 3:54 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1991 to 2020
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:02 am
mona amon - Apr 9, 2008 3:38 am (#1991 of 2617)
I also agree with Tandaradei. It was only one contribution he was talking about, Snape's. Surely Slughorn's green pyjamas don't make his duel with Voldy a specifically 'slytherin contribution'! And in the epilogue Harry uses Snape as the sole vindication of Slytherin house.
I think he had to learn a certain type of forgiveness or tolerance in his year as a headmaster while he was protecting the kids who were rebelling (as they thought) against him. (Julia)
I do not know if I'd include protecting the kids who were rebelling against him as forgiveness. Basically he does not have a forgiving nature. I'm thinking specifically about the Marauders. He could have forgiven Lupin at least, especially since he himself has experienced forgiveness for the terrible things that he did. But he seems to go about with a grudge against all mankind.
On the hilltop, as we know, it was concentrated exclusively on Lily. Towards the end of Snape's life, however, I think this love may have broadened: I think through his love for Lily he learned to love others in a less personal way: students he was protecting, people who were in need of his help or maybe just life in general, life for other people, not for himself. Something that made him endure the attack by his colleagues without attacking back, for example.
But whatever he was protecting everyone for, whatever was his reason for giving up everything to fight the evil he had once condoned, I never get the feeling it was because of love. Which brings up the intriguing question, what was Severus's motivation?
Yes, it is great but saying a few words exclusively for the memory of Snape and not in order to taunt Voldemort is a different thing.
Nooooooooo!!! He was not doing it just to taunt Voldemort. He was proclaiming to all who would listen that Severus was Dumbledore's, and that he loved his mom. And in the process he was avenging Snape, because that information would be especially galling to Voldemort.
I mean I know he had tragic flaws but what do you mean by "his downfall"? His death? Is it really any of his tragic flaws that led there?
Lol, I'm not quite sure myself! Sounded OK in my head, but now that I'm asked to explain, I'm having difficulties. I guess I was trying to fit him into the mould of Shakespearean tragic hero, and I'm no expert on Shakespeare. Anyway, while destiny does play a part, Shakespeare's tragic heroes usually have some flaw/flaws which are responsible for their downfall.
By Snape's downfall I did not mean his death. That was solely due to an unfortunate combination of circumstances. If he'd got his cue to go to Harry (Nagini in the protected cage) a bit earlier, before Voldemort got that bright idea about who was the true master of the wand, he may have survived the battle. I mean the whole tragedy of his life, best illustrated by his flight from Hogwarts, set upon by man and beast. He had a heart and he had a soul, yet he lived his life in such a way that nobody but Dumbledore knew or cared. And ultimately Harry, because he finally allows himself to reach out to him.
PeskyPixie - Apr 9, 2008 8:40 am (#1992 of 2617)
Hmmm, now I'm wondering what Severus's 'tragic flaw' is?
Julia H. - Apr 9, 2008 8:43 am (#1993 of 2617)
"I do not know if I'd include protecting the kids who were rebelling against him as forgiveness. Basically he does not have a forgiving nature. I'm thinking specifically about the Marauders." (Mona)
I would but I guess I need to explain a bit what I am trying to say. At the moment it is more a feeling than a coherent idea in my head but I'll try. Some people say that things that happen to us can often be seen as things that teach us something. For example, if someone tends to make the same kind of mistake again and again, the consequences can be more and more serious until the person learns not to make the same mistake. Certain challenges, jobs, tasks we have to face may also teach us something important. Yes, Snape has an unforgiving nature. (It goes to his credit though that he does not treat himself any more kindly than others.) He does not forgive the Marauders. However, I see some progress as his participation in the fight against Voldemort becomes more and more serious, in the sense that he is able to put aside (temporarily at least) his hatred against them for the sake of the common goal: he checks whether Sirius is safe or not at the end of OOTP and he does not want to let Lupin be killed in front of him even though he should, in principle, keep his cover. This is not necessarily forgiveness but a clear indication that his better nature overcomes his unforgiving nature in serious situations at least.
Then he is given the task of protecting the students of Hogwarts as a headmaster appointed by the enemy. Dumbledore stresses the importance of this task twice in DH. (I think Snape also protects the colleagues as much as he can.) Let me analyze the situation a bit: What does Snape have to do? First of all he has to pay special attention to students who may be in danger because of their families. We know he does not let Ginny go out of the school while the village is full of DE's and we know that Luna is captured only on her way home before Christmas even though her father has been supporting Harry for a long time. I think these details imply that Snape is doing a good job protecting the students. Secondly, there is a hard core of students who more or less openly rebel in the school (DD's Army) and they are the students who are most likely to become the target of the Carrows and Snape must keep them out of harm's way as much as possible. But these students do not only rebel against the Carrows, their prime target is probably the headmaster, who they think is collaborating with the enemy. Now we are talking about Snape, who could not bear being impersonated by a boggart in front of students. In the present situation, however, he must be able to bear much more. He must protect the very same students who rebel against him personally. On the one hand, of course Snape knows that it is not the students' fault that they have a mistaken idea about him. On the other hand, he must keep this in mind every day in every situation and he must totally put aside any vindictiveness in him in order to do his duty. He must accept a situation in which he has to repay the bad he receives with something good (protection), which is a basic idea behind forgiveness (yes). I think this is a very serious exercise for someone with an unforgiving nature (and would be so perhaps for anyone) and Snape apparently does very well.
James and Sirius are dead. Lupin is alive but out of Snape's reach, though Snape has already tried to save his life. He may not have been forgiving towards them but now he finds himself in a situation where forgiveness, though of a different kind and towards different people, is very important. He has to learn to be generous, he has to learn to see beyond any personal offence for the sake of something more important and noble. It is also important that he does this in a position of real power and responsibility. Earlier, as a teacher, he tended to use the little power he had in the wrong way at least partly out of vindictiveness. Now, when he is not a teacher but the headmaster and Voldemort's "right hand man", he has real power and he uses this power to protect the ones who are in his power even when those people are clearly against him. This is a very important change: a change in behaviour but I think it indicates a deeper change as well.
Similarly, when he is attacked by his colleagues (and accused of trying to kill someone), he only defends himself but does not strike back. From an objective point of view, it is easy to understand that the colleagues have a reason to think what they think of him and that they are doing what they consider right. Being the one accused and attacked, however, may make it difficult to cling to this objective viewpoint at a moment like this. Given that we have known Snape as an impulsive person (and especially good at duelling), it probably requires remarkable self-discipline and understanding for him not to strike back. This is another lesson in understanding and (a kind of) forgiveness.
So, what I'm trying to say is that Snape may not be able to put right all of his old mistakes but in new situations he seems to be demonstrating that he has been able to overcome at least some of his characteristic flaws.
"But he seems to go about with a grudge against all mankind." (Mona)
Yes, this is what we see in the earlier volumes. In DH, however, we see very little of Snape, and only learn about most if his actions (that year) indirectly. What we do learn, however, seems to be (IMO) implying important changes. He is in a completely new situation, the job he is doing is radically different from what he had to do before. It is difficult in a new way and it means responsibility he never had before. It seems (secrecy or not) these things bring "the best of Snape" to the surface. I don't see the point in saying "oh, yes, his behaviour has changed, he does incredibly good things and in an incredibly successful way but he is still that unforgiving person full of hatred that he has always been". I think he has for a while now been going through experiences that would affect a rock. If patronuses can change due to certain experiences, why not Snape? He is doing an advanced course in being good (an advanced course in "love" I think - but I'll come to this point another time) and he is doing it extremely well. I just can't believe that he does not learn the basics - such as forgiveness - along the way somewhere.
"What was Severus's motivation?" (Mona)
It is really a very good question. (Does anyone have an answer?) I still think it is love one way or other and I would like to come back to this in another post. This one is already long enough.
tandaradei - Apr 9, 2008 1:51 pm (#1994 of 2617)
Julia H. said:
...[cut]..."I rather assumed, possibly thru editing, that a fair amount of this stuff had been removed?" (Tandaradei)
That is interesting, what kind of things do you think may have been removed? ...[cut]...
Erm, most anything not germain to who actually survives the final confrontation. I know it sounds shallow, but I gather there are lots of arguments among editors of all kinds of entertainments, along such lines. In addition, according to one pet theory of mine, I'm betting a fair amount of editing was dependent upon whether Jo was trying to write a Quest story here or there (action centered), or a more Bildungsroman type story (i.e., getting philosophical … cf Jo’s epilogue to some Goethe endings).
To a lesser extent, I think books are edited and "trimmed down" like movies. Many a Hollywood movie especially has lost significant and poignant materials, either to meet a screening time, or to meet "Tentpole ,movie" aesthetics (fast * simple showy plot, as against a more involved, indie-type film that explores situations in depth.)
I know Jo probably achieved more editorial leeway with the progression of her books; I'll bet she was "allowed" to retain passages she felt important, where an editor might have thought them peripheral to the main movements of the story. Nonetheless, I bet many "editorial" arguments passed between Jo and her editors throughout the entire HP series; ... and I bet, by the end, that possibly to avoid such prolonged negotiations (?heh heh), maybe Jo tried to keep her main story trimmed to sail, even before editorial approval! I'm just saying, perhaps by the end of all this, that Jo might have been inadvertently "editing" out some passages that were poignant for her but nonetheless peripheral to the current and fast-moving plot (for example, as to the question, will Harry/Voldemort die?, etc).
I'm just saying this because I've been reading all these very intriguing essays and can't believe Jo herself doesn't have an encyclopedia worth of Snape-stuff still stuck in that mind of hers; and I'd bet she'd be a great sounding board for many of these ideas. Right now, I wish she'd write just some philosophical essays sans story, just to help us get some more footing on Snape.
haymoni - Apr 9, 2008 6:17 pm (#1995 of 2617)
Snape's tragic flaw - the inability to let go.
However, it was this flaw that enabled Harry to live so...
mmm...why didn't Snape just Apparate out of the Shrieking Shack????
PeskyPixie - Apr 9, 2008 6:19 pm (#1996 of 2617)
I think JKR herself is in denial over how she feels about Snape and the manner in which she handles the character reflects this indecision on her part.
Julia H. - Apr 11, 2008 2:46 am (#1997 of 2617)
"... what was Severus's motivation? (Mona)
Let's start with the relevant quotes:
"If you loved Lily Evans, if you truly loved her, then your way forward is clear... You know how and why she died. Make sure it was not in vain. Help me protect Lily's son."
"I have spied for you and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you. Everything was supposed to be to keep Lily Potter's son safe."
"Always."
Snape agrees to help Dumbledore protect Harry because he loves his mother. (No surprise to anyone here, I know.) Some 15 or 16 years later, he still says he has done everything - including spying on LV - to keep Lily's son safe. At the same time he admits that his feelings for Lily have not changed. So far it seems to be clear that his motivation has been love: his love for Lily. However, he has just been told that Lily's son will have to die before Voldemort can be defeated and that Harry must be killed by Voldemort himself. If this is not enough, he has just been entrusted with giving Harry this information. If his love for Lily is really his only motivation, then everything he has done and everything he has been through in the fight against LV must seem to have been in vain now. So far, fighting against Voldemort and keeping Harry alive have seemed to be one and the same thing but now there is a difference: if the world is to get rid of Voldemort, Harry must sacrifice his life. Snape has to come to terms with the idea that the goal of defeating LV is more important than keeping Lily's son alive - the primary purpose of his life for many years. Of course, he knows that Harry's life must be protected for a while yet because Harry still has a job to do but when Harry disappears from sight (to look for Horcruxes), Snape cannot watch over him directly any more. Still he knows that he must help Harry as much as he can and he knows that he must deliver the final piece of information to him and this task remains the last concern of his life - until the very last minutes. There is only one more thought beyond that: Lily. So helping Harry still seems to be connected with loving Lily in his soul. I think Snape must have understood that his duty towards Lily has changed: helping Harry has become more than protecting Harry's life now. Harry wants to fight Voldemort, he will not flee (as Aberforth tells him to do) and Harry must be given the choice regarding the sacrifice and regarding the fate of his own soul.
At the same time Snape has another task given to him by DD: to do all in his power to protect the students of Hogwarts - a task which cannot be directly related to his duty to Lily. Of course, Snape has done things before that were not directly related to Lily but now when he has lost the hope of being able to keep Harry alive, he must have found some further motivation to go on with the plan and with the very difficult job he has to do. I can think of three key aspects here:
Snape made a promise - "Anything" - to DD a long time ago and he keeps his word. But his obedience is not blind: he has feelings as we see, for example, when he desperately struggles with the idea of having to AK Dumbledore or when he becomes upset over Harry's seemingly inevitable death by Voldemort. It is touching how he remains loyal to DD after DD's death in the same way as he remains loyal to Lily long after Lily's death. Whatever he feels for DD - loyalty, gratitude, respect etc. -, this relationship with the only person who knows him for what he really is seems to be very important to him.
The other key aspect is the way Snape has for a long time interpreted his duty to Lily. He seems to have taken the broadest possible view regarding the protection of Harry: he did not only protect Harry's life directly but actively worked for the distant purpose of removing the main danger threatening Harry and was willing to do anything that even remotely served this purpose. However, the fight against Voldemort is a fight against the evil threatening a lot of lives. I think this broad interpretation is something that in the long run influences his personality and provides him with a meaningful purpose even when his duty is to protect others, not Lily's son. Because of his love for Lily, he has made great sacrifices in the fight against Voldemort. It is generally true that the sacrifice we make for someone or something will in itself make the goal or person even more valuable to us. I think it applies to Snape as well. His love for Lily is a channel through which he learns to value other people and other people's lives and when he cannot protect Harry any more, he still finds this a worthy goal to fight for.
The third aspect is that Snape (like Harry) probably regards Hogwarts as his real home: a place where he did find some sort of acceptance and a life he could live. Whatever his relationship may have been with various people (including students) there, in times of danger he will defend this place and its inhabitants at whatever cost to himself and to the best of his abilities.
"...there's also something symbolic about the child who resembles Harry and the only one who had Lily's eyes being named after Severus. He may have lost Lily to his rival. But Lily's grandchild still ends up with his name." (Mona)
I like this observation very much. Yes, it does seem that Snape finally (and of course symbolically) has a "family". But this is again a symbol reflecting the best of Snape's actions in life: He loves a girl all his life and even though this love remains unreturned, he is faithful to her and he ultimately lives only for her. Snape, as a child, does not know what really loving parents are like and does not know what it is like to have a father who loves him and one he can respect and love in return. However, he seems to have feelings "in store" for a father like this and that may be one reason why he does so much to deserve the trust of the man who has protected him and given him the chance to prove himself worthy of trust. He has no children of his own but he gets the job of protecting a child and he does his best to do it. After that he is entrusted with the protection of many children - DD seems to be extending Snape's original job: you have protected the child you vowed to protect and now I trust you will protect all the children of Hogwarts. And so he does. Symbolically, he is rewarded by having a child - Lily's grandson - named after him.
PeskyPixie - Apr 11, 2008 9:02 am (#1998 of 2617)
"The third aspect is that Snape (like Harry) probably regards Hogwarts as his real home: a place where he did find some sort of acceptance and a life he could live. Whatever his relationship may have been with various people (including students) there, in times of danger he will defend this place and its inhabitants at whatever cost to himself and to the best of his abilities. -Julia H.
Nice point. I think that upon becoming a member of Hogwarts staff he becomes even more possessive of his 'home'. This feeling of exclusively belonging to Hogwarts may also add to his unwillingness to openly accept known enemies (e.g. Lupin, Moody) or imbeciles (cough, cough -Gilderoy- cough, cough) as part of his 'family'.
wynnleaf - Apr 11, 2008 1:46 pm (#1999 of 2617)
Julia's essay was quite a lovely explanation of something I've felt since DH, that Snape's love for Lily grew in a way that motivated him toward care for others in situations that seemingly have little to do with protecting Lily's child or her memory. It kind of reminds me of love in chivalry -- not exactly, but sort of.
Pesky, I agree that I think JKR's feelings about Snape are rather convoluted. Personally, I don't get the impression that her own feelings about Snape are even clear to her, much less her readers. So while I'm sure she has envisioned many things about Snape that never made it into the final copy in the books, I don't necessarily think any essays sans story would give us a lot of insight.
Did anyone see on Mugglenet a report of an interview with JKR recently where she commented on Snape and Dumbledore being the most important characters in DH, aside from the Trio? She was commenting on having to know Snape and Dumbledore's stories from the beginning of the series and weaving in hints throughout the books. Does anyone know where to find that entire interview? I think it may have originally not been in English.
Julia H. - Apr 11, 2008 2:08 pm (#2000 of 2617)
'Snape's tragic flaw - the inability to let go.
However, it was this flaw that enabled Harry to live so..." (Haymoni)
Good thought! A tragic flaw - something that makes someone a tragic hero - IMO does not need to be something bad in itself. I think it can be any trait that is taken to extremes. Snape's inability to let go has the same origin as his characteristic loyalty. Both his loyalty and his inability to let go are carried beyond the ordinary. Where would Harry have been without that? Snape, however, pays the price. Often, a tragic hero is a hero because in some respect he is above the ordinary human level and tragic because in this respect he cannot make a compromise.
"mmm...why didn't Snape just Apparate out of the Shrieking Shack????" (Haymoni)
Dumbledore's spy through and through. If he Disapparates, he might save his life but how will then he get back to Hogwarts - before it is too late - to find Harry? I think he realizes that there is little time now - LV is going to face Harry soon so there is no time for Disapparating and going back secretly. If he can persuade LV to let him go, he may have a chance to talk to Harry before LV reaches him and this is what Snape wants to do.
JKR's indecision about Snape: she may have had two Snapes in her mind - one is a sort of revenge on a real-life person while the other one is a tragic hero.
PeskyPixie - Apr 11, 2008 3:12 pm (#2001 of 2617)
"Does anyone know where to find that entire interview?" -wynnleaf
I think I may have read it on Leaky Cauldron.
mona amon - Apr 11, 2008 6:42 pm (#2002 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, hope you found it at The Leaky (I don't think the whole interview is there though). If not, here are the relevant passages-
"Of interest are her comments regarding the plot lines and several of the characters. The Harry Potter author said some of the less crucial story lines were not always planned right from the begining and evolved as she went along, “But the big ones, the Dumbledore storyline, the Snape storyline were always there because you — the series is built around those.” Further comments on the importance of Snape and Dumbledore came from a question about the development of their story lines. Jo said:
“with Dumbledore quite deliberately, you find out little about Dumbledore’s own private life because his interactions with Harry are always about Harry, which sets up the fact that in the seventh book Harry thinks “but why did I never ask ?” He’s gone now and he’s never even thought of saying : “so how about you ?” you know, at the end of one of those conversations which I think is something that happens after the grief, the regret that he didn’t ask. And I think also that Dumbledore had always been such an almost god-like figure to Harry in some ways, that he felt he couldn’t ask him personal questions.
Snape, on the other hand, I had to drop clues all the way through because as you know in the seventh book when you have the revelation scene where everything shifts and you realize why Snape was… what Snape’s motivation was. I had to plot that through the books because at the point where you see what was really going on, it would have been an absolute cheat on the reader at that point just to show a bunch of stuff you’ve never seen before, you know… “Oh by the way, in the background this was happening.” So I did know. It was a complicated plotting process but by the time Philosopher’s Stone was finished, I definitely knew all the big things about Snape and Dumbledore because in many ways they’re the two most important characters in the seventh book… Well, other than the trio, Harry, Ron and Hermione.
mona amon - Apr 12, 2008 2:38 am (#2003 of 2617)
It goes to his credit though that he does not treat himself any more kindly than others. (Julia)
Do we know this? Did he really look into his heart to find out where he went wrong, what his faults were, what he could do to make up for it, and then decide, no, what I did was too terrible. I can never forgive myself for it! Was this man introspective at all? IMO he believed more in shutting out troublesome thoughts and emotions than in allowing himself to feel. Occlumency was one of his tragic flaws, or maybe a fatal gift.
He must accept a situation in which he has to repay the bad he receives with something good (protection), which is a basic idea behind forgiveness
Too broad a definition of forgiveness, IMO. Way back in PS he protects Harry, but there is no forgiveness involved. He loathes the kid, and he continues to loathe the dead father. I don't see any evidence that this changes later. He always does his duty. He's promised DD he will protect these kids. And I do not doubt that by this time he has evolved to the point where he really wants to protect them. But that does not mean his heart was filled with understanding and generous feelings towards the kids who rebelled against him. For all we know he loathed the dunderheads for the unnecessary trouble they were giving him.
----------
Julia, you've done a really good job of finding reasons for why Severus does the (great) things that he does, but it still remains a mystery to me. I mean, considering the magnitude of everything he was giving up- some people might do it because of an all-encompassing love for humanity, but that's not our Severus. The people he actually liked can be counted on the fingers of one hand - Lily, DD, and the three Malfoys!
Sometimes he seems to do it all just because he can. Dumbledore gives him the dirtiest job of all, horrendously difficult and the most thankless, but he takes pride in doing it so well. (The curious, satisfied expression on his face when Harry talks about his 'job' in OOTP). I suppose after a while fighting against Voldemort just becomes part of his nature. He doesn't do it for himself. Nor I believe, for anyone else (at least there's no strong motivation to do it for anyone else). It seems like he's just driven to do it. And that's another thing that makes him so Shakespearean. He is supremely capable of doing the big things. He cannot do the little things.
Julia H. - Apr 12, 2008 7:24 am (#2004 of 2617)
Edited Apr 12, 2008 7:56 am
"Do we know this? Did he really look into his heart to find out where he went wrong, what his faults were, what he could do to make up for it, and then decide, no, what I did was too terrible. I can never forgive myself for it!" (Mona)
Well, I would think the way he lives after Lily's death, his solitary life-style, that he gives up looking for relationships, that he wears black all the time (the colour of mourning, among other things), the really, really bitter personality he develops are all signs of self-punishment while his secrecy and his inability to let go are signs that he feels he did something unforgivable. Whether he practises occlumency when he is not in front of Voldemort, we do not really know - to me it seems occlumency is a way to hide one's emotions from an intruder but we do not know whether it can be used to forget about emotions. But even if it is so, is it not self-punishment again? Is is not because he cannot forgive himself, so he cannot bear feeling what he feels?
"He loathes the kid, and he continues to loathe the dead father. I don't see any evidence that this changes later." (Mona)
He protects Harry because he loves Lily. The kids he protects in DH have no such claim to his protection. My point was the following: Snape missed his chance to be forgiving to the Marauders, though actually saving Lupin's life while risking his own may be a sign that he was willing to forgive him at least. (I don't know.) He missed his chance to be kind to Harry. In the DH year, when the changes I am talking about take place, he is completely isolated. But he still has the job of protecting Hogwarts kids and putting aside any grudge that he might feel towards any of them. This is a different situation, I know, and a different chance to do what he did not do before.
I was trying to stress the importance of Snape being in a position of real power here and the way he uses this power. I think at some point in his youth (in his DE period) Snape wanted to be bad but he had to realize that he could not be bad. Then he could have been good but he did not want to be good. Now Fate says to him: "I am giving you another chance to find what is deep in your heart. I am going to give you a job with power and responsibility you have never had. You will be alone with nobody to influence you any more. I am going to give you a choice: you can really take revenge now when you are angry if that is what you want or you can use your power to do what you think is your duty. You will have the power to be really bad or to be really good. Not just once and for all but you will have to make this choice every day for months. It is not about Lily. The man you made your promise to is dead. You are free to be good or to be bad. There will be no punishment and no reward, nothing but your choice. Let's see what you will do."
I am not saying "his heart was filled with understanding and generous feelings towards the kids who rebelled against him" (who knows?), I am only looking at his actions and trying to interpret them. He is probably angry with them for making trouble for him and for themselves. ("Snape hated it." - Neville.) But anger means that he is not indifferent: he cares. He is hated and despised by all and he returns this with protection (and he does not owe these kids what he owes to Harry). This is something we know for sure and I don't think this is too broad a definition for forgiveness (whether it is because he knows it is not their fault or because he knows there is a greater goal or even because he has made a promise). He has to practise this kind of forgiveness (patience, tolerance) on a daily basis and he seems to succeed. The Marauders are the past. He can only prove he has changed in the present. And you may be right that he is "capable of doing the big things" only but then the way he does the big things may be what shows us the real Snape.
"The people he actually liked can be counted on the fingers of one hand - Lily, DD, and the three Malfoys!" (Mona)
I'm not sure about the Malfoys. Maybe Draco - he seems to be sorry for him when Draco becomes a DE, the rest is a mystery.
"Dumbledore gives him the dirtiest job of all, horrendously difficult and the most thankless, but he takes pride in doing it so well. (The curious, satisfied expression on his face when Harry talks about his 'job' in OOTP). (Mona)
He takes pride in facing the danger and doing the job well and perhaps enjoys telling it to Harry and seeing his expression but I am not sure he really finds it such a great job.
"I have spied for you and lied for you and put myself in mortal danger for you."
I have always interpreted this line as Snape telling DD (maybe for the first time) how he feels about the horrible things he has to do. 'Spying: horrible; lying: even more horrible (Snape is a man who always keeps his promise - he probably hates having to lie); mortal danger: have you ever thought of that?' And when he is in the Malfoy Manor with LV and the rest of them, I just don't get the feeling that he is particularly thrilled.
"It seems like he's just driven to do it." (Mona)
Maybe it is also atonement: he takes all the bad things because he thinks he deserves it.
"... some people might do it because of an all-encompassing love for humanity, but that's not our Severus" (Mona)
Perhaps not and I don't mind. Snape has to protect individual kids (with a face, with a temper, with good and bad characteristics) in specific situations again and again. It is often easier to love humanity than helping individual people. Humanity never comes to your door begging for a piece of bread. We can only guess how deeply Snape may feel the difference between being able to save a particular kid on a particular occasion from the Carrows or not being able to do so. But in the hollowness of complete isolation, surrounded by the portraits of the dead and facing a thankless, lonely and difficult job, why could he not find a purpose greater than any he has known before?
It is remarkable that he can still produce a Patronus.
----
JKR's clues about Snape - I wonder how many we can find if we specifically look for them and what exactly they are...
PeskyPixie - Apr 12, 2008 8:16 pm (#2005 of 2617)
Solitaire posted the following on Neville Longbottom's thread. I think she raises some interesting points about dear Sev.
"Snape does blow his stack at the kids quite frequently, something which shows his (IMO) lack of emotional maturity. On the other hand, when he is in the presence of Bella, other DEs, and Voldemort, he is as cool as a cucumber and manages to use his Occlumency to best advantage ... through control. When Snape wants to be in control, he is. Sometimes I think exploding all over the kids is his "safety valve." He can't explode at anyone else without consequences, so he takes advantage here. Of course, I think this is absolutely unfair ... I think he truly fears for their survival, because he has come to understand that the well-being of the Wizarding World may just depend on the abilities of Harry and his friends. If Harry cannot survive and prevail, it may mean the end of any kind of decent life for those who oppose Voldemort." -Solitaire
haymoni - Apr 12, 2008 10:08 pm (#2006 of 2617)
So...did Dumbledore really keep Snape from teaching the Dark Arts because he was afraid Snape would be tempted or was it something else?
Was Dumbledore afraid of the Curse that Voldy had put on the position?
Orion - Apr 13, 2008 12:33 am (#2007 of 2617)
The second guess, IMO. A spy who has to resign a year later is not much use to anybody. DD may have or may have not told Snape he didn't want him to be tempted, but it seems to me that both Snape and DD knew about the curse and the rest was speculation of students and staff.
Julia H. - Apr 13, 2008 3:53 am (#2008 of 2617)
So the "Snape as a teacher" question has come up again... and not only on this thread.
I agree with Solitaire's opinion about control and safety valve and the survival of students.
"He can't explode at anyone else without consequences, so he takes advantage here. Of course, I think this is absolutely unfair ..." (Solitaire)
It may be unfair but it is understandable. Not all harsh teachers have such backstories or background jobs as Snape has and since Hogwarts is his home, where else could he explode? I mean if he had another home (in the usual sense of the word), or, more importantly, any human relationship where he could expect understanding and a break from everything that bothers him, he might have more patience with students (though "stupidity" and lack of attention would probably still irritate him).
(Once I had a really strict teacher with a bitter personality, who had vast knowledge and quite evidently considered all students dunderheads and most students were a bit afraid of him. But when I heard that he was suffering from an advanced state of cancer, that really put things into a different perspective for me. It did not make anything any fairer but it was much easier to understand and to accept.)
I think Pesky mentioned that Snape is not a real teacher person. This is true. He is a scientist with a teaching job (working as a spy). In real life I find it a rare combination when someone is a really good, inventive scientist and a great teacher at the same time. I guess these things require different minds, different personalities. (Perhaps one has an analytical mind and a subject-centred approach, while the other one has empathy and a student-centred approach.)
On other things that came up on the Neville-thread: One thing I cannot imagine Snape ever becoming is a businessman (selling potions or whatever). BTW has anyone noticed that Snape never ever seems to be using his potions knowledge in his own interest? He teaches potions and uses his knowledge to help others: Wolfsbane potion for Lupin, some gold-coloured potion to save DD's life, Veritaserum to interrogate Barty, fake Veritaserum to Umbridge, the Mandrake-thing in CoS - is there anything else? (Slughorn admits having used Felix twice in his life.)
"The only time we see any form of tenderness from him towards a student is when his student is almost dead (Draco in HBP)." (Pesky, Neville-thread)
But when this happens, it is just so touching... Perhaps all the more so because this is the only time. And he is the only wizard in HP who ever says an incantation which is almost like a song - and it is his own invention, too! (I like this scene!) It seems like a short glance into the unknown depth of his personality and at the personality he could have become.
"So...did Dumbledore really keep Snape from teaching the Dark Arts because he was afraid Snape would be tempted or was it something else?" (Haymoni)
It is difficult to imagine that anyone would really want a cursed job so much (especially if the person has enough trouble without the curse) and it was easy to notice that there was something wrong with the job even if DD did not tell Snape. After HBP and the Prince's Potions book, it is difficult to believe that Snape really disliked potions as a subject, even if he was also very much interested in the Dark Arts. I think Hagrid tells the Trio somewhere (with reference to either Lockhart or Umbridge) that there was only one applicant to choose from... He does not seem to know about any official application on Snape's part. As for temptation: DD did send Snape back to the DE's apparently without being afraid that Snape might be "tempted".
Orion - Apr 13, 2008 6:01 am (#2009 of 2617)
"As for temptation: DD did send Snape back to the DE's apparently without being afraid that Snape might be "tempted"." That is a good observation. I also like your comparison with suffering from cancer. (Without wishing to diminish the experiences which forumers may have had. I've had lots of cancer cases in my family, it was hell.)
Dryleaves - Apr 13, 2008 9:33 am (#2010 of 2617)
I know it is late to join this forum, but I did anyway and I hope it is allright with the rest of you.
"Sometimes he seems to do it all just because he can. Dumbledore gives him the dirtiest job of all, horrendously difficult and the most thankless, but he takes pride in doing it so well."(Mona amon) I think this is true, but that there might be some further dimensions to it. It seems to me Snape has given up all hope on being liked by anyone. His parents may have loved him, but seems not to have been able to show it, and noone (except Lily, maybe) seems to have loved him just because he exists, but many, for example Petunia and James disliked him just because he existed. He is just odd, uncharming, ugly, poor, etc. Early on in life Snape knows this, but he fights against it: he is smart, he is a wizard, etc. He even tries to make friend with someone, because he thinks he is not worse than anyone else. Later in life he at least wants respect, because he knows he deserves it. Still, I think he allways doubts it deep within. They might be right and he has also proved them right by causing the death of his loved one. He isolates himself, but I think he somewhere deep down wants to be part of mankind and does this in the same way as he did when he was a child wanting a friend, watching and acting in the hidden, doing these difficult things, but allways with this feeling of hopelessness, still maybe with a tiny, tiny sparkle of hope.
Orion - Apr 13, 2008 9:53 am (#2011 of 2617)
It is irritating that Snape didn't choose the easier way of being "part of mankind" by behaving a bit nicer and more sociable to everybody. Instead of that he chose to fulfil the enormous and terrible task set by DD. As an adult, nobody would have bullied him. Adults aren't schoolboys. If he had pulled together, he could have had a cozy life at Hogwarts - at least until the crucial phase began. Even if you have lost somebody, and even if you're feeling guilty 24 hours a day, it's not compulsory to make your own life such a total misery. I blame DD and his emotional pressure, but everybody has heard that for the umpteenth time, sorry!
Hello Dryleaves!
Julia H. - Apr 13, 2008 10:34 am (#2012 of 2617)
Welcome Dryleaves!
"... a tiny, tiny sparkle of hope." (Dryleaves)
Hm... A few posts ago I mentioned I find it important that after going through all these things Snape was still able to produce a Patronus. There must have been still a light for him somewhere (whether it was hope or something else) if he could do that.
Dryleaves - Apr 14, 2008 2:26 am (#2013 of 2617)
"JKR's clues about Snape - I wonder how many we can find if we specifically look for them and what exactly they are..." (Julia)
When I reread the books I realised that there are quite a few passages where he for example shows his feelings but the first time I read it it wasn't so obvious that that was the case. Most things JKR writes about Snape can be read one way or another, but when you know the story you know much better how to interpret them (but obviously it's not completely clear...
). I agree it would be fun to go through the books to look for the clues.
I hope I'm not interupting an ongoing discussion, but earlier on this thread there was a discussion about Snape's ending and the possible lack of closure for the character. I allways liked to read the passages in the book where Snape and Harry interacted and I'm really interested in their relationship. When I reread DH and came to the passage where Harry finds his mother's letter to Sirius with the missing page and the half photograph at Grimauld place, I now knew that it was Snape that had the other half and I got this weird feeling, that they were so far away from each other but still so close.
In DH we realise to what extent Snape's actions have formed Harry's destiny (and his own) and in this I think they form a unity that ultimately leads to the defeating of Voldemort. Snape sets the ball rolling and Harry finishes the task with Snape as the secret helper. Their patronuses turns out to be mates(?). In this unity they are often opposites: Harry male - Snape female, Harry active, open, warm - Snape passive, hidden, cold, etc, (and I think Snape's "femininity" is interesting in itself), but I think that once we realise their unity, or at least the closeness of their relationship, it's not mentioned anymore.
There is the epilogue of course, and then the metaphor with the three boys that finds their home at Hogwarts and possibly the tale of the three brothers, but here it is all about a trinity and not the dualism that I found in the Harry - Snape relationship. I know that Harry had a piece of Voldemort inside him, but I still think the relationship with Snape is just as important, and I don't think it is closed properly in the book. Even if I don't like it when a writer tells you too much, I think that the epilogue is "too much" and that there yet is something missing, some loose thread. I guess I would have liked some more tying up of the relationship and the possible unity, but maybe I just misunderstod it all...
Orion - Apr 14, 2008 6:55 am (#2014 of 2617)
"Harry, I have formed your destiny." "Yeah, thank you very much." Harry is Snape's victim in more than one way. He's been made an orphan through (not "by") Snape, and bullied, and forced into that strange role as LV's slayer.
But he gets his revenge, through stubborn un-oppressability and impudence (the Pensieve!). He certainly torments his poor teacher enough to get even with him.
I agree, the Epilogue is simultaneously "too much" and "not enough". But Rowling obviously loves it and defends it, so if it makes her happy ...
PeskyPixie - Apr 14, 2008 9:13 am (#2015 of 2617)
Welcome, Dryleaves! It's never too late to join and always wonderful to have fresh ideas in our discussions.
Orion, I agree about the epilogue. 'Albus Severus' simultaneously made me weepy and sent horrible shivers down my spine.
I'd like to take a moment to address a few points made about Snape on the Neville Longbottom thread. I figure the poor boy doesn't deserve to have his nightmare of a teacher stealing his glory on his own thread.
"[Snape] obviously considers himself to be some sort of artist/scientist/inventor and is beyond annoyed by this kid who is unable to follow step-by-step instructions he has provided." -myself
"Hmm… I didn't see' teacher' or 'educator' on that list." -Chemyst
"Chemyst, this belongs more on the Severus Snape thread, however, I think it is common knowledge by now that Snape is not a born educator, especially for those students who have no ability in the classes he teaches. His main function is as Dumbledore's spy when the Dark Lord surely arises once again. However, he is a pro at what he does and any student who gets a chance to learn with him should consider him/herself fortunate." -myself
"Chemyst is right that Snape was at Hogwarts because of a deal he made with Dumbledore. He never really was a teacher; his heart wasn't in it. He was brilliant, to be sure, but--like many of his Muggle counterparts who hold teaching credentials and teaching positions--he despised his charges and felt only contempt for their meager abilities." -Solitaire
I just want to clarify that I left 'teacher' and 'educator' off the list because I feel that it is common knowledge by now that Snape is not the right person to teach beginners or those with no ability in his subject. Responses to my post seemed to imply that I was the sole believer in Snape as an ideal teacher which is not an accurate interpretation of my words.
Julia H. - Apr 14, 2008 2:01 pm (#2016 of 2617)
"I agree it would be fun to go through the books to look for the clues." (Dryleaves)
I can think of various clues we get at the occlumency lessons and the Narcissa-scene may be a clue of a kind.
"He certainly torments his poor teacher enough to get even with him." (Orion)
I would not call either of them the victim of the other one... but a relationship of mutual torment, yes. And yet (having talked about control above), it is important that Snape never forgot, not even in his worst moments, that he had to protect Harry. After DD's death, the safest thing Harry could do was running after Snape, because Snape would not hurt him (well, seriously), not even in his desperate fury and not even as he was being attacked by Harry, and Snape would not let the other DE's hurt Harry either. And when Snape was dying, Harry approached him. There is no logical explanation why it was important in that situation and yet, Harry bent over Snape. Then in the despair that followed LV's announcement, the first thing Harry thought of doing was watching Snape's memories and then he "accidentally" guessed the password to Snape's office - this may also indicate something about their deeper relationship or similarities (unknown to them).
"Responses to my post seemed to imply that I was the sole believer in Snape as an ideal teacher ..." (Pesky)
We know you are not, Pesky! :-)
To me it seemed clear that you left out the word "teacher" because you were implying that Snape was not a teacher (in the first place). I totally agree that he is an "artist/scientist/inventor" character and not a teacher character and it is not even because "his heart wasn't in it" but because his approach was subject-centred and not student-centred. Subject-wise, his heart may have been in it but this is the approach of the professions you mentioned and not of educators. I think (and you seem to be implying that, too, - am I right?) that it is possible to learn a lot from these "artist/scientist/inventor" people, only not for the average student, but rather for someone who is similarly talented or interested in that particular subject. BTW, I tend to think that Snape's interest in the DA was primarily an academic/scientific interest: he was a scientist who happened to be interested in a dangerous and controversial area of magical science that was generally looked upon with prejudice. His interest was certainly deeper than that of the average DADA teacher at Hogwarts. The problem was that anybody with a serious DA interest tended to end up in Slytherin and classified as a would-be dark wizard (the dangerous current political situation may have been a factor), while, as Snape's life later implies (and DD also acknowledges), expertise in the area of the Dark Arts, when properly used, can be beneficial to society and can even be the basis of a "broader" kind of defence against dark magic.
Solitaire - Apr 14, 2008 9:31 pm (#2017 of 2617)
Pesky, I do not believe that anyone--not you, not even Dumbledore--thinks Snape was an ideal teacher. I'm betting even Snape wouldn't see himself that way, if he were honest--at least not for young kids at Hogwarts.
Solitaire
Dryleaves - Apr 15, 2008 12:44 am (#2018 of 2617)
I agree that Snape is an artist/scientist/inventor that is deeply passionate about his subject (but hates the students) and I think this is how he feels about the dark arts aswell. He wants to know as much as possible because he loves knowledge. But from one of his conversations with Lily we can see that as a teenager he didn't see any difference between the dark arts and good magic. Later in life he seems to realise this difference and uses his deep knowledge to heal those who have been injured by dark magic.
Edit: I have had teachers that were a little nicer than Snape (but not that much) and had really high demands on the students. Then we thought everything they said was way above our understanding, but later we had to unwillingly agree that we had learnt quite a few usefull things from them and even learnt how to see things in a different way. But this is perhaps only happy accidents... And I don't want to defend Snape's treatment of the students! I'm not really impressed with many the teachers at Hogwarts by the way. Snape at least seems to have a curriculum...
mona amon - Apr 15, 2008 4:48 am (#2019 of 2617)
Welcome to the Forum, Dryleaves!
But from one of his conversations with Lily we can see that as a teenager he didn't see any difference between the dark arts and good magic. (Dryleaves)
Not exactly. He didn't see any difference between the Dark magic pranks his friends were playing, and the pranks the Marauders were playing, and I think I agree with him, more or less. At least the way JKR has written it there does not seem to be much difference.
Dryleaves - Apr 15, 2008 5:05 am (#2020 of 2617)
Hello Mona amon! I think you have a point there. It doesn't have to be a general disability not to see the difference between good and evil. And I agree that there is a difficulty to understand the difference in the case of the Marauders. And in other cases in the books too. Sometimes the result justify the means, but the means could also "contaminate" the result. Sometimes it feels like it is who does something that matters, not what they do, for example when it comes to using unforgivables.
I also agree with Tandaradei. It was only one contribution he was talking about, Snape's. Surely Slughorn's green pyjamas don't make his duel with Voldy a specifically 'slytherin contribution'! And in the epilogue Harry uses Snape as the sole vindication of Slytherin house.
I think he had to learn a certain type of forgiveness or tolerance in his year as a headmaster while he was protecting the kids who were rebelling (as they thought) against him. (Julia)
I do not know if I'd include protecting the kids who were rebelling against him as forgiveness. Basically he does not have a forgiving nature. I'm thinking specifically about the Marauders. He could have forgiven Lupin at least, especially since he himself has experienced forgiveness for the terrible things that he did. But he seems to go about with a grudge against all mankind.
On the hilltop, as we know, it was concentrated exclusively on Lily. Towards the end of Snape's life, however, I think this love may have broadened: I think through his love for Lily he learned to love others in a less personal way: students he was protecting, people who were in need of his help or maybe just life in general, life for other people, not for himself. Something that made him endure the attack by his colleagues without attacking back, for example.
But whatever he was protecting everyone for, whatever was his reason for giving up everything to fight the evil he had once condoned, I never get the feeling it was because of love. Which brings up the intriguing question, what was Severus's motivation?
Yes, it is great but saying a few words exclusively for the memory of Snape and not in order to taunt Voldemort is a different thing.
Nooooooooo!!! He was not doing it just to taunt Voldemort. He was proclaiming to all who would listen that Severus was Dumbledore's, and that he loved his mom. And in the process he was avenging Snape, because that information would be especially galling to Voldemort.
I mean I know he had tragic flaws but what do you mean by "his downfall"? His death? Is it really any of his tragic flaws that led there?
Lol, I'm not quite sure myself! Sounded OK in my head, but now that I'm asked to explain, I'm having difficulties. I guess I was trying to fit him into the mould of Shakespearean tragic hero, and I'm no expert on Shakespeare. Anyway, while destiny does play a part, Shakespeare's tragic heroes usually have some flaw/flaws which are responsible for their downfall.
By Snape's downfall I did not mean his death. That was solely due to an unfortunate combination of circumstances. If he'd got his cue to go to Harry (Nagini in the protected cage) a bit earlier, before Voldemort got that bright idea about who was the true master of the wand, he may have survived the battle. I mean the whole tragedy of his life, best illustrated by his flight from Hogwarts, set upon by man and beast. He had a heart and he had a soul, yet he lived his life in such a way that nobody but Dumbledore knew or cared. And ultimately Harry, because he finally allows himself to reach out to him.
PeskyPixie - Apr 9, 2008 8:40 am (#1992 of 2617)
Hmmm, now I'm wondering what Severus's 'tragic flaw' is?
Julia H. - Apr 9, 2008 8:43 am (#1993 of 2617)
"I do not know if I'd include protecting the kids who were rebelling against him as forgiveness. Basically he does not have a forgiving nature. I'm thinking specifically about the Marauders." (Mona)
I would but I guess I need to explain a bit what I am trying to say. At the moment it is more a feeling than a coherent idea in my head but I'll try. Some people say that things that happen to us can often be seen as things that teach us something. For example, if someone tends to make the same kind of mistake again and again, the consequences can be more and more serious until the person learns not to make the same mistake. Certain challenges, jobs, tasks we have to face may also teach us something important. Yes, Snape has an unforgiving nature. (It goes to his credit though that he does not treat himself any more kindly than others.) He does not forgive the Marauders. However, I see some progress as his participation in the fight against Voldemort becomes more and more serious, in the sense that he is able to put aside (temporarily at least) his hatred against them for the sake of the common goal: he checks whether Sirius is safe or not at the end of OOTP and he does not want to let Lupin be killed in front of him even though he should, in principle, keep his cover. This is not necessarily forgiveness but a clear indication that his better nature overcomes his unforgiving nature in serious situations at least.
Then he is given the task of protecting the students of Hogwarts as a headmaster appointed by the enemy. Dumbledore stresses the importance of this task twice in DH. (I think Snape also protects the colleagues as much as he can.) Let me analyze the situation a bit: What does Snape have to do? First of all he has to pay special attention to students who may be in danger because of their families. We know he does not let Ginny go out of the school while the village is full of DE's and we know that Luna is captured only on her way home before Christmas even though her father has been supporting Harry for a long time. I think these details imply that Snape is doing a good job protecting the students. Secondly, there is a hard core of students who more or less openly rebel in the school (DD's Army) and they are the students who are most likely to become the target of the Carrows and Snape must keep them out of harm's way as much as possible. But these students do not only rebel against the Carrows, their prime target is probably the headmaster, who they think is collaborating with the enemy. Now we are talking about Snape, who could not bear being impersonated by a boggart in front of students. In the present situation, however, he must be able to bear much more. He must protect the very same students who rebel against him personally. On the one hand, of course Snape knows that it is not the students' fault that they have a mistaken idea about him. On the other hand, he must keep this in mind every day in every situation and he must totally put aside any vindictiveness in him in order to do his duty. He must accept a situation in which he has to repay the bad he receives with something good (protection), which is a basic idea behind forgiveness (yes). I think this is a very serious exercise for someone with an unforgiving nature (and would be so perhaps for anyone) and Snape apparently does very well.
James and Sirius are dead. Lupin is alive but out of Snape's reach, though Snape has already tried to save his life. He may not have been forgiving towards them but now he finds himself in a situation where forgiveness, though of a different kind and towards different people, is very important. He has to learn to be generous, he has to learn to see beyond any personal offence for the sake of something more important and noble. It is also important that he does this in a position of real power and responsibility. Earlier, as a teacher, he tended to use the little power he had in the wrong way at least partly out of vindictiveness. Now, when he is not a teacher but the headmaster and Voldemort's "right hand man", he has real power and he uses this power to protect the ones who are in his power even when those people are clearly against him. This is a very important change: a change in behaviour but I think it indicates a deeper change as well.
Similarly, when he is attacked by his colleagues (and accused of trying to kill someone), he only defends himself but does not strike back. From an objective point of view, it is easy to understand that the colleagues have a reason to think what they think of him and that they are doing what they consider right. Being the one accused and attacked, however, may make it difficult to cling to this objective viewpoint at a moment like this. Given that we have known Snape as an impulsive person (and especially good at duelling), it probably requires remarkable self-discipline and understanding for him not to strike back. This is another lesson in understanding and (a kind of) forgiveness.
So, what I'm trying to say is that Snape may not be able to put right all of his old mistakes but in new situations he seems to be demonstrating that he has been able to overcome at least some of his characteristic flaws.
"But he seems to go about with a grudge against all mankind." (Mona)
Yes, this is what we see in the earlier volumes. In DH, however, we see very little of Snape, and only learn about most if his actions (that year) indirectly. What we do learn, however, seems to be (IMO) implying important changes. He is in a completely new situation, the job he is doing is radically different from what he had to do before. It is difficult in a new way and it means responsibility he never had before. It seems (secrecy or not) these things bring "the best of Snape" to the surface. I don't see the point in saying "oh, yes, his behaviour has changed, he does incredibly good things and in an incredibly successful way but he is still that unforgiving person full of hatred that he has always been". I think he has for a while now been going through experiences that would affect a rock. If patronuses can change due to certain experiences, why not Snape? He is doing an advanced course in being good (an advanced course in "love" I think - but I'll come to this point another time) and he is doing it extremely well. I just can't believe that he does not learn the basics - such as forgiveness - along the way somewhere.
"What was Severus's motivation?" (Mona)
It is really a very good question. (Does anyone have an answer?) I still think it is love one way or other and I would like to come back to this in another post. This one is already long enough.
tandaradei - Apr 9, 2008 1:51 pm (#1994 of 2617)
Julia H. said:
...[cut]..."I rather assumed, possibly thru editing, that a fair amount of this stuff had been removed?" (Tandaradei)
That is interesting, what kind of things do you think may have been removed? ...[cut]...
Erm, most anything not germain to who actually survives the final confrontation. I know it sounds shallow, but I gather there are lots of arguments among editors of all kinds of entertainments, along such lines. In addition, according to one pet theory of mine, I'm betting a fair amount of editing was dependent upon whether Jo was trying to write a Quest story here or there (action centered), or a more Bildungsroman type story (i.e., getting philosophical … cf Jo’s epilogue to some Goethe endings).
To a lesser extent, I think books are edited and "trimmed down" like movies. Many a Hollywood movie especially has lost significant and poignant materials, either to meet a screening time, or to meet "Tentpole ,movie" aesthetics (fast * simple showy plot, as against a more involved, indie-type film that explores situations in depth.)
I know Jo probably achieved more editorial leeway with the progression of her books; I'll bet she was "allowed" to retain passages she felt important, where an editor might have thought them peripheral to the main movements of the story. Nonetheless, I bet many "editorial" arguments passed between Jo and her editors throughout the entire HP series; ... and I bet, by the end, that possibly to avoid such prolonged negotiations (?heh heh), maybe Jo tried to keep her main story trimmed to sail, even before editorial approval! I'm just saying, perhaps by the end of all this, that Jo might have been inadvertently "editing" out some passages that were poignant for her but nonetheless peripheral to the current and fast-moving plot (for example, as to the question, will Harry/Voldemort die?, etc).
I'm just saying this because I've been reading all these very intriguing essays and can't believe Jo herself doesn't have an encyclopedia worth of Snape-stuff still stuck in that mind of hers; and I'd bet she'd be a great sounding board for many of these ideas. Right now, I wish she'd write just some philosophical essays sans story, just to help us get some more footing on Snape.
haymoni - Apr 9, 2008 6:17 pm (#1995 of 2617)
Snape's tragic flaw - the inability to let go.
However, it was this flaw that enabled Harry to live so...
mmm...why didn't Snape just Apparate out of the Shrieking Shack????
PeskyPixie - Apr 9, 2008 6:19 pm (#1996 of 2617)
I think JKR herself is in denial over how she feels about Snape and the manner in which she handles the character reflects this indecision on her part.
Julia H. - Apr 11, 2008 2:46 am (#1997 of 2617)
"... what was Severus's motivation? (Mona)
Let's start with the relevant quotes:
"If you loved Lily Evans, if you truly loved her, then your way forward is clear... You know how and why she died. Make sure it was not in vain. Help me protect Lily's son."
"I have spied for you and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you. Everything was supposed to be to keep Lily Potter's son safe."
"Always."
Snape agrees to help Dumbledore protect Harry because he loves his mother. (No surprise to anyone here, I know.) Some 15 or 16 years later, he still says he has done everything - including spying on LV - to keep Lily's son safe. At the same time he admits that his feelings for Lily have not changed. So far it seems to be clear that his motivation has been love: his love for Lily. However, he has just been told that Lily's son will have to die before Voldemort can be defeated and that Harry must be killed by Voldemort himself. If this is not enough, he has just been entrusted with giving Harry this information. If his love for Lily is really his only motivation, then everything he has done and everything he has been through in the fight against LV must seem to have been in vain now. So far, fighting against Voldemort and keeping Harry alive have seemed to be one and the same thing but now there is a difference: if the world is to get rid of Voldemort, Harry must sacrifice his life. Snape has to come to terms with the idea that the goal of defeating LV is more important than keeping Lily's son alive - the primary purpose of his life for many years. Of course, he knows that Harry's life must be protected for a while yet because Harry still has a job to do but when Harry disappears from sight (to look for Horcruxes), Snape cannot watch over him directly any more. Still he knows that he must help Harry as much as he can and he knows that he must deliver the final piece of information to him and this task remains the last concern of his life - until the very last minutes. There is only one more thought beyond that: Lily. So helping Harry still seems to be connected with loving Lily in his soul. I think Snape must have understood that his duty towards Lily has changed: helping Harry has become more than protecting Harry's life now. Harry wants to fight Voldemort, he will not flee (as Aberforth tells him to do) and Harry must be given the choice regarding the sacrifice and regarding the fate of his own soul.
At the same time Snape has another task given to him by DD: to do all in his power to protect the students of Hogwarts - a task which cannot be directly related to his duty to Lily. Of course, Snape has done things before that were not directly related to Lily but now when he has lost the hope of being able to keep Harry alive, he must have found some further motivation to go on with the plan and with the very difficult job he has to do. I can think of three key aspects here:
Snape made a promise - "Anything" - to DD a long time ago and he keeps his word. But his obedience is not blind: he has feelings as we see, for example, when he desperately struggles with the idea of having to AK Dumbledore or when he becomes upset over Harry's seemingly inevitable death by Voldemort. It is touching how he remains loyal to DD after DD's death in the same way as he remains loyal to Lily long after Lily's death. Whatever he feels for DD - loyalty, gratitude, respect etc. -, this relationship with the only person who knows him for what he really is seems to be very important to him.
The other key aspect is the way Snape has for a long time interpreted his duty to Lily. He seems to have taken the broadest possible view regarding the protection of Harry: he did not only protect Harry's life directly but actively worked for the distant purpose of removing the main danger threatening Harry and was willing to do anything that even remotely served this purpose. However, the fight against Voldemort is a fight against the evil threatening a lot of lives. I think this broad interpretation is something that in the long run influences his personality and provides him with a meaningful purpose even when his duty is to protect others, not Lily's son. Because of his love for Lily, he has made great sacrifices in the fight against Voldemort. It is generally true that the sacrifice we make for someone or something will in itself make the goal or person even more valuable to us. I think it applies to Snape as well. His love for Lily is a channel through which he learns to value other people and other people's lives and when he cannot protect Harry any more, he still finds this a worthy goal to fight for.
The third aspect is that Snape (like Harry) probably regards Hogwarts as his real home: a place where he did find some sort of acceptance and a life he could live. Whatever his relationship may have been with various people (including students) there, in times of danger he will defend this place and its inhabitants at whatever cost to himself and to the best of his abilities.
"...there's also something symbolic about the child who resembles Harry and the only one who had Lily's eyes being named after Severus. He may have lost Lily to his rival. But Lily's grandchild still ends up with his name." (Mona)
I like this observation very much. Yes, it does seem that Snape finally (and of course symbolically) has a "family". But this is again a symbol reflecting the best of Snape's actions in life: He loves a girl all his life and even though this love remains unreturned, he is faithful to her and he ultimately lives only for her. Snape, as a child, does not know what really loving parents are like and does not know what it is like to have a father who loves him and one he can respect and love in return. However, he seems to have feelings "in store" for a father like this and that may be one reason why he does so much to deserve the trust of the man who has protected him and given him the chance to prove himself worthy of trust. He has no children of his own but he gets the job of protecting a child and he does his best to do it. After that he is entrusted with the protection of many children - DD seems to be extending Snape's original job: you have protected the child you vowed to protect and now I trust you will protect all the children of Hogwarts. And so he does. Symbolically, he is rewarded by having a child - Lily's grandson - named after him.
PeskyPixie - Apr 11, 2008 9:02 am (#1998 of 2617)
"The third aspect is that Snape (like Harry) probably regards Hogwarts as his real home: a place where he did find some sort of acceptance and a life he could live. Whatever his relationship may have been with various people (including students) there, in times of danger he will defend this place and its inhabitants at whatever cost to himself and to the best of his abilities. -Julia H.
Nice point. I think that upon becoming a member of Hogwarts staff he becomes even more possessive of his 'home'. This feeling of exclusively belonging to Hogwarts may also add to his unwillingness to openly accept known enemies (e.g. Lupin, Moody) or imbeciles (cough, cough -Gilderoy- cough, cough) as part of his 'family'.
wynnleaf - Apr 11, 2008 1:46 pm (#1999 of 2617)
Julia's essay was quite a lovely explanation of something I've felt since DH, that Snape's love for Lily grew in a way that motivated him toward care for others in situations that seemingly have little to do with protecting Lily's child or her memory. It kind of reminds me of love in chivalry -- not exactly, but sort of.
Pesky, I agree that I think JKR's feelings about Snape are rather convoluted. Personally, I don't get the impression that her own feelings about Snape are even clear to her, much less her readers. So while I'm sure she has envisioned many things about Snape that never made it into the final copy in the books, I don't necessarily think any essays sans story would give us a lot of insight.
Did anyone see on Mugglenet a report of an interview with JKR recently where she commented on Snape and Dumbledore being the most important characters in DH, aside from the Trio? She was commenting on having to know Snape and Dumbledore's stories from the beginning of the series and weaving in hints throughout the books. Does anyone know where to find that entire interview? I think it may have originally not been in English.
Julia H. - Apr 11, 2008 2:08 pm (#2000 of 2617)
'Snape's tragic flaw - the inability to let go.
However, it was this flaw that enabled Harry to live so..." (Haymoni)
Good thought! A tragic flaw - something that makes someone a tragic hero - IMO does not need to be something bad in itself. I think it can be any trait that is taken to extremes. Snape's inability to let go has the same origin as his characteristic loyalty. Both his loyalty and his inability to let go are carried beyond the ordinary. Where would Harry have been without that? Snape, however, pays the price. Often, a tragic hero is a hero because in some respect he is above the ordinary human level and tragic because in this respect he cannot make a compromise.
"mmm...why didn't Snape just Apparate out of the Shrieking Shack????" (Haymoni)
Dumbledore's spy through and through. If he Disapparates, he might save his life but how will then he get back to Hogwarts - before it is too late - to find Harry? I think he realizes that there is little time now - LV is going to face Harry soon so there is no time for Disapparating and going back secretly. If he can persuade LV to let him go, he may have a chance to talk to Harry before LV reaches him and this is what Snape wants to do.
JKR's indecision about Snape: she may have had two Snapes in her mind - one is a sort of revenge on a real-life person while the other one is a tragic hero.
PeskyPixie - Apr 11, 2008 3:12 pm (#2001 of 2617)
"Does anyone know where to find that entire interview?" -wynnleaf
I think I may have read it on Leaky Cauldron.
mona amon - Apr 11, 2008 6:42 pm (#2002 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, hope you found it at The Leaky (I don't think the whole interview is there though). If not, here are the relevant passages-
"Of interest are her comments regarding the plot lines and several of the characters. The Harry Potter author said some of the less crucial story lines were not always planned right from the begining and evolved as she went along, “But the big ones, the Dumbledore storyline, the Snape storyline were always there because you — the series is built around those.” Further comments on the importance of Snape and Dumbledore came from a question about the development of their story lines. Jo said:
“with Dumbledore quite deliberately, you find out little about Dumbledore’s own private life because his interactions with Harry are always about Harry, which sets up the fact that in the seventh book Harry thinks “but why did I never ask ?” He’s gone now and he’s never even thought of saying : “so how about you ?” you know, at the end of one of those conversations which I think is something that happens after the grief, the regret that he didn’t ask. And I think also that Dumbledore had always been such an almost god-like figure to Harry in some ways, that he felt he couldn’t ask him personal questions.
Snape, on the other hand, I had to drop clues all the way through because as you know in the seventh book when you have the revelation scene where everything shifts and you realize why Snape was… what Snape’s motivation was. I had to plot that through the books because at the point where you see what was really going on, it would have been an absolute cheat on the reader at that point just to show a bunch of stuff you’ve never seen before, you know… “Oh by the way, in the background this was happening.” So I did know. It was a complicated plotting process but by the time Philosopher’s Stone was finished, I definitely knew all the big things about Snape and Dumbledore because in many ways they’re the two most important characters in the seventh book… Well, other than the trio, Harry, Ron and Hermione.
mona amon - Apr 12, 2008 2:38 am (#2003 of 2617)
It goes to his credit though that he does not treat himself any more kindly than others. (Julia)
Do we know this? Did he really look into his heart to find out where he went wrong, what his faults were, what he could do to make up for it, and then decide, no, what I did was too terrible. I can never forgive myself for it! Was this man introspective at all? IMO he believed more in shutting out troublesome thoughts and emotions than in allowing himself to feel. Occlumency was one of his tragic flaws, or maybe a fatal gift.
He must accept a situation in which he has to repay the bad he receives with something good (protection), which is a basic idea behind forgiveness
Too broad a definition of forgiveness, IMO. Way back in PS he protects Harry, but there is no forgiveness involved. He loathes the kid, and he continues to loathe the dead father. I don't see any evidence that this changes later. He always does his duty. He's promised DD he will protect these kids. And I do not doubt that by this time he has evolved to the point where he really wants to protect them. But that does not mean his heart was filled with understanding and generous feelings towards the kids who rebelled against him. For all we know he loathed the dunderheads for the unnecessary trouble they were giving him.
----------
Julia, you've done a really good job of finding reasons for why Severus does the (great) things that he does, but it still remains a mystery to me. I mean, considering the magnitude of everything he was giving up- some people might do it because of an all-encompassing love for humanity, but that's not our Severus. The people he actually liked can be counted on the fingers of one hand - Lily, DD, and the three Malfoys!
Sometimes he seems to do it all just because he can. Dumbledore gives him the dirtiest job of all, horrendously difficult and the most thankless, but he takes pride in doing it so well. (The curious, satisfied expression on his face when Harry talks about his 'job' in OOTP). I suppose after a while fighting against Voldemort just becomes part of his nature. He doesn't do it for himself. Nor I believe, for anyone else (at least there's no strong motivation to do it for anyone else). It seems like he's just driven to do it. And that's another thing that makes him so Shakespearean. He is supremely capable of doing the big things. He cannot do the little things.
Julia H. - Apr 12, 2008 7:24 am (#2004 of 2617)
Edited Apr 12, 2008 7:56 am
"Do we know this? Did he really look into his heart to find out where he went wrong, what his faults were, what he could do to make up for it, and then decide, no, what I did was too terrible. I can never forgive myself for it!" (Mona)
Well, I would think the way he lives after Lily's death, his solitary life-style, that he gives up looking for relationships, that he wears black all the time (the colour of mourning, among other things), the really, really bitter personality he develops are all signs of self-punishment while his secrecy and his inability to let go are signs that he feels he did something unforgivable. Whether he practises occlumency when he is not in front of Voldemort, we do not really know - to me it seems occlumency is a way to hide one's emotions from an intruder but we do not know whether it can be used to forget about emotions. But even if it is so, is it not self-punishment again? Is is not because he cannot forgive himself, so he cannot bear feeling what he feels?
"He loathes the kid, and he continues to loathe the dead father. I don't see any evidence that this changes later." (Mona)
He protects Harry because he loves Lily. The kids he protects in DH have no such claim to his protection. My point was the following: Snape missed his chance to be forgiving to the Marauders, though actually saving Lupin's life while risking his own may be a sign that he was willing to forgive him at least. (I don't know.) He missed his chance to be kind to Harry. In the DH year, when the changes I am talking about take place, he is completely isolated. But he still has the job of protecting Hogwarts kids and putting aside any grudge that he might feel towards any of them. This is a different situation, I know, and a different chance to do what he did not do before.
I was trying to stress the importance of Snape being in a position of real power here and the way he uses this power. I think at some point in his youth (in his DE period) Snape wanted to be bad but he had to realize that he could not be bad. Then he could have been good but he did not want to be good. Now Fate says to him: "I am giving you another chance to find what is deep in your heart. I am going to give you a job with power and responsibility you have never had. You will be alone with nobody to influence you any more. I am going to give you a choice: you can really take revenge now when you are angry if that is what you want or you can use your power to do what you think is your duty. You will have the power to be really bad or to be really good. Not just once and for all but you will have to make this choice every day for months. It is not about Lily. The man you made your promise to is dead. You are free to be good or to be bad. There will be no punishment and no reward, nothing but your choice. Let's see what you will do."
I am not saying "his heart was filled with understanding and generous feelings towards the kids who rebelled against him" (who knows?), I am only looking at his actions and trying to interpret them. He is probably angry with them for making trouble for him and for themselves. ("Snape hated it." - Neville.) But anger means that he is not indifferent: he cares. He is hated and despised by all and he returns this with protection (and he does not owe these kids what he owes to Harry). This is something we know for sure and I don't think this is too broad a definition for forgiveness (whether it is because he knows it is not their fault or because he knows there is a greater goal or even because he has made a promise). He has to practise this kind of forgiveness (patience, tolerance) on a daily basis and he seems to succeed. The Marauders are the past. He can only prove he has changed in the present. And you may be right that he is "capable of doing the big things" only but then the way he does the big things may be what shows us the real Snape.
"The people he actually liked can be counted on the fingers of one hand - Lily, DD, and the three Malfoys!" (Mona)
I'm not sure about the Malfoys. Maybe Draco - he seems to be sorry for him when Draco becomes a DE, the rest is a mystery.
"Dumbledore gives him the dirtiest job of all, horrendously difficult and the most thankless, but he takes pride in doing it so well. (The curious, satisfied expression on his face when Harry talks about his 'job' in OOTP). (Mona)
He takes pride in facing the danger and doing the job well and perhaps enjoys telling it to Harry and seeing his expression but I am not sure he really finds it such a great job.
"I have spied for you and lied for you and put myself in mortal danger for you."
I have always interpreted this line as Snape telling DD (maybe for the first time) how he feels about the horrible things he has to do. 'Spying: horrible; lying: even more horrible (Snape is a man who always keeps his promise - he probably hates having to lie); mortal danger: have you ever thought of that?' And when he is in the Malfoy Manor with LV and the rest of them, I just don't get the feeling that he is particularly thrilled.
"It seems like he's just driven to do it." (Mona)
Maybe it is also atonement: he takes all the bad things because he thinks he deserves it.
"... some people might do it because of an all-encompassing love for humanity, but that's not our Severus" (Mona)
Perhaps not and I don't mind. Snape has to protect individual kids (with a face, with a temper, with good and bad characteristics) in specific situations again and again. It is often easier to love humanity than helping individual people. Humanity never comes to your door begging for a piece of bread. We can only guess how deeply Snape may feel the difference between being able to save a particular kid on a particular occasion from the Carrows or not being able to do so. But in the hollowness of complete isolation, surrounded by the portraits of the dead and facing a thankless, lonely and difficult job, why could he not find a purpose greater than any he has known before?
It is remarkable that he can still produce a Patronus.
----
JKR's clues about Snape - I wonder how many we can find if we specifically look for them and what exactly they are...
PeskyPixie - Apr 12, 2008 8:16 pm (#2005 of 2617)
Solitaire posted the following on Neville Longbottom's thread. I think she raises some interesting points about dear Sev.
"Snape does blow his stack at the kids quite frequently, something which shows his (IMO) lack of emotional maturity. On the other hand, when he is in the presence of Bella, other DEs, and Voldemort, he is as cool as a cucumber and manages to use his Occlumency to best advantage ... through control. When Snape wants to be in control, he is. Sometimes I think exploding all over the kids is his "safety valve." He can't explode at anyone else without consequences, so he takes advantage here. Of course, I think this is absolutely unfair ... I think he truly fears for their survival, because he has come to understand that the well-being of the Wizarding World may just depend on the abilities of Harry and his friends. If Harry cannot survive and prevail, it may mean the end of any kind of decent life for those who oppose Voldemort." -Solitaire
haymoni - Apr 12, 2008 10:08 pm (#2006 of 2617)
So...did Dumbledore really keep Snape from teaching the Dark Arts because he was afraid Snape would be tempted or was it something else?
Was Dumbledore afraid of the Curse that Voldy had put on the position?
Orion - Apr 13, 2008 12:33 am (#2007 of 2617)
The second guess, IMO. A spy who has to resign a year later is not much use to anybody. DD may have or may have not told Snape he didn't want him to be tempted, but it seems to me that both Snape and DD knew about the curse and the rest was speculation of students and staff.
Julia H. - Apr 13, 2008 3:53 am (#2008 of 2617)
So the "Snape as a teacher" question has come up again... and not only on this thread.
I agree with Solitaire's opinion about control and safety valve and the survival of students.
"He can't explode at anyone else without consequences, so he takes advantage here. Of course, I think this is absolutely unfair ..." (Solitaire)
It may be unfair but it is understandable. Not all harsh teachers have such backstories or background jobs as Snape has and since Hogwarts is his home, where else could he explode? I mean if he had another home (in the usual sense of the word), or, more importantly, any human relationship where he could expect understanding and a break from everything that bothers him, he might have more patience with students (though "stupidity" and lack of attention would probably still irritate him).
(Once I had a really strict teacher with a bitter personality, who had vast knowledge and quite evidently considered all students dunderheads and most students were a bit afraid of him. But when I heard that he was suffering from an advanced state of cancer, that really put things into a different perspective for me. It did not make anything any fairer but it was much easier to understand and to accept.)
I think Pesky mentioned that Snape is not a real teacher person. This is true. He is a scientist with a teaching job (working as a spy). In real life I find it a rare combination when someone is a really good, inventive scientist and a great teacher at the same time. I guess these things require different minds, different personalities. (Perhaps one has an analytical mind and a subject-centred approach, while the other one has empathy and a student-centred approach.)
On other things that came up on the Neville-thread: One thing I cannot imagine Snape ever becoming is a businessman (selling potions or whatever). BTW has anyone noticed that Snape never ever seems to be using his potions knowledge in his own interest? He teaches potions and uses his knowledge to help others: Wolfsbane potion for Lupin, some gold-coloured potion to save DD's life, Veritaserum to interrogate Barty, fake Veritaserum to Umbridge, the Mandrake-thing in CoS - is there anything else? (Slughorn admits having used Felix twice in his life.)
"The only time we see any form of tenderness from him towards a student is when his student is almost dead (Draco in HBP)." (Pesky, Neville-thread)
But when this happens, it is just so touching... Perhaps all the more so because this is the only time. And he is the only wizard in HP who ever says an incantation which is almost like a song - and it is his own invention, too! (I like this scene!) It seems like a short glance into the unknown depth of his personality and at the personality he could have become.
"So...did Dumbledore really keep Snape from teaching the Dark Arts because he was afraid Snape would be tempted or was it something else?" (Haymoni)
It is difficult to imagine that anyone would really want a cursed job so much (especially if the person has enough trouble without the curse) and it was easy to notice that there was something wrong with the job even if DD did not tell Snape. After HBP and the Prince's Potions book, it is difficult to believe that Snape really disliked potions as a subject, even if he was also very much interested in the Dark Arts. I think Hagrid tells the Trio somewhere (with reference to either Lockhart or Umbridge) that there was only one applicant to choose from... He does not seem to know about any official application on Snape's part. As for temptation: DD did send Snape back to the DE's apparently without being afraid that Snape might be "tempted".
Orion - Apr 13, 2008 6:01 am (#2009 of 2617)
"As for temptation: DD did send Snape back to the DE's apparently without being afraid that Snape might be "tempted"." That is a good observation. I also like your comparison with suffering from cancer. (Without wishing to diminish the experiences which forumers may have had. I've had lots of cancer cases in my family, it was hell.)
Dryleaves - Apr 13, 2008 9:33 am (#2010 of 2617)
I know it is late to join this forum, but I did anyway and I hope it is allright with the rest of you.
"Sometimes he seems to do it all just because he can. Dumbledore gives him the dirtiest job of all, horrendously difficult and the most thankless, but he takes pride in doing it so well."(Mona amon) I think this is true, but that there might be some further dimensions to it. It seems to me Snape has given up all hope on being liked by anyone. His parents may have loved him, but seems not to have been able to show it, and noone (except Lily, maybe) seems to have loved him just because he exists, but many, for example Petunia and James disliked him just because he existed. He is just odd, uncharming, ugly, poor, etc. Early on in life Snape knows this, but he fights against it: he is smart, he is a wizard, etc. He even tries to make friend with someone, because he thinks he is not worse than anyone else. Later in life he at least wants respect, because he knows he deserves it. Still, I think he allways doubts it deep within. They might be right and he has also proved them right by causing the death of his loved one. He isolates himself, but I think he somewhere deep down wants to be part of mankind and does this in the same way as he did when he was a child wanting a friend, watching and acting in the hidden, doing these difficult things, but allways with this feeling of hopelessness, still maybe with a tiny, tiny sparkle of hope.
Orion - Apr 13, 2008 9:53 am (#2011 of 2617)
It is irritating that Snape didn't choose the easier way of being "part of mankind" by behaving a bit nicer and more sociable to everybody. Instead of that he chose to fulfil the enormous and terrible task set by DD. As an adult, nobody would have bullied him. Adults aren't schoolboys. If he had pulled together, he could have had a cozy life at Hogwarts - at least until the crucial phase began. Even if you have lost somebody, and even if you're feeling guilty 24 hours a day, it's not compulsory to make your own life such a total misery. I blame DD and his emotional pressure, but everybody has heard that for the umpteenth time, sorry!
Hello Dryleaves!
Julia H. - Apr 13, 2008 10:34 am (#2012 of 2617)
Welcome Dryleaves!
"... a tiny, tiny sparkle of hope." (Dryleaves)
Hm... A few posts ago I mentioned I find it important that after going through all these things Snape was still able to produce a Patronus. There must have been still a light for him somewhere (whether it was hope or something else) if he could do that.
Dryleaves - Apr 14, 2008 2:26 am (#2013 of 2617)
"JKR's clues about Snape - I wonder how many we can find if we specifically look for them and what exactly they are..." (Julia)
When I reread the books I realised that there are quite a few passages where he for example shows his feelings but the first time I read it it wasn't so obvious that that was the case. Most things JKR writes about Snape can be read one way or another, but when you know the story you know much better how to interpret them (but obviously it's not completely clear...
). I agree it would be fun to go through the books to look for the clues. I hope I'm not interupting an ongoing discussion, but earlier on this thread there was a discussion about Snape's ending and the possible lack of closure for the character. I allways liked to read the passages in the book where Snape and Harry interacted and I'm really interested in their relationship. When I reread DH and came to the passage where Harry finds his mother's letter to Sirius with the missing page and the half photograph at Grimauld place, I now knew that it was Snape that had the other half and I got this weird feeling, that they were so far away from each other but still so close.
In DH we realise to what extent Snape's actions have formed Harry's destiny (and his own) and in this I think they form a unity that ultimately leads to the defeating of Voldemort. Snape sets the ball rolling and Harry finishes the task with Snape as the secret helper. Their patronuses turns out to be mates(?). In this unity they are often opposites: Harry male - Snape female, Harry active, open, warm - Snape passive, hidden, cold, etc, (and I think Snape's "femininity" is interesting in itself), but I think that once we realise their unity, or at least the closeness of their relationship, it's not mentioned anymore.
There is the epilogue of course, and then the metaphor with the three boys that finds their home at Hogwarts and possibly the tale of the three brothers, but here it is all about a trinity and not the dualism that I found in the Harry - Snape relationship. I know that Harry had a piece of Voldemort inside him, but I still think the relationship with Snape is just as important, and I don't think it is closed properly in the book. Even if I don't like it when a writer tells you too much, I think that the epilogue is "too much" and that there yet is something missing, some loose thread. I guess I would have liked some more tying up of the relationship and the possible unity, but maybe I just misunderstod it all...
Orion - Apr 14, 2008 6:55 am (#2014 of 2617)
"Harry, I have formed your destiny." "Yeah, thank you very much." Harry is Snape's victim in more than one way. He's been made an orphan through (not "by") Snape, and bullied, and forced into that strange role as LV's slayer.
But he gets his revenge, through stubborn un-oppressability and impudence (the Pensieve!). He certainly torments his poor teacher enough to get even with him.
I agree, the Epilogue is simultaneously "too much" and "not enough". But Rowling obviously loves it and defends it, so if it makes her happy ...
PeskyPixie - Apr 14, 2008 9:13 am (#2015 of 2617)
Welcome, Dryleaves! It's never too late to join and always wonderful to have fresh ideas in our discussions.
Orion, I agree about the epilogue. 'Albus Severus' simultaneously made me weepy and sent horrible shivers down my spine.
I'd like to take a moment to address a few points made about Snape on the Neville Longbottom thread. I figure the poor boy doesn't deserve to have his nightmare of a teacher stealing his glory on his own thread.
"[Snape] obviously considers himself to be some sort of artist/scientist/inventor and is beyond annoyed by this kid who is unable to follow step-by-step instructions he has provided." -myself
"Hmm… I didn't see' teacher' or 'educator' on that list." -Chemyst
"Chemyst, this belongs more on the Severus Snape thread, however, I think it is common knowledge by now that Snape is not a born educator, especially for those students who have no ability in the classes he teaches. His main function is as Dumbledore's spy when the Dark Lord surely arises once again. However, he is a pro at what he does and any student who gets a chance to learn with him should consider him/herself fortunate." -myself
"Chemyst is right that Snape was at Hogwarts because of a deal he made with Dumbledore. He never really was a teacher; his heart wasn't in it. He was brilliant, to be sure, but--like many of his Muggle counterparts who hold teaching credentials and teaching positions--he despised his charges and felt only contempt for their meager abilities." -Solitaire
I just want to clarify that I left 'teacher' and 'educator' off the list because I feel that it is common knowledge by now that Snape is not the right person to teach beginners or those with no ability in his subject. Responses to my post seemed to imply that I was the sole believer in Snape as an ideal teacher which is not an accurate interpretation of my words.
Julia H. - Apr 14, 2008 2:01 pm (#2016 of 2617)
"I agree it would be fun to go through the books to look for the clues." (Dryleaves)
I can think of various clues we get at the occlumency lessons and the Narcissa-scene may be a clue of a kind.
"He certainly torments his poor teacher enough to get even with him." (Orion)
I would not call either of them the victim of the other one... but a relationship of mutual torment, yes. And yet (having talked about control above), it is important that Snape never forgot, not even in his worst moments, that he had to protect Harry. After DD's death, the safest thing Harry could do was running after Snape, because Snape would not hurt him (well, seriously), not even in his desperate fury and not even as he was being attacked by Harry, and Snape would not let the other DE's hurt Harry either. And when Snape was dying, Harry approached him. There is no logical explanation why it was important in that situation and yet, Harry bent over Snape. Then in the despair that followed LV's announcement, the first thing Harry thought of doing was watching Snape's memories and then he "accidentally" guessed the password to Snape's office - this may also indicate something about their deeper relationship or similarities (unknown to them).
"Responses to my post seemed to imply that I was the sole believer in Snape as an ideal teacher ..." (Pesky)
We know you are not, Pesky! :-)
To me it seemed clear that you left out the word "teacher" because you were implying that Snape was not a teacher (in the first place). I totally agree that he is an "artist/scientist/inventor" character and not a teacher character and it is not even because "his heart wasn't in it" but because his approach was subject-centred and not student-centred. Subject-wise, his heart may have been in it but this is the approach of the professions you mentioned and not of educators. I think (and you seem to be implying that, too, - am I right?) that it is possible to learn a lot from these "artist/scientist/inventor" people, only not for the average student, but rather for someone who is similarly talented or interested in that particular subject. BTW, I tend to think that Snape's interest in the DA was primarily an academic/scientific interest: he was a scientist who happened to be interested in a dangerous and controversial area of magical science that was generally looked upon with prejudice. His interest was certainly deeper than that of the average DADA teacher at Hogwarts. The problem was that anybody with a serious DA interest tended to end up in Slytherin and classified as a would-be dark wizard (the dangerous current political situation may have been a factor), while, as Snape's life later implies (and DD also acknowledges), expertise in the area of the Dark Arts, when properly used, can be beneficial to society and can even be the basis of a "broader" kind of defence against dark magic.
Solitaire - Apr 14, 2008 9:31 pm (#2017 of 2617)
Pesky, I do not believe that anyone--not you, not even Dumbledore--thinks Snape was an ideal teacher. I'm betting even Snape wouldn't see himself that way, if he were honest--at least not for young kids at Hogwarts.
Solitaire
Dryleaves - Apr 15, 2008 12:44 am (#2018 of 2617)
I agree that Snape is an artist/scientist/inventor that is deeply passionate about his subject (but hates the students) and I think this is how he feels about the dark arts aswell. He wants to know as much as possible because he loves knowledge. But from one of his conversations with Lily we can see that as a teenager he didn't see any difference between the dark arts and good magic. Later in life he seems to realise this difference and uses his deep knowledge to heal those who have been injured by dark magic.
Edit: I have had teachers that were a little nicer than Snape (but not that much) and had really high demands on the students. Then we thought everything they said was way above our understanding, but later we had to unwillingly agree that we had learnt quite a few usefull things from them and even learnt how to see things in a different way. But this is perhaps only happy accidents... And I don't want to defend Snape's treatment of the students! I'm not really impressed with many the teachers at Hogwarts by the way. Snape at least seems to have a curriculum...
mona amon - Apr 15, 2008 4:48 am (#2019 of 2617)
Welcome to the Forum, Dryleaves!
But from one of his conversations with Lily we can see that as a teenager he didn't see any difference between the dark arts and good magic. (Dryleaves)
Not exactly. He didn't see any difference between the Dark magic pranks his friends were playing, and the pranks the Marauders were playing, and I think I agree with him, more or less. At least the way JKR has written it there does not seem to be much difference.
Dryleaves - Apr 15, 2008 5:05 am (#2020 of 2617)
Hello Mona amon! I think you have a point there. It doesn't have to be a general disability not to see the difference between good and evil. And I agree that there is a difficulty to understand the difference in the case of the Marauders. And in other cases in the books too. Sometimes the result justify the means, but the means could also "contaminate" the result. Sometimes it feels like it is who does something that matters, not what they do, for example when it comes to using unforgivables.
Last edited by Mona on Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:55 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2021 to 2060
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:08 am
Orion - Apr 15, 2008 6:29 am (#2021 of 2617)
"Snape at least seems to have a curriculum..." ROTFL! Compared with Hagrid, Binns or Lockhart he seems like a beacon of light. I agree that he was probably fascinated with both the Dark Arts and DADA, simply the subject is so fascinating. (Everybody here would be fascinated by it if magic existed, just admit it! The Dark Arts would have the same fascination as shotguns have for us muggles.)
azi - Apr 15, 2008 6:38 am (#2022 of 2617)
I would argue that Binns did have a curriculum, but it was just so boring that no one ever listened to it. His lessons were always structured (albeit tedious) while Hagrid and Lockhart's had a tendancy to end in major disruption.
But that is off-topic. I like the muggles/guns - Snape/Dart Arts analogy. I hate guns though and can't understand how people can be near them. Guess that means I'd be on the good side.
Solitaire - Apr 15, 2008 7:07 am (#2023 of 2617)
I hate guns though and can't understand how people can be near them. Guess that means I'd be on the good side.
By that logic, I guess I'd be a bad witch. Because my dad was a hunter all his life, I grew up around guns and learned to respect them at a young age. I am also glad my father kept a pistol in the house; he used it to frighten away an intruder when my sister and I were kids. It's a good thing, too. The police took a half hour to arrive.
Solitaire
Julia H. - Apr 15, 2008 7:40 am (#2024 of 2617)
"Compared with Hagrid, Binns or Lockhart he seems like a beacon of light." (Orion)
LOL! As far as light means 'knowledge', well, we never had a reason to doubt Snape's knowledge but there is more to this than that. Lockhart is nothing in comparison with Snape, Hagrid is not a real teacher character either and he is much more inexperienced (as a teacher) than Snape. But Binns is different: he has spent a life (and more!) teaching but what he actually does (curriculum or not) is busily reading out his presumably old, old notes to generations of students, not even noticing that he has died and probably much less that those notes might need updating now and then (even if they are about history). I find him absolutely realistic because he strongly reminds me of certain real-life professors I have known (LOL). Snape, however, even as a student, found it important/interesting to "update" his textbook. (I think in HBP, what he says to Hermione about her answer being copied almost word by word from a book but correct in essentials is much more than just another nasty remark.) And I must confess, even if I were perhaps scared of Snape as a teacher, I would be just thrilled by his intro-speeches at the beginning of courses: both by his PS introduction to Potions (a shame they did not let Rickman say the whole soliloquy in the movie) and by his intro to his DADA course in HBP. After such introductions I would want to know absolutely everything about the subject.
"I agree that he was probably fascinated with both the Dark Arts and DADA..." (Orion)
Yes, he was and he had the courage to be openly interested ("scientifically") in a subject that was bound to raise suspicion. (Look what happened...)
"He didn't see any difference between the Dark magic pranks his friends were playing, and the pranks the Marauders were playing, and I think I agree with him, more or less." (Mona)
So do I, absolutely.
Dryleaves - Apr 15, 2008 8:31 am (#2025 of 2617)
"After such introductions I would want to know absolutely everything about the subject." I feel the same.
As to guns and the Dark Arts I find the Dark Arts more interesting... Luckily, I'm a muggle.
Dryleaves - Apr 16, 2008 5:51 am (#2026 of 2617)
As I am new to this forum and this thread contains more than 2000 posts, the following question might have been covered thoroughly earlier, but I post it anyway and you are all free to ignore it (or give me a tip were the discussion can be found).
What is the relationship between Snape and the Malfoys?
Lucius seems to take Snape under his wing when Snape has just been sorted into Slytherin house, they are fellow Death Eaters. When Narcissa visits Snape at Spinner's end she refers to his friendship with Lucius and at school Snape calls Draco by his first name. Still I am unsure of how well Narcissa actually knows him. She knows where he lives, anyway. Sometimes I get the feeling that Snape use to be invited to the Malfoys, but I don't know if it is so, or if he was a long time ago.
But does he like them or not? If he still sees Lucius he must be lying to him about his loyalty to Dumbledore and the relationship cannot be all sincere. Still, in HBP he seems to care about Narcissa and Draco. I often get a feeling that he doesn't like them very much, but then sometimes I wonder if he doesn't actually appreciate them in some way or other. He is not that fond of people, but they seem to be some of few he actually has some kind of relationship with.
Then the Malfoys, with all their despise for the poverty of the Weaslsy family: how can they be interested in Snape at all? Because of his knowledge of the dark arts? His Hogwarts connections?
What do you think? Or where among these 2000 posts do I find out what you used to think?
Orion - Apr 16, 2008 6:13 am (#2027 of 2617)
About the 2000 posts, I cannot help you there because I'm new too and many forumers have left. But there is always the search function, maybe a cunning combination of search words might help.
I think that Snape's "friendship" with Lucius is only skin-deep because Lucius is a DE and Snape can't value a DE too highly after his experiences with LV. The DEs are his enemies now. You can't be friends with somebody if you're spying on him. Or can you? There's a movie with Johnny Depp and Al Pacino about that, and I think the outcome is that you can't, it is betrayal.
I don't think that Snape feels comfortable around anybody, and that includes the Malfoys. He certainly hangs around in their household, but does he enjoy it there? Narcissa is clutching at straws when she asks him for help, and it seems as if she finds the situation at Spinner's End exactly as weird as Snape does. She intrudes on him, but she doesn't care much about it because her son is so infinitely more important for her.
wynnleaf - Apr 16, 2008 6:25 am (#2028 of 2617)
Dryleaves,
Welcome to the Forum! And don't worry about going over old topics. This isn't the first Snape thread. There have been many, all back in the archives. People always discuss Snape and some of the questions, like the Malfoy connection, just can't be resolved.
You bring up a good point about the Malfoy's disdain for the poor Weasleys. What about Snape? He was obviously from a poor, working class family. From what friends in Britain say, class is important, even aside from economic level. So being both poor and from some little house in a northern English mill town, wouldn't be exactly the sort of kid you'd expect a Malfoy to gravitate toward.
Lucius is several years older than Snape and appears, at least with the tiny hint we get in DH, to have welcomed Snape into Slytherin. Perhaps in the couple of years while Lucius was still at Hogwarts he was protective of Snape? Perhaps he saw something in Snape that interested him. However it happened, somehow Snape does appear to have become friends with both Lucius and Narcissa. Narcissa makes a big point of Snape's friendship with Lucius when pleading that he help Draco in HBP.
My guess is that when Snape was young, he looked up to Lucius as the wealthy, elegant, suave, and powerful pureblood. Perhaps he aspired to that sort of persona. Note that Snape's mode of speech changes from his childhood to that very smooth, sarcastic manner, not that he has quite the suavity of Lucius.
However, after Snape switched sides, he had new loyalties. But that doesn't mean he immediately despised his old friends. It's possible, too, that he wanted to believe Lucius' claim that he'd been imperioused back in the first Voldemort wars (people sometimes will themselves to believe good things about people that they like). For some reason Snape started when Harry mentioned seeing Lucius in the graveyard in GOF. Why would Snape find that surprising? Perhaps he knew that the Malfoy's really wanted to avoid LV the second time around, due to their self-protective interests.
It's impossible to know, but my guess is that this is one area where JKR does have a lot of backstory worked out that just never found a good place in the actual books.
mona amon - Apr 16, 2008 7:53 am (#2029 of 2617)
I get the feeling Severus likes all three Malfoys. We see Lucius patting him on the back as soon as he is sorted into Slytherin, and he sits down beside him. Significant details I think, which taken together with Sirius's 'lap dog' comment suggest to me that Lucius took young Snape under his wing, and Severus probably hero worshipped the older boy. Then there's the sudden unguarded movement that Snape makes when Harry names Lucius as a DE who returned to Voldemort at the end of GOF.
He definitely likes Draco. All that preferrential treatment throughout six books cannot be just a front. I wonder if he wanted to help Draco avoid the mistakes he himself made when he was younger. If so, he is of course unsuccessful. His double agent role makes him singularly unsuited for that purpose.
Narcissa- the Spinners End chapter is the only interaction between them that we see, and I get the feeling he really likes her. She treats him respectfully, and seems to sincerely feel that he is the only one who can help her, and he responds in a positive way.
You can't be friends with somebody if you're spying on him. Or can you? (Orion)
But does he like them or not? If he still sees Lucius he must be lying to him about his loyalty to Dumbledore and the relationship cannot be all sincere. (Dryleaves)
Yes, I think after the return of Voldemort Severus would have been in a bit of a quandary about his relationship with the Malfoys. He must have still liked them, but he couldn't afford to be too friendly with Lucius and Narcissa as he was now betraying them. My guess is that he must have avoided them as much as possible.
EDIT: cross posted with Wynnleaf!
Julia H. - Apr 16, 2008 8:58 am (#2030 of 2617)
Interesting posts. It is an intriguing question and it is true that we only get faint hints in the books. I agree that the flash showing prefect Lucius as he is welcoming Snape to Slytherin probably has a purpose. It is likely that young Severus looked up to him for the reasons Wynnleaf mentioned. (I wonder if it was Lucius who took him to Voldemort first). I don't know if we are supposed to think that even Lucius had a relatively innocent youth, when he could be kind in a disinterested way (pure-blood or not) to someone like Severus, who was poor and a half-blood (etc.), because I don't know how the Lucius we get to know in the books could be interested in him in any way.
Yes, "there's the sudden unguarded movement that Snape makes when Harry names Lucius as a DE who returned to Voldemort at the end of GOF" (Mona), which is never explained to us. Did Snape hope that Malfoy would not return to Voldemort? Or was he worried because Malfoy may have known more than the average DE about Snape's change of heart?
"He must have still liked them, but he couldn't afford to be too friendly with Lucius and Narcissa as he was betraying them." (Mona)
I agree with Orion: already in his thirties, how could Snape like a DE? And not only a DE: in CoS, Malfoy deliberately set Slytherin's monster on Hogwarts kids, years before LV's return to power. How could Snape still like him? And if he did not like him, could he still feel the old, childish respect towards Lucius? Sometimes childhood feelings are difficult to outgrow but in this (extreme) case the only possible explanation I can think of is Snape's extraordinarily loyal nature, which explains that his feelings (love or hatred) very rarely change.
Narcissa: Certainly there is a difference between Snape's treatment of Narcissa and Snape's treatment of Bellatrix. However, I still feel (as I have explained in several long posts) that Snape's kindness to Narcissa in one of my favourite scenes originates in more (and maybe less) than friendship: Snape realizes that Narcissa is doing what he did many years ago on the hilltop and he responds with great sympathy. Narcissa does know where Snape lives (which is interesting because I just can't imagine her going on a conventional visit there any time in the past) but she also tells Bellatrix that there is nothing she would not do now - and I think it refers to a lot of things she does at Spinner's End.
Draco: Snape may like Draco for the memory of his earlier relationship (friendship?) with Lucius and/or because Draco seems to like him. Snape saves Draco's life in HBP twice (and his soul once), although he does the same for Harry as well... Well, I can believe he cares and that he is sorry for Draco for eventually becoming a DE. In the Prince's Tale, it seems he is understanding towards Draco's motivation: "Draco blames me, he thinks I have usurped Lucius's position". I don't think Draco directly told him that but Snape seems to understand all the same, which means he watches Draco even before he takes the vow with Narcissa or before Dumbledore tells him to.
Orion - Apr 16, 2008 9:06 am (#2031 of 2617)
Draco was probably on Snape's lap as a little baby in nappies, so naturally Snape is protective and treats Draco as special. (In reality it is not quite as easy. I've had several students who were on my lap as little babies in nappies, and they know very well that they must call me with my last name in class and can't expect better marks or something.) But Draco doesn't return these feelings. As soon as he is under heavy stress in HBP he gets stroppy and nasty towards Snape, not only because he blames him, IMO, but also because Snape gets on his nerves with his constant prodding. No gentle feelings there, lap or not.
Julia H. - Apr 16, 2008 9:39 am (#2032 of 2617)
"Draco was probably on Snape's lap as a little baby in nappies, so naturally Snape is protective and treats Draco as special." (Orion)
I'm trying to picture that... It would imply that deep inside Snape longed to have a child and had tender feelings for a son he never had. I wonder if he had the chance to look into that enchanted mirror in PS and see Lily, himself and a child together.
rambkowalczyk - Apr 16, 2008 7:17 pm (#2033 of 2617)
intriging question as to whether Snape actually likes Lucius. I give it a guarded yes in that I think Lucius respects Snape's abilities at magic. And because Lucius gives him the respect he deserves, Snape is cordial to him. He probably is never snide or sarcastic to Lucius.
On the other hand, Snape knows that Lucius despises Muggleborns, so I don't think that Snape can be himself completely.
Dryleaves - Apr 17, 2008 6:35 am (#2034 of 2617)
How many interesting posts!
"My guess is that when Snape was young, he looked up to Lucius as the wealthy, elegant, suave, and powerful pureblood." (Wynnleaf)
I could imagine this aswell, but this is also one of the things that gives me doubts about their friendship. Lucius is wealthy, elegant and well-connected, but Snape, at least later in life, seems to value competence and skills higher: it is what you do and how well you do it that matters, not birth, riches and who you know. This is what he values in himself and this seems to be important for what he thinks about other people too. Still, he may not think Lucius incompetent, and I realise he may also be jealous and actually want everything that Lucius has. But I think he would rather have it because he was competent than because of who he was born as or who he knows.
"...Lucius is a DE and Snape can't value a DE too highly after his experiences with LV" (Orion)
This is of course another difference of value system that makes the friendship difficult to sustain. I wonder who pretended the most about his true loyalty: Snape or Lucius?
"He definitely likes Draco. All that preferential treatment throughout six books cannot be just a front." (mona amon)
I used to think that he treated Draco preferentially because he wanted to keep his good relation with Lucius, but I am not sure anymore. In the early books I used to think that Draco and Snape were sort of sucking up to each other, but in the later books I sometimes think Snape cares about (more than likes) Draco.
"Draco was probably on Snape's lap as a little baby in nappies, so naturally Snape is protective and treats Draco as special." (Orion)
This could be the case. I just can't help seeing before me a scene from the Ang Lee/Emma Thompson version of "Sense and Sensibility), were the proud Mrs Palmer shows up her baby son and tells everyone what a good father Mr Palmer is and how fond he is of his child, while Mr Palmer holds the child as far away from himself as the length of his arms admits, with a look of disgust on his face, and Colonel Brandon is standing beside him trying to look polite, though he also in fact is disgusted...
"Snape realizes that Narcissa is doing what he did many years ago on the hilltop and he responds with great sympathy." (Julia)
"And because Lucius gives him the respect he deserves, Snape is cordial to him." (rambkowalczyk)
It is a possibility that Snape feels sympathy with Narcissa. She also treats him with respect, and being respected seems to be important to Snape, so he responds to this and allows himself to feel sympathy.
I can't help wondering why Slytherins would like Snape when nobody else does. I find most of the Slytherins unsympathetic because they have certain values, e.g. the pureblood ideology, but Snape is never shown to hold any of these values (apart from being anti-Gryffindor). On the other hand he is perceived as being odd by most people, muggles and Gryffindors at least, and I just don't understand why Slytherins would feel so radically different about him. Maybe the Slytherin students like him because he is fairly young (I mean, he is my age, hem hem...) and because he is on their side when noone else at Hogwarts is, but in general his social skills ought not to be regarded so differently by Slytherins than by other people, or would they?
wynnleaf - Apr 17, 2008 9:00 am (#2035 of 2617)
Why do the Slytherins like Snape?
First, I think the oddness of Snape was primarily something that was apparent when he was a teenager. In my experience, the darkish, extremely bright, goth kind of nerdy kid is often considered very "other" by most children and teens.
But the kids who were very bright nerdy types as teens often grow up into adults that some kids think of as very cool. I certainly have seen this occur. Slytherin students might like the aura of the dark wizard that Snape maintains. And the drama of his speech, etc.
And then he is apparently on "their" side. If the rest of the school seems to think of them as suspicious by default, just because they are Slytherins, then they might feel much better about their Head of House who might be more willing to see their point of view in any school or disciplinary matters.
I don't see anything about Snape as a teacher or Head of House that would make the Slytherins dislike him. He doesn't appear to be very harsh toward them -- at least any more than his general manner. And he seems to advocate for them, for instance making sure the quidditch team as good times for practice. Given, in HBP, his concern over Crabbe and Goyle's grades, it seems that he's fairly conscientious regarding watching out over his students. We already know he's concerned about the physical protection of all of the students, not just his house.
By the way, when I say he's not particularly harsh toward them, that doesn't mean I think he lets them get away with anything. Pansy, in I think GOF, is mean to Hermione behind Snape's back, and in GOF Draco flashes his insulting badge when Snape's back is turned. This implies that they know Snape will disapprove if he catches them.
Dryleaves - Apr 17, 2008 9:37 am (#2036 of 2617)
Good points, Wynnleaf. I guess I wondered because Snape is (I think) the only Head of House who is actually described as being popular among the students of his house (not meaning that he is the only one that is), but at the same time he has an introvert personality that doesn't immediately attract people in general, but often this kind of personality can win in the long run, and as he works in the interest of the Slytherins he could very well truly be popular with them.
PeskyPixie - Apr 17, 2008 6:57 pm (#2037 of 2617)
The very idea of Severus Snape bouncing a baby on his knee cracks me up! However, the Sense & Sensibility works for me!
Orion, the movie with Johnny Depp and Al Pacino you were referring to is probably Donnie Brasco. I love it. I've got it on DVD, but for some reason I prefer watching it when it's on T.V.. It was on a few weeks ago, and I was making Snape connections all over the place.
This is my favourite thread but I haven't been around in a while. I look forward to doing so next week. Meanwhile I'll lurk around.
wynnleaf - Apr 17, 2008 8:13 pm (#2038 of 2617)
By the way, Dryleaves, I thought it was interesting that you brought up the character in Sense and Sensibility that was played by Hugh Laurie, because I always thought his role as that character (in S&S) might have been what helped Laurie get the role of House -- and House is a very Snapish character.
Julia H. - Apr 18, 2008 1:28 am (#2039 of 2617)
Edited Apr 18, 2008 2:17 am
I like Wynnleaf's analysis of Snape as a Head of House. In the books we always see him through the eyes of Gryffindors and never through the eyes of Slytherin students. However, all children appreciate when their own teacher stands by them and cares about their achievements. Besides the examples Wynnleaf mentioned, I'd like to mention how naturally Draco goes to Snape's office to ask for his help when Montague is found in OOTP. Do we ever see any Gryffindors going to McGonagall (or to her office) for help? Harry certainly prefers to solve the problems alone or with friends. (In PS, Harry tries to talk to McG about the stone but all McG says is that it is not his business. In CoS, it does not occur to Harry to mention it to anybody - besides Lockhart! - that he knows how to get into the Chamber.)
"I think Lucius respects Snape's abilities at magic. And because Lucius gives him the respect he deserves, Snape is cordial to him. He probably is never snide or sarcastic to Lucius." (Ramb)
"Lucius is wealthy, elegant and well-connected, but Snape, at least later in life, seems to value competence and skills higher: it is what you do and how well you do it that matters, not birth, riches and who you know." (Dryleaves)
Unfortunately, we never get to see them communicating directly, we only get third-party (often biased) references to their relationship. Yes, Snape values competence and skills, but that does not mean that as a child, he could not have been awfully impressed by Lucius. At Spinner's End, he probably never saw anyone like him and Lucius may have been a Percy-type prefect, both patronizing and protective towards younger kids. Snape, whose social background must have been very different from that of most Slytherin students, may have felt rather uncomfortable at Hogwarts at least in the beginning, and he may have had reasons to be thankful to Lucius or to look up to him as a kind of role model. However, I don't think friendship was possible between them, since children do not make friends with children who are four years younger (not mentioning the other differences). Yet, if Snape was this respectful little kid towards Lucius, Lucius may have liked him for that, since he probably did not get the same respect from other wealthy, pure-blood kids in the same way. If Lucius came to respect Snape's abilities, it was probably later, when they were adults. I find it hard to imagine real friendship between them when they were on opposite sides and indeed held different values. However, Snape may have still liked Lucius because of how he remembered the younger Lucius and may have taken a real interest in helping the family to get out of the mess they got themselves into.
"She also treats him with respect, and being respected seems to be important to Snape, so he responds to this and allows himself to feel sympathy. " (Dryleaves)
Narcissa is asking him to help. (As I earlier said) Snape is more used to receiving orders that being asked to do something and it is a huge difference. Respect and benevolence, yes; but this does not seem to be friendship exactly. (I mean friendship in the sense like between Harry and Ron or Hermione.) Though Narcissa is desperate and the request she is making is a big one, I don't think this is the way requests are made between real friends: on her knees and kissing his hands and then, when he says yes, asking him to take the Unbreakable Vow...
Dryleaves - Apr 18, 2008 3:32 am (#2040 of 2617)
"Narcissa is asking him to help. (As I earlier said) Snape is more used to receiving orders that being asked to do something and it is a huge difference. Respect and benevolence, yes; but this does not seem to be friendship exactly. (I mean friendship in the sense like between Harry and Ron or Hermione.) Though Narcissa is desperate and the request she is making is a big one, I don't think this is the way requests are made between real friends: on her knees and kissing his hands and then, when he says yes, asking him to take the Unbreakable Vow... " (Julia)
First, I'm sorry if I don't remember your earlier post. I've been reading the Forum discussions a while before I joined, but it's not really the same as taking part. I'll go back and read when I have the time!
No, it's not really friendship. Actually, it's a terrible and very selfish thing to ask of somebody. I think this is similar to DD asking Snape to kill him. They both ask for help knowing that the helper will put himself in a very difficult (even lethal!)position. (I think it's an often overlooked problem with euthanasia: someone actually has to do it.) And Snape still agrees to help.
"House is a very Snapish character" (Wynnleaf)
I remember having read some posts about what Snape could have done had he survived and many thought he could have been a healer at S:t Mungo's (yes, I remember sometimes...). I had thought the same, and then it hit me: he would have been the House M.D. of the wizarding world! : ) I like House and I like Snape... What's my problem?
Julia H. - Apr 18, 2008 4:10 am (#2041 of 2617)
"First, I'm sorry if I don't remember your earlier post." (Dryleaves)
Oh, please, don't say that, I never meant you to think anything like that! I also went through hundreds of posts before I joined the Forum, I know what it is like. :-)
"I think this is similar to DD asking Snape to kill him."
Yes, and this is another time when Snape is being asked, not just ordered to do something. (Well, at first he is ordered but he nods only when he is asked.)
wynnleaf - Apr 18, 2008 6:04 pm (#2042 of 2617)
Regarding Lucius, I find it hard to understand why Lucius, once he was older with lots of power in the Ministry and with a son, would have any desire for LV's return. In fact, I doubt that Lucius really wanted him back. Why would Lucius want LV around? As a young adult, I can see Lucius' pureblood interests and Dark Arts interests dovetailing with the interests of LV. But later, Lucius had far too much to lose from LV's return. And what did Lucius really stand to gain? Nothing. He already had it all -- wealth, power, and family.
So how this relates to Snape.
My guess is that Snape was around Lucius enough, after LV's first defeat, to know that Lucius, for all his pureblood bias, Dark interests and power grabbing, didn't really want LV back. Oh sure, he'd talk as though the Dark Lord was great, but he probably didn't really want him back and Snape probably knew it. I think that's why Snape was startled when, at the end of GOF, he learned that Lucius had responded to LV's call.
I think Lucius probably felt trapped and Snape may have known that. Lucius may have supported LV's general causes of purebloods and Dark Arts, but he didn't really want to risk all he had by following LV. And he probably didn't really want Draco involved either, in spite of all the talk at home of the "Dark Lord" and his greatness. Still, you don't run from LV, so instead he came to LV at the graveyard.
I thought Lucius was played well in the OOPT film. In the ministry scenes he comes across as though he really doesn't want to be doing any of it, but has to do it anyway. Oh, there was no guilt about it, but that's not necessarily the same as not wanting to be involved.
If indeed that was the way Lucius felt, then I can see how Snape might have been able to maintain a friendship of sorts with Lucius during the period while LV was gone.
Also, I thought that perhaps some of the info that DD got regarding Lucius' actions with the diary and what Lucius actually knew about the diary (he didn't know it was a horcrux apparently and his intent in planting it on Ginny was to discredit the Weasleys, not to let the basilisk out in Hogwarts), was actually information gleaned by Snape, probably through his ongoing associations with Lucius.
Dryleaves - Apr 19, 2008 12:30 am (#2043 of 2617)
Julia, I guess I'm still worried about bringing up old topics that you all have discussed to boredom and find obvious. And I certainly don't mind reading the old posts. They're very interesting. There are just so many of them... : )
Wynnleaf, interesting post about Lucius. I think you are right in that he had no real interest in Voldemort's return but had to turn up at the graveyard. (We know what happened to Karkaroff...)
Julia H. - Apr 19, 2008 3:41 am (#2044 of 2617)
A very interesting analyis, Wynnleaf. I have never thought of that but it seems to be absolutely plausible now that Lucius may have returned to LV only because he was afraid not to and he, as an adult, had no real reason to wish LV back and that Snape may have known about this and could hope for a while that Lucius would not return to Voldemort. Snape may have been somewhat shocked to realize that they had ended up on opposite sides. Also, if Snape did really care for Draco, he must have seen that Lucius was likely to ruin his son's life if Draco saw a DE father as a role model. Now I must wonder, if Snape knew (noticed probably rather than being told directly) how Lucius really felt about LV being out of power, then how much he may have let Lucius realize that he (Snape) had sincerely turned his back on Voldemort. I don't think Lucius knew anything about Lily or about Snape being a spy but could he have seen that Snape - as a person - really changed? (Would he have bothered to observe this in the first place?)
Having said that, I still think it must have been difficult even for Snape to consider Lucius even relatively innocent in connection with the diary. Lucius did not know the diary was a Horcrux but he must have had some idea how it could be a means of discrediting the Weasleys. I suppose he knew it could somehow lead to the re-opening of the Chamber and the killing of Muggle-born kids, even if he did not know that it could lead to the return of Voldemort and he may not have known about the basilisk. (After all would he really have wanted such a monster loose in the school where his own son was? Even if the basilisk was supposed to kill only Muggle-born students, an accident might always happen.) Snape, however, was in general concerned about the safety of students, Muggle-born or not. Then Lucius did everything in his power to remove Dumbledore from Hogwarts and Snape can't have liked that either.
One more thought on Snape as Head of House: If Snape as Head of House was really liked by his students and if the students really felt that they could trust him and that he was really interested in what and how they were doing, they must have been hit very hard when Snape apparently turned out to be a murderer and fled the school. It is not only that they may well have missed him after that but also the question how you come to terms with the shock of your favourite teacher committing a crime. Then Snape returned to Hogwarts as a headmaster, seemingly supporting and being supported by a regime every other teacher hated, so the students (I'm not talking about kids of DE's but the "average" Slytherin kid), who had liked him before and may have looked up to him, must have been utterly confused now, not knowing what to think, what to believe.
Dryleaves, as far as I can see, none of the topics you have brought up seems to be boring (quite on the contrary), so don't worry. :-)
Orion - Apr 19, 2008 5:06 am (#2045 of 2617)
To your last paragraph, Julia: The Slytherins were glad to get rid of DD, weren't they? Draco, for example, always mouthed off how rubbish DD was and that he ought to be removed. The way the Slytherins are portrayed (IMO, a biased, over-simplifying and derogatory way) they can't be very shocked about a murder because they are all little Death Nibblers and see murder simply as a very effective way of politics.
Dryleaves, I would be very happy to discuss every topic imaginable with you, even if it was discussed to death in the year 2003 or so, because I wasn't around then and I'm delighted to find somebody who's willing to go through these things again.
mona amon - Apr 19, 2008 5:39 am (#2046 of 2617)
I completely agree with Orion. Whatever JKR may say about it in interviews, in the books she has portrayed the Slytherins as all bad, every one of them. In DH they seem perfectly happy having Snape as headmaster, murderer or not.
My guess is that Snape was around Lucius enough, after LV's first defeat, to know that Lucius, for all his pureblood bias, Dark interests and power grabbing, didn't really want LV back. Oh sure, he'd talk as though the Dark Lord was great, but he probably didn't really want him back and Snape probably knew it. I think that's why Snape was startled when, at the end of GOF, he learned that Lucius had responded to LV's call. (Wynnleaf)
That's insightful. I can imagine Severus being sympathetic to Lucius under the circumstances.
Also, I thought that perhaps some of the info that DD got regarding Lucius' actions with the diary and what Lucius actually knew about the diary (he didn't know it was a horcrux apparently and his intent in planting it on Ginny was to discredit the Weasleys, not to let the basilisk out in Hogwarts), was actually information gleaned by Snape, probably through his ongoing associations with Lucius.
I thought Harry, with some help from Dobby, guesses that it was Lucius who plants the diary on Ginny at the end of CoS. But it was probably Snape who tells DD that when Voldemort discovered the loss of the Diary, his anger was terrible to behold.
(Edited)
Julia H. - Apr 19, 2008 6:12 am (#2047 of 2617)
It seems what I managed to say was different from what I intended.
"The way the Slytherins are portrayed (IMO, a biased, over-simplifying and derogatory way) they can't be very shocked about a murder because they are all little Death Nibblers and see murder simply as a very effective way of politics." (Orion)
"Whatever JKR may say about it in interviews, in the books she has portrayed the Slytherins as all bad, every one of them." (Mona)
The Slytherins who are portrayed may be so. I was simply trying to say that even those who would not have been (and I am not saying they were especially good, only that they may not have been equally bad) may have been further corrupted because they saw that someone they had liked did this and it may have been reinforced (for them) that this was acceptable. All the more so if they did not like DD but liked Snape. Whose side would they take? Perhaps shock is not the best word but (further) confusion about what is right and what is not.
"In DH they seem perfectly happy having Snape as headmaster, murderer or not." (Mona)
I know and this is the point I was trying to make. Instead of turning away from him, they continued to like him. Not necessarily because they thought he was a murderer but because they had liked him before. If they continued to like him, then they easily found it acceptable whatever Snape seemed to represent and unfortunately that was the wrong sort of thing. I am not even saying that it was the only or the main reason for their behaviour in DH, only that it may have been one of the reasons. Kids of DE's (like C. and G.) were corrupted anyway but I was talking about the rest of the Slytherin kids. I think it affected them, even if only as a sort of reinforcement of their already twisted way of thinking.
What do you say to that?
wynnleaf - Apr 19, 2008 6:41 am (#2048 of 2617)
I may have misunderstood DH on this topic, but the way I read it I thought that doubt was cast on Harry's testimony about Snape being the murderer of Dumbledore. It was only Harry's testimony that was evidence against Snape and even at the end of HBP, we don't see a sign that the public at large was being told "Snape murdered Dumbledore." That is, we aren't shown newspaper articles about it at the end of HBP. So at the end of Harry's 6th year, I'm sure there were lots of rumors about what happened on the tower, but not necessarily an official story.
After the wedding, Harry disappeared from public view. It would therefore be very easy for his claims about Snape to be discredited. And Slytherins, who liked Snape and were loyal to him, and probably generally disliked Harry, would be predisposed to disbelieve Harry. After all, there were lots of people on the tower that night and without an official inquiry and investigation, no one was around to prove who killed Dumbledore.
When Snape came back to Hogwarts, any evidence that Harry might have given anyone in the past would have been surpressed. And who did Harry tell in an official manner? Yes, aurors who were Order members knew, but did Harry ever give an official statement? I don't think we were told. In any case, after Bill and Fleur's wedding, Harry wasn't around to back up whatever earlier testimony he may have given.
Solitaire - Apr 19, 2008 10:10 am (#2049 of 2617)
Instead of turning away from him, they continued to like him. Not necessarily because they thought he was a murderer but because they had liked him before.
As far back as CoS (perhaps earlier), we are aware that Draco has never seemed to respect or admire Dumbledore as other students have. Isn't it possible that Jo has used him to represent to the reader the general Slytherin attitude toward Dumbledore? If this is the case--and I'm only suggesting a possibility--then it is natural that Slytherin kids and their families might look to Snape as their true leader. In that event--even if they knew he killed Dumbledore--they might not feel that was such a bad thing, so they would naturally continue to support him as Headmaster. Just a thought ...
Solitaire
mona amon - Apr 19, 2008 9:31 pm (#2050 of 2617)
And Slytherins, who liked Snape and were loyal to him, and probably generally disliked Harry, would be predisposed to disbelieve Harry. (Wynnleaf)
After the DEs took over the ministry the official version fed to the public becomes "Harry Potter wanted for questioning about the death of Albus Dumbledore", but they (the DEs) know that Severus killed DD. And I feel that the Slytherin kids, many of whom have DE parents, would also know that Snape killed DD, that this would have been the version circulating in the Slytherin common room.
Kids of DE's (like C. and G.) were corrupted anyway but I was talking about the rest of the Slytherin kids. I think it affected them, even if only as a sort of reinforcement of their already twisted way of thinking. (Julia)
I agree. Another instance of Slytherin house being left out of the whole 'moral guidance' deal. But I wonder how they reacted later, when it was revealed that their favourite teacher was on the good side after all, and gave his life to defeat evil. I especially wonder how this revelation affected Draco. We see no outward signs of gratitude to the man who saved his life and saved his behind. Isn't little Scorpius's name Scorpius Hyperion Malfoy and not Scorpius Severus Malfoy?
Solitaire - Apr 20, 2008 8:20 am (#2051 of 2617)
I suspect Harry's revelation that Snape had loved Lily--a Mudblood--for his entire life was a jolt from which most Slytherins could not recover. JM2K ...
Julia H. - Apr 20, 2008 8:54 am (#2052 of 2617)
Oh, yes, it would have been interesting to read about the reaction of students (Slytherins and Gryffindors especially...). And of the colleagues. And of Order members. Of the Malfoys. Draco? In HBP, he actually started an argument with Dumbledore about whose side Snape was on. He may have thought, well, Dumbledore was right... No, there are no signs that he felt gratitude to Snape or that he even thought about that Snape had saved his life and his soul. Maybe during the years when Snape was his protective Head of House (in all the small things), Draco learned to take Snape for granted. (I guess he tended to take lots of things for granted.) Therefore he may not have been really surprised that in spite of his recent disrespectful behaviour to his teacher, Snape saved his life when his parents were not there to protect him.
"Scorpius Severus" would have been horrible! :-) I mean the fact that Draco named his son Scorpius implies that the change in the Malfoys is only skin deep. "Albus Severus", however, is a name that Snape could have given to his own son if he had lived, moved on and eventually had a family. (Or not?)
Orion - Apr 20, 2008 9:55 am (#2053 of 2617)
What's wrong with "Scorpius"?
mona amon - Apr 20, 2008 10:58 am (#2054 of 2617)
I kind of like Scorpius Severus, nice alliteration, and I actually like 'Scorpius'! Snape's son- Albus Harry Snape?
Julia H. - Apr 20, 2008 11:37 am (#2055 of 2617)
I know that the scorpion is just one of the many animals in the world but as an allegory, it does not mean good things. I'm afraid the name implies that little Malfoy will be an allegorical scorpion.
"Albus Harry Snape" - now that would really require another HP-book first. :-) I would read it though.
Dryleaves - Apr 21, 2008 1:34 am (#2056 of 2617)
In a way I think "Albus Harry Snape" would be more likely, because even if wizards seem very traditional in their naming of their children, I don't really think Snape would have named his son after himself. But I agree, Julia, "Albus Harry" would require at least one more book... Perhaps, he'd better have a daughter... Well, he is dead, after all...
About Scorpius, I laughed when I read it. I really like the associations to evil of the Malfoy first names. I agree, it implies that nothing really has changed when it comes to Draco's values, but as I was born in the sign of Scorpio and am used to people stepping back with fear in their eyes when I tell them this, I just want to defend the name a little. Even if I don't believe in astrology, I for some reason sometimes read horoscopes, and I once read that yes, Scorpios can steep very low to achieve their goals, but they can also rise very high above their own selfish needs. So maybe there could be some hope for Scorpius and his father. But then there is "Hyperion" as well, and I think I need to look that up to see what implications it may have.
Another question about names: why is Snape "The Half-blood Prince"? I don't mean why Snape called himself that, but why JKR did. Why did she give Snape's mother the surname "Prince"? It ought to mean something, as it is the title of one of the books and also because there is a chapter called "The Prince's Tale". I just haven't worked out what, really. What Prince?
Edit: Hyperion is a sun god, "he who goes before the sun". That is all I can find out right now.
Orion - Apr 21, 2008 7:28 am (#2057 of 2617)
That's what I meant, dryleaves, because I'm a Scorpio too and its simply a constellation. (And a little animal struggling to make a living, like we all do.)
"Albus Harry Snape" is an atrocious thought. Albus Harry??? The two people he had to die for? Why not Albus Harry Marvolo, to have the whole set?
If Snape had lieved and had a daughter, post-DH, he would have named her Lily Chastity, maybe, to honour those he could not save.
PeskyPixie - Apr 21, 2008 7:45 am (#2058 of 2617)
Chastity?
BTW, if Snape had indeed had kids ***snickers again at the thought of Snape with a baby*** it would mean that he had moved on from Lily.
Julia H. - Apr 21, 2008 8:17 am (#2059 of 2617)
I have no problems with the constellation at all. :-)
Orion, who is Chastity? Or did you mean Charity (a nice name, actually)? (LOL!) Naming Snape's daughter Lily, yes, probably, though it is funny to think how much overlap we imagine between the names of the hypothetical Snape-kids and the names of the Potter-kids. (OK, nobody has suggested "James" for Snape yet.) However, if Snape had moved on and had got married, then naming his daughter after Lily might not have been the nicest idea... (though for a middle name it might be still). I mean he would have a wife! :-) I agree with Dryleaves that Snape might not have wanted to name his son after himself. Names do seem to predict people's destiny in the HP-world, so he'd better be careful...
What is the literary significance of Snape being a "prince"? Dryleaves, please go on asking questions like this. It is very interesting! (I can't remember ever seeing it discussed.) What can be the symbolism of a prince? An heir to the throne, a future king? Someone above (and separated from) the others? Someone next to the king only? (Who is the king?)
I found the following intriguing observation on the alchemy thread (about "The Dark Lord Ascending" chapter):
"On the other hand, another "dark lord" is present in that chapter: Snape, the "dark prince". ... If there is a "dark lord" that will be truly ascending in the DH, it is Snape, not Voldemort." (Elanor)
So perhaps Snape being a "prince" is a connection to the "Dark Lord" and to the role Snape is going to play by his side and in the fight against him. Any other ideas?
EDIT: Cross-posted with Pesky!
ETA: ""Albus Harry Snape" is an atrocious thought. Albus Harry??? The two people he had to die for?" (Orion)
Only if he had lived. :-)
Orion - Apr 21, 2008 8:48 am (#2060 of 2617)
Oh, I mixed up Chastity and Charity. The poor girl who was fed to Nagini. Sorry everybody!
And if Snape had lived he still would have hated Harry's guts. And you're right, there's always the wife you have to ask. (Not that it kept Harry from naming his breed exactly as he pleased, Ginny? who is Ginny?)
"Snape at least seems to have a curriculum..." ROTFL! Compared with Hagrid, Binns or Lockhart he seems like a beacon of light. I agree that he was probably fascinated with both the Dark Arts and DADA, simply the subject is so fascinating. (Everybody here would be fascinated by it if magic existed, just admit it! The Dark Arts would have the same fascination as shotguns have for us muggles.)
azi - Apr 15, 2008 6:38 am (#2022 of 2617)
I would argue that Binns did have a curriculum, but it was just so boring that no one ever listened to it. His lessons were always structured (albeit tedious) while Hagrid and Lockhart's had a tendancy to end in major disruption.
But that is off-topic. I like the muggles/guns - Snape/Dart Arts analogy. I hate guns though and can't understand how people can be near them. Guess that means I'd be on the good side.
Solitaire - Apr 15, 2008 7:07 am (#2023 of 2617)
I hate guns though and can't understand how people can be near them. Guess that means I'd be on the good side.
By that logic, I guess I'd be a bad witch. Because my dad was a hunter all his life, I grew up around guns and learned to respect them at a young age. I am also glad my father kept a pistol in the house; he used it to frighten away an intruder when my sister and I were kids. It's a good thing, too. The police took a half hour to arrive.
Solitaire
Julia H. - Apr 15, 2008 7:40 am (#2024 of 2617)
"Compared with Hagrid, Binns or Lockhart he seems like a beacon of light." (Orion)
LOL! As far as light means 'knowledge', well, we never had a reason to doubt Snape's knowledge but there is more to this than that. Lockhart is nothing in comparison with Snape, Hagrid is not a real teacher character either and he is much more inexperienced (as a teacher) than Snape. But Binns is different: he has spent a life (and more!) teaching but what he actually does (curriculum or not) is busily reading out his presumably old, old notes to generations of students, not even noticing that he has died and probably much less that those notes might need updating now and then (even if they are about history). I find him absolutely realistic because he strongly reminds me of certain real-life professors I have known (LOL). Snape, however, even as a student, found it important/interesting to "update" his textbook. (I think in HBP, what he says to Hermione about her answer being copied almost word by word from a book but correct in essentials is much more than just another nasty remark.) And I must confess, even if I were perhaps scared of Snape as a teacher, I would be just thrilled by his intro-speeches at the beginning of courses: both by his PS introduction to Potions (a shame they did not let Rickman say the whole soliloquy in the movie) and by his intro to his DADA course in HBP. After such introductions I would want to know absolutely everything about the subject.
"I agree that he was probably fascinated with both the Dark Arts and DADA..." (Orion)
Yes, he was and he had the courage to be openly interested ("scientifically") in a subject that was bound to raise suspicion. (Look what happened...)
"He didn't see any difference between the Dark magic pranks his friends were playing, and the pranks the Marauders were playing, and I think I agree with him, more or less." (Mona)
So do I, absolutely.
Dryleaves - Apr 15, 2008 8:31 am (#2025 of 2617)
"After such introductions I would want to know absolutely everything about the subject." I feel the same.
As to guns and the Dark Arts I find the Dark Arts more interesting... Luckily, I'm a muggle.
Dryleaves - Apr 16, 2008 5:51 am (#2026 of 2617)
As I am new to this forum and this thread contains more than 2000 posts, the following question might have been covered thoroughly earlier, but I post it anyway and you are all free to ignore it (or give me a tip were the discussion can be found).
What is the relationship between Snape and the Malfoys?
Lucius seems to take Snape under his wing when Snape has just been sorted into Slytherin house, they are fellow Death Eaters. When Narcissa visits Snape at Spinner's end she refers to his friendship with Lucius and at school Snape calls Draco by his first name. Still I am unsure of how well Narcissa actually knows him. She knows where he lives, anyway. Sometimes I get the feeling that Snape use to be invited to the Malfoys, but I don't know if it is so, or if he was a long time ago.
But does he like them or not? If he still sees Lucius he must be lying to him about his loyalty to Dumbledore and the relationship cannot be all sincere. Still, in HBP he seems to care about Narcissa and Draco. I often get a feeling that he doesn't like them very much, but then sometimes I wonder if he doesn't actually appreciate them in some way or other. He is not that fond of people, but they seem to be some of few he actually has some kind of relationship with.
Then the Malfoys, with all their despise for the poverty of the Weaslsy family: how can they be interested in Snape at all? Because of his knowledge of the dark arts? His Hogwarts connections?
What do you think? Or where among these 2000 posts do I find out what you used to think?
Orion - Apr 16, 2008 6:13 am (#2027 of 2617)
About the 2000 posts, I cannot help you there because I'm new too and many forumers have left. But there is always the search function, maybe a cunning combination of search words might help.
I think that Snape's "friendship" with Lucius is only skin-deep because Lucius is a DE and Snape can't value a DE too highly after his experiences with LV. The DEs are his enemies now. You can't be friends with somebody if you're spying on him. Or can you? There's a movie with Johnny Depp and Al Pacino about that, and I think the outcome is that you can't, it is betrayal.
I don't think that Snape feels comfortable around anybody, and that includes the Malfoys. He certainly hangs around in their household, but does he enjoy it there? Narcissa is clutching at straws when she asks him for help, and it seems as if she finds the situation at Spinner's End exactly as weird as Snape does. She intrudes on him, but she doesn't care much about it because her son is so infinitely more important for her.
wynnleaf - Apr 16, 2008 6:25 am (#2028 of 2617)
Dryleaves,
Welcome to the Forum! And don't worry about going over old topics. This isn't the first Snape thread. There have been many, all back in the archives. People always discuss Snape and some of the questions, like the Malfoy connection, just can't be resolved.
You bring up a good point about the Malfoy's disdain for the poor Weasleys. What about Snape? He was obviously from a poor, working class family. From what friends in Britain say, class is important, even aside from economic level. So being both poor and from some little house in a northern English mill town, wouldn't be exactly the sort of kid you'd expect a Malfoy to gravitate toward.
Lucius is several years older than Snape and appears, at least with the tiny hint we get in DH, to have welcomed Snape into Slytherin. Perhaps in the couple of years while Lucius was still at Hogwarts he was protective of Snape? Perhaps he saw something in Snape that interested him. However it happened, somehow Snape does appear to have become friends with both Lucius and Narcissa. Narcissa makes a big point of Snape's friendship with Lucius when pleading that he help Draco in HBP.
My guess is that when Snape was young, he looked up to Lucius as the wealthy, elegant, suave, and powerful pureblood. Perhaps he aspired to that sort of persona. Note that Snape's mode of speech changes from his childhood to that very smooth, sarcastic manner, not that he has quite the suavity of Lucius.
However, after Snape switched sides, he had new loyalties. But that doesn't mean he immediately despised his old friends. It's possible, too, that he wanted to believe Lucius' claim that he'd been imperioused back in the first Voldemort wars (people sometimes will themselves to believe good things about people that they like). For some reason Snape started when Harry mentioned seeing Lucius in the graveyard in GOF. Why would Snape find that surprising? Perhaps he knew that the Malfoy's really wanted to avoid LV the second time around, due to their self-protective interests.
It's impossible to know, but my guess is that this is one area where JKR does have a lot of backstory worked out that just never found a good place in the actual books.
mona amon - Apr 16, 2008 7:53 am (#2029 of 2617)
I get the feeling Severus likes all three Malfoys. We see Lucius patting him on the back as soon as he is sorted into Slytherin, and he sits down beside him. Significant details I think, which taken together with Sirius's 'lap dog' comment suggest to me that Lucius took young Snape under his wing, and Severus probably hero worshipped the older boy. Then there's the sudden unguarded movement that Snape makes when Harry names Lucius as a DE who returned to Voldemort at the end of GOF.
He definitely likes Draco. All that preferrential treatment throughout six books cannot be just a front. I wonder if he wanted to help Draco avoid the mistakes he himself made when he was younger. If so, he is of course unsuccessful. His double agent role makes him singularly unsuited for that purpose.
Narcissa- the Spinners End chapter is the only interaction between them that we see, and I get the feeling he really likes her. She treats him respectfully, and seems to sincerely feel that he is the only one who can help her, and he responds in a positive way.
You can't be friends with somebody if you're spying on him. Or can you? (Orion)
But does he like them or not? If he still sees Lucius he must be lying to him about his loyalty to Dumbledore and the relationship cannot be all sincere. (Dryleaves)
Yes, I think after the return of Voldemort Severus would have been in a bit of a quandary about his relationship with the Malfoys. He must have still liked them, but he couldn't afford to be too friendly with Lucius and Narcissa as he was now betraying them. My guess is that he must have avoided them as much as possible.
EDIT: cross posted with Wynnleaf!
Julia H. - Apr 16, 2008 8:58 am (#2030 of 2617)
Interesting posts. It is an intriguing question and it is true that we only get faint hints in the books. I agree that the flash showing prefect Lucius as he is welcoming Snape to Slytherin probably has a purpose. It is likely that young Severus looked up to him for the reasons Wynnleaf mentioned. (I wonder if it was Lucius who took him to Voldemort first). I don't know if we are supposed to think that even Lucius had a relatively innocent youth, when he could be kind in a disinterested way (pure-blood or not) to someone like Severus, who was poor and a half-blood (etc.), because I don't know how the Lucius we get to know in the books could be interested in him in any way.
Yes, "there's the sudden unguarded movement that Snape makes when Harry names Lucius as a DE who returned to Voldemort at the end of GOF" (Mona), which is never explained to us. Did Snape hope that Malfoy would not return to Voldemort? Or was he worried because Malfoy may have known more than the average DE about Snape's change of heart?
"He must have still liked them, but he couldn't afford to be too friendly with Lucius and Narcissa as he was betraying them." (Mona)
I agree with Orion: already in his thirties, how could Snape like a DE? And not only a DE: in CoS, Malfoy deliberately set Slytherin's monster on Hogwarts kids, years before LV's return to power. How could Snape still like him? And if he did not like him, could he still feel the old, childish respect towards Lucius? Sometimes childhood feelings are difficult to outgrow but in this (extreme) case the only possible explanation I can think of is Snape's extraordinarily loyal nature, which explains that his feelings (love or hatred) very rarely change.
Narcissa: Certainly there is a difference between Snape's treatment of Narcissa and Snape's treatment of Bellatrix. However, I still feel (as I have explained in several long posts) that Snape's kindness to Narcissa in one of my favourite scenes originates in more (and maybe less) than friendship: Snape realizes that Narcissa is doing what he did many years ago on the hilltop and he responds with great sympathy. Narcissa does know where Snape lives (which is interesting because I just can't imagine her going on a conventional visit there any time in the past) but she also tells Bellatrix that there is nothing she would not do now - and I think it refers to a lot of things she does at Spinner's End.
Draco: Snape may like Draco for the memory of his earlier relationship (friendship?) with Lucius and/or because Draco seems to like him. Snape saves Draco's life in HBP twice (and his soul once), although he does the same for Harry as well... Well, I can believe he cares and that he is sorry for Draco for eventually becoming a DE. In the Prince's Tale, it seems he is understanding towards Draco's motivation: "Draco blames me, he thinks I have usurped Lucius's position". I don't think Draco directly told him that but Snape seems to understand all the same, which means he watches Draco even before he takes the vow with Narcissa or before Dumbledore tells him to.
Orion - Apr 16, 2008 9:06 am (#2031 of 2617)
Draco was probably on Snape's lap as a little baby in nappies, so naturally Snape is protective and treats Draco as special. (In reality it is not quite as easy. I've had several students who were on my lap as little babies in nappies, and they know very well that they must call me with my last name in class and can't expect better marks or something.) But Draco doesn't return these feelings. As soon as he is under heavy stress in HBP he gets stroppy and nasty towards Snape, not only because he blames him, IMO, but also because Snape gets on his nerves with his constant prodding. No gentle feelings there, lap or not.
Julia H. - Apr 16, 2008 9:39 am (#2032 of 2617)
"Draco was probably on Snape's lap as a little baby in nappies, so naturally Snape is protective and treats Draco as special." (Orion)
I'm trying to picture that... It would imply that deep inside Snape longed to have a child and had tender feelings for a son he never had. I wonder if he had the chance to look into that enchanted mirror in PS and see Lily, himself and a child together.
rambkowalczyk - Apr 16, 2008 7:17 pm (#2033 of 2617)
intriging question as to whether Snape actually likes Lucius. I give it a guarded yes in that I think Lucius respects Snape's abilities at magic. And because Lucius gives him the respect he deserves, Snape is cordial to him. He probably is never snide or sarcastic to Lucius.
On the other hand, Snape knows that Lucius despises Muggleborns, so I don't think that Snape can be himself completely.
Dryleaves - Apr 17, 2008 6:35 am (#2034 of 2617)
How many interesting posts!
"My guess is that when Snape was young, he looked up to Lucius as the wealthy, elegant, suave, and powerful pureblood." (Wynnleaf)
I could imagine this aswell, but this is also one of the things that gives me doubts about their friendship. Lucius is wealthy, elegant and well-connected, but Snape, at least later in life, seems to value competence and skills higher: it is what you do and how well you do it that matters, not birth, riches and who you know. This is what he values in himself and this seems to be important for what he thinks about other people too. Still, he may not think Lucius incompetent, and I realise he may also be jealous and actually want everything that Lucius has. But I think he would rather have it because he was competent than because of who he was born as or who he knows.
"...Lucius is a DE and Snape can't value a DE too highly after his experiences with LV" (Orion)
This is of course another difference of value system that makes the friendship difficult to sustain. I wonder who pretended the most about his true loyalty: Snape or Lucius?
"He definitely likes Draco. All that preferential treatment throughout six books cannot be just a front." (mona amon)
I used to think that he treated Draco preferentially because he wanted to keep his good relation with Lucius, but I am not sure anymore. In the early books I used to think that Draco and Snape were sort of sucking up to each other, but in the later books I sometimes think Snape cares about (more than likes) Draco.
"Draco was probably on Snape's lap as a little baby in nappies, so naturally Snape is protective and treats Draco as special." (Orion)
This could be the case. I just can't help seeing before me a scene from the Ang Lee/Emma Thompson version of "Sense and Sensibility), were the proud Mrs Palmer shows up her baby son and tells everyone what a good father Mr Palmer is and how fond he is of his child, while Mr Palmer holds the child as far away from himself as the length of his arms admits, with a look of disgust on his face, and Colonel Brandon is standing beside him trying to look polite, though he also in fact is disgusted...
"Snape realizes that Narcissa is doing what he did many years ago on the hilltop and he responds with great sympathy." (Julia)
"And because Lucius gives him the respect he deserves, Snape is cordial to him." (rambkowalczyk)
It is a possibility that Snape feels sympathy with Narcissa. She also treats him with respect, and being respected seems to be important to Snape, so he responds to this and allows himself to feel sympathy.
I can't help wondering why Slytherins would like Snape when nobody else does. I find most of the Slytherins unsympathetic because they have certain values, e.g. the pureblood ideology, but Snape is never shown to hold any of these values (apart from being anti-Gryffindor). On the other hand he is perceived as being odd by most people, muggles and Gryffindors at least, and I just don't understand why Slytherins would feel so radically different about him. Maybe the Slytherin students like him because he is fairly young (I mean, he is my age, hem hem...) and because he is on their side when noone else at Hogwarts is, but in general his social skills ought not to be regarded so differently by Slytherins than by other people, or would they?
wynnleaf - Apr 17, 2008 9:00 am (#2035 of 2617)
Why do the Slytherins like Snape?
First, I think the oddness of Snape was primarily something that was apparent when he was a teenager. In my experience, the darkish, extremely bright, goth kind of nerdy kid is often considered very "other" by most children and teens.
But the kids who were very bright nerdy types as teens often grow up into adults that some kids think of as very cool. I certainly have seen this occur. Slytherin students might like the aura of the dark wizard that Snape maintains. And the drama of his speech, etc.
And then he is apparently on "their" side. If the rest of the school seems to think of them as suspicious by default, just because they are Slytherins, then they might feel much better about their Head of House who might be more willing to see their point of view in any school or disciplinary matters.
I don't see anything about Snape as a teacher or Head of House that would make the Slytherins dislike him. He doesn't appear to be very harsh toward them -- at least any more than his general manner. And he seems to advocate for them, for instance making sure the quidditch team as good times for practice. Given, in HBP, his concern over Crabbe and Goyle's grades, it seems that he's fairly conscientious regarding watching out over his students. We already know he's concerned about the physical protection of all of the students, not just his house.
By the way, when I say he's not particularly harsh toward them, that doesn't mean I think he lets them get away with anything. Pansy, in I think GOF, is mean to Hermione behind Snape's back, and in GOF Draco flashes his insulting badge when Snape's back is turned. This implies that they know Snape will disapprove if he catches them.
Dryleaves - Apr 17, 2008 9:37 am (#2036 of 2617)
Good points, Wynnleaf. I guess I wondered because Snape is (I think) the only Head of House who is actually described as being popular among the students of his house (not meaning that he is the only one that is), but at the same time he has an introvert personality that doesn't immediately attract people in general, but often this kind of personality can win in the long run, and as he works in the interest of the Slytherins he could very well truly be popular with them.
PeskyPixie - Apr 17, 2008 6:57 pm (#2037 of 2617)
The very idea of Severus Snape bouncing a baby on his knee cracks me up! However, the Sense & Sensibility works for me!
Orion, the movie with Johnny Depp and Al Pacino you were referring to is probably Donnie Brasco. I love it. I've got it on DVD, but for some reason I prefer watching it when it's on T.V.. It was on a few weeks ago, and I was making Snape connections all over the place.
This is my favourite thread but I haven't been around in a while. I look forward to doing so next week. Meanwhile I'll lurk around.
wynnleaf - Apr 17, 2008 8:13 pm (#2038 of 2617)
By the way, Dryleaves, I thought it was interesting that you brought up the character in Sense and Sensibility that was played by Hugh Laurie, because I always thought his role as that character (in S&S) might have been what helped Laurie get the role of House -- and House is a very Snapish character.
Julia H. - Apr 18, 2008 1:28 am (#2039 of 2617)
Edited Apr 18, 2008 2:17 am
I like Wynnleaf's analysis of Snape as a Head of House. In the books we always see him through the eyes of Gryffindors and never through the eyes of Slytherin students. However, all children appreciate when their own teacher stands by them and cares about their achievements. Besides the examples Wynnleaf mentioned, I'd like to mention how naturally Draco goes to Snape's office to ask for his help when Montague is found in OOTP. Do we ever see any Gryffindors going to McGonagall (or to her office) for help? Harry certainly prefers to solve the problems alone or with friends. (In PS, Harry tries to talk to McG about the stone but all McG says is that it is not his business. In CoS, it does not occur to Harry to mention it to anybody - besides Lockhart! - that he knows how to get into the Chamber.)
"I think Lucius respects Snape's abilities at magic. And because Lucius gives him the respect he deserves, Snape is cordial to him. He probably is never snide or sarcastic to Lucius." (Ramb)
"Lucius is wealthy, elegant and well-connected, but Snape, at least later in life, seems to value competence and skills higher: it is what you do and how well you do it that matters, not birth, riches and who you know." (Dryleaves)
Unfortunately, we never get to see them communicating directly, we only get third-party (often biased) references to their relationship. Yes, Snape values competence and skills, but that does not mean that as a child, he could not have been awfully impressed by Lucius. At Spinner's End, he probably never saw anyone like him and Lucius may have been a Percy-type prefect, both patronizing and protective towards younger kids. Snape, whose social background must have been very different from that of most Slytherin students, may have felt rather uncomfortable at Hogwarts at least in the beginning, and he may have had reasons to be thankful to Lucius or to look up to him as a kind of role model. However, I don't think friendship was possible between them, since children do not make friends with children who are four years younger (not mentioning the other differences). Yet, if Snape was this respectful little kid towards Lucius, Lucius may have liked him for that, since he probably did not get the same respect from other wealthy, pure-blood kids in the same way. If Lucius came to respect Snape's abilities, it was probably later, when they were adults. I find it hard to imagine real friendship between them when they were on opposite sides and indeed held different values. However, Snape may have still liked Lucius because of how he remembered the younger Lucius and may have taken a real interest in helping the family to get out of the mess they got themselves into.
"She also treats him with respect, and being respected seems to be important to Snape, so he responds to this and allows himself to feel sympathy. " (Dryleaves)
Narcissa is asking him to help. (As I earlier said) Snape is more used to receiving orders that being asked to do something and it is a huge difference. Respect and benevolence, yes; but this does not seem to be friendship exactly. (I mean friendship in the sense like between Harry and Ron or Hermione.) Though Narcissa is desperate and the request she is making is a big one, I don't think this is the way requests are made between real friends: on her knees and kissing his hands and then, when he says yes, asking him to take the Unbreakable Vow...
Dryleaves - Apr 18, 2008 3:32 am (#2040 of 2617)
"Narcissa is asking him to help. (As I earlier said) Snape is more used to receiving orders that being asked to do something and it is a huge difference. Respect and benevolence, yes; but this does not seem to be friendship exactly. (I mean friendship in the sense like between Harry and Ron or Hermione.) Though Narcissa is desperate and the request she is making is a big one, I don't think this is the way requests are made between real friends: on her knees and kissing his hands and then, when he says yes, asking him to take the Unbreakable Vow... " (Julia)
First, I'm sorry if I don't remember your earlier post. I've been reading the Forum discussions a while before I joined, but it's not really the same as taking part. I'll go back and read when I have the time!
No, it's not really friendship. Actually, it's a terrible and very selfish thing to ask of somebody. I think this is similar to DD asking Snape to kill him. They both ask for help knowing that the helper will put himself in a very difficult (even lethal!)position. (I think it's an often overlooked problem with euthanasia: someone actually has to do it.) And Snape still agrees to help.
"House is a very Snapish character" (Wynnleaf)
I remember having read some posts about what Snape could have done had he survived and many thought he could have been a healer at S:t Mungo's (yes, I remember sometimes...). I had thought the same, and then it hit me: he would have been the House M.D. of the wizarding world! : ) I like House and I like Snape... What's my problem?
Julia H. - Apr 18, 2008 4:10 am (#2041 of 2617)
"First, I'm sorry if I don't remember your earlier post." (Dryleaves)
Oh, please, don't say that, I never meant you to think anything like that! I also went through hundreds of posts before I joined the Forum, I know what it is like. :-)
"I think this is similar to DD asking Snape to kill him."
Yes, and this is another time when Snape is being asked, not just ordered to do something. (Well, at first he is ordered but he nods only when he is asked.)
wynnleaf - Apr 18, 2008 6:04 pm (#2042 of 2617)
Regarding Lucius, I find it hard to understand why Lucius, once he was older with lots of power in the Ministry and with a son, would have any desire for LV's return. In fact, I doubt that Lucius really wanted him back. Why would Lucius want LV around? As a young adult, I can see Lucius' pureblood interests and Dark Arts interests dovetailing with the interests of LV. But later, Lucius had far too much to lose from LV's return. And what did Lucius really stand to gain? Nothing. He already had it all -- wealth, power, and family.
So how this relates to Snape.
My guess is that Snape was around Lucius enough, after LV's first defeat, to know that Lucius, for all his pureblood bias, Dark interests and power grabbing, didn't really want LV back. Oh sure, he'd talk as though the Dark Lord was great, but he probably didn't really want him back and Snape probably knew it. I think that's why Snape was startled when, at the end of GOF, he learned that Lucius had responded to LV's call.
I think Lucius probably felt trapped and Snape may have known that. Lucius may have supported LV's general causes of purebloods and Dark Arts, but he didn't really want to risk all he had by following LV. And he probably didn't really want Draco involved either, in spite of all the talk at home of the "Dark Lord" and his greatness. Still, you don't run from LV, so instead he came to LV at the graveyard.
I thought Lucius was played well in the OOPT film. In the ministry scenes he comes across as though he really doesn't want to be doing any of it, but has to do it anyway. Oh, there was no guilt about it, but that's not necessarily the same as not wanting to be involved.
If indeed that was the way Lucius felt, then I can see how Snape might have been able to maintain a friendship of sorts with Lucius during the period while LV was gone.
Also, I thought that perhaps some of the info that DD got regarding Lucius' actions with the diary and what Lucius actually knew about the diary (he didn't know it was a horcrux apparently and his intent in planting it on Ginny was to discredit the Weasleys, not to let the basilisk out in Hogwarts), was actually information gleaned by Snape, probably through his ongoing associations with Lucius.
Dryleaves - Apr 19, 2008 12:30 am (#2043 of 2617)
Julia, I guess I'm still worried about bringing up old topics that you all have discussed to boredom and find obvious. And I certainly don't mind reading the old posts. They're very interesting. There are just so many of them... : )
Wynnleaf, interesting post about Lucius. I think you are right in that he had no real interest in Voldemort's return but had to turn up at the graveyard. (We know what happened to Karkaroff...)
Julia H. - Apr 19, 2008 3:41 am (#2044 of 2617)
A very interesting analyis, Wynnleaf. I have never thought of that but it seems to be absolutely plausible now that Lucius may have returned to LV only because he was afraid not to and he, as an adult, had no real reason to wish LV back and that Snape may have known about this and could hope for a while that Lucius would not return to Voldemort. Snape may have been somewhat shocked to realize that they had ended up on opposite sides. Also, if Snape did really care for Draco, he must have seen that Lucius was likely to ruin his son's life if Draco saw a DE father as a role model. Now I must wonder, if Snape knew (noticed probably rather than being told directly) how Lucius really felt about LV being out of power, then how much he may have let Lucius realize that he (Snape) had sincerely turned his back on Voldemort. I don't think Lucius knew anything about Lily or about Snape being a spy but could he have seen that Snape - as a person - really changed? (Would he have bothered to observe this in the first place?)
Having said that, I still think it must have been difficult even for Snape to consider Lucius even relatively innocent in connection with the diary. Lucius did not know the diary was a Horcrux but he must have had some idea how it could be a means of discrediting the Weasleys. I suppose he knew it could somehow lead to the re-opening of the Chamber and the killing of Muggle-born kids, even if he did not know that it could lead to the return of Voldemort and he may not have known about the basilisk. (After all would he really have wanted such a monster loose in the school where his own son was? Even if the basilisk was supposed to kill only Muggle-born students, an accident might always happen.) Snape, however, was in general concerned about the safety of students, Muggle-born or not. Then Lucius did everything in his power to remove Dumbledore from Hogwarts and Snape can't have liked that either.
One more thought on Snape as Head of House: If Snape as Head of House was really liked by his students and if the students really felt that they could trust him and that he was really interested in what and how they were doing, they must have been hit very hard when Snape apparently turned out to be a murderer and fled the school. It is not only that they may well have missed him after that but also the question how you come to terms with the shock of your favourite teacher committing a crime. Then Snape returned to Hogwarts as a headmaster, seemingly supporting and being supported by a regime every other teacher hated, so the students (I'm not talking about kids of DE's but the "average" Slytherin kid), who had liked him before and may have looked up to him, must have been utterly confused now, not knowing what to think, what to believe.
Dryleaves, as far as I can see, none of the topics you have brought up seems to be boring (quite on the contrary), so don't worry. :-)
Orion - Apr 19, 2008 5:06 am (#2045 of 2617)
To your last paragraph, Julia: The Slytherins were glad to get rid of DD, weren't they? Draco, for example, always mouthed off how rubbish DD was and that he ought to be removed. The way the Slytherins are portrayed (IMO, a biased, over-simplifying and derogatory way) they can't be very shocked about a murder because they are all little Death Nibblers and see murder simply as a very effective way of politics.
Dryleaves, I would be very happy to discuss every topic imaginable with you, even if it was discussed to death in the year 2003 or so, because I wasn't around then and I'm delighted to find somebody who's willing to go through these things again.
mona amon - Apr 19, 2008 5:39 am (#2046 of 2617)
I completely agree with Orion. Whatever JKR may say about it in interviews, in the books she has portrayed the Slytherins as all bad, every one of them. In DH they seem perfectly happy having Snape as headmaster, murderer or not.
My guess is that Snape was around Lucius enough, after LV's first defeat, to know that Lucius, for all his pureblood bias, Dark interests and power grabbing, didn't really want LV back. Oh sure, he'd talk as though the Dark Lord was great, but he probably didn't really want him back and Snape probably knew it. I think that's why Snape was startled when, at the end of GOF, he learned that Lucius had responded to LV's call. (Wynnleaf)
That's insightful. I can imagine Severus being sympathetic to Lucius under the circumstances.
Also, I thought that perhaps some of the info that DD got regarding Lucius' actions with the diary and what Lucius actually knew about the diary (he didn't know it was a horcrux apparently and his intent in planting it on Ginny was to discredit the Weasleys, not to let the basilisk out in Hogwarts), was actually information gleaned by Snape, probably through his ongoing associations with Lucius.
I thought Harry, with some help from Dobby, guesses that it was Lucius who plants the diary on Ginny at the end of CoS. But it was probably Snape who tells DD that when Voldemort discovered the loss of the Diary, his anger was terrible to behold.
(Edited)
Julia H. - Apr 19, 2008 6:12 am (#2047 of 2617)
It seems what I managed to say was different from what I intended.
"The way the Slytherins are portrayed (IMO, a biased, over-simplifying and derogatory way) they can't be very shocked about a murder because they are all little Death Nibblers and see murder simply as a very effective way of politics." (Orion)
"Whatever JKR may say about it in interviews, in the books she has portrayed the Slytherins as all bad, every one of them." (Mona)
The Slytherins who are portrayed may be so. I was simply trying to say that even those who would not have been (and I am not saying they were especially good, only that they may not have been equally bad) may have been further corrupted because they saw that someone they had liked did this and it may have been reinforced (for them) that this was acceptable. All the more so if they did not like DD but liked Snape. Whose side would they take? Perhaps shock is not the best word but (further) confusion about what is right and what is not.
"In DH they seem perfectly happy having Snape as headmaster, murderer or not." (Mona)
I know and this is the point I was trying to make. Instead of turning away from him, they continued to like him. Not necessarily because they thought he was a murderer but because they had liked him before. If they continued to like him, then they easily found it acceptable whatever Snape seemed to represent and unfortunately that was the wrong sort of thing. I am not even saying that it was the only or the main reason for their behaviour in DH, only that it may have been one of the reasons. Kids of DE's (like C. and G.) were corrupted anyway but I was talking about the rest of the Slytherin kids. I think it affected them, even if only as a sort of reinforcement of their already twisted way of thinking.
What do you say to that?
wynnleaf - Apr 19, 2008 6:41 am (#2048 of 2617)
I may have misunderstood DH on this topic, but the way I read it I thought that doubt was cast on Harry's testimony about Snape being the murderer of Dumbledore. It was only Harry's testimony that was evidence against Snape and even at the end of HBP, we don't see a sign that the public at large was being told "Snape murdered Dumbledore." That is, we aren't shown newspaper articles about it at the end of HBP. So at the end of Harry's 6th year, I'm sure there were lots of rumors about what happened on the tower, but not necessarily an official story.
After the wedding, Harry disappeared from public view. It would therefore be very easy for his claims about Snape to be discredited. And Slytherins, who liked Snape and were loyal to him, and probably generally disliked Harry, would be predisposed to disbelieve Harry. After all, there were lots of people on the tower that night and without an official inquiry and investigation, no one was around to prove who killed Dumbledore.
When Snape came back to Hogwarts, any evidence that Harry might have given anyone in the past would have been surpressed. And who did Harry tell in an official manner? Yes, aurors who were Order members knew, but did Harry ever give an official statement? I don't think we were told. In any case, after Bill and Fleur's wedding, Harry wasn't around to back up whatever earlier testimony he may have given.
Solitaire - Apr 19, 2008 10:10 am (#2049 of 2617)
Instead of turning away from him, they continued to like him. Not necessarily because they thought he was a murderer but because they had liked him before.
As far back as CoS (perhaps earlier), we are aware that Draco has never seemed to respect or admire Dumbledore as other students have. Isn't it possible that Jo has used him to represent to the reader the general Slytherin attitude toward Dumbledore? If this is the case--and I'm only suggesting a possibility--then it is natural that Slytherin kids and their families might look to Snape as their true leader. In that event--even if they knew he killed Dumbledore--they might not feel that was such a bad thing, so they would naturally continue to support him as Headmaster. Just a thought ...
Solitaire
mona amon - Apr 19, 2008 9:31 pm (#2050 of 2617)
And Slytherins, who liked Snape and were loyal to him, and probably generally disliked Harry, would be predisposed to disbelieve Harry. (Wynnleaf)
After the DEs took over the ministry the official version fed to the public becomes "Harry Potter wanted for questioning about the death of Albus Dumbledore", but they (the DEs) know that Severus killed DD. And I feel that the Slytherin kids, many of whom have DE parents, would also know that Snape killed DD, that this would have been the version circulating in the Slytherin common room.
Kids of DE's (like C. and G.) were corrupted anyway but I was talking about the rest of the Slytherin kids. I think it affected them, even if only as a sort of reinforcement of their already twisted way of thinking. (Julia)
I agree. Another instance of Slytherin house being left out of the whole 'moral guidance' deal. But I wonder how they reacted later, when it was revealed that their favourite teacher was on the good side after all, and gave his life to defeat evil. I especially wonder how this revelation affected Draco. We see no outward signs of gratitude to the man who saved his life and saved his behind. Isn't little Scorpius's name Scorpius Hyperion Malfoy and not Scorpius Severus Malfoy?
Solitaire - Apr 20, 2008 8:20 am (#2051 of 2617)
I suspect Harry's revelation that Snape had loved Lily--a Mudblood--for his entire life was a jolt from which most Slytherins could not recover. JM2K ...
Julia H. - Apr 20, 2008 8:54 am (#2052 of 2617)
Oh, yes, it would have been interesting to read about the reaction of students (Slytherins and Gryffindors especially...). And of the colleagues. And of Order members. Of the Malfoys. Draco? In HBP, he actually started an argument with Dumbledore about whose side Snape was on. He may have thought, well, Dumbledore was right... No, there are no signs that he felt gratitude to Snape or that he even thought about that Snape had saved his life and his soul. Maybe during the years when Snape was his protective Head of House (in all the small things), Draco learned to take Snape for granted. (I guess he tended to take lots of things for granted.) Therefore he may not have been really surprised that in spite of his recent disrespectful behaviour to his teacher, Snape saved his life when his parents were not there to protect him.
"Scorpius Severus" would have been horrible! :-) I mean the fact that Draco named his son Scorpius implies that the change in the Malfoys is only skin deep. "Albus Severus", however, is a name that Snape could have given to his own son if he had lived, moved on and eventually had a family. (Or not?)
Orion - Apr 20, 2008 9:55 am (#2053 of 2617)
What's wrong with "Scorpius"?
mona amon - Apr 20, 2008 10:58 am (#2054 of 2617)
I kind of like Scorpius Severus, nice alliteration, and I actually like 'Scorpius'! Snape's son- Albus Harry Snape?
Julia H. - Apr 20, 2008 11:37 am (#2055 of 2617)
I know that the scorpion is just one of the many animals in the world but as an allegory, it does not mean good things. I'm afraid the name implies that little Malfoy will be an allegorical scorpion.
"Albus Harry Snape" - now that would really require another HP-book first. :-) I would read it though.
Dryleaves - Apr 21, 2008 1:34 am (#2056 of 2617)
In a way I think "Albus Harry Snape" would be more likely, because even if wizards seem very traditional in their naming of their children, I don't really think Snape would have named his son after himself. But I agree, Julia, "Albus Harry" would require at least one more book... Perhaps, he'd better have a daughter... Well, he is dead, after all...
About Scorpius, I laughed when I read it. I really like the associations to evil of the Malfoy first names. I agree, it implies that nothing really has changed when it comes to Draco's values, but as I was born in the sign of Scorpio and am used to people stepping back with fear in their eyes when I tell them this, I just want to defend the name a little. Even if I don't believe in astrology, I for some reason sometimes read horoscopes, and I once read that yes, Scorpios can steep very low to achieve their goals, but they can also rise very high above their own selfish needs. So maybe there could be some hope for Scorpius and his father. But then there is "Hyperion" as well, and I think I need to look that up to see what implications it may have.
Another question about names: why is Snape "The Half-blood Prince"? I don't mean why Snape called himself that, but why JKR did. Why did she give Snape's mother the surname "Prince"? It ought to mean something, as it is the title of one of the books and also because there is a chapter called "The Prince's Tale". I just haven't worked out what, really. What Prince?
Edit: Hyperion is a sun god, "he who goes before the sun". That is all I can find out right now.
Orion - Apr 21, 2008 7:28 am (#2057 of 2617)
That's what I meant, dryleaves, because I'm a Scorpio too and its simply a constellation. (And a little animal struggling to make a living, like we all do.)
"Albus Harry Snape" is an atrocious thought. Albus Harry??? The two people he had to die for? Why not Albus Harry Marvolo, to have the whole set?
If Snape had lieved and had a daughter, post-DH, he would have named her Lily Chastity, maybe, to honour those he could not save.
PeskyPixie - Apr 21, 2008 7:45 am (#2058 of 2617)
Chastity?
BTW, if Snape had indeed had kids ***snickers again at the thought of Snape with a baby*** it would mean that he had moved on from Lily.
Julia H. - Apr 21, 2008 8:17 am (#2059 of 2617)
I have no problems with the constellation at all. :-)
Orion, who is Chastity? Or did you mean Charity (a nice name, actually)? (LOL!) Naming Snape's daughter Lily, yes, probably, though it is funny to think how much overlap we imagine between the names of the hypothetical Snape-kids and the names of the Potter-kids. (OK, nobody has suggested "James" for Snape yet.) However, if Snape had moved on and had got married, then naming his daughter after Lily might not have been the nicest idea... (though for a middle name it might be still). I mean he would have a wife! :-) I agree with Dryleaves that Snape might not have wanted to name his son after himself. Names do seem to predict people's destiny in the HP-world, so he'd better be careful...
What is the literary significance of Snape being a "prince"? Dryleaves, please go on asking questions like this. It is very interesting! (I can't remember ever seeing it discussed.) What can be the symbolism of a prince? An heir to the throne, a future king? Someone above (and separated from) the others? Someone next to the king only? (Who is the king?)
I found the following intriguing observation on the alchemy thread (about "The Dark Lord Ascending" chapter):
"On the other hand, another "dark lord" is present in that chapter: Snape, the "dark prince". ... If there is a "dark lord" that will be truly ascending in the DH, it is Snape, not Voldemort." (Elanor)
So perhaps Snape being a "prince" is a connection to the "Dark Lord" and to the role Snape is going to play by his side and in the fight against him. Any other ideas?
EDIT: Cross-posted with Pesky!
ETA: ""Albus Harry Snape" is an atrocious thought. Albus Harry??? The two people he had to die for?" (Orion)
Only if he had lived. :-)
Orion - Apr 21, 2008 8:48 am (#2060 of 2617)
Oh, I mixed up Chastity and Charity. The poor girl who was fed to Nagini. Sorry everybody!
And if Snape had lived he still would have hated Harry's guts. And you're right, there's always the wife you have to ask. (Not that it kept Harry from naming his breed exactly as he pleased, Ginny? who is Ginny?)
Last edited by Mona on Tue Nov 25, 2014 1:08 pm; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2061 to 2100
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:11 am
Julia H. - Apr 21, 2008 9:00 am (#2061 of 2617)
"And if Snape had lived he still would have hated Harry's guts." (Orion)
I like to think that he would not have hated Harry any more, especially if that great tension of unforgivable guilt and life-long obligation had been eased and if he had moved on and had had a family of his own..., but it is entirely up to each reader to decide.
I don't think Ginny would have let Harry name his daughter Cho.
Orion - Apr 21, 2008 9:19 am (#2062 of 2617)
Cho! ROTFL! And a son named Michael, for justice?
I'd like to think that after 10 or 15 years a very cautious shape of friendship would have been possible between Harry and Snape, after many very polite letters and only when both parties had children of their own and after postponing visits for years and years. On the other hand, there are people you just don't like. And if Snape had liked Harry's face a little bit he wouldn't have been able to bully him like he did for a moment. There is a form of mutual dislike you can't avoid, you see somebody and think "go away". And I think Snape's whole bullying story over several years would have been impossible without this inbuilt spontaneous dislike inside him and that all the reasons he made up inside his greasy head were only seemingly rational explanations and justifications (for him) for something he simply felt in the first three seconds.
Julia H. - Apr 21, 2008 10:04 am (#2063 of 2617)
"...for something he simply felt in the first three seconds." (Orion)
IMO it also matters that before those three seconds Snape had ten years to dread the moment when he would first have to look into Harry Potter's green, almond-shaped eyes.
I still like to think that Snape hated Harry for the various reasons we have been discussing on this thread for a while and that he could have and (before he died) did let go off this hatred. As for actual friendship, I can imagine something like your scenario, and I don't think they would need to be best friends. Mutual respect (real respect) and acknowledging each other as partners in the fight for a common goal would be perhaps more important.
Orion - Apr 21, 2008 10:27 am (#2064 of 2617)
On yet another hand (that makes three) the wife would surely object and say "let the past lie" because would you like your hubby to hang around with the son of his long lost love and be reminded of her? Talk about her? Keep old wounds open? But in the case of a) Snape survives, b) wife has superhuman patience and isn't jealous at all, and c) Harry feels the need to contact his childhood nemesis, then I would like to be fly on the wall when they meet! ("You were a rubbish teacher." "And you were rubbish at potions. Fancy some cake?")
PeskyPixie - Apr 21, 2008 12:48 pm (#2065 of 2617)
For some reason, the very idea of Snape as a loving husband and father cracks me up! It seems that I can only take him seriously as an overgrown, tragic bat.
Julia H. - Apr 21, 2008 2:55 pm (#2066 of 2617)
Edited Apr 21, 2008 4:07 pm
ROTFL, Orion!
Pesky, of course, that is all we got from JKR. Still, I can't help being reminded that once upon a time there were readers who could not imagine Snape ever being in love, and yet... (Not long ago my children (in the middle of the series) asked me giggling what would happen if Professor Snape drank love potion and fell in love. I did my best to keep a straight face and told them that love potion would not make a person really fall in love.) LOL!
A bit more seriously: Snape seems to have a protective nature and he can love - deeply - in his own way.
Dryleaves - Apr 22, 2008 1:47 am (#2067 of 2617)
"...for something he simply felt in the first three seconds." (Orion)
"IMO it also matters that before those three seconds Snape had ten years to dread the moment when he would first have to look into Harry Potter's green, almond-shaped eyes." (Julia)
I really liked the fact that Snape's hatred of Harry was so complex. Before we know the story it seems like instant dislike without any legitimate reason, then we understand that Snape at least has a reason to hate Harry's father, of whom Harry is the spitting image, then come all this love, guilt and maybe also self-hatred. Harry is the incarnation of almost everything gone wrong in Snape's life, most of it due to his own actions, of his worst fears come true (his boggart?), but in all this there are also these eyes, a reminder of the only beautiful thing in his life, a memory in flesh and blood.
For some reason, the very idea of Snape as a loving husband and father cracks me up!(PeskyPixie)
Maybe that is why we love to imagine it..? I think maybe something happens to Snape after killing Dumbledore, that he maybe starts to reflect upon himself and his own thoughts and motivations in a way he hasn't done before. Maybe this feeling comes from the fact that the memories he gives to Harry are very carefully selected and that he not only gives Harry information but also tells his own story. Maybe he has forced himself to view his own memories in the pensieve in the Headmaster's office. (Dumbledore seems to have used the pensieve quite a lot and almost become too good at seeing himself from a distance.) So maybe this feeling makes me think that he could have moved on if he had survived and loved someone else than Lily and at least respected Harry. I also like to think that he would have continued to "care" about Harry: looking in the Daily Prophet for wedding announcement, child births and work promotions, but not really invite him for cake...(LOL, Orion) I agree that Snape's wife would have had to be a miracle of patience, though, even if I don't question his ability to love. Snape as a "parent" in the HP books is very good at keeping children safe, but not as good at making them feel safe. When he sends the silver doe to Harry he finally manages to do this as well. Maybe we should try to find that resurrection stone..?
"So perhaps Snape being a "prince" is a connection to the "Dark Lord" and to the role Snape is going to play by his side and in the fight against him. Any other ideas? "(Julia)
Hmm... I read some of the posts on the alchemy thread. They were interesting, though my knowledge of alchemy is not even rudimentary, so some dimensions were probably lost on me. I still wonder what prince? If he is a prince in connection to the Dark Lord (and he sits at his right side, is a half-blood just like Voldemort)then what exactly is this connection? Snape loves and Voldemort doesn't understand love. Snape once was a follower of Voldemort but is no longer. Then what does it mean that he is a prince?
Orion - Apr 22, 2008 5:38 am (#2068 of 2617)
Harry as Snape's boggart is a great idea! I always imagined it would be Lily dead.
Prince versus Lord: Are there british forumers on this thread? You still have titles in your country, so maybe you could tell us something about the hierarchy. Who is higher up, a Count, an Earl, a Lord or a Prince? Prince William is the successor to the throne, but there is also Prince Harry, Prince Andrew... Rowling is also british, she surely knows.
rambkowalczyk - Apr 22, 2008 7:58 am (#2069 of 2617)
regarding Prince--why JKR chose the name...
I think part of it may have been misdirection. Dark Lord (who happens to be a half blood)--Voldemort, half blood prince--Snape.
Also before book 7 came out readers at Mugglenet were commenting on the analogies between Machielli's "Prince" and Snape which caused many to believe that Snape might actually be evil. That is he appeared to be helping Dumbledore only as a means to defeat the Dark Lord then he was going to betray Dumbledore at the end to gain power for himself. (See Mugglenet's World Famous Editorials, Under April 2006). Obviously the Editorial was wrong, but before book 7 it made me stop and think.
mona amon - Apr 22, 2008 9:49 pm (#2070 of 2617)
"Albus Harry Snape" - now that would really require another HP-book first. :-)
No, not a whole book, the way I see it, maybe just a chapter. I feel that the death of Voldemort would have given Severus such a feeling of being released from intolerable bonds that he would have been extremely grateful to Harry. If he had been in The Great Hall at the moment of defeat (if only!) I feel sure he would have embraced Harry along with Ron and Hermione and McGonnagall and the rest. Of course we will never know.
Then what does it mean that he is a prince? (Dryleaves)
Good question. I always thought the title was rather silly, I mean it's OK for a teenager to call himself that, but the author persists in referring to the adult Snape as The Prince in her chapter titles. Maybe she considers him a lot more special than she is willing to admit in her interviews.
an overgrown, tragic bat. (Pesky)
LOL!
Dryleaves - Apr 23, 2008 12:53 am (#2071 of 2617)
"...I feel sure he would have embraced Harry..." (mona amon)
...or maybe a handshake and a curt nod..
It's been a while since I read "The Prince" ("Il principe" if the English title is not correct)by Machiavelli and I'm not sure whether it would really apply to Snape (even if Cesare Borgia and his likes would certainly have been Slytherin...). JKR calls Dumbledore "machiavellian" in an interview, I believe, and in the scene in DH where Dumbledore shows this trait Snape protests against it. (That Dumbledore has kept Harry alive so that he can die at the right moment.) Maybe someone else have read Machiavelli more recently and more thorouhgly?
You are right Orion, "prince" would of course be a royal title. But Voldemort wouldn't really be a Lord either, would he? I think too it would be nice if someone could sort out the different titles.
Sorry for only continuing to ask the prince question and not coming up with any good ideas!
Julia H. - Apr 23, 2008 1:14 am (#2072 of 2617)
"I feel that the death of Voldemort would have given Severus such a feeling of being released from intolerable bonds that he would have been extremely grateful to Harry." (Mona)
I think you are right, that is how he would have felt.
"If he had been in The Great Hall at the moment of defeat (if only!) I feel sure he would have embraced Harry along with Ron and Hermione and McGonnagall and the rest." (Mona)
In a really wild moment of joy.
Why "Prince"?
Misdirection is a good observation: at the end of HBP, Harry himself makes a "misdirecting" comparison between Snape and Voldemort. But I think it is also true that Snape is "a lot more special" than one would think at first sight and this may be what his "title" implies.
"Prince versus Lord" (Orion)
Until British forumers come and tell us what they know or correct what we don't know, we have to be satisfied with definitions such as that a "prince" is a member of the royal family. "Lord" as a title, I suppose is lower in rank. However: On the one hand, while the prince is a member of the royal family, he is not the king but a sort of "secondary power" in the family. The word "lord", on the other hand, has lots of meanings, including a more general reference to someone in power, real power above other people and appears in lots of compound words such as "liege lord" or "war-lord". In one sense, I think the king is a lord above the prince. Perhaps rather than studying the modern titles these words refer to, we should look for a mediaeval, feudal interpretation. I'm saying this because Voldemort's "world" seems to be a feudal one based on his absolute power and full of the "accessories" of a feudal royal court: the words, the language, the gestures, the lord-servant relationship (there is a hierarchy but everybody is only a subject), the ruling ideology based on birth-right, the way LV insists on objects of ancient glory and of great material value. Since in the wizarding world there are no titles such as lord or prince, I think Snape's "title" is a reference to his connection with LV's "court". What is the significance of a "Prince"? He is, as I said, a power second only to the supreme lord. This may be a reference to the degree of Snape's magical abilities. In a situation of war, it is (and I think in history it often was) an important question where the Prince's loyalties lie. The Prince's power in the service of his Lord is an extremely valuable asset, but the same power is an equally significant danger when it serves the Lord's enemy. The third option is, of course, that the Prince can appear as a rival, a pretender to the throne (there are examples in history and in literature as well).
Symbolically, in HP, the two parties engaged in war are the forces of hatred and love, darkness and light. Our "Prince", during the original distribution of characters, is sorted to the dark side, to the side of hatred (represented by Slytherin). However, by the time that happens, he has already been touched by love. Throughout his life he is torn between love and hatred and an important question in the books is the question of his true allegiance. Both the readers and the various characters on both sides spend a lot of time considering this question. Why is it so important? (The answer below is an attempt at the symbolic interpretation of the "Prince" title, not the exact recounting of surface canon events.)
After Voldemort's first downfall, the two main (and opposing) characters have more or less equal power and their situations are similar. Harry is a baby at the Dursley's mercy, Voldemort has not got a body and is hiding in distant Albania. Neither can use his magical abilities. Over time, however, they both grow and gain power and find helpers, Harry at Hogwarts, Voldemort in the outside world. For years, neither can truly defeat the other. The opposing forces are all this time balanced in a way. In this situation, the loyalties of the Prince can be of crucial significance. Seemingly, all three options above appear in the books. Snape seems to end up on the side of the dark forces, but in reality the light in him - love - is much stronger than the power of hatred over him and with all his Prince-power, he supports Harry. The third option - the Prince as pretender - appears when Voldemort believes that Snape is the master of the Elder Wand. In his eyes, his favourite, the Prince, has become too powerful, too dangerous, someone suddenly standing between himself and absolute power - not because of his allegiance but because of his own power. Voldemort is of course mistaken, nevertheless this is how the third option is alluded to in the books. So the Prince has to die - not in a duel (the Lord is a coward anyway) but executed, killed by a snake, as too powerful favourites have often done. However, his true allegiance is firmly on the side of light and love - and his power and support make the light side strong enough to win.
EDIT: DD is the Machiavellian one. I think Snape is just the opposite of a Machiavellian Prince. He is willing to sacrifice himself for others in every possible way.
Dryleaves - Apr 23, 2008 1:51 am (#2073 of 2617)
Very interesting analysis, Julia. Unfortunately, I don't have time to think it through as thoroughly as it deserves, but I think it is interesting what you write about power. It probably is a question of magical power, where Snape can be seen as secondary only to Voldemort, the Dark Lord, but there is also another kind of power. Voldemort wants world dominion, but Snape is, I think, a rather powerless person. Poor working class kid, bullied at school, never got the girl. He gains some power over kids as a teacher and he finally gets a position at Voldemort's court as secondary to the Dark Lord himself, but he never has any real worldly power as I see it, and he seldom uses his magic to take power over others the way Voldemort does. Snape's true power seems to be his ability to love.
Julia H. - Apr 23, 2008 2:05 am (#2074 of 2617)
Of course, it is the power of magic (and not some wordly power or position) that makes Snape second to LV only, a "Prince". His true power - his ability to love - connects him to the good side and puts him way above LV. Love as his real power, yes. Or love as the real power that truly rules him.
Dryleaves - Apr 24, 2008 4:40 am (#2075 of 2617)
Julia, as I wrote I thought your analysis of “the Prince” was very interesting, and the following is, I guess, an elaboration:
From GoF I think Snape’s importance to the plot is beginning to reveal itself. In the final task of the Triwizard Tournament Harry meets the Sphinx in the middle of the maze and answers her riddle. The first part of it tells of a person “who lives in disguise,/Who deals in secrets and tells naught but lies” and the answer is a spy. In this book we learn that Snape was a spy and that he will be again. The answer of the riddle as a whole is “spider” and then Harry meets a giant spider. In his fight with the spider Harry is lifted up in the air by the spider’s pincers, something that happens again in the next book, OotP, where Harry watches the teenage Snape, walking twitchy like a spider, in the pensieve, and then is lifted out of it by Snape’s pincerlike grip. In HBP we meet “the spider” again in the middle of the maze of streets, Spinner’s end. A spider may have many symbolic meanings. One is a Goddess of Fate, something that fits Snape’s role in the plot, as he is later to be revealed as the one who gave Voldemort the prophecy that led to the killing of Harry’s parents.
At Spinner’s End Snape reveals himself as a Death Eater in his conversation with Narcissa and Bellatrix. He is spinning a web of lies either to them or to Dumbledore and the Order, and the fact that he agrees to make the Unbreakable Vow suggests that it is the latter. A few chapters on “The Half-Blood Prince” is introduced to the story. Then DD has also appointed Snape teacher of DADA, his favourite subject that, according to what he tells Narcissa and Bellatrix, he has not been trusted to teach before, as DD thought it might tempt him to go back to his old ways. Snape is shown to be a possible traitor, but we are also shown that DD trusts him. At the end of the book we are made to believe that Snape is in fact a supporter of Voldemort as he kills DD. All this suggest that “The Half-Blood Prince” is a reference to Snape’s connection to Lord Voldemort and that he, as Julia writes, is sorted to the dark side in the war of darkness and light.
Harry is happy that he won’t have Snape for a teacher this year, but disappointed as it means that he will not be able to become an Auror. As it turns out it will be the other way around: he can take potions and become an Auror, but will have Snape for a teacher in DADA. He gets hold of an old potions book, which has been the property of “The Half-Blood Prince” and finds that the book helps him to get good results in potions and that it also contains several useful (if you are a teenage boy, at least...) spells. Hermione and Ginny question “The Prince” and suggest that the book may be dangerous. As it turns out, the book is dangerous, as Harry almost kills Draco with the Sectumsempra spell that he finds in the book. But Harry trusts “the Prince”. He does not trust Snape. As Julia writes, the loyalties of the Prince is of crucial significance, all through the book.
Even if it is suggested that Snape is sorted to the dark side, another thing about Snape is revealed in HBP. He is not only teacher in Defence against the Dark Arts, he is in fact a very skilled healer of Dark Arts injuries. When, after the killing of DD, Harry chases Snape, (The Flight of the Prince) he is hit by the cruciatus curse and thinks that it is Snape who is torturing him and will torture him to death. In fact, it is Snape that saves him from the pain by telling the torturer to stop it.
It is during this chase that the Prince's true identity is revealed: “You dare use my own spells against me, Potter? It was I who invented them, I, the Half-Blood Prince! And you’d turn my inventions on me, like your filthy father, would you? I don’t think so...no!” As it later turns out, the evil Snape has done has hit himself very hard.
The image of Snape as a spider may indicate his role as the one who sets the story in motion. Now he is the Prince. His allegiance is crucial. And the Half-Blood Prince is a double character. The potions book holds knowledge that can be used for both good and evil purposes. Snape is a double agent. He seems to be a murderer, but he is also a healer. In DH the Prince’s Tale is a story of love, bad choices and remorse. As Julia writes, he is “torn between love and hatred”.
Voldemort uses his magical power to gain one that is worldy: to rule both wizards and muggles. Snape is shown sitting at his right side and learning his magic (he has learnt to fly from “his Master”), but the true power he has is another one: love. It is because Voldemort cannot understand this that Snape can lie to him so successfully, not only his occlumency skill.
I wonder if the Prince title can also allude to something else than Snape’s connection to Lord Voldemort, to something that has to do with the light side of the character?
"But I think it is also true that Snape is "a lot more special" than one would think at first sight and this may be what his "title" implies." (Julia)
I would think so too. He is a character that contains many of the important themes of the story: love, choice and courage. This makes me feel a bit confused when I read interviews with JKR and she talks about Snape. She says he is not a hero, she stresses that he is a bitter, insecure bully, but well, by the way, he loved, he was brave... I think she dismisses a character that is obviously very important to the plot and belongs to the most interesting kind of heros, the anti-hero.
Julia H. - Apr 24, 2008 11:19 pm (#2076 of 2617)
Interesting post, Dryleaves. Snape as a spider (spy, spider...), of course, is a rather different image from Snape as a Prince but both are valid. Snape does not only set the story into motion by giving the Prophecy to Voldemort but also asks him to spare Lily's life, giving her the chance to save Harry and later, as Harry's secret protector, he still plays the part of fate in the plot and in the end, he gives Harry the final piece of information necessary to defeat Voldemort and in the final confrontation the spell Harry uses (again) is the one he learned from Snape. With reference to the spider web, though, I think Snape turns out to be not only "spinning" a web but being entrapped in a sort of spider web (of his own making?) as well, not being able to get out.
"... as Julia writes, is sorted to the dark side in the war of darkness and light"
In fact I referred to the original sorting, by the sorting hat: Snape is put into Slytherin and with what we learn about Slytherin in the books, this should mean Snape's fate is decided for ever. It is during his student years that he becomes a "Prince" of vast but dangerous knowledge, foreshadowing his connection to the Dark Lord. However, he manages to reverse this fate and he returns to the good side once and for ever.
"It is because Voldemort cannot understand this /love/ that Snape can lie to him so successfully, not only his occlumency skill."
Interesting thought: Voldemort not having access to certain things in others' minds because he does not understand them...
"I wonder if the Prince title can also allude to something else than Snape’s connection to Lord Voldemort, to something that has to do with the light side of the character?"
I wondered this, too, but I haven't had time to think about it yet. A "Prince" by Dumbledore's side perhaps? Snape is Dumbledore's most important ally and his successor in the Headmaster's office, an heir to DD's plan.
"This makes me feel a bit confused when I read interviews with JKR ..."
Oh, you are not the only one. But it has often been said that ultimately what matters is not what JKR says but what she wrote. She wrote the character as complex as this and we are free to interpret now.
Dryleaves - Apr 25, 2008 12:45 am (#2077 of 2617)
"I think Snape turns out to be not only "spinning" a web but being entrapped in a sort of spider web..." (Julia)
Yes, Snape is certainly caught in his own web. (No wonder he and Harry hate each other...) Of course Snape continues to play the part of Fate and this part is not fully revealed until DH. But when he gives Harry the information about what is needed in order to defeat Voldemort I think he is also giving him a choice. He doesn't trap Harry in a situation where Voldemort can kill him, but leaves it to Harry to decide if he will actually do it. Then, of course, it is this element of choice that makes the difference. That Harry goes willingly to meet his death is what finally saves him.
"...I referred to the original sorting..." (Julia)
I see. Both in the Harry Potter universe and in the plot it is a bad thing to be sorted into the Slytherin house. For a while Snape seems to be a possible exception, though, but when he kills DD the first sorting is being confirmed.
"...we are free to interpret now." (Julia)
The reader does half the job. : ) Maybe some day, when she reads her own books over again, JKR will understand us.
Julia H. - Apr 26, 2008 1:51 pm (#2078 of 2617)
"But when he gives Harry the information about what is needed in order to defeat Voldemort I think he is also giving him a choice." (Dryleaves)
Yes, the choice is crucial. Nothing would be easier for Snape than letting Harry be captured and killed by LV. But DD's instructions are clear: Snape must tell Harry the truth about his soul before Harry sets out to meet his death. I think Snape understands that it must be Harry's decision to sacrifice his life: He desperately wants to talk to Harry before it is too late. I wonder if he makes the connection between Lily's sacrifice, which saved Harry, and Harry's sacrifice, which may save a lot of other people. Perhaps he does: he must have spent a lot of time thinking about Lily's sacrifice.
Back to the "Prince" symbol: Now I think the fact that the chapter revealing Snape's true allegiance is called "The Prince's Tale" underlines the image of Snape as a Prince on the good side as well. He is really Dumbledore's most important and (magic-wise) most powerful ally and also his successor in the fight against the dark side.
Dryleaves - Apr 27, 2008 2:07 am (#2079 of 2617)
First, just a thought about the definition of "Prince". We mentioned Machiavelli's Prince, and I think that here the word means the actual ruler of a country or state, not the one secondary in power, so I think the word could have this meaning as well.
Then, I think your interpretation may be very accurate, Julia, as Snape appears to be Voldemort's right hand at Hogwarts, but is in fact Dumbledore's successor to the Headmaster office also when it comes to his allegiance.
Still, I think it would be interesting if there were any other interpretations to add to this, so I think I'll have to continue to think about this subject a bit more. But I guess it doesn't have to be more complicated than it allready is... : )
mona amon - Apr 27, 2008 10:14 pm (#2080 of 2617)
Nice connections you've made, Julia and Dryleaves!
Maybe JKR, when she chose this title for Snape, was unconsciously influenced by Hamlet the moody prince of Denmark, who's always dressed in black?
Julia H. - Apr 28, 2008 12:14 am (#2081 of 2617)
Thanks Mona!
JKR influenced by Hamlet? Hm... Hamlet's father telling Hamlet to kill his step-father. Snape's surrogate father telling Snape to kill his surrogate father. Both jobs are difficult. Hamlet receiving instructions from his dead father's ghost. Snape receiving instructions from dead DD's portrait. Both die in the end but first gradually lose their connections to the living. I can get carried away by literary comparisons but at the moment that is all that comes to my mind.
mona amon - Apr 28, 2008 8:46 pm (#2082 of 2617)
I don't think she was 'influenced' by Hamlet. Just the unconcious suggestion when she was trying to find a title for her morose, sable clad character. I can't remember anything of Hamlet right now (though maybe I'll read it next week when I'll have some time) except
"Good night sweet prince: And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!"
Which to me seems quite appropriate!
Julia H. - Apr 29, 2008 4:58 am (#2083 of 2617)
Brilliant!
Soul Search - Apr 29, 2008 7:05 am (#2084 of 2617)
Ya know, I have been wondering why JKR came up with the "Prince" appellation for Snape. It really didn't go anywhere, yet she used it for a book title, throughout HBP, and again as a chapter title in DH. I think mona amon may be on to something.
Orion - Apr 29, 2008 7:59 am (#2085 of 2617)
It might be much simpler. The character Snape gives himself the title "Prince", which is in itself quite a laughable act, born out of puberty and the desire to overcome a low self-esteem. If Rowling uses this adolescent title until the character dies, she tries to show, IMO, that Snape dies as an emotional adolescent, that he never manages to grow out of the problems he had (and caused) as a teenager.
Snape as Hamlet... my first reaction was "snort!", but the thought starts to grow on me. It's actually quite good. Well, it's brilliant, in fact. But only Rowling knows deep down in her black heart whether she intended that similarity.
wynnleaf - Apr 29, 2008 7:59 am (#2086 of 2617)
I'm sure there were all sorts of perhaps unconscious associations JKR had with the title "Prince." And perhaps even after she chose it, she saw many of the same fascinating correlations you are all pointing out.
Personally, I think her main reasons were oriented to plotting the story and her continuing interest in misdirecting the reader. "Prince" works as both a title and a name, and therefore can be used to misdirect the reader (both when the title was announced and when people are reading the book), into guessing that The Prince could be anyone who is half-blood, guessing that the "Prince" is a title like "Lord" Voldemort, etc.
And in addition to simple misdirection, it also makes the reader think of Lord Voldemort and wonder if the Half-Blood Prince is someone like Tom Riddle, especially once we see in HBP that the prince is a student giving himself a name. That, obviously, increases the reader's chance of believing Snape is Evil at the end of the book.
Further, once we learn that the HBP is Snape, I think it enhances that picture of young Severus as the kind of nerdy, Goth kind of kid, giving himself a "cool" title, through the use of a family name. And yeah, I think that -- whether reminiscent of Hamlet or The Black Prince -- the idea of a Goth sort of young man in black, styling himself "Prince" has the right feel to it. It's cool, in a darkish sort of way.
Orion - Apr 29, 2008 8:04 am (#2087 of 2617)
Goth Snape! Sitting in his bedroom, listening to The Cure and cutting his arms. It's official: Snape is really Trent Reznor! Thank you, wynnleaf, for this mental image - I'll never manage to imagine Snape without black nail varnish again.
Dryleaves - Apr 29, 2008 9:02 am (#2088 of 2617)
Orion and Wynnleaf, it may very well be as you suggest. "Prince" is both a surname and a title and it is of course misdirecting. It is also a very adolescent thing to call oneself. I guess it is the fact that JKR uses it as a title of a book and continues to use it in the title of a chapter in DH that makes me wonder if it means something more. The HP books have a lot of fairy tale motives in them and that makes me wonder as well, as princes also belongs to fairy tales. But as Soul Search says: it didn't really go anywhere.
"...that Snape dies as an emotional adolescent, that he never manages to grow out of the problems he had (and caused) as a teenager" (Orion)
If this is what she intended, I think that she is more cruel and more unfair than Snape ever was to any of his students... The Prince's Tale chapter shows a person who, though maybe emotionally immature, is faced with situations that would be really hard to tackle even for someone with a very developed emotional life.
mona amon - Apr 29, 2008 9:20 am (#2089 of 2617)
I'd like to quote an excerpt from Jo's website. It's from the FAQ section and I've bolded the part I find interesting.
In what way is 'Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince' related to 'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets'?
I have been engulfed by an avalanche of questions on the subject of 'Prince' having once been a title of 'Chamber'...[cut]... The plot of 'Prince' bears no resemblance whatsoever to the plot of 'Chamber', nor is it an off-cut of 'Chamber'. The story of 'Prince' takes off where 'Phoenix' ended and does not hark back to four years previously. True, mention is made to events that happened in 'Chamber,' but of course, mention is also made of events that happened in 'Stone', 'Azkaban', 'Goblet' and 'Phoenix'.
'The Half-Blood Prince' might be described as a strand of the overall plot. That strand could be used in a whole variety of ways and back in 1997 I considered weaving it into the story of 'Chamber'. It really didn't fit there, though; it was not part of the story of the basilisk and Riddle's diary, and before long I accepted that it would be better to do it justice in book six. I clung to the title for a while, even though all trace of the 'Prince' storyline had disappeared, because I liked it so much (yes, I really like this title!). I re-christened book two 'Chamber of Secrets' when I started the second draft.
The link I mentioned between books two and six does not, in fact, relate to the 'Half-Blood Prince' (because there is no trace left of the HBP storyline in 'Chamber'.) Rather, it relates to a discovery Harry made in 'Chamber' that foreshadows something that he finds out in 'Prince'.
I suppose the link between the two books is the secret of the Horcruxes. Surely she could not have Snape announcing that he was the Half Blood Prince back in COS. So if she was planning to call CoS 'Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince', it must have been a title that she chose for Tom Riddle? And then she changed her mind and thought it would be a great title for Snape?
Soul Search - Apr 29, 2008 9:34 am (#2090 of 2617)
Good pickup, mona amon. What her statements imply is she liked the title "Half-Blood Prince" and messed with the sixth-book storyline so the title would fit and she could, finally, use it. That would explain why "Half-Blood Prince" gets attention, but really doesn't go anywhere.
Makes me wonder about the "Irma Pince" name anagram: "I'm a Prince." That couldn't be by accident! I really thought there had to be something to MPISM. What storyline got cut, but the name remained?
Dryleaves - Apr 29, 2008 9:36 am (#2091 of 2617)
"So if she was planning to call CoS 'Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince', it must have been a title that she chose for Tom Riddle?" (mona amon)
Mona, that could explain my feeling of "there ought to be something more to it"...
Soul Search - Apr 29, 2008 1:45 pm (#2092 of 2617)
Madam Pince is first mentioned in SS, "The Mirror of Erised."
"Madam Pince the librarian brandished a feather duster at him."
Now, we know JKR foreshadows a lot. For example, Hagrid's mention of "young Sirius Black" in SS, Harry having his mother's eyes, etc. So, the name "Madam Pince," had to have been placed in SS in anticipation of the title "Half-Blood Prince" for CoS. (Although, "Irma" is not mentioned in SS.)
So, the name anagram did not refer to Snape, but to someone else. I can't see any possible connection to Tom Riddle, so who? Or, was Snape the Half-Blood Prince, even when it was the title of CoS?
Julia H. - Apr 29, 2008 4:08 pm (#2093 of 2617)
Fascinating observations everybody! The Snape-thread at its best!
Tom Riddle as the original "Half-blood Prince"? This is very interesting though at the same time a bit disenchanting. (I prefer Prince Snape.) Fortunately, we don't know what JKR really intended earlier or later, so the "Prince" is ours to interpret.
"Snape dies as an emotional adolescent..." (Orion)
Please, noooo! :-) That would spoil the whole character development thing, which becomes so important in DH. Another part of the problem is how he could have done all the things he did with such responsibility and so well and where he would have found the necessary strength if he had stayed an "emotional adolescent".
Snape the young, nerdy "Prince"; Snape as Prince Hamlet (Mona, that quote is great!); the "Irma Pince" - "I'm a Prince" anagram - I don't think Tom Riddle would have given us so many interesting ways to connect the title. On the whole, it underlines Snape's importance and perhaps the mystery around him. He is also the "Secret Prince", nobody knows his title (HRH will find it out though...), as nobody really knows his mind and his soul, his real personality. Maybe, in a way, the Prince is the "real" Snape.
wynnleaf - Apr 29, 2008 4:32 pm (#2094 of 2617)
I remember those comments by JKR regarding her early use of HBP in COS. I have always assumed that at one point she was planning to use the HBP potions book plot line in HBP. The potions book, with messages from the the Half Blood Prince, would have been a counterpoint to the diary with messages from Tom Riddle, "Lord" Voldemort. Both would initially seem helpful and supportive to Harry, but Harry would later find out the diary personality was the evil Lord Voldemort, while the Half Blood Prince's advice would eventually go sour with a dark spell. However, it would have still resulted in misdirection as Harry would assume that Snape was evil, just as Voldemort was.
Dryleaves - Apr 30, 2008 12:57 am (#2095 of 2617)
Using the title "Prince" the way JKR does as mere misdirection is not really satisfying, I think. At least to me it then leaves a sense of a loose thread left behind, never really tied into the story.
The potions book is a great help to Harry, but turns out to also contain dangerous, dark spells. Then the Prince is revealed as Snape, who is then a traitor and DD's murderer, and it results in Harry and the reader assuming that Snape is evil. This far it is misdirection and an adolescent nickname, but then JKR uses it in the DH chapter where Snape's true allegiance and his full importance to the plot is revealed. It also reveals his enormous courage. Therefor the name/title could be a way of stressing these traits of the Snape character, but my problem is that he is then almost forgotten. To make a connection to the Hamlet quotation: Where are the angels?
I think JKR lets the importance of Snape go after the great revelation, it's the highlight and turn of the story, but it's impact on Harry comes first in the epilogue with Albus Severus and then there is no "prince". What Snape did was great and very unexpected from a person like him, but noone seems to care. Seeing Snape's memories and knowing what had happened to Snape could have been an encouragement for Harry on his way to the forest, just as talking to his dead parents, Lupin and Sirius, but then he seems just forgotten. But maybe the use of "Prince" in the DH chapter title is an hommage to Snape and what he did.
"Another part of the problem is how he could have done all the things he did with such responsibility and so well and where he would have found the necessary strength if he had stayed an 'emotional adolescent'." (Julia)
I think this is an interesting thing about Snape. He is emotionally immature and faces very difficult situations (even if they may be of his own doing) that he is very unequipped for - and handles them quite well (as an understatement). He behaves extremely childish towards Harry sometimes (remember breaking his potions bottle so that Harry wouldn't get any mark on his potion, for example!), still when it comes to really important things he handles them very well and maturely. In this he reminds me of a character from a Danish TV-series: a banker's wife, who was extremely silly and who fell ill and had to go to bed if someone had the same dress as her to a party or other things of equal importance, but who, when her husband turned out to have an affair with one of his employees and was involved in an illegal abortion, handled the situation more maturely than most people would have done. Then she was almost as silly again, until the next big crisis came, but she, who first seemed to be a caricature of a silly woman, turned out to be a complex character who actually went through some sort of personal development if not a complete change. I think the same is true of Snape.
wynnleaf - Apr 30, 2008 6:26 am (#2096 of 2617)
Not to get off on a tangent, but in OOTP, it doesn't actually say that Snape broke the potions vial. In fact, none of the characters even act as if he broke it. Harry makes no comment and doesn't appear to be thinking about Snape breaking it. It is just as possible that the vial falls by accident and breaks and Snape simply takes advantage of the fact to give Harry a bad grade and be derisive. Harry is upset because of Snape's derision, the bad grade, and the fact that Hermione already got rid of the rest of the potion Harry had prepared.
There are aspects of Snape that are emotionally frozen or even damaged, but I wouldn't just put it down to immaturity, because he doesn't, in my opinion, actually act like an adolescent, but more like a severely damaged person.
His reaction to Harry in PS/SS is very unpleasant, but this isn't just an adult reacting to the son of a man for whom he had a childish dislike. Snape felt that James was behind years of ongoing bullying toward him, was instrumental in attempting to murder him, took away the love of his life, and then stupidly trusted a traitor against Dumbledore (and Snape's) advice and thereby helped get Lily killed in spite of all Snape's work. Further, he sees Harry as the person for whom Lily died. And Snape cannot look at Harry without seeing the face of James, and the eyes of Lily looking at him with dislike.
After Snape's initial unpleasant and sarcastic treatment of Harry, we find that Harry's own actions only increase Snape's dislike of him so that their mutual hatred becomes circular. Harry repeatedly lies to Snape. Harry steals from Snape. Harry sets of an explosion in Snape's class that injures other students. Harry is very disrespectful to Snape. Harry does not do his work well in Potions.
Granted, most teachers would never have gotten the whole hatred cycle started in the first place, because they'd have never started off being so confrontational with Harry. But once Harry had got into the lies, disrespect, breaking rules, poor classwork, stealing, harming others in class, etc., almost any teacher would start to see Harry in an extremely poor light.
So Snape's view of Harry starts due to Snape's emotional difficulties and his initial dislike of Harry due to all of the things that Harry's presence makes him think and feel. But I think the continued animosity between the two is just as much due to both of their actions and attitudes, as Snape's inability to set aside the emotional connection he has with Harry.
But I don't see this as "childish" or even adolescent, because the problems behind Snape's emotions aren't childlike or adolescent problems.
However, when we look at the positive things Snape does, we see this love that is not adolescent. I'm sure it was once, but as the years go by, Snape's commitment to his love for Lily grows and expands to the point where his love for her influences even his willingness to risk his life to save someone he thoroughly dislikes (Lupin). And we see that his commitment to these causes and ideals that seem to stem from his love for her, is so strong that he's willing to give up everything else that is important to him (respect of others, trust of others, possibly end in Azkaban or a nasty painful death), in order to maintain that commitment.
And then his various duties and the overwhelming stress of them would demand a certain degree of emotional balance and maturity just to pull it all off successfully.
Therefore, Dryleaves, on the one hand I kind of agree with your comparison to the Danish television show, except that I'd say that what may appear on the surface to be "childish" behavior from Snape is not so much "immature" behavior as the behavior of an emotionally damaged person. It's sort of like one person limping because his leg never matured, while another person limps because his leg is broken.
Dryleaves - Apr 30, 2008 9:11 am (#2097 of 2617)
I see what you mean, Wynnleaf, and I agree that it is blunt to say that Snape's emotional difficulties are just immaturity. And I certainly agree that his relation with Harry is more than complicated - most people, however mature they may be, would have a severe problem in this situation, I think.
I still think he acts immaturely sometimes, or at least seemingly immature, but to use your metaphor about the limp, I guess I saw it as the leg stopped growing because of an injury. And I guess that is what I called immaturity, but what you call it, "damage", is probably a more accurate choice of word.
Orion - Apr 30, 2008 9:58 am (#2098 of 2617)
About "emotional adolescent": That's not entirely what I think. But to me it seems like that:
Snape hates Harry's guts until he dies.
La Venerable Rowling hates Snape's guts until he dies.
She portrays him, or thinks she portrays him, in very dull colours: Emotional unstable, with unresolved issues, and immature. (Yes, I think that's what she intends.)
There's this old story about her chemistry teacher who seems to have humiliated her severely as a student.
So she writes Snape's story about someone who can't grow up properly because he's too damaged, and behaves like a jerk most of the time, and gets humiliated in every conceivable way, and dies a miserable death. Sweet revenge on her part, or so she thinks.
But there must have been some other feelings involved in the chemistry teacher story. Because from under her fingers a third story oozes out, that of heroic Snape who is totally different from our first impression of him, who does tons of really great (but IMO totally stupid - minority opinion of somebody originally sorted into Slytherin) things and who, surprise, surprise, amasses a huge fan following. That must have floored her totally. (Sweet revenge on our part, nyer nyer.)
wynnleaf - Apr 30, 2008 12:36 pm (#2099 of 2617)
But there must have been some other feelings involved in the chemistry teacher story. Because from under her fingers a third story oozes out, that of heroic Snape who is totally different from our first impression of him, who does tons of really great (but IMO totally stupid - minority opinion of somebody originally sorted into Slytherin) things and who, surprise, surprise, amasses a huge fan following. That must have floored her totally. (Sweet revenge on our part, nyer nyer.) (Orion)
My personal guess is that she can neither see nor understand why so many readers are fans of Snape, because she has too many personal feelings toward the character and probably the real person on whom he's based, to be able to see what so many readers see. And yet, I think JKR is so particularly wonderful at drawing very believable, 3-dimensional characters that she couldn't help but write Snape the way she did, even if it was partly, perhaps, unconscious.
Julia H. - Apr 30, 2008 3:20 pm (#2100 of 2617)
Orion, I find the idea of "two Snapes in JKR's mind" quite probable and perhaps they are reflected in the contrasting reactions of readers to the character: some people see the one, others see the other Snape as the "real" or "main" Snape, JKR included. (Unless of course she simply has a good psychologist on her public relations team who has told her that Snape-fans will simply go crazy because of Snape if the author abuses the character a little bit in her interviews. - Am I being cynical? ) However, unconsciously or accidentally or otherwise, the combination resulted in a very good, as Wynnleaf says, 3-dimensional character, a fascinating and convincing compound of the ordinary and the extraordinary, even heroic.
Speaking about heroism: It is conspicuous that Snape ("one of the two" at least) does not seem to want to be a hero at all, but, considering the goal with a practical mind, he simply sticks with his duty and his promise and that is what ultimately makes him a hero. With this approach, he is willing to make the sacrifices that are true sacrifices partly because he cannot expect anybody to applaud afterwards ("Wow, that was a noble thing to do!") and in the end he dies a miserable death still focusing on his duty and still sticking with his job, however terrible it is. This, for example, seems to result from the complexity of the character and at the same time provides a psychologically totally believable and very "human" story.
To make a connection to the Hamlet quotation: Where are the angels? (Dryleaves)
I think the angles are really angels this time, unseen by living humans (characters, author or readers) and they are probably in the Shrieking Shack singing a heavenly song to the Prince, healing his wounds and giving peace to his troubled soul.
"And if Snape had lived he still would have hated Harry's guts." (Orion)
I like to think that he would not have hated Harry any more, especially if that great tension of unforgivable guilt and life-long obligation had been eased and if he had moved on and had had a family of his own..., but it is entirely up to each reader to decide.
I don't think Ginny would have let Harry name his daughter Cho.
Orion - Apr 21, 2008 9:19 am (#2062 of 2617)
Cho! ROTFL! And a son named Michael, for justice?
I'd like to think that after 10 or 15 years a very cautious shape of friendship would have been possible between Harry and Snape, after many very polite letters and only when both parties had children of their own and after postponing visits for years and years. On the other hand, there are people you just don't like. And if Snape had liked Harry's face a little bit he wouldn't have been able to bully him like he did for a moment. There is a form of mutual dislike you can't avoid, you see somebody and think "go away". And I think Snape's whole bullying story over several years would have been impossible without this inbuilt spontaneous dislike inside him and that all the reasons he made up inside his greasy head were only seemingly rational explanations and justifications (for him) for something he simply felt in the first three seconds.
Julia H. - Apr 21, 2008 10:04 am (#2063 of 2617)
"...for something he simply felt in the first three seconds." (Orion)
IMO it also matters that before those three seconds Snape had ten years to dread the moment when he would first have to look into Harry Potter's green, almond-shaped eyes.
I still like to think that Snape hated Harry for the various reasons we have been discussing on this thread for a while and that he could have and (before he died) did let go off this hatred. As for actual friendship, I can imagine something like your scenario, and I don't think they would need to be best friends. Mutual respect (real respect) and acknowledging each other as partners in the fight for a common goal would be perhaps more important.
Orion - Apr 21, 2008 10:27 am (#2064 of 2617)
On yet another hand (that makes three) the wife would surely object and say "let the past lie" because would you like your hubby to hang around with the son of his long lost love and be reminded of her? Talk about her? Keep old wounds open? But in the case of a) Snape survives, b) wife has superhuman patience and isn't jealous at all, and c) Harry feels the need to contact his childhood nemesis, then I would like to be fly on the wall when they meet! ("You were a rubbish teacher." "And you were rubbish at potions. Fancy some cake?")
PeskyPixie - Apr 21, 2008 12:48 pm (#2065 of 2617)
For some reason, the very idea of Snape as a loving husband and father cracks me up! It seems that I can only take him seriously as an overgrown, tragic bat.
Julia H. - Apr 21, 2008 2:55 pm (#2066 of 2617)
Edited Apr 21, 2008 4:07 pm
ROTFL, Orion!
Pesky, of course, that is all we got from JKR. Still, I can't help being reminded that once upon a time there were readers who could not imagine Snape ever being in love, and yet... (Not long ago my children (in the middle of the series) asked me giggling what would happen if Professor Snape drank love potion and fell in love. I did my best to keep a straight face and told them that love potion would not make a person really fall in love.) LOL!
A bit more seriously: Snape seems to have a protective nature and he can love - deeply - in his own way.
Dryleaves - Apr 22, 2008 1:47 am (#2067 of 2617)
"...for something he simply felt in the first three seconds." (Orion)
"IMO it also matters that before those three seconds Snape had ten years to dread the moment when he would first have to look into Harry Potter's green, almond-shaped eyes." (Julia)
I really liked the fact that Snape's hatred of Harry was so complex. Before we know the story it seems like instant dislike without any legitimate reason, then we understand that Snape at least has a reason to hate Harry's father, of whom Harry is the spitting image, then come all this love, guilt and maybe also self-hatred. Harry is the incarnation of almost everything gone wrong in Snape's life, most of it due to his own actions, of his worst fears come true (his boggart?), but in all this there are also these eyes, a reminder of the only beautiful thing in his life, a memory in flesh and blood.
For some reason, the very idea of Snape as a loving husband and father cracks me up!(PeskyPixie)
Maybe that is why we love to imagine it..? I think maybe something happens to Snape after killing Dumbledore, that he maybe starts to reflect upon himself and his own thoughts and motivations in a way he hasn't done before. Maybe this feeling comes from the fact that the memories he gives to Harry are very carefully selected and that he not only gives Harry information but also tells his own story. Maybe he has forced himself to view his own memories in the pensieve in the Headmaster's office. (Dumbledore seems to have used the pensieve quite a lot and almost become too good at seeing himself from a distance.) So maybe this feeling makes me think that he could have moved on if he had survived and loved someone else than Lily and at least respected Harry. I also like to think that he would have continued to "care" about Harry: looking in the Daily Prophet for wedding announcement, child births and work promotions, but not really invite him for cake...(LOL, Orion) I agree that Snape's wife would have had to be a miracle of patience, though, even if I don't question his ability to love. Snape as a "parent" in the HP books is very good at keeping children safe, but not as good at making them feel safe. When he sends the silver doe to Harry he finally manages to do this as well. Maybe we should try to find that resurrection stone..?
"So perhaps Snape being a "prince" is a connection to the "Dark Lord" and to the role Snape is going to play by his side and in the fight against him. Any other ideas? "(Julia)
Hmm... I read some of the posts on the alchemy thread. They were interesting, though my knowledge of alchemy is not even rudimentary, so some dimensions were probably lost on me. I still wonder what prince? If he is a prince in connection to the Dark Lord (and he sits at his right side, is a half-blood just like Voldemort)then what exactly is this connection? Snape loves and Voldemort doesn't understand love. Snape once was a follower of Voldemort but is no longer. Then what does it mean that he is a prince?
Orion - Apr 22, 2008 5:38 am (#2068 of 2617)
Harry as Snape's boggart is a great idea! I always imagined it would be Lily dead.
Prince versus Lord: Are there british forumers on this thread? You still have titles in your country, so maybe you could tell us something about the hierarchy. Who is higher up, a Count, an Earl, a Lord or a Prince? Prince William is the successor to the throne, but there is also Prince Harry, Prince Andrew... Rowling is also british, she surely knows.
rambkowalczyk - Apr 22, 2008 7:58 am (#2069 of 2617)
regarding Prince--why JKR chose the name...
I think part of it may have been misdirection. Dark Lord (who happens to be a half blood)--Voldemort, half blood prince--Snape.
Also before book 7 came out readers at Mugglenet were commenting on the analogies between Machielli's "Prince" and Snape which caused many to believe that Snape might actually be evil. That is he appeared to be helping Dumbledore only as a means to defeat the Dark Lord then he was going to betray Dumbledore at the end to gain power for himself. (See Mugglenet's World Famous Editorials, Under April 2006). Obviously the Editorial was wrong, but before book 7 it made me stop and think.
mona amon - Apr 22, 2008 9:49 pm (#2070 of 2617)
"Albus Harry Snape" - now that would really require another HP-book first. :-)
No, not a whole book, the way I see it, maybe just a chapter. I feel that the death of Voldemort would have given Severus such a feeling of being released from intolerable bonds that he would have been extremely grateful to Harry. If he had been in The Great Hall at the moment of defeat (if only!) I feel sure he would have embraced Harry along with Ron and Hermione and McGonnagall and the rest. Of course we will never know.
Then what does it mean that he is a prince? (Dryleaves)
Good question. I always thought the title was rather silly, I mean it's OK for a teenager to call himself that, but the author persists in referring to the adult Snape as The Prince in her chapter titles. Maybe she considers him a lot more special than she is willing to admit in her interviews.
an overgrown, tragic bat. (Pesky)
LOL!
Dryleaves - Apr 23, 2008 12:53 am (#2071 of 2617)
"...I feel sure he would have embraced Harry..." (mona amon)
...or maybe a handshake and a curt nod..
It's been a while since I read "The Prince" ("Il principe" if the English title is not correct)by Machiavelli and I'm not sure whether it would really apply to Snape (even if Cesare Borgia and his likes would certainly have been Slytherin...). JKR calls Dumbledore "machiavellian" in an interview, I believe, and in the scene in DH where Dumbledore shows this trait Snape protests against it. (That Dumbledore has kept Harry alive so that he can die at the right moment.) Maybe someone else have read Machiavelli more recently and more thorouhgly?
You are right Orion, "prince" would of course be a royal title. But Voldemort wouldn't really be a Lord either, would he? I think too it would be nice if someone could sort out the different titles.
Sorry for only continuing to ask the prince question and not coming up with any good ideas!
Julia H. - Apr 23, 2008 1:14 am (#2072 of 2617)
"I feel that the death of Voldemort would have given Severus such a feeling of being released from intolerable bonds that he would have been extremely grateful to Harry." (Mona)
I think you are right, that is how he would have felt.
"If he had been in The Great Hall at the moment of defeat (if only!) I feel sure he would have embraced Harry along with Ron and Hermione and McGonnagall and the rest." (Mona)
In a really wild moment of joy.
Why "Prince"?
Misdirection is a good observation: at the end of HBP, Harry himself makes a "misdirecting" comparison between Snape and Voldemort. But I think it is also true that Snape is "a lot more special" than one would think at first sight and this may be what his "title" implies.
"Prince versus Lord" (Orion)
Until British forumers come and tell us what they know or correct what we don't know, we have to be satisfied with definitions such as that a "prince" is a member of the royal family. "Lord" as a title, I suppose is lower in rank. However: On the one hand, while the prince is a member of the royal family, he is not the king but a sort of "secondary power" in the family. The word "lord", on the other hand, has lots of meanings, including a more general reference to someone in power, real power above other people and appears in lots of compound words such as "liege lord" or "war-lord". In one sense, I think the king is a lord above the prince. Perhaps rather than studying the modern titles these words refer to, we should look for a mediaeval, feudal interpretation. I'm saying this because Voldemort's "world" seems to be a feudal one based on his absolute power and full of the "accessories" of a feudal royal court: the words, the language, the gestures, the lord-servant relationship (there is a hierarchy but everybody is only a subject), the ruling ideology based on birth-right, the way LV insists on objects of ancient glory and of great material value. Since in the wizarding world there are no titles such as lord or prince, I think Snape's "title" is a reference to his connection with LV's "court". What is the significance of a "Prince"? He is, as I said, a power second only to the supreme lord. This may be a reference to the degree of Snape's magical abilities. In a situation of war, it is (and I think in history it often was) an important question where the Prince's loyalties lie. The Prince's power in the service of his Lord is an extremely valuable asset, but the same power is an equally significant danger when it serves the Lord's enemy. The third option is, of course, that the Prince can appear as a rival, a pretender to the throne (there are examples in history and in literature as well).
Symbolically, in HP, the two parties engaged in war are the forces of hatred and love, darkness and light. Our "Prince", during the original distribution of characters, is sorted to the dark side, to the side of hatred (represented by Slytherin). However, by the time that happens, he has already been touched by love. Throughout his life he is torn between love and hatred and an important question in the books is the question of his true allegiance. Both the readers and the various characters on both sides spend a lot of time considering this question. Why is it so important? (The answer below is an attempt at the symbolic interpretation of the "Prince" title, not the exact recounting of surface canon events.)
After Voldemort's first downfall, the two main (and opposing) characters have more or less equal power and their situations are similar. Harry is a baby at the Dursley's mercy, Voldemort has not got a body and is hiding in distant Albania. Neither can use his magical abilities. Over time, however, they both grow and gain power and find helpers, Harry at Hogwarts, Voldemort in the outside world. For years, neither can truly defeat the other. The opposing forces are all this time balanced in a way. In this situation, the loyalties of the Prince can be of crucial significance. Seemingly, all three options above appear in the books. Snape seems to end up on the side of the dark forces, but in reality the light in him - love - is much stronger than the power of hatred over him and with all his Prince-power, he supports Harry. The third option - the Prince as pretender - appears when Voldemort believes that Snape is the master of the Elder Wand. In his eyes, his favourite, the Prince, has become too powerful, too dangerous, someone suddenly standing between himself and absolute power - not because of his allegiance but because of his own power. Voldemort is of course mistaken, nevertheless this is how the third option is alluded to in the books. So the Prince has to die - not in a duel (the Lord is a coward anyway) but executed, killed by a snake, as too powerful favourites have often done. However, his true allegiance is firmly on the side of light and love - and his power and support make the light side strong enough to win.
EDIT: DD is the Machiavellian one. I think Snape is just the opposite of a Machiavellian Prince. He is willing to sacrifice himself for others in every possible way.
Dryleaves - Apr 23, 2008 1:51 am (#2073 of 2617)
Very interesting analysis, Julia. Unfortunately, I don't have time to think it through as thoroughly as it deserves, but I think it is interesting what you write about power. It probably is a question of magical power, where Snape can be seen as secondary only to Voldemort, the Dark Lord, but there is also another kind of power. Voldemort wants world dominion, but Snape is, I think, a rather powerless person. Poor working class kid, bullied at school, never got the girl. He gains some power over kids as a teacher and he finally gets a position at Voldemort's court as secondary to the Dark Lord himself, but he never has any real worldly power as I see it, and he seldom uses his magic to take power over others the way Voldemort does. Snape's true power seems to be his ability to love.
Julia H. - Apr 23, 2008 2:05 am (#2074 of 2617)
Of course, it is the power of magic (and not some wordly power or position) that makes Snape second to LV only, a "Prince". His true power - his ability to love - connects him to the good side and puts him way above LV. Love as his real power, yes. Or love as the real power that truly rules him.
Dryleaves - Apr 24, 2008 4:40 am (#2075 of 2617)
Julia, as I wrote I thought your analysis of “the Prince” was very interesting, and the following is, I guess, an elaboration:
From GoF I think Snape’s importance to the plot is beginning to reveal itself. In the final task of the Triwizard Tournament Harry meets the Sphinx in the middle of the maze and answers her riddle. The first part of it tells of a person “who lives in disguise,/Who deals in secrets and tells naught but lies” and the answer is a spy. In this book we learn that Snape was a spy and that he will be again. The answer of the riddle as a whole is “spider” and then Harry meets a giant spider. In his fight with the spider Harry is lifted up in the air by the spider’s pincers, something that happens again in the next book, OotP, where Harry watches the teenage Snape, walking twitchy like a spider, in the pensieve, and then is lifted out of it by Snape’s pincerlike grip. In HBP we meet “the spider” again in the middle of the maze of streets, Spinner’s end. A spider may have many symbolic meanings. One is a Goddess of Fate, something that fits Snape’s role in the plot, as he is later to be revealed as the one who gave Voldemort the prophecy that led to the killing of Harry’s parents.
At Spinner’s End Snape reveals himself as a Death Eater in his conversation with Narcissa and Bellatrix. He is spinning a web of lies either to them or to Dumbledore and the Order, and the fact that he agrees to make the Unbreakable Vow suggests that it is the latter. A few chapters on “The Half-Blood Prince” is introduced to the story. Then DD has also appointed Snape teacher of DADA, his favourite subject that, according to what he tells Narcissa and Bellatrix, he has not been trusted to teach before, as DD thought it might tempt him to go back to his old ways. Snape is shown to be a possible traitor, but we are also shown that DD trusts him. At the end of the book we are made to believe that Snape is in fact a supporter of Voldemort as he kills DD. All this suggest that “The Half-Blood Prince” is a reference to Snape’s connection to Lord Voldemort and that he, as Julia writes, is sorted to the dark side in the war of darkness and light.
Harry is happy that he won’t have Snape for a teacher this year, but disappointed as it means that he will not be able to become an Auror. As it turns out it will be the other way around: he can take potions and become an Auror, but will have Snape for a teacher in DADA. He gets hold of an old potions book, which has been the property of “The Half-Blood Prince” and finds that the book helps him to get good results in potions and that it also contains several useful (if you are a teenage boy, at least...) spells. Hermione and Ginny question “The Prince” and suggest that the book may be dangerous. As it turns out, the book is dangerous, as Harry almost kills Draco with the Sectumsempra spell that he finds in the book. But Harry trusts “the Prince”. He does not trust Snape. As Julia writes, the loyalties of the Prince is of crucial significance, all through the book.
Even if it is suggested that Snape is sorted to the dark side, another thing about Snape is revealed in HBP. He is not only teacher in Defence against the Dark Arts, he is in fact a very skilled healer of Dark Arts injuries. When, after the killing of DD, Harry chases Snape, (The Flight of the Prince) he is hit by the cruciatus curse and thinks that it is Snape who is torturing him and will torture him to death. In fact, it is Snape that saves him from the pain by telling the torturer to stop it.
It is during this chase that the Prince's true identity is revealed: “You dare use my own spells against me, Potter? It was I who invented them, I, the Half-Blood Prince! And you’d turn my inventions on me, like your filthy father, would you? I don’t think so...no!” As it later turns out, the evil Snape has done has hit himself very hard.
The image of Snape as a spider may indicate his role as the one who sets the story in motion. Now he is the Prince. His allegiance is crucial. And the Half-Blood Prince is a double character. The potions book holds knowledge that can be used for both good and evil purposes. Snape is a double agent. He seems to be a murderer, but he is also a healer. In DH the Prince’s Tale is a story of love, bad choices and remorse. As Julia writes, he is “torn between love and hatred”.
Voldemort uses his magical power to gain one that is worldy: to rule both wizards and muggles. Snape is shown sitting at his right side and learning his magic (he has learnt to fly from “his Master”), but the true power he has is another one: love. It is because Voldemort cannot understand this that Snape can lie to him so successfully, not only his occlumency skill.
I wonder if the Prince title can also allude to something else than Snape’s connection to Lord Voldemort, to something that has to do with the light side of the character?
"But I think it is also true that Snape is "a lot more special" than one would think at first sight and this may be what his "title" implies." (Julia)
I would think so too. He is a character that contains many of the important themes of the story: love, choice and courage. This makes me feel a bit confused when I read interviews with JKR and she talks about Snape. She says he is not a hero, she stresses that he is a bitter, insecure bully, but well, by the way, he loved, he was brave... I think she dismisses a character that is obviously very important to the plot and belongs to the most interesting kind of heros, the anti-hero.
Julia H. - Apr 24, 2008 11:19 pm (#2076 of 2617)
Interesting post, Dryleaves. Snape as a spider (spy, spider...), of course, is a rather different image from Snape as a Prince but both are valid. Snape does not only set the story into motion by giving the Prophecy to Voldemort but also asks him to spare Lily's life, giving her the chance to save Harry and later, as Harry's secret protector, he still plays the part of fate in the plot and in the end, he gives Harry the final piece of information necessary to defeat Voldemort and in the final confrontation the spell Harry uses (again) is the one he learned from Snape. With reference to the spider web, though, I think Snape turns out to be not only "spinning" a web but being entrapped in a sort of spider web (of his own making?) as well, not being able to get out.
"... as Julia writes, is sorted to the dark side in the war of darkness and light"
In fact I referred to the original sorting, by the sorting hat: Snape is put into Slytherin and with what we learn about Slytherin in the books, this should mean Snape's fate is decided for ever. It is during his student years that he becomes a "Prince" of vast but dangerous knowledge, foreshadowing his connection to the Dark Lord. However, he manages to reverse this fate and he returns to the good side once and for ever.
"It is because Voldemort cannot understand this /love/ that Snape can lie to him so successfully, not only his occlumency skill."
Interesting thought: Voldemort not having access to certain things in others' minds because he does not understand them...
"I wonder if the Prince title can also allude to something else than Snape’s connection to Lord Voldemort, to something that has to do with the light side of the character?"
I wondered this, too, but I haven't had time to think about it yet. A "Prince" by Dumbledore's side perhaps? Snape is Dumbledore's most important ally and his successor in the Headmaster's office, an heir to DD's plan.
"This makes me feel a bit confused when I read interviews with JKR ..."
Oh, you are not the only one. But it has often been said that ultimately what matters is not what JKR says but what she wrote. She wrote the character as complex as this and we are free to interpret now.
Dryleaves - Apr 25, 2008 12:45 am (#2077 of 2617)
"I think Snape turns out to be not only "spinning" a web but being entrapped in a sort of spider web..." (Julia)
Yes, Snape is certainly caught in his own web. (No wonder he and Harry hate each other...) Of course Snape continues to play the part of Fate and this part is not fully revealed until DH. But when he gives Harry the information about what is needed in order to defeat Voldemort I think he is also giving him a choice. He doesn't trap Harry in a situation where Voldemort can kill him, but leaves it to Harry to decide if he will actually do it. Then, of course, it is this element of choice that makes the difference. That Harry goes willingly to meet his death is what finally saves him.
"...I referred to the original sorting..." (Julia)
I see. Both in the Harry Potter universe and in the plot it is a bad thing to be sorted into the Slytherin house. For a while Snape seems to be a possible exception, though, but when he kills DD the first sorting is being confirmed.
"...we are free to interpret now." (Julia)
The reader does half the job. : ) Maybe some day, when she reads her own books over again, JKR will understand us.
Julia H. - Apr 26, 2008 1:51 pm (#2078 of 2617)
"But when he gives Harry the information about what is needed in order to defeat Voldemort I think he is also giving him a choice." (Dryleaves)
Yes, the choice is crucial. Nothing would be easier for Snape than letting Harry be captured and killed by LV. But DD's instructions are clear: Snape must tell Harry the truth about his soul before Harry sets out to meet his death. I think Snape understands that it must be Harry's decision to sacrifice his life: He desperately wants to talk to Harry before it is too late. I wonder if he makes the connection between Lily's sacrifice, which saved Harry, and Harry's sacrifice, which may save a lot of other people. Perhaps he does: he must have spent a lot of time thinking about Lily's sacrifice.
Back to the "Prince" symbol: Now I think the fact that the chapter revealing Snape's true allegiance is called "The Prince's Tale" underlines the image of Snape as a Prince on the good side as well. He is really Dumbledore's most important and (magic-wise) most powerful ally and also his successor in the fight against the dark side.
Dryleaves - Apr 27, 2008 2:07 am (#2079 of 2617)
First, just a thought about the definition of "Prince". We mentioned Machiavelli's Prince, and I think that here the word means the actual ruler of a country or state, not the one secondary in power, so I think the word could have this meaning as well.
Then, I think your interpretation may be very accurate, Julia, as Snape appears to be Voldemort's right hand at Hogwarts, but is in fact Dumbledore's successor to the Headmaster office also when it comes to his allegiance.
Still, I think it would be interesting if there were any other interpretations to add to this, so I think I'll have to continue to think about this subject a bit more. But I guess it doesn't have to be more complicated than it allready is... : )
mona amon - Apr 27, 2008 10:14 pm (#2080 of 2617)
Nice connections you've made, Julia and Dryleaves!
Maybe JKR, when she chose this title for Snape, was unconsciously influenced by Hamlet the moody prince of Denmark, who's always dressed in black?
Julia H. - Apr 28, 2008 12:14 am (#2081 of 2617)
Thanks Mona!
JKR influenced by Hamlet? Hm... Hamlet's father telling Hamlet to kill his step-father. Snape's surrogate father telling Snape to kill his surrogate father. Both jobs are difficult. Hamlet receiving instructions from his dead father's ghost. Snape receiving instructions from dead DD's portrait. Both die in the end but first gradually lose their connections to the living. I can get carried away by literary comparisons but at the moment that is all that comes to my mind.
mona amon - Apr 28, 2008 8:46 pm (#2082 of 2617)
I don't think she was 'influenced' by Hamlet. Just the unconcious suggestion when she was trying to find a title for her morose, sable clad character. I can't remember anything of Hamlet right now (though maybe I'll read it next week when I'll have some time) except
"Good night sweet prince: And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!"
Which to me seems quite appropriate!
Julia H. - Apr 29, 2008 4:58 am (#2083 of 2617)
Brilliant!
Soul Search - Apr 29, 2008 7:05 am (#2084 of 2617)
Ya know, I have been wondering why JKR came up with the "Prince" appellation for Snape. It really didn't go anywhere, yet she used it for a book title, throughout HBP, and again as a chapter title in DH. I think mona amon may be on to something.
Orion - Apr 29, 2008 7:59 am (#2085 of 2617)
It might be much simpler. The character Snape gives himself the title "Prince", which is in itself quite a laughable act, born out of puberty and the desire to overcome a low self-esteem. If Rowling uses this adolescent title until the character dies, she tries to show, IMO, that Snape dies as an emotional adolescent, that he never manages to grow out of the problems he had (and caused) as a teenager.
Snape as Hamlet... my first reaction was "snort!", but the thought starts to grow on me. It's actually quite good. Well, it's brilliant, in fact. But only Rowling knows deep down in her black heart whether she intended that similarity.
wynnleaf - Apr 29, 2008 7:59 am (#2086 of 2617)
I'm sure there were all sorts of perhaps unconscious associations JKR had with the title "Prince." And perhaps even after she chose it, she saw many of the same fascinating correlations you are all pointing out.
Personally, I think her main reasons were oriented to plotting the story and her continuing interest in misdirecting the reader. "Prince" works as both a title and a name, and therefore can be used to misdirect the reader (both when the title was announced and when people are reading the book), into guessing that The Prince could be anyone who is half-blood, guessing that the "Prince" is a title like "Lord" Voldemort, etc.
And in addition to simple misdirection, it also makes the reader think of Lord Voldemort and wonder if the Half-Blood Prince is someone like Tom Riddle, especially once we see in HBP that the prince is a student giving himself a name. That, obviously, increases the reader's chance of believing Snape is Evil at the end of the book.
Further, once we learn that the HBP is Snape, I think it enhances that picture of young Severus as the kind of nerdy, Goth kind of kid, giving himself a "cool" title, through the use of a family name. And yeah, I think that -- whether reminiscent of Hamlet or The Black Prince -- the idea of a Goth sort of young man in black, styling himself "Prince" has the right feel to it. It's cool, in a darkish sort of way.
Orion - Apr 29, 2008 8:04 am (#2087 of 2617)
Goth Snape! Sitting in his bedroom, listening to The Cure and cutting his arms. It's official: Snape is really Trent Reznor! Thank you, wynnleaf, for this mental image - I'll never manage to imagine Snape without black nail varnish again.
Dryleaves - Apr 29, 2008 9:02 am (#2088 of 2617)
Orion and Wynnleaf, it may very well be as you suggest. "Prince" is both a surname and a title and it is of course misdirecting. It is also a very adolescent thing to call oneself. I guess it is the fact that JKR uses it as a title of a book and continues to use it in the title of a chapter in DH that makes me wonder if it means something more. The HP books have a lot of fairy tale motives in them and that makes me wonder as well, as princes also belongs to fairy tales. But as Soul Search says: it didn't really go anywhere.
"...that Snape dies as an emotional adolescent, that he never manages to grow out of the problems he had (and caused) as a teenager" (Orion)
If this is what she intended, I think that she is more cruel and more unfair than Snape ever was to any of his students... The Prince's Tale chapter shows a person who, though maybe emotionally immature, is faced with situations that would be really hard to tackle even for someone with a very developed emotional life.
mona amon - Apr 29, 2008 9:20 am (#2089 of 2617)
I'd like to quote an excerpt from Jo's website. It's from the FAQ section and I've bolded the part I find interesting.
In what way is 'Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince' related to 'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets'?
I have been engulfed by an avalanche of questions on the subject of 'Prince' having once been a title of 'Chamber'...[cut]... The plot of 'Prince' bears no resemblance whatsoever to the plot of 'Chamber', nor is it an off-cut of 'Chamber'. The story of 'Prince' takes off where 'Phoenix' ended and does not hark back to four years previously. True, mention is made to events that happened in 'Chamber,' but of course, mention is also made of events that happened in 'Stone', 'Azkaban', 'Goblet' and 'Phoenix'.
'The Half-Blood Prince' might be described as a strand of the overall plot. That strand could be used in a whole variety of ways and back in 1997 I considered weaving it into the story of 'Chamber'. It really didn't fit there, though; it was not part of the story of the basilisk and Riddle's diary, and before long I accepted that it would be better to do it justice in book six. I clung to the title for a while, even though all trace of the 'Prince' storyline had disappeared, because I liked it so much (yes, I really like this title!). I re-christened book two 'Chamber of Secrets' when I started the second draft.
The link I mentioned between books two and six does not, in fact, relate to the 'Half-Blood Prince' (because there is no trace left of the HBP storyline in 'Chamber'.) Rather, it relates to a discovery Harry made in 'Chamber' that foreshadows something that he finds out in 'Prince'.
I suppose the link between the two books is the secret of the Horcruxes. Surely she could not have Snape announcing that he was the Half Blood Prince back in COS. So if she was planning to call CoS 'Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince', it must have been a title that she chose for Tom Riddle? And then she changed her mind and thought it would be a great title for Snape?
Soul Search - Apr 29, 2008 9:34 am (#2090 of 2617)
Good pickup, mona amon. What her statements imply is she liked the title "Half-Blood Prince" and messed with the sixth-book storyline so the title would fit and she could, finally, use it. That would explain why "Half-Blood Prince" gets attention, but really doesn't go anywhere.
Makes me wonder about the "Irma Pince" name anagram: "I'm a Prince." That couldn't be by accident! I really thought there had to be something to MPISM. What storyline got cut, but the name remained?
Dryleaves - Apr 29, 2008 9:36 am (#2091 of 2617)
"So if she was planning to call CoS 'Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince', it must have been a title that she chose for Tom Riddle?" (mona amon)
Mona, that could explain my feeling of "there ought to be something more to it"...
Soul Search - Apr 29, 2008 1:45 pm (#2092 of 2617)
Madam Pince is first mentioned in SS, "The Mirror of Erised."
"Madam Pince the librarian brandished a feather duster at him."
Now, we know JKR foreshadows a lot. For example, Hagrid's mention of "young Sirius Black" in SS, Harry having his mother's eyes, etc. So, the name "Madam Pince," had to have been placed in SS in anticipation of the title "Half-Blood Prince" for CoS. (Although, "Irma" is not mentioned in SS.)
So, the name anagram did not refer to Snape, but to someone else. I can't see any possible connection to Tom Riddle, so who? Or, was Snape the Half-Blood Prince, even when it was the title of CoS?
Julia H. - Apr 29, 2008 4:08 pm (#2093 of 2617)
Fascinating observations everybody! The Snape-thread at its best!
Tom Riddle as the original "Half-blood Prince"? This is very interesting though at the same time a bit disenchanting. (I prefer Prince Snape.) Fortunately, we don't know what JKR really intended earlier or later, so the "Prince" is ours to interpret.
"Snape dies as an emotional adolescent..." (Orion)
Please, noooo! :-) That would spoil the whole character development thing, which becomes so important in DH. Another part of the problem is how he could have done all the things he did with such responsibility and so well and where he would have found the necessary strength if he had stayed an "emotional adolescent".
Snape the young, nerdy "Prince"; Snape as Prince Hamlet (Mona, that quote is great!); the "Irma Pince" - "I'm a Prince" anagram - I don't think Tom Riddle would have given us so many interesting ways to connect the title. On the whole, it underlines Snape's importance and perhaps the mystery around him. He is also the "Secret Prince", nobody knows his title (HRH will find it out though...), as nobody really knows his mind and his soul, his real personality. Maybe, in a way, the Prince is the "real" Snape.
wynnleaf - Apr 29, 2008 4:32 pm (#2094 of 2617)
I remember those comments by JKR regarding her early use of HBP in COS. I have always assumed that at one point she was planning to use the HBP potions book plot line in HBP. The potions book, with messages from the the Half Blood Prince, would have been a counterpoint to the diary with messages from Tom Riddle, "Lord" Voldemort. Both would initially seem helpful and supportive to Harry, but Harry would later find out the diary personality was the evil Lord Voldemort, while the Half Blood Prince's advice would eventually go sour with a dark spell. However, it would have still resulted in misdirection as Harry would assume that Snape was evil, just as Voldemort was.
Dryleaves - Apr 30, 2008 12:57 am (#2095 of 2617)
Using the title "Prince" the way JKR does as mere misdirection is not really satisfying, I think. At least to me it then leaves a sense of a loose thread left behind, never really tied into the story.
The potions book is a great help to Harry, but turns out to also contain dangerous, dark spells. Then the Prince is revealed as Snape, who is then a traitor and DD's murderer, and it results in Harry and the reader assuming that Snape is evil. This far it is misdirection and an adolescent nickname, but then JKR uses it in the DH chapter where Snape's true allegiance and his full importance to the plot is revealed. It also reveals his enormous courage. Therefor the name/title could be a way of stressing these traits of the Snape character, but my problem is that he is then almost forgotten. To make a connection to the Hamlet quotation: Where are the angels?
I think JKR lets the importance of Snape go after the great revelation, it's the highlight and turn of the story, but it's impact on Harry comes first in the epilogue with Albus Severus and then there is no "prince". What Snape did was great and very unexpected from a person like him, but noone seems to care. Seeing Snape's memories and knowing what had happened to Snape could have been an encouragement for Harry on his way to the forest, just as talking to his dead parents, Lupin and Sirius, but then he seems just forgotten. But maybe the use of "Prince" in the DH chapter title is an hommage to Snape and what he did.
"Another part of the problem is how he could have done all the things he did with such responsibility and so well and where he would have found the necessary strength if he had stayed an 'emotional adolescent'." (Julia)
I think this is an interesting thing about Snape. He is emotionally immature and faces very difficult situations (even if they may be of his own doing) that he is very unequipped for - and handles them quite well (as an understatement). He behaves extremely childish towards Harry sometimes (remember breaking his potions bottle so that Harry wouldn't get any mark on his potion, for example!), still when it comes to really important things he handles them very well and maturely. In this he reminds me of a character from a Danish TV-series: a banker's wife, who was extremely silly and who fell ill and had to go to bed if someone had the same dress as her to a party or other things of equal importance, but who, when her husband turned out to have an affair with one of his employees and was involved in an illegal abortion, handled the situation more maturely than most people would have done. Then she was almost as silly again, until the next big crisis came, but she, who first seemed to be a caricature of a silly woman, turned out to be a complex character who actually went through some sort of personal development if not a complete change. I think the same is true of Snape.
wynnleaf - Apr 30, 2008 6:26 am (#2096 of 2617)
Not to get off on a tangent, but in OOTP, it doesn't actually say that Snape broke the potions vial. In fact, none of the characters even act as if he broke it. Harry makes no comment and doesn't appear to be thinking about Snape breaking it. It is just as possible that the vial falls by accident and breaks and Snape simply takes advantage of the fact to give Harry a bad grade and be derisive. Harry is upset because of Snape's derision, the bad grade, and the fact that Hermione already got rid of the rest of the potion Harry had prepared.
There are aspects of Snape that are emotionally frozen or even damaged, but I wouldn't just put it down to immaturity, because he doesn't, in my opinion, actually act like an adolescent, but more like a severely damaged person.
His reaction to Harry in PS/SS is very unpleasant, but this isn't just an adult reacting to the son of a man for whom he had a childish dislike. Snape felt that James was behind years of ongoing bullying toward him, was instrumental in attempting to murder him, took away the love of his life, and then stupidly trusted a traitor against Dumbledore (and Snape's) advice and thereby helped get Lily killed in spite of all Snape's work. Further, he sees Harry as the person for whom Lily died. And Snape cannot look at Harry without seeing the face of James, and the eyes of Lily looking at him with dislike.
After Snape's initial unpleasant and sarcastic treatment of Harry, we find that Harry's own actions only increase Snape's dislike of him so that their mutual hatred becomes circular. Harry repeatedly lies to Snape. Harry steals from Snape. Harry sets of an explosion in Snape's class that injures other students. Harry is very disrespectful to Snape. Harry does not do his work well in Potions.
Granted, most teachers would never have gotten the whole hatred cycle started in the first place, because they'd have never started off being so confrontational with Harry. But once Harry had got into the lies, disrespect, breaking rules, poor classwork, stealing, harming others in class, etc., almost any teacher would start to see Harry in an extremely poor light.
So Snape's view of Harry starts due to Snape's emotional difficulties and his initial dislike of Harry due to all of the things that Harry's presence makes him think and feel. But I think the continued animosity between the two is just as much due to both of their actions and attitudes, as Snape's inability to set aside the emotional connection he has with Harry.
But I don't see this as "childish" or even adolescent, because the problems behind Snape's emotions aren't childlike or adolescent problems.
However, when we look at the positive things Snape does, we see this love that is not adolescent. I'm sure it was once, but as the years go by, Snape's commitment to his love for Lily grows and expands to the point where his love for her influences even his willingness to risk his life to save someone he thoroughly dislikes (Lupin). And we see that his commitment to these causes and ideals that seem to stem from his love for her, is so strong that he's willing to give up everything else that is important to him (respect of others, trust of others, possibly end in Azkaban or a nasty painful death), in order to maintain that commitment.
And then his various duties and the overwhelming stress of them would demand a certain degree of emotional balance and maturity just to pull it all off successfully.
Therefore, Dryleaves, on the one hand I kind of agree with your comparison to the Danish television show, except that I'd say that what may appear on the surface to be "childish" behavior from Snape is not so much "immature" behavior as the behavior of an emotionally damaged person. It's sort of like one person limping because his leg never matured, while another person limps because his leg is broken.
Dryleaves - Apr 30, 2008 9:11 am (#2097 of 2617)
I see what you mean, Wynnleaf, and I agree that it is blunt to say that Snape's emotional difficulties are just immaturity. And I certainly agree that his relation with Harry is more than complicated - most people, however mature they may be, would have a severe problem in this situation, I think.
I still think he acts immaturely sometimes, or at least seemingly immature, but to use your metaphor about the limp, I guess I saw it as the leg stopped growing because of an injury. And I guess that is what I called immaturity, but what you call it, "damage", is probably a more accurate choice of word.
Orion - Apr 30, 2008 9:58 am (#2098 of 2617)
About "emotional adolescent": That's not entirely what I think. But to me it seems like that:
Snape hates Harry's guts until he dies.
La Venerable Rowling hates Snape's guts until he dies.
She portrays him, or thinks she portrays him, in very dull colours: Emotional unstable, with unresolved issues, and immature. (Yes, I think that's what she intends.)
There's this old story about her chemistry teacher who seems to have humiliated her severely as a student.
So she writes Snape's story about someone who can't grow up properly because he's too damaged, and behaves like a jerk most of the time, and gets humiliated in every conceivable way, and dies a miserable death. Sweet revenge on her part, or so she thinks.
But there must have been some other feelings involved in the chemistry teacher story. Because from under her fingers a third story oozes out, that of heroic Snape who is totally different from our first impression of him, who does tons of really great (but IMO totally stupid - minority opinion of somebody originally sorted into Slytherin) things and who, surprise, surprise, amasses a huge fan following. That must have floored her totally. (Sweet revenge on our part, nyer nyer.)
wynnleaf - Apr 30, 2008 12:36 pm (#2099 of 2617)
But there must have been some other feelings involved in the chemistry teacher story. Because from under her fingers a third story oozes out, that of heroic Snape who is totally different from our first impression of him, who does tons of really great (but IMO totally stupid - minority opinion of somebody originally sorted into Slytherin) things and who, surprise, surprise, amasses a huge fan following. That must have floored her totally. (Sweet revenge on our part, nyer nyer.) (Orion)
My personal guess is that she can neither see nor understand why so many readers are fans of Snape, because she has too many personal feelings toward the character and probably the real person on whom he's based, to be able to see what so many readers see. And yet, I think JKR is so particularly wonderful at drawing very believable, 3-dimensional characters that she couldn't help but write Snape the way she did, even if it was partly, perhaps, unconscious.
Julia H. - Apr 30, 2008 3:20 pm (#2100 of 2617)
Orion, I find the idea of "two Snapes in JKR's mind" quite probable and perhaps they are reflected in the contrasting reactions of readers to the character: some people see the one, others see the other Snape as the "real" or "main" Snape, JKR included. (Unless of course she simply has a good psychologist on her public relations team who has told her that Snape-fans will simply go crazy because of Snape if the author abuses the character a little bit in her interviews. - Am I being cynical? ) However, unconsciously or accidentally or otherwise, the combination resulted in a very good, as Wynnleaf says, 3-dimensional character, a fascinating and convincing compound of the ordinary and the extraordinary, even heroic.
Speaking about heroism: It is conspicuous that Snape ("one of the two" at least) does not seem to want to be a hero at all, but, considering the goal with a practical mind, he simply sticks with his duty and his promise and that is what ultimately makes him a hero. With this approach, he is willing to make the sacrifices that are true sacrifices partly because he cannot expect anybody to applaud afterwards ("Wow, that was a noble thing to do!") and in the end he dies a miserable death still focusing on his duty and still sticking with his job, however terrible it is. This, for example, seems to result from the complexity of the character and at the same time provides a psychologically totally believable and very "human" story.
To make a connection to the Hamlet quotation: Where are the angels? (Dryleaves)
I think the angles are really angels this time, unseen by living humans (characters, author or readers) and they are probably in the Shrieking Shack singing a heavenly song to the Prince, healing his wounds and giving peace to his troubled soul.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2101 to 2140
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:14 am
Soul Search - Apr 30, 2008 4:23 pm (#2101 of 2617)
On the DH read-a-long thread Orion made the observation that Snape, a male character, was crafted by a female author. I also note that some of the diversity of opinion for the Snape character may align by gender.
Do we see Snape differently because we each attach a gender bias?
Dryleaves - May 1, 2008 2:56 am (#2102 of 2617)
"...convincing compound of the ordinary and the extraordinary, even heroic." (Julia)
I like this description of Snape and it is something like this that I first thought JKR wanted Snape to be when she wrote the books, and therefore I was suprised when she spoke about the character in the post DH interviews (so the theory about the psychologist on the public relations team may be accurate... : )) I thought she really liked this idea, that a person could be like that. I also like what you write about him as the reluctant hero, because I tend to feel and care more about this type of hero, maybe because I feel that it is much more easy to identify with them. If you are not an adventurer, you still may meet lots of situations in your life that will demand some kind of courage and maybe even heroism.
So if JKR wanted revenge on her old chemistry teacher, it might have backfired. He must have been a very good muse!
"I think the angles are really angels this time, unseen by living humans (characters, author or readers) and they are probably in the Shrieking Shack singing a heavenly song to the Prince, healing his wounds and giving peace to his troubled soul." (Julia)
I hope so. I guess angels' song isn't easily heard by the worldly ear...
"Do we see Snape differently because we each attach a gender bias?" (Soul Search)
Could you elaborate that, please? Nobody I know wants to discuss Snape with me, so I have not noted any such differences, but it would be interesting to learn more about them.
Julia H. - May 1, 2008 6:49 am (#2103 of 2617)
Of course it is not the angles but the angels but I see you understood my post in spite of my mistake. LOL!
Orion - May 1, 2008 7:13 am (#2104 of 2617)
I very much like the idea of the psychologist on the public relations team. You're not cynical at all, only realistic. On the other hand, Rowling has revealed so many things which aren't exactly pro-sales (the big DD controversy, Hagrid never marries, things like that) that you wonder what exactly the psychologist is being paid for. Maybe they hired him or her to contain the damage.
Julia H. - May 1, 2008 9:19 am (#2105 of 2617)
Snape as the reluctant hero (Dryleaves)... I like this expression, I really do (it has an interesting "ring"), although perhaps it was not exactly reluctance that I had in mind. Snape is willing to do lots of things, difficult and dangerous things included, but does not mind staying in the background and he seems to have a practical approach to the common purpose: whatever takes us there the soonest, it must be done by someone, regardless whether it is something spectacular or something mundane, glorious or unpleasant, small or big.
Perhaps it is because he does not see or imagine himself as a hero, in spite of his bravery. It is interesting that he does not want to be a Gryffindor originally and then many years later he seems to be stricken when Dumbledore tells him how brave he thinks Snape to be and that they "sort to soon". I guess most eleven-year-old boys like imagining themselves heroes but Snape is repeatedly described as small and skinny, so it is not surprising that he cannot imagine himself in a house among "would-be heroes" and this self-image is probably a long-lasting one, even though he experiences it first as a student and later as a teacher that real Gryffindor-students do not necessarily seem to be typical heroes at once (Neville...). In time it becomes rather important to him that no Gryffindor should/could question his bravery (the typical Gryffindor-value). But when he is stricken by DD's words, it implies perhaps that Snape, on the one hand, thinks/knows that his life could have been very different if he had not been sorted into Slytherin and, on the other hand, he is stricken by the realization (because of DD's words?) that he could have had a chance to be sorted and accepted among the "heroes" after all.
Do we see Snape differently because we each attach a gender bias? (Soul Search)
I can't wait to read answers to this question.
Nobody I know wants to discuss Snape with me... (Dryleaves)
That is why the Forum is here.
shepherdess - May 1, 2008 11:00 am (#2106 of 2617)
I don't feel like I can discuss Snape on this forum, because my opinion of him is vastly different from everyone else's here. If I were to post my opinion of him, I'd get dung bombs thrown at me!
Since JKR made him into some wounded bird who had no choice but to do the things he did, it seems like everyone now worships and idolizes him. My opinion is quite the opposite.
The thing is, I want to be able to appreciate the good he did, and if people would discuss him in a realistic way, taking the bad with the good, it would be easier for me to accept the good. But to go from thinking he's a pathetic loser, to worshiping at his feet, is too big a leap, and I find it sickening. So I generally just avoid Snape discussions here.
Well, I guess that illustrates my opinion on the gender bias thing too.
Ducks dung bombs*
wynnleaf - May 1, 2008 11:52 am (#2107 of 2617)
Shepherdess, I am completely at a loss to see how your comments reflect or in any way relate to a gender bias. But since none of us are quite sure what Soul Search meant in the first place (please tell us SS! ), maybe I'm just missing it.
As regards worshipping at Snape's feet, I'm never quite sure what some readers mean by this, especially regarding this thread. I've often seen people comment that some of us (I tend to assume I'm included), totally worship Snape and see no negatives in him, nothing wrong with his insults or sarcasm, etc. And yet I've yet to see anyone post on here over several years that asserts that Snape is just wonderful. I've yet to see anyone deny that he has many flaws. My feeling is that the readers who truly dislike Snape were very unsettled by JKR having him do such heroic things, love someone with such commitment, give up practically everything and die for the cause. But frankly, I think a thread that spent a lot of time with everyone just agreeing that Snape is overly insulting and sarcastic would be kind of boring. In general, people like to discuss differences in opinion, or new ideas, and the fact that Snape is insulting and sarcastic and unfair at times to students just doesn't go very far in a discussion, until you get people with different opinions about why he was sarcastic, why he was insulting, and why he hated Harry or was unfair. But then you get others posting that to explore the "whys" is somehow the same as "excusing" Snape (it's not). So I tend to feel that for readers who thoroughly dislike Snape, it's really difficult to discuss him. I mean, what is there to say? Everyone agrees with most of his bad points, and if a person doesn't want to think through the "whys and wherefores" behind those bad points, there's not much less to discuss but the more positive stuff.
So Shepherdess, what would you like to see discussed on this thread?
Solitaire - May 1, 2008 7:51 pm (#2108 of 2617)
If I were to post my opinion of him, I'd get dung bombs thrown at me!
Probably not from me, Shepherdess. Although I have had to acquit him of a lot after DH, I have never been a big Snape fan. I suppose I still tend to filter his treatment of Harry and the others through my Muggle Teacher Filter, and I find a lot of it unacceptable. I won't belabor the point, because a couple of my tirades are in some of the Snape archives.
Along another line of thought ... this is probably not true of our more discerning readers, but I have friends who did not begin reading the series until after they'd seen the first movie. They became Snape-fans because they were Alan Rickman fans.
Solitaire
Julia H. - May 2, 2008 12:26 am (#2109 of 2617)
It is sad if people expect to get dung bombs for expressing their opinion. I guess those who like the Snape-character could expect the same thing because Shepherdess is clearly not alone with her opinion (whatever is is). But this is not what usually happens on this forum. More than half a year has passed since the publication of DH. The first surprise/shock/(name it what you want) after the Snape-revelation is over. I guess people who truly dislike the character have given up discussing him because it really is not too interesting to enter long, long discussions for a long time about a character that the reader simply sees as despicable. After a while there is not much to tell. (I can't see much discussion on Vernon Dursley on this forum and even the discussion concerning the much more important Lucius Malfoy is far more limited than the discussion on Snape.) Those who are still discussing Snape tend to be the ones who like the character at least to some extent, and, as Wynnleaf says, who are more interested in the whys and wherefores than in condemning the many flaws which are obvious anyway.
As for the "sickening worship": These words felt a bit like dung bombs, actually. If opinions differ, they differ, there is nothing wrong with that. But before we start labelling other people's opinions, we should perhaps remember that all opinions originate in what is written in the HP books (Alan Rickman fans aside). Of course, it is up to every one of us to decide what they can or what they want to discuss and with whom or whether they "risk" getting answers (not dung bombs) that may express opinions different from theirs or not.
mona amon - May 2, 2008 7:04 am (#2110 of 2617)
My opinion is quite the opposite. (Shepherdess)
I would love to hear your opinion, Shepherdess! It's true that most of us posting now are 'Snape fans' except for Soul Search I think, and opposite opinions definitely make the discussions more lively!
Orion - May 2, 2008 7:26 am (#2111 of 2617)
Soul Search, was that you with the gender bias aspect? I'd love to know more about that. Does it relate to Julia's post about his Patronus representing his feminine side? Or to my post about the difficulties of a female author who wants to do justice to a male character?
Soul Search - May 2, 2008 8:14 am (#2112 of 2617)
Gender bias, etc.
I have wondered why the Snape character has generated so much, and so strong, discussion. We have made thousands of Snape posts to only a few for Harry Potter, the main character. Many Snape posters express very strong feelings and these are often in opposition to other posters. We even had one poster get banned for her strong expressions. Some posters are even afraid to express their opinion.
Even the author is surprised by the interest in her Snape character. She thought she was creating a rather minor character and can't understand why he has garnered to much strong opinion.
Now, I don't think it is any surprise that readers interpret a character based upon their own experiences, life philosophy, etc. It is hard to be objective and ignore our own feelings. For a simple character, say Harry, there isn't much room for personal interpretation. He is the hero, is heroic, and most of us will see him that way. Same with Voldemort: evil, evil, evil. Neither Harry nor Voldemort generate a lot of discussion: we mostly agree.
Snape is different. He is a bit heroic, but also a bit evil, or at least nasty. Some posters, or at some times, the hero shines through; with other posters, or at other times, the evil pervades. This generates a lot of strong discussion.
Orion's post about a female author creating a male character and Julia's about the doe patronus sparked a thought that posters may be seeing the same character from a gender dominate viewpoint. Maybe, for example, female posters want to "mother" him and male posters want to defeat him in battle.
After making the observation and the post, I started looking back through posts but couldn't really come to any conclusion. There is just plain too much data to sort anything out.
Can anyone else make any observations? Do opinions on the Snape character align by poster gender?
Orion - May 2, 2008 9:29 am (#2113 of 2617)
Ah, that's what you mean. An interesting post!
First of all it would be perfect to know the gender of every poster. Sometimes, when they assume first names or take their own plain names (?), it's easy, but I don't always know. Do the other forumers?
The aspect of "mothering" is certainly important. But there's another aspect - I don't know whether it's true for many other Snape thread inhabitants:
Gryffindor gets on my nerves. Especially when all the other houses cheer for Gryffindor during the Quidditch matches. And Harry really is heroic, heroic, heroic and not much else. Harry has a brief chance to be an obnoxious git in OOP, but he is in a very difficult phase of his life and already his perpetual anger makes you feel sorry for him again. And he often acts first and thinks afterwards, but that's all. Again and again this "ability to love" is emphasized, and DD gushes over him as if he was Harry's own proud grandfather. Every Gryffindor is firmly on the good side, and every Slytherin is firmly on the bad side, and every Hufflepuff and every Ravenclaw is firmly on the Gryffindor side. I can't stand that.
The pro-Gryffindor bias represents everything I don't like about these books, and it's the reason why I took long breaks between book one, two and three. And Snape is the antidote these books need so badly. I was never a real Snape fan until I joined this forum last year and read wynnleaf's posts, but I always enjoyed it when Snape was severely underwhelmed by a Gryffindor performance and said so, and I was always disappointed when he lost out to them, again and again and again. In the beginning Snape was still a comic relief character, and he kept some scenes out of the sugar pot with his acerbic comments.
So that's the reason why I like Snape. I hate "heroic Super.Snape" with a vengeance and I would like him a lot more if he had done the sensible thing, told DD in very forum-unfriendly words that he could do his dirty work himself, told Harry everything he knew and disapparated to sunny beaches with a new passport and a false beard. Harry would have coped excellently on his own. He always does.
Julia H. - May 2, 2008 10:12 am (#2114 of 2617)
Undoubtedly, the great amount of discussion the Snape character can generate is due in the first place to the fact that Snape is neither totally black, nor totally white, as Soul Search says, a bit heroic and a bit nasty, or even quite heroic and quite nasty. One of the possible reasons why the character touches so many reader's feelings may be (and I don't know if this has already come up or not on this thread) the Prodigal Son effect. We have got Harry as the Good Son, who is always good and who ultimately gets everything for his hard work and loyalty (and indeed he does) and then there is Snape who goes astray, loses more or less everything of value that he has (Lily...) and then returns... and the reader is happy and finds the occasion worthy a feast. (Even more so, if the author does not...) Then it is intriguing to know what happens to the Prodigal Son after his return and this is the story we more or less get with the Snape character.
The "son" metaphor then takes us almost directly to:
Maybe, for example, female posters want to "mother" him and male posters want to defeat him in battle. (Soul Search)
... and then the male posters find themselves face to face with the "mother tigers"...
(About "mothering Snape": it does no really belong here but not long ago my son did a HP personality test and it turned out that he is a Severus Snape! At least now I know why I understand the character. LOL!)
More seriously: I don't see a gender correlation with liking or disliking Snape. Of course, Orion is right, we do not always know the gender behind a nickname, but when we can at least suspect it, I think the only possible correlation (very tentatively said now) there seems to be is that female readers perhaps tend to express stronger or more "extreme" opinions, while "suspected" male readers may be more balanced and less emotional. Granted, there must be lots of exceptions even if this suggestion is valid at all. I don't know... Besides Orion's observation and my observation on the Read Along, we must not forget Tandaradei's post with the insightful observation that certain female readers tend to read so many different feelings into that poor male character that he would certainly explode if he were to feel all that.
That is a reference to a conversation between Hermione and Ron, illustrating psychological differences between teenage girls and teenage boys - something that JKR, IMO does very well, though I don't want to decide how much of this is really typical and how much only stereotypical. Snape as a male character is certainly written by a female author but then all other characters in the books are... Actually it would be interesting to see if it is possible to make some kind of parallel between the communication difficulties observable between Ron and Hermione, Harry and Cho and the communication difficulties between Lily and Snape at about the same age. Is JKR showing us the same thing or not?
Soul Search - May 2, 2008 11:37 am (#2115 of 2617)
Julia H.,
"... female readers perhaps tend to express stronger or more "extreme" opinions, while "suspected" male readers may be more balanced and less emotional."
Wow. If I, with my male gender bias, had said that I would expect to be buried in dung bombs! You may, however, be on to something. While looking at past posts I did note that most posters still active on this thread are probably female. (I also noted we have lost a lot of good posters in the last few months.)
Myself, I like someone to present a reasoned disagreement to my ideas. It means they have read the post, always good, but it also allows me to look again and see if I missed something. And, of course, disagreement also means more discussion ... which is the point to all this.
wynnleaf - May 2, 2008 12:29 pm (#2116 of 2617)
Good posts to all.
Myself, I like someone to present a reasoned disagreement to my ideas. (Soul Search)
Absolutely. In my opinion, the discussion provoked through reasoned disagreement is one of the best attributes of the Forum and the Snape thread.
I've noticed on some other HP forums that the "anti-Slytherin bias" seems to get more response from male posters than the "anti-Snape bias."
I love this quote from a friend, duj, who posts elsewhere in the HP fandom:
I've noticed that my favourite fandom characters, such as Snape and Percy and Neville, are all under-appreciated and male. Perhaps they symbolise my autistic sons, and society's tendency to dismiss disabled people as being worth less than "normal" people.
What draws adults like myself to Snape is not "bad boy appeal" (I find the very suggestion ludicrous, frankly), but hurt/comfort or identification; we recognised early on that Snape was a profoundly unhappy man, trapped by duty and obligation into a dead-end job/life. "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation" (Henry David Thoreau) - only for Snape, despair is a more accurate word.
I think this has a lot to do with my interest in Snape's character. The reference above comparing Snape and other characters to people with disabilities may seem extreme, but I think some of what we've been discussing lately is exactly that - Snape being kind of emotionally "disabled" or "damaged" or "stunted" or whatever.
Julia H. - May 2, 2008 1:29 pm (#2117 of 2617)
I like your observation, Wynnleaf. I don't know if you agree but then the fact that Snape becomes a hero - one way or other [/b]- May be compared to a physically disabled person beginning to walk again or something similar. Despite all the tragic aspects, there is something hopeful about it.
Julia H. - May 3, 2008 12:51 am (#2118 of 2617)
I keep thinking about the quote from Wynnleaf's friend. (I like it more and more.) I've been thinking hard and I still cannot give a similar reason why or how I can relate Snape to my life, I only remember some very disturbing feelings associated with the Snape-story. Yet: I think dwelling on a character (and from a "children's book", too!) for such a long time goes beyond what the Dursleys would regard as "normal" but there it is... and it seems very probable to me that a lot of people (myself included) respond to something profoundly personal and important hidden somewhere in the depth of the character.
Dryleaves - May 3, 2008 12:47 pm (#2119 of 2617)
A reflection of mine on the quote from Wynnleaf's friend is that I tend to like the under-appreciated characters as well, or those that don't really fit the pattern they "should" fit in, such as Neville, Hermione (girl, intelligent, not pretty) and Snape. I am, myself, very shy and introvert as a person and often think that I don't "fit" socially. So that is one aspect of why I like Snape, I think.
Then I think it is the fact that Snape is neither good nor evil (nasty is a better word) or that he is both, and the possibilities of identificaton in this fact, but here I think it is also the idea of something positive (like love) in fact being the leading star of a person who is otherwise dark, nasty and bitter, that fascinates me. I like the idea of the unexpected good and the unconditional carrying through of it. (I guess it is a romantic streak...) The Snape character is extreme in this sense and this emphasises this idea to me. I think the character held this promise from book one, and after HBP I was afraid that JKR would have made him just a plain villain after all.
Then there is my mean streak: I just love his sarcasms. Even those uttered to children, though I am ashamed of it... : ) The only one I don't find funny at all is his comment on Hermione's teeth.
tandaradei - May 4, 2008 12:35 pm (#2120 of 2617)
Hmmm. My fascination with Snape comes through my original and obvious misunderstanding of him. I guess my "male" reading here is that I had developed, erm, extreme prejudices through ignorance? Among other things, I feel uncomfortable that I had experienced this; and want to understand why.
On the one hand, actions regardless of reasons, should be judged to some major degree; and here, Snape proved a most difficult person. However on the other hand, we are all human and carry invisible baggage, which influences our actions; and any fair and final judgement of others MUST take all such into consideration; if only so things can be made better. In the story as a whole I think Hermione always sought to understand others in this "final and fair" way; and Ron simply responded, which IMO is how all males probably do; and Harry took things personal, immediately, and for good reasons of his own, so his early hatreds of Snape must also be understood from such baggage. Interesting, from a 7-book overview.
Maybe there's a male/female example of all this, even within the story.
As to the "female" interpretations of Snape, I believe in this forum such investigations are on the mark and useful; only that at times they go beyond my male "intuitive-teaspoon" level's ability to follow. It all is most interesting, and important for me to follow nonetheless; because I (IMO) misjudged someone so profoundly in the story.
Soul Search - May 4, 2008 3:46 pm (#2121 of 2617)
I found the Snape character interesting because he was great for "theories."
The surface storyline had Snape as nasty in general and particularly toward Harry. Each book showed Snape getting closer to being "evil."
Yet, there were little snippets that said there was more to Snape and that he wasn't as bad as we had been led to believe. Especially starting at the end of GOF when Snape accepted an implied, but not stated, mission for Dumbledore it seemed he was destined for greater things.
Deathly Hallows, of course, quelched most of the "theories" and, to my mind, Snape's story became a bit lame, but it was fun while it lasted.
Dryleaves - May 5, 2008 12:52 am (#2122 of 2617)
Just a silly reflection on Snape being 'evil'. I never saw him as that, and when I read an interview with JKR I thought that maybe it is all about the 'P'.
In this interview she mentioned that the name 'Snape' is an allusion to 'snake', and that is of course obvious, but curiously enough I had never made that association. English is not my native language, but I remember thinking, when I read the first book, that the name 'Snape' was so fitting on this character, because even if the word in itself doesn't mean anything in my language, I associated it with adjectives that describe a person that is pretty much like Snape (and adjectives with the same associations exist in English as well of course), and I remember that I found it hilarious when I learned that his first name was 'Severus'. So I saw him as a snappy, rather unpleasant person, a caricature of a horrible teacher, not evil, but as he turned out to have saved Harry's life, I thought there would be something more to him, and that this would be something positive rather than negative. The 'p' instead of the 'k' made the difference.
And of course it is not as simple as that, but I think it is one of the factors that formed my picture of Snape.
wynnleaf - May 6, 2008 2:18 pm (#2123 of 2617)
Much is made of Snape's persecution of Neville. However, I recently noticed some facts and comparisons from the series that are interesting.
1. In general, it seems that Snape often assigns essays prior to classes regarding what the class is going to be studying. If Hermione was going to be helping Neville, the best time to do it would be prior to class in preparation, rather than helping him on assessable in-class work (they are often graded on what they do in class) which is basically just cheating. If Neville himself wanted Hermione's help, why not get it the night before, rather than depend on her to help him in class?
2. We don't see Snape actually punish Neville, at least as far as we know, for potions mishaps. He does punish him once for being involved in a fight, and another time for unknown reasons.
3. Snape does say rude or mean things to Neville, in particular his comments at the time of Lupin's boggart lesson. On the other hand, McGonagall isn't very nice to Neville either. In GOF, she "barked" at him in front of the whole class, "Longbottom, kindly do not reveal that you can't even perform a simple Switching Spell in front of anyone from Durmstrang!" And in POA, when he was found to have been carrying around a list of the Gryffindor passwords (which he did not, in fact, lose), McGonagall left him without a password, publicly humiliated and sitting outside the Gryffindor door waiting for someone to let him in, in spite of the supposed real danger that a mass murderer was lurking about -- and all of this due to a memory problem he probably couldn't even help.
4. Last, Neville really did, especially in the early years, present a danger to the class. In the very first class he melted a cauldron and we have seen how some of the potions can be dangerous.
Yes, Snape doesn't help things by intimidating Neville. On the other hand, I'm not sure that Snape is very much more severe with Neville than McGonagall is, or would be in similar situations. After all, Neville doesn't pose much danger in her class, although when he did seem to pose a danger to the Gryffindor common room security, she readily punished and humiliated him.
I think that Snape's actions as a teacher are presented so much through Harry's eyes that we sympathize with Neville when it is Snape making comments or actions toward him and assume that Snape is just being mean and unfair, but when McGonagall does it we "understand" her point of view. I think that's how JKR means the reader to respond.
Julia H. - May 7, 2008 5:34 am (#2124 of 2617)
Good observation, Dryleaves, about the "P". In a way, Snape's name is a red-herring, implying that he is a "snake". Not only this name but there is all the hissing alliteration in his name (Severus Snape), then he is the potions teacher (poisons, antidotes, medicine etc.: all snake-associations), then he is the Head of Slytherin House and what is Slytherin's animal? Not surprisingly, the character easily gets associated with a snake. Yet, he is not called "Snake" but "Snape": one sound of difference as a hint that he may not be a snake after all. It is a bit similar to what happens in HBP: there the whole book gradually and with increasing probability points to the possibility that Snape is evil. However, behind all the accumulating evidence regarding this conclusion, there is one quiet discordant voice, Dumbledore"s, repeating again and again: "I completely trust Severus Snape."
I completely understand the importance of this one sound difference. There is a certain translation of the HP series where quite a few of the names are translated as well (probably to make things easier to understand for the children who do not understand the associations of the English names and may not even know how to pronounce them). In this translation, Snape's name is translated with a word that actually means a kind of snake. I find it horrible and I hate it! It is just not true and misses the subtle hint the original name contains. Besides, as you say, the way this one-syllable name sounds in English is descriptive of the character (quite independent of the snake-associations) - snappy and quick and sudden and so on.
Interesting analysis, Wynnleaf. Snape is mean to Harry, while McGonagall is good to him (she puts her on the Quidditch team when he actually expects to be expelled), so from that moment on, the reader is meant to understand that Snape is a teacher who is just simply mean to all the good characters (who are students), while McGonagall is only strict but essentially fair and well-meaning to all the good student characters (who are mainly Gryffindors). But, as you say, on the one hand, McGonagall can also say very harsh things to Neville when she thinks she has a reason to do it and, on the other hand, Snape usually also has a reason to be angry with Neville (and Neville does not seem to make a lot of efforts to do a little better in Snape's classes). Snape's reactions are not encouraging (the worst one is indeed the one made to Lupin) but nor are McGonagall's and still nobody seems to think that McGonagall is particularly nasty to him.
After OOTP, McGonagall praises Neville for his participation in the fight in the Ministry. Snape cannot do anything similar because of his role but he also seems to lose all on-page contact with Neville after Neville's O.W.L.-s. The last thing I can recall that Snape says in connection with Neville is telling Crabbe to loosen his hold on Neville's neck. Not a nice remark (though probably one disguising a real concern for Neville's life) but at the moment, in front of Umbridge and the Slytherin students, he could not afford to be any kinder (even if he wanted). So I wonder a bit whether this remark might nevertheless include the meaning that Snape in his own way recognized Neville as one of the "fighters" - a real Gryffindor at last, not someone who somehow made it into precious Gryffindor without being either brainy or brawnie.
wynnleaf - May 7, 2008 6:07 am (#2125 of 2617)
Somewhat related to the Snape-snake sounds, does anyone think there's anything to the fact that Albus Severus Potter's initials are asp and that there seems to be some family speculation that he could end up in Slytherin? Not really part of the Snape discussion, but still...
The reason I brought up McGonagall and the way we readers are led to read her actions toward Neville completely differently from Snape's, is that I think such tactics are used by JKR throughout the series in order to misdirect us in our thinking about Snape.
For instance, we're led in HBP to believe that Slughorn is the better potions teacher because he seems so nice, gives incentives in his class for the students to achieve, and most of all, he likes Harry. But if we look carefully, we see that the brightest student, Hermione, is not able to brew potions as well in Slughorn's class as she did under Snape's teaching (perhaps because Snape used his own instructions which he put on the board, rather than the textbook), while Harry only succeeds because he's using Snape's notes. Sometimes, however, JKR gives us heavy clues that she's been misdirecting us, such as when Hermione points out the great similarities between Snape's opening DADA class speech and Harry's comments the previous year about learning DADA.
Dryleaves - May 7, 2008 7:45 am (#2126 of 2617)
...I think such tactics are used by JKR throughout the series in order to misdirect us in our thinking about Snape. (Wynnleaf)
I think so too, and sometimes she is doing this to the extent that it perhaps becomes a little too obvious. She also shows us that Snape is in fact a very skilled wizard. Snape is often described, openly or in a more disguised way, by comparison to other teachers, for example McGonagall, Lockhart or Slughorn, and the comparisons are not always to Snape's disadvantage. I think the constant miscrediting of Snape in combination with his shown competence is one of the reasons why he has become such a popular character.
I really like it when Snape tells Crabbe to loosen his hold around Neville's neck. It is concern about Neville in disguise, even if this concern is of more general than of personal character, and there is almost artistry in it. I think it reveals not too high an opinion of Crabbe, as well (but that might be me not understanding the fine distinctions of the English language).
And Crabbe, loosen your hold a little. If Longbottom suffocates it will mean a lot of tedious paperwork and I am afraid I shall have to mention it on your reference if ever you apply for a job. (OotP, Ch. 32)
Julia H. - May 7, 2008 9:58 am (#2127 of 2617)
I think it reveals not too high an opinion of Crabbe... (Dryleaves)
LOL, it certainly does! "... if ever you apply for a job." (Crabbe never does.)
Albus Severus Potter's initials are asp and that there seems to be some family speculation that he could end up in Slytherin? (Wynnleaf)
Wow, I never noticed this! Would it mean some uncanny influence by the "Severus" part of the name? Or just the force of the initials? Do these speculations concern the possibility of another book by Rowling (hinted at in the Epilogue)? At first sight Albus Severus does not seem to be somebody for Slytherin House. He is quite like Harry and it is to him that Harry acknowledges the internal "gryffindorness" of Snape, i.e., his extraordinary bravery. However, I recall an interview (I don't know where) with Rowling where she says that making a final decision on somebody's character (sorting) at such an early age without considering the possibility that people can change is unfair (or something similar). But, she adds, there can always come someone who has the ability to change the whole (Slytherin) House for the better from inside. (These are not her own words exactly but as far as I remember that is more or less what she says.) This is the only way I can imagine Albus Severus in Slytherin. (Albus and Severus together as "Albus Severus" redeeming Slytherin House - don't you think the idea may be worth a book?)
...I think such tactics are used by JKR throughout the series in order to misdirect us in our thinking about Snape. (Wynnleaf)
Yes, she is very good at that. It shows that she started to prepare the final surprise about Snape at the very beginning of the series, casting doubts about his trustability, then removing these doubts but in such a way that more and more of them linger still. When Snape does something good, it is almost always in the background and / or is shadowed by something bad in the foreground.
PS: Snape is suspected by Harry and seems to want to kill him. Then it turns out that Snape in fact saved Harry's life and that they were on the same side all along. However, Harry never talks about it with Snape, only with others and he learns that Snape hated his father (praised by others in the book) and probably saved Harry only to be "even" with James who had also saved Snape's life (both the reader and Harry suppose that it was in some noble, heroic way).
CoS: Snape enters the scene by wanting to have Harry expelled. A long scene about a situation unpleasant for the hero, who indeed has broken the law, by the way. Meanwhile, the reader almost forgets that before Snape's entrance, Harry and Ron are peering through a window trying to guess why Snape is not at the feast, expressing hopes that he is ill or has been sacked and Snape overhears the conversation. He is obviously angry, not only because the boys broke the law but because they talk about him like that. (Hogwarts is his home.) So, he threatens the boys with the possibility of expulsion. After DH, it is hard to believe that Snape really expected DD to expel Harry Potter, so it was probably just a "lesson" from Snape. It is never explained why Snape was not at the feast after all. Knowing now that Snape watched over Harry all the time, it is easy to imagine that he wanted to go and look for the boys somehow and saw them arriving and was going towards them when he heard them talk about him. (But we never find this out, so it remains a theory unfortunately.)
PoA: Snape is trying to watch over Harry while a dangerous murderer is believed to be looking for him but Snape is nasty and his nastiness is in contrast with Lupin's kindness, who seems to be genuinely concerned about Harry (teaches him the Patronus Charm). However, Lupin keeps the information of how Sirius could get into the castle a secret even when it is known that Sirius has been inside - but readers find it out only when they also find out that Sirius is not a murderer at all but a friend. From that moment, Snape's concern about Harry's safety seems to be totally pointless and only the nastiness remains.
GoF: Snape is suspected again. He is also nasty as ever. It turns out he was a DE. At the end of the book he saves Harry's life with DD and McGonagall but it is DD who is in the foreground. Snape joins the fight against LV but nobody knows what exactly he does. The question how DD knows that Snape can be trusted comes up for the first time.
OOTP: Snape is in the foreground but remains mysterious and ambiguous as he must. At the end of the book he saves Harry and his friends by alerting the order, however this happens off the page, while the scene where he is nasty to Harry (in the presence of Umbridge) happens in front of the reader. Harry (and by extension the reader) does not pay much attention to Snape saving his life because he is mourning Sirius, and even blames Snape for Sirius's death.
HBP: Only DD trusts Snape and it seems it is a mistake. Snape is kind to Narcissa and Draco but his usual self to Harry. He saves Draco in the foreground after the Sectumsempra. He also saves Harry's soul but this aspect remains in the background. In the end, he AK's DD, saves Draco and flees with the DE's. He also happens to drive them out of the castle before they could do any serious harm to anybody and saves Harry from the Cruciatus Curse but "explains" it with the Dark Lord's orders.
DH: JKR goes out of her way to give us more evidence about Snape being evil (I think this is the main reason behind the "betrayal" plan and George's ear) in order to fully "prepare" us for the major surprise in The Prince's Tale.
Hermione points out the great similarities between Snape's opening DADA class speech and Harry's comments the previous year about learning DADA. (Wynnleaf)
I love this part! Hermione at her best! IMO it is not only pointing out how JKR can misdirect us but also a reference to the idea that Harry and Snape have certain things in common despite the mutual loathing. This is something I'd really like to explore here on the Snape-thread once (if you don't mind). I think they even look similar (black hair, both of them are rather small and thin) but that is obviously not the main similarity.
Dryleaves - May 8, 2008 1:59 am (#2128 of 2617)
Hmm... The more Snape got suspected in the books, the more I grow to care for this character. His doubleness and the doubts about him makes him more and more alive as a character, and one particular scene where I felt a lot for him is when he shows his Dark Mark to Fudge. It is clear that he was a DE, but that he seems to be one no more. A scene like this could make the reader question where Snape's true loyalty lies, but it also make you wonder about who this person really is, what is his story, his motives, etc. The reader may suspect that there is an inner conflict that could be of great interest.
IMO it is not only pointing out how JKR can misdirect us but also a reference to the idea that Harry and Snape have certain things in common despite the mutual loathing. This is something I'd really like to explore here on the Snape-thread once (if you don't mind). I think they even look similar (black hair, both of them are rather small and thin) but that is obviously not the main similarity. (Julia)
Yes, this would be very interesting to discuss. I will think about it.
Julia H. - May 10, 2008 4:20 pm (#2129 of 2617)
Mona, our latest conversation on the Read A Long reminded me of lots of things but since I don't want to stretch the patience of the participants of the Read A Long, I have decided to bring these thoughts over here.
One part is still connected to Snape being "selfish" versus "selfless".
Do you mean Lily was also selfish when she shielded Harry with her own life? (Julia)
In a way, yes. We always consider those whom we love very much as part of ourselves. Lily's sacrifice was a good thing. But almost any parent would have done the same thing. It is a natural instinct to throw oneself between danger and the one we love, without even thinking about it. (Mona)
In my vocabulary, selfish has such a pejorative meaning that it simply cannot include this kind of thing and I don't know what I would call Pettigrew or Voldemort if Lily's sacrifice is selfish. (OK, they are called evil but IMO selfish at the same time.) However, I see that you agree that it was a good thing for Snape to try to save Lily and that it was a good thing that Lily saved her son - and it is here the thoughts start to come:
You seem to be saying (I hope I understand it correctly) that dying for someone we love very much is just natural ("selfish"), while dying for someone or someones who is/are not particularly important to us would be selfless. (Is that what you mean?) This reminds me of a 19th century novel in which the author says something that can be summarized like this: A man who is willing to die for a cause he believes in can be called a great man. A man who is willing to die for a cause he does not believe in, however, is a real hero. (In these terms, Snape risking his life for Lily would be "great" but Snape risking his life for Harry would be "heroic".) I think a logical question after the above thought can be: Where is the man who would be willing to die for a cause he does not believe in? Why would anyone do that? In the novel, there is an explanation: the "hero" who does not believe in and does not fight for the cause (BTW the cause is absolutely noble and the man in question is not morally bankrupt) dies (when the cause is lost) by pretending to be his brother, who fought for the cause and who is now facing arrest and execution. Due to this hero's voluntary self-sacrifice, instead of the man who believes in the cause, another man dies, one who does not believe in the cause. Fine. But he does not do it alone for the cause he does not believe in but also (and primarily) for the purpose of saving his brother, who he loves very much. Selfish or selfless? Heroic or natural? It depends on how we look at it. The two reasons cannot be separated from each other. In the same way, Snape risks his life (directly) for Harry, who he loathes. That would be super-selfless and super-heroic. But he also does this (indirectly) for Lily, who he loves. That would be just natural and great. Again, I don't think the two aspects can be separated. Snape himself says: to keep Lily Potter's son safe. He risks and sacrifices for years - not for Lily and not for Harry but for Lily's son. He even says Lily Potter's son, indicating that he was trying to protect Lily's son but at the same time a Potter. IMO, what Snape says expresses perfectly and beautifully how his love for Lily (a deeply personal feeling) is intermingled with (even) more selfless motivations.
I think people who risk their lives or make sacrifices for people they do not know or love will tend to have some other personal (selfish?) motivations for doing it, whether it is a personal experience in the past or their love for a country, or a general love for life or compassion or the good feeling the result gives... I don't know but I find it hard to believe that many people would sacrifice their lives without any other motivation just because they are so selfless. Then, if motivations are complex, why could we not say that on the hilltop, where Snape's motivation was to save someone he loved, he was also making a choice (in a more general sense) for that one single beam of light in him (against all the darkness) that love represented? Similarly, while Lily "only" did the natural thing when she sacrificed her life, was she not also fighting against a great evil power, against the principle of hatred ruining so many other lives and for the principle of love?
(... to be continued...)
wynnleaf - May 10, 2008 6:58 pm (#2130 of 2617)
Julia makes an excellent point with the expression "personal motivations." My feeling is that according to mona amon's comment, it would imply that anyone who acts sacrificially for "personal motivations" is selfish. But everything we do has some personal, that is internal, motivation. That is, there's a reason why we think it's important. Our inner decision or values may make a complete stranger's life seem important enough to risk our own life. But we reach that decision because we believe in our personal assessment and motivations. Does that make the decision selfish? No. Because acting on our personal motivations is not the same as acting for personal benefit.
Is it personal benefit to do something because we are personally motivated and therefore it is satisfying to act? I think that's really stretching it. One might as well say that the enjoyment that one gets out of giving a gift makes all gift giving selfish unless it's unpleasant.
And what about the person who acts without any thought at all to save another's life? What about the stranger who dashes into the street to pull a child out of the way of a passing car? Because that person didn't think at all, but just acted, are they somehow far more heroic than if they had risked their life to save their own child?
Personally, I think the parsing of heroism based on the notion that doing something for someone you love isn't as noble as doing something for someone who you dislike is actually missing the point. In my opinion, love is a great deal based upon action, not just a set of warm fuzzy feelings. Therefore, the notion of "loving your enemy," or just a stranger, would make the action of risking one's life to save the enemy or stranger the same thing as loving the enemy or stranger, and therefore the "stranger" becomes just as important to one's personal motivation as anyone else.
But the instinct to save one's own child is, according to JKR in an interview, something practically any mother would do. In fact, I don't think it's necessarily true. It's kind of true, but there are far too many parents who neglect their children or selfishly care for themselves over their child to think that any mother would do the same as Lily.
Dryleaves - May 11, 2008 3:48 am (#2131 of 2617)
Very good points, Julia and Wynnleaf.
In the discussion about Snape's selfishness on the hilltop I feel that the moral aspect is not so much in the "anything" as in what is said before it is pronounced. DD is disgusted with Snape when he hears about his request to Voldemort. Then Snape alters his request to DD from "save her" to save them ". This makes me think of a (I think) biblical story (I seem to have a lot of biblical associations when it comes to The Prince's tale )where two women are brought before King Solomo because they both claim to be the mother of an infant child. None of them will give in and there is no way of prooving to whom the child really belongs, so finally King Solomo says: "Let's cut the child in half and give the women one half each!" One of the women then says: "Well, that is just as good. Kill the child: then none of us will have it and we will be even", but the other cries: "No, let her have it! Just don't harm the child!" King Solomo decided she was the mother. When given the choice, Snape on the hilltop would rather see Lily live happily ever after together with James Potter and their son than have her for himself only. When realising that DD will not save Lily only, but also her family, he could just as well have said: "Let her die, then, if I can't have her anyway!" or "Just kill me, then, if I can't have her!" But he asks DD to save them all and agrees to take part in the protection. And I think this is at least less selfish than just wanting to have her for himself.
Then, if for example what Lily does when she protects Harry with her own life is selfish, there is perhaps no real need or use for the very word.
Julia H. - May 11, 2008 5:16 am (#2132 of 2617)
Edited May 11, 2008 6:26 am
When realising that DD will not save Lily only, but also her family... (Dryleaves)
It does not seem probable that this is what he realizes at this point. I think what he realizes is that DD expects him to think of the other two people involved in the danger as well. He is concerned about Lily only and he does not care for anyone else but he is not stupid: it is unlikely that he ever actually thinks that DD will save Lily for him and let her family die. This is what LV has promised to him, so if he wanted to save Lily exclusively for himself, the only thing he could do would be to hope that LV would keep his word. However, he knows that Lily has always come to the defence of anybody being attacked (Petunia, Mary, Snape) and LV has just identified the Potters to him as a couple who have thrice defied him (together!). Asking LV to spare Lily (an Order member) involves a certain risk. LV tends to suspect his servants rather easily, and we see how he reacts in GoF, when Pettigrew suggests capturing another enemy instead of the well-guarded Harry Potter or how easily he suspects that Draco may have decided to befriend Harry Potter (in DH). Snape could not ask LV to grant him anything more when Voldemort is determined to kill the child and the father is seen as the child's main protector. Besides, it is entirely up to LV whether he wants to grant this favour or not (it is not "in exchange" for anything). Even Lily is likely to be spared only if she does not interfere - but she is just the kind of person who will interfere and Snape knows her. So Snape decides to go to DD but when he does that, he must know (if at all he thinks about what will happen after Lily is saved) that it means that the whole family will be warned. He knows what he is doing is spoiling LV's whole plan, it is not just an extra security measure for Lily's sake. Besides, he might be killed or at least captured, arrested, put into Azkaban, his role in the prophecy business may be made known - or else may be killed by LV if LV discovers what he has done. This is all very likely and it means he cannot have any hope of saving Lily for himself, from the moment DD is involved in the rescue attempt and after all it is Snape who decides to alert DD.
A faithful follower still, but it is to his credit that he now finds it far more congenial to follow the light than the dark. (Mona from the Read A Long)
Mona, I was nitpicking a little here (sorry ), even though I understood that we essentially agreed. What caught my attention in this sentence was the word but. I wondered if the word (faithful) follower had a slightly negative meaning (something like "only a follower but at least following the right person"). Snape is a follower and for a while it may be the same to him what he follows but later, when he is "Dumbledore's man through and through" I think this changes. He is definitely not tempted when he is again in the company of "leader-type" Voldemort, not even when DD is dead, LV is indestructible and the light side seems to be losing. He keeps following DD and he follows his own choice.
Now I am reminded of another book ("children's book"?) in which a group of boys regularly play a game in which they form a hierarchical organization and of course everybody wants to be someone of a higher rank and there is only one of them who is happy to be a private only and who does not mind receiving orders from everyone else and obeying. When the game becomes unexpectedly serious, this little follower turns out to be very brave, very selfless and ultimately a hero.
Back to Snape: What does "being a follower" mean in his case? An innate trait, a situation in life, a choice or a sign of "immaturity", something that he has to grow out of? Twice he is shown in a quasi-leader position. Once when he takes charge among the DE's at the end of HBP: He is not a real leader, of course, because in reality he fights against those he is at the moment "leading" but he shows the ability to give orders and to become accepted as a leader in a situation of crisis. Another time is when he is Headmaster. Again, it is not a real leader position because he is not accepted by those he "leads". However, he shows the ability to bring important decisions and to work for those whose safety depends on him. He is a loner in the first place, of course, but on these occasions he seems to show certain qualities leaders are expected to have. Any opinions?
Dryleaves - May 11, 2008 9:50 am (#2133 of 2617)
I know I didn’t write it like that at all , but my point was not that Snape didn’t realise that DD would save all the Potters, I meant that DD’s ‘disgusting’-remark works as a test of Snape’s true intentions. He says (this is not an exact quote): “You do not care about the lives of her husband and child as long as you can have what you want.” Snape’s “Save them all, then” is a sign to DD that he really, truly cares about Lily, not that he just wants her for himself.
Then Snape as a leader or follower: We do see Snape in a leader position in the classroom as well. In CoS his behaviour in a classroom crisis is contrasted to Lockhart’s. When Lockhart releases the pixies he flees the turmoil he has caused, when Harry throws fireworks in potion class Snape restores order, makes the students line up to get an antidote and threatens the guilty one with expulsion. He takes controll of the situation.
Compared to DD and LV Snape is always second. Like the two of them Snape is a very intelligent and powerfull wizard and it is possible that his being second is not so much due to his lesser abilities as it is due to a personal disposition. Snape works silently, in the hidden, and I don’t think he minds this, even if he might need a bit of recognition once in a while. He makes his own decisions, but accordingly to the plan. Even if he is an ambitious Slytherin, I don’t think his ambition is to rule and lead others. I think he is more of a scientist and an artist regarding ambition and disposition. I think he wants recognition more than power. But he can take the lead if it is required of him.
Julia H. - May 11, 2008 1:04 pm (#2134 of 2617)
I meant that DD’s ‘disgusting’-remark works as a test of Snape’s true intentions. (Dryleaves)
I see now what you mean. I agreed with all the rest of your post except that half sentence.
We do see Snape in a leader position in the classroom as well.
Thanks for reminding me of this instance, yes. I am a teacher and I have never really thought that being a teacher in a classroom is a leadership position but of course in a sense it is.
I think he is more of a scientist and an artist regarding ambition and disposition. I think he wants recognition more than power.
I absolutely agree. Snape seems to be able to take control when it is necessary (in a crisis mainly) but does not seem to crave for a position of leadership or power. But I don't think that "wanting power" (or even "having power") always and necessarily overlaps with "having (some) qualities of a leader".
mona amon - May 11, 2008 7:25 pm (#2135 of 2617)
This reminds me of a 19th century novel
Julia, which novel?
In my vocabulary, selfish has such a pejorative meaning that it simply cannot include this kind of thing
Well maybe not absolutely selfish, but relatively, when compared to dying heroically to save others. It's almost the same as defending yourself from danger. Not selfish exactly, but something you are doing for yourself. What you and Wynnleaf have demonstrated is that this sort of thing is good, which I never disputed. I'm definitely not saying that saving strangers is the only noble thing to do. I'm not even saying that saving your own loved ones is not a noble thing to do. What I'm saying is that this sort of deed has nothing to do with one's moral state. Even a 'morally bankrupt' person is capable of this sort of heroism or self sacrifice, as long as they love someone as much as or more than they love themselves, and if that loved one is in danger. Narcissa would have done the same thing as the morally superior Lily if LV had burst in and threatened baby Draco. Bella wouldn't, but she loves Voldy above all others, LOL!
What caught my attention in this sentence was the word but. I wondered if the word (faithful) follower had a slightly negative meaning (something like "only a follower but at least following the right person"). (Julia)
Well it is a tricky sort of position. It does depend on who one chooses to follow. If the follower has the discernment enough to choose the right leader, then being a faithful follower need not be a negative thing.
Dryleaves - May 12, 2008 12:28 am (#2136 of 2617)
Julia, which novel? (mona amon)
Yes, I'd like to know that as well!
Julia H. - May 12, 2008 4:21 am (#2137 of 2617)
Edited May 12, 2008 5:37 am
Julia, which novel?
One that you may not find in the library round the corner but I found a text version on the internet, here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It is a Hungarian novel The Baron's Sons by M. Jókai. (Historical, romantic, epic, about patriotism, heroism and choices.) The part I referred to starts on page 297, with Chapter XXVII. However, the text is abridged and the short chapter containing the thought about the "true hero" is missing. A more exact rough translation - still only mine - is something like this: "He was the only hero among us ... to die for a cause one adores and believes in is human ambition but to die for a cause one adores but never believed in - it is a superhuman sacrifice. The former is a 'great man', the latter is a 'hero'."
If the follower has the discernment enough to choose the right leader, then being a faithful follower need not be a negative thing. (Mona)
That is what I am saying. I don't think "being a follower" has an absolute positive or negative value. Not everybody is born to be a leader. "Being a leader" is not negative or positive in itself either. It depends on who and where the person leads. This is the reason why I asked whether "being a follower (or leader)" is an innate characteristic or a situation or a choice or what.
Steve Newton - May 12, 2008 6:38 am (#2138 of 2617)
In the DH read along thread we have decided to do a series read along. On our agenda is a comparison/parallel of Harry and Snape. On the way to work this morning I had a thought, I know, very dangerous. Anyway, in SS/PS Ron sacrifices himself so that Harry can advance to the goal. This sounds familial so I'm thinking that perhaps there may be more parallels of Snape to Ron than Harry.
Julia H. - May 12, 2008 12:56 pm (#2139 of 2617)
Steve, I am very much interested in the Harry - Snape parallels and many very good points have already been brought up on the Read A Long, which I would really like to discuss in details. However, I am absolutely ready to investigate any Ron - Snape parallels as well. Since the idea (I guess) is really new (and it does seem a good one), we could start by collecting a few more points. (Ron's self-sacrifice in PS takes place just before Harry faces Voldemort for the first time - almost, not counting the one when he was a baby. Snape dies helping Harry just before Harry faces Voldemort for almost the last time - the last but one time before the final confrontation.)
Dryleaves - May 13, 2008 10:24 am (#2140 of 2617)
Ron's self-sacrifice in PS/SS takes place during a game of wizard's chess (that is for real) and in a way so does Snape's (but this time its for real-real). So maybe this scene is pointing forwards to the real game that is to come and that will demand sacrifices in order to reach the final victory, more than it shows any parallels between Ron and Snape. But I think we should be open to any parallels and of course this one is worth investigating!
On the DH read-a-long thread Orion made the observation that Snape, a male character, was crafted by a female author. I also note that some of the diversity of opinion for the Snape character may align by gender.
Do we see Snape differently because we each attach a gender bias?
Dryleaves - May 1, 2008 2:56 am (#2102 of 2617)
"...convincing compound of the ordinary and the extraordinary, even heroic." (Julia)
I like this description of Snape and it is something like this that I first thought JKR wanted Snape to be when she wrote the books, and therefore I was suprised when she spoke about the character in the post DH interviews (so the theory about the psychologist on the public relations team may be accurate... : )) I thought she really liked this idea, that a person could be like that. I also like what you write about him as the reluctant hero, because I tend to feel and care more about this type of hero, maybe because I feel that it is much more easy to identify with them. If you are not an adventurer, you still may meet lots of situations in your life that will demand some kind of courage and maybe even heroism.
So if JKR wanted revenge on her old chemistry teacher, it might have backfired. He must have been a very good muse!
"I think the angles are really angels this time, unseen by living humans (characters, author or readers) and they are probably in the Shrieking Shack singing a heavenly song to the Prince, healing his wounds and giving peace to his troubled soul." (Julia)
I hope so. I guess angels' song isn't easily heard by the worldly ear...
"Do we see Snape differently because we each attach a gender bias?" (Soul Search)
Could you elaborate that, please? Nobody I know wants to discuss Snape with me, so I have not noted any such differences, but it would be interesting to learn more about them.
Julia H. - May 1, 2008 6:49 am (#2103 of 2617)
Of course it is not the angles but the angels but I see you understood my post in spite of my mistake. LOL!
Orion - May 1, 2008 7:13 am (#2104 of 2617)
I very much like the idea of the psychologist on the public relations team. You're not cynical at all, only realistic. On the other hand, Rowling has revealed so many things which aren't exactly pro-sales (the big DD controversy, Hagrid never marries, things like that) that you wonder what exactly the psychologist is being paid for. Maybe they hired him or her to contain the damage.
Julia H. - May 1, 2008 9:19 am (#2105 of 2617)
Snape as the reluctant hero (Dryleaves)... I like this expression, I really do (it has an interesting "ring"), although perhaps it was not exactly reluctance that I had in mind. Snape is willing to do lots of things, difficult and dangerous things included, but does not mind staying in the background and he seems to have a practical approach to the common purpose: whatever takes us there the soonest, it must be done by someone, regardless whether it is something spectacular or something mundane, glorious or unpleasant, small or big.
Perhaps it is because he does not see or imagine himself as a hero, in spite of his bravery. It is interesting that he does not want to be a Gryffindor originally and then many years later he seems to be stricken when Dumbledore tells him how brave he thinks Snape to be and that they "sort to soon". I guess most eleven-year-old boys like imagining themselves heroes but Snape is repeatedly described as small and skinny, so it is not surprising that he cannot imagine himself in a house among "would-be heroes" and this self-image is probably a long-lasting one, even though he experiences it first as a student and later as a teacher that real Gryffindor-students do not necessarily seem to be typical heroes at once (Neville...). In time it becomes rather important to him that no Gryffindor should/could question his bravery (the typical Gryffindor-value). But when he is stricken by DD's words, it implies perhaps that Snape, on the one hand, thinks/knows that his life could have been very different if he had not been sorted into Slytherin and, on the other hand, he is stricken by the realization (because of DD's words?) that he could have had a chance to be sorted and accepted among the "heroes" after all.
Do we see Snape differently because we each attach a gender bias? (Soul Search)
I can't wait to read answers to this question.
Nobody I know wants to discuss Snape with me... (Dryleaves)
That is why the Forum is here.
shepherdess - May 1, 2008 11:00 am (#2106 of 2617)
I don't feel like I can discuss Snape on this forum, because my opinion of him is vastly different from everyone else's here. If I were to post my opinion of him, I'd get dung bombs thrown at me!
Since JKR made him into some wounded bird who had no choice but to do the things he did, it seems like everyone now worships and idolizes him. My opinion is quite the opposite.
The thing is, I want to be able to appreciate the good he did, and if people would discuss him in a realistic way, taking the bad with the good, it would be easier for me to accept the good. But to go from thinking he's a pathetic loser, to worshiping at his feet, is too big a leap, and I find it sickening. So I generally just avoid Snape discussions here.
Well, I guess that illustrates my opinion on the gender bias thing too.
Ducks dung bombs*
wynnleaf - May 1, 2008 11:52 am (#2107 of 2617)
Shepherdess, I am completely at a loss to see how your comments reflect or in any way relate to a gender bias. But since none of us are quite sure what Soul Search meant in the first place (please tell us SS! ), maybe I'm just missing it.
As regards worshipping at Snape's feet, I'm never quite sure what some readers mean by this, especially regarding this thread. I've often seen people comment that some of us (I tend to assume I'm included), totally worship Snape and see no negatives in him, nothing wrong with his insults or sarcasm, etc. And yet I've yet to see anyone post on here over several years that asserts that Snape is just wonderful. I've yet to see anyone deny that he has many flaws. My feeling is that the readers who truly dislike Snape were very unsettled by JKR having him do such heroic things, love someone with such commitment, give up practically everything and die for the cause. But frankly, I think a thread that spent a lot of time with everyone just agreeing that Snape is overly insulting and sarcastic would be kind of boring. In general, people like to discuss differences in opinion, or new ideas, and the fact that Snape is insulting and sarcastic and unfair at times to students just doesn't go very far in a discussion, until you get people with different opinions about why he was sarcastic, why he was insulting, and why he hated Harry or was unfair. But then you get others posting that to explore the "whys" is somehow the same as "excusing" Snape (it's not). So I tend to feel that for readers who thoroughly dislike Snape, it's really difficult to discuss him. I mean, what is there to say? Everyone agrees with most of his bad points, and if a person doesn't want to think through the "whys and wherefores" behind those bad points, there's not much less to discuss but the more positive stuff.
So Shepherdess, what would you like to see discussed on this thread?
Solitaire - May 1, 2008 7:51 pm (#2108 of 2617)
If I were to post my opinion of him, I'd get dung bombs thrown at me!
Probably not from me, Shepherdess. Although I have had to acquit him of a lot after DH, I have never been a big Snape fan. I suppose I still tend to filter his treatment of Harry and the others through my Muggle Teacher Filter, and I find a lot of it unacceptable. I won't belabor the point, because a couple of my tirades are in some of the Snape archives.
Along another line of thought ... this is probably not true of our more discerning readers, but I have friends who did not begin reading the series until after they'd seen the first movie. They became Snape-fans because they were Alan Rickman fans.
Solitaire
Julia H. - May 2, 2008 12:26 am (#2109 of 2617)
It is sad if people expect to get dung bombs for expressing their opinion. I guess those who like the Snape-character could expect the same thing because Shepherdess is clearly not alone with her opinion (whatever is is). But this is not what usually happens on this forum. More than half a year has passed since the publication of DH. The first surprise/shock/(name it what you want) after the Snape-revelation is over. I guess people who truly dislike the character have given up discussing him because it really is not too interesting to enter long, long discussions for a long time about a character that the reader simply sees as despicable. After a while there is not much to tell. (I can't see much discussion on Vernon Dursley on this forum and even the discussion concerning the much more important Lucius Malfoy is far more limited than the discussion on Snape.) Those who are still discussing Snape tend to be the ones who like the character at least to some extent, and, as Wynnleaf says, who are more interested in the whys and wherefores than in condemning the many flaws which are obvious anyway.
As for the "sickening worship": These words felt a bit like dung bombs, actually. If opinions differ, they differ, there is nothing wrong with that. But before we start labelling other people's opinions, we should perhaps remember that all opinions originate in what is written in the HP books (Alan Rickman fans aside). Of course, it is up to every one of us to decide what they can or what they want to discuss and with whom or whether they "risk" getting answers (not dung bombs) that may express opinions different from theirs or not.
mona amon - May 2, 2008 7:04 am (#2110 of 2617)
My opinion is quite the opposite. (Shepherdess)
I would love to hear your opinion, Shepherdess! It's true that most of us posting now are 'Snape fans' except for Soul Search I think, and opposite opinions definitely make the discussions more lively!
Orion - May 2, 2008 7:26 am (#2111 of 2617)
Soul Search, was that you with the gender bias aspect? I'd love to know more about that. Does it relate to Julia's post about his Patronus representing his feminine side? Or to my post about the difficulties of a female author who wants to do justice to a male character?
Soul Search - May 2, 2008 8:14 am (#2112 of 2617)
Gender bias, etc.
I have wondered why the Snape character has generated so much, and so strong, discussion. We have made thousands of Snape posts to only a few for Harry Potter, the main character. Many Snape posters express very strong feelings and these are often in opposition to other posters. We even had one poster get banned for her strong expressions. Some posters are even afraid to express their opinion.
Even the author is surprised by the interest in her Snape character. She thought she was creating a rather minor character and can't understand why he has garnered to much strong opinion.
Now, I don't think it is any surprise that readers interpret a character based upon their own experiences, life philosophy, etc. It is hard to be objective and ignore our own feelings. For a simple character, say Harry, there isn't much room for personal interpretation. He is the hero, is heroic, and most of us will see him that way. Same with Voldemort: evil, evil, evil. Neither Harry nor Voldemort generate a lot of discussion: we mostly agree.
Snape is different. He is a bit heroic, but also a bit evil, or at least nasty. Some posters, or at some times, the hero shines through; with other posters, or at other times, the evil pervades. This generates a lot of strong discussion.
Orion's post about a female author creating a male character and Julia's about the doe patronus sparked a thought that posters may be seeing the same character from a gender dominate viewpoint. Maybe, for example, female posters want to "mother" him and male posters want to defeat him in battle.
After making the observation and the post, I started looking back through posts but couldn't really come to any conclusion. There is just plain too much data to sort anything out.
Can anyone else make any observations? Do opinions on the Snape character align by poster gender?
Orion - May 2, 2008 9:29 am (#2113 of 2617)
Ah, that's what you mean. An interesting post!
First of all it would be perfect to know the gender of every poster. Sometimes, when they assume first names or take their own plain names (?), it's easy, but I don't always know. Do the other forumers?
The aspect of "mothering" is certainly important. But there's another aspect - I don't know whether it's true for many other Snape thread inhabitants:
Gryffindor gets on my nerves. Especially when all the other houses cheer for Gryffindor during the Quidditch matches. And Harry really is heroic, heroic, heroic and not much else. Harry has a brief chance to be an obnoxious git in OOP, but he is in a very difficult phase of his life and already his perpetual anger makes you feel sorry for him again. And he often acts first and thinks afterwards, but that's all. Again and again this "ability to love" is emphasized, and DD gushes over him as if he was Harry's own proud grandfather. Every Gryffindor is firmly on the good side, and every Slytherin is firmly on the bad side, and every Hufflepuff and every Ravenclaw is firmly on the Gryffindor side. I can't stand that.
The pro-Gryffindor bias represents everything I don't like about these books, and it's the reason why I took long breaks between book one, two and three. And Snape is the antidote these books need so badly. I was never a real Snape fan until I joined this forum last year and read wynnleaf's posts, but I always enjoyed it when Snape was severely underwhelmed by a Gryffindor performance and said so, and I was always disappointed when he lost out to them, again and again and again. In the beginning Snape was still a comic relief character, and he kept some scenes out of the sugar pot with his acerbic comments.
So that's the reason why I like Snape. I hate "heroic Super.Snape" with a vengeance and I would like him a lot more if he had done the sensible thing, told DD in very forum-unfriendly words that he could do his dirty work himself, told Harry everything he knew and disapparated to sunny beaches with a new passport and a false beard. Harry would have coped excellently on his own. He always does.
Julia H. - May 2, 2008 10:12 am (#2114 of 2617)
Undoubtedly, the great amount of discussion the Snape character can generate is due in the first place to the fact that Snape is neither totally black, nor totally white, as Soul Search says, a bit heroic and a bit nasty, or even quite heroic and quite nasty. One of the possible reasons why the character touches so many reader's feelings may be (and I don't know if this has already come up or not on this thread) the Prodigal Son effect. We have got Harry as the Good Son, who is always good and who ultimately gets everything for his hard work and loyalty (and indeed he does) and then there is Snape who goes astray, loses more or less everything of value that he has (Lily...) and then returns... and the reader is happy and finds the occasion worthy a feast. (Even more so, if the author does not...) Then it is intriguing to know what happens to the Prodigal Son after his return and this is the story we more or less get with the Snape character.
The "son" metaphor then takes us almost directly to:
Maybe, for example, female posters want to "mother" him and male posters want to defeat him in battle. (Soul Search)
... and then the male posters find themselves face to face with the "mother tigers"...
(About "mothering Snape": it does no really belong here but not long ago my son did a HP personality test and it turned out that he is a Severus Snape! At least now I know why I understand the character. LOL!)
More seriously: I don't see a gender correlation with liking or disliking Snape. Of course, Orion is right, we do not always know the gender behind a nickname, but when we can at least suspect it, I think the only possible correlation (very tentatively said now) there seems to be is that female readers perhaps tend to express stronger or more "extreme" opinions, while "suspected" male readers may be more balanced and less emotional. Granted, there must be lots of exceptions even if this suggestion is valid at all. I don't know... Besides Orion's observation and my observation on the Read Along, we must not forget Tandaradei's post with the insightful observation that certain female readers tend to read so many different feelings into that poor male character that he would certainly explode if he were to feel all that.
That is a reference to a conversation between Hermione and Ron, illustrating psychological differences between teenage girls and teenage boys - something that JKR, IMO does very well, though I don't want to decide how much of this is really typical and how much only stereotypical. Snape as a male character is certainly written by a female author but then all other characters in the books are... Actually it would be interesting to see if it is possible to make some kind of parallel between the communication difficulties observable between Ron and Hermione, Harry and Cho and the communication difficulties between Lily and Snape at about the same age. Is JKR showing us the same thing or not?
Soul Search - May 2, 2008 11:37 am (#2115 of 2617)
Julia H.,
"... female readers perhaps tend to express stronger or more "extreme" opinions, while "suspected" male readers may be more balanced and less emotional."
Wow. If I, with my male gender bias, had said that I would expect to be buried in dung bombs! You may, however, be on to something. While looking at past posts I did note that most posters still active on this thread are probably female. (I also noted we have lost a lot of good posters in the last few months.)
Myself, I like someone to present a reasoned disagreement to my ideas. It means they have read the post, always good, but it also allows me to look again and see if I missed something. And, of course, disagreement also means more discussion ... which is the point to all this.
wynnleaf - May 2, 2008 12:29 pm (#2116 of 2617)
Good posts to all.
Myself, I like someone to present a reasoned disagreement to my ideas. (Soul Search)
Absolutely. In my opinion, the discussion provoked through reasoned disagreement is one of the best attributes of the Forum and the Snape thread.
I've noticed on some other HP forums that the "anti-Slytherin bias" seems to get more response from male posters than the "anti-Snape bias."
I love this quote from a friend, duj, who posts elsewhere in the HP fandom:
I've noticed that my favourite fandom characters, such as Snape and Percy and Neville, are all under-appreciated and male. Perhaps they symbolise my autistic sons, and society's tendency to dismiss disabled people as being worth less than "normal" people.
What draws adults like myself to Snape is not "bad boy appeal" (I find the very suggestion ludicrous, frankly), but hurt/comfort or identification; we recognised early on that Snape was a profoundly unhappy man, trapped by duty and obligation into a dead-end job/life. "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation" (Henry David Thoreau) - only for Snape, despair is a more accurate word.
I think this has a lot to do with my interest in Snape's character. The reference above comparing Snape and other characters to people with disabilities may seem extreme, but I think some of what we've been discussing lately is exactly that - Snape being kind of emotionally "disabled" or "damaged" or "stunted" or whatever.
Julia H. - May 2, 2008 1:29 pm (#2117 of 2617)
I like your observation, Wynnleaf. I don't know if you agree but then the fact that Snape becomes a hero - one way or other [/b]- May be compared to a physically disabled person beginning to walk again or something similar. Despite all the tragic aspects, there is something hopeful about it.
Julia H. - May 3, 2008 12:51 am (#2118 of 2617)
I keep thinking about the quote from Wynnleaf's friend. (I like it more and more.) I've been thinking hard and I still cannot give a similar reason why or how I can relate Snape to my life, I only remember some very disturbing feelings associated with the Snape-story. Yet: I think dwelling on a character (and from a "children's book", too!) for such a long time goes beyond what the Dursleys would regard as "normal" but there it is... and it seems very probable to me that a lot of people (myself included) respond to something profoundly personal and important hidden somewhere in the depth of the character.
Dryleaves - May 3, 2008 12:47 pm (#2119 of 2617)
A reflection of mine on the quote from Wynnleaf's friend is that I tend to like the under-appreciated characters as well, or those that don't really fit the pattern they "should" fit in, such as Neville, Hermione (girl, intelligent, not pretty) and Snape. I am, myself, very shy and introvert as a person and often think that I don't "fit" socially. So that is one aspect of why I like Snape, I think.
Then I think it is the fact that Snape is neither good nor evil (nasty is a better word) or that he is both, and the possibilities of identificaton in this fact, but here I think it is also the idea of something positive (like love) in fact being the leading star of a person who is otherwise dark, nasty and bitter, that fascinates me. I like the idea of the unexpected good and the unconditional carrying through of it. (I guess it is a romantic streak...) The Snape character is extreme in this sense and this emphasises this idea to me. I think the character held this promise from book one, and after HBP I was afraid that JKR would have made him just a plain villain after all.
Then there is my mean streak: I just love his sarcasms. Even those uttered to children, though I am ashamed of it... : ) The only one I don't find funny at all is his comment on Hermione's teeth.
tandaradei - May 4, 2008 12:35 pm (#2120 of 2617)
Hmmm. My fascination with Snape comes through my original and obvious misunderstanding of him. I guess my "male" reading here is that I had developed, erm, extreme prejudices through ignorance? Among other things, I feel uncomfortable that I had experienced this; and want to understand why.
On the one hand, actions regardless of reasons, should be judged to some major degree; and here, Snape proved a most difficult person. However on the other hand, we are all human and carry invisible baggage, which influences our actions; and any fair and final judgement of others MUST take all such into consideration; if only so things can be made better. In the story as a whole I think Hermione always sought to understand others in this "final and fair" way; and Ron simply responded, which IMO is how all males probably do; and Harry took things personal, immediately, and for good reasons of his own, so his early hatreds of Snape must also be understood from such baggage. Interesting, from a 7-book overview.
Maybe there's a male/female example of all this, even within the story.
As to the "female" interpretations of Snape, I believe in this forum such investigations are on the mark and useful; only that at times they go beyond my male "intuitive-teaspoon" level's ability to follow. It all is most interesting, and important for me to follow nonetheless; because I (IMO) misjudged someone so profoundly in the story.
Soul Search - May 4, 2008 3:46 pm (#2121 of 2617)
I found the Snape character interesting because he was great for "theories."
The surface storyline had Snape as nasty in general and particularly toward Harry. Each book showed Snape getting closer to being "evil."
Yet, there were little snippets that said there was more to Snape and that he wasn't as bad as we had been led to believe. Especially starting at the end of GOF when Snape accepted an implied, but not stated, mission for Dumbledore it seemed he was destined for greater things.
Deathly Hallows, of course, quelched most of the "theories" and, to my mind, Snape's story became a bit lame, but it was fun while it lasted.
Dryleaves - May 5, 2008 12:52 am (#2122 of 2617)
Just a silly reflection on Snape being 'evil'. I never saw him as that, and when I read an interview with JKR I thought that maybe it is all about the 'P'.
In this interview she mentioned that the name 'Snape' is an allusion to 'snake', and that is of course obvious, but curiously enough I had never made that association. English is not my native language, but I remember thinking, when I read the first book, that the name 'Snape' was so fitting on this character, because even if the word in itself doesn't mean anything in my language, I associated it with adjectives that describe a person that is pretty much like Snape (and adjectives with the same associations exist in English as well of course), and I remember that I found it hilarious when I learned that his first name was 'Severus'. So I saw him as a snappy, rather unpleasant person, a caricature of a horrible teacher, not evil, but as he turned out to have saved Harry's life, I thought there would be something more to him, and that this would be something positive rather than negative. The 'p' instead of the 'k' made the difference.
And of course it is not as simple as that, but I think it is one of the factors that formed my picture of Snape.
wynnleaf - May 6, 2008 2:18 pm (#2123 of 2617)
Much is made of Snape's persecution of Neville. However, I recently noticed some facts and comparisons from the series that are interesting.
1. In general, it seems that Snape often assigns essays prior to classes regarding what the class is going to be studying. If Hermione was going to be helping Neville, the best time to do it would be prior to class in preparation, rather than helping him on assessable in-class work (they are often graded on what they do in class) which is basically just cheating. If Neville himself wanted Hermione's help, why not get it the night before, rather than depend on her to help him in class?
2. We don't see Snape actually punish Neville, at least as far as we know, for potions mishaps. He does punish him once for being involved in a fight, and another time for unknown reasons.
3. Snape does say rude or mean things to Neville, in particular his comments at the time of Lupin's boggart lesson. On the other hand, McGonagall isn't very nice to Neville either. In GOF, she "barked" at him in front of the whole class, "Longbottom, kindly do not reveal that you can't even perform a simple Switching Spell in front of anyone from Durmstrang!" And in POA, when he was found to have been carrying around a list of the Gryffindor passwords (which he did not, in fact, lose), McGonagall left him without a password, publicly humiliated and sitting outside the Gryffindor door waiting for someone to let him in, in spite of the supposed real danger that a mass murderer was lurking about -- and all of this due to a memory problem he probably couldn't even help.
4. Last, Neville really did, especially in the early years, present a danger to the class. In the very first class he melted a cauldron and we have seen how some of the potions can be dangerous.
Yes, Snape doesn't help things by intimidating Neville. On the other hand, I'm not sure that Snape is very much more severe with Neville than McGonagall is, or would be in similar situations. After all, Neville doesn't pose much danger in her class, although when he did seem to pose a danger to the Gryffindor common room security, she readily punished and humiliated him.
I think that Snape's actions as a teacher are presented so much through Harry's eyes that we sympathize with Neville when it is Snape making comments or actions toward him and assume that Snape is just being mean and unfair, but when McGonagall does it we "understand" her point of view. I think that's how JKR means the reader to respond.
Julia H. - May 7, 2008 5:34 am (#2124 of 2617)
Good observation, Dryleaves, about the "P". In a way, Snape's name is a red-herring, implying that he is a "snake". Not only this name but there is all the hissing alliteration in his name (Severus Snape), then he is the potions teacher (poisons, antidotes, medicine etc.: all snake-associations), then he is the Head of Slytherin House and what is Slytherin's animal? Not surprisingly, the character easily gets associated with a snake. Yet, he is not called "Snake" but "Snape": one sound of difference as a hint that he may not be a snake after all. It is a bit similar to what happens in HBP: there the whole book gradually and with increasing probability points to the possibility that Snape is evil. However, behind all the accumulating evidence regarding this conclusion, there is one quiet discordant voice, Dumbledore"s, repeating again and again: "I completely trust Severus Snape."
I completely understand the importance of this one sound difference. There is a certain translation of the HP series where quite a few of the names are translated as well (probably to make things easier to understand for the children who do not understand the associations of the English names and may not even know how to pronounce them). In this translation, Snape's name is translated with a word that actually means a kind of snake. I find it horrible and I hate it! It is just not true and misses the subtle hint the original name contains. Besides, as you say, the way this one-syllable name sounds in English is descriptive of the character (quite independent of the snake-associations) - snappy and quick and sudden and so on.
Interesting analysis, Wynnleaf. Snape is mean to Harry, while McGonagall is good to him (she puts her on the Quidditch team when he actually expects to be expelled), so from that moment on, the reader is meant to understand that Snape is a teacher who is just simply mean to all the good characters (who are students), while McGonagall is only strict but essentially fair and well-meaning to all the good student characters (who are mainly Gryffindors). But, as you say, on the one hand, McGonagall can also say very harsh things to Neville when she thinks she has a reason to do it and, on the other hand, Snape usually also has a reason to be angry with Neville (and Neville does not seem to make a lot of efforts to do a little better in Snape's classes). Snape's reactions are not encouraging (the worst one is indeed the one made to Lupin) but nor are McGonagall's and still nobody seems to think that McGonagall is particularly nasty to him.
After OOTP, McGonagall praises Neville for his participation in the fight in the Ministry. Snape cannot do anything similar because of his role but he also seems to lose all on-page contact with Neville after Neville's O.W.L.-s. The last thing I can recall that Snape says in connection with Neville is telling Crabbe to loosen his hold on Neville's neck. Not a nice remark (though probably one disguising a real concern for Neville's life) but at the moment, in front of Umbridge and the Slytherin students, he could not afford to be any kinder (even if he wanted). So I wonder a bit whether this remark might nevertheless include the meaning that Snape in his own way recognized Neville as one of the "fighters" - a real Gryffindor at last, not someone who somehow made it into precious Gryffindor without being either brainy or brawnie.
wynnleaf - May 7, 2008 6:07 am (#2125 of 2617)
Somewhat related to the Snape-snake sounds, does anyone think there's anything to the fact that Albus Severus Potter's initials are asp and that there seems to be some family speculation that he could end up in Slytherin? Not really part of the Snape discussion, but still...
The reason I brought up McGonagall and the way we readers are led to read her actions toward Neville completely differently from Snape's, is that I think such tactics are used by JKR throughout the series in order to misdirect us in our thinking about Snape.
For instance, we're led in HBP to believe that Slughorn is the better potions teacher because he seems so nice, gives incentives in his class for the students to achieve, and most of all, he likes Harry. But if we look carefully, we see that the brightest student, Hermione, is not able to brew potions as well in Slughorn's class as she did under Snape's teaching (perhaps because Snape used his own instructions which he put on the board, rather than the textbook), while Harry only succeeds because he's using Snape's notes. Sometimes, however, JKR gives us heavy clues that she's been misdirecting us, such as when Hermione points out the great similarities between Snape's opening DADA class speech and Harry's comments the previous year about learning DADA.
Dryleaves - May 7, 2008 7:45 am (#2126 of 2617)
...I think such tactics are used by JKR throughout the series in order to misdirect us in our thinking about Snape. (Wynnleaf)
I think so too, and sometimes she is doing this to the extent that it perhaps becomes a little too obvious. She also shows us that Snape is in fact a very skilled wizard. Snape is often described, openly or in a more disguised way, by comparison to other teachers, for example McGonagall, Lockhart or Slughorn, and the comparisons are not always to Snape's disadvantage. I think the constant miscrediting of Snape in combination with his shown competence is one of the reasons why he has become such a popular character.
I really like it when Snape tells Crabbe to loosen his hold around Neville's neck. It is concern about Neville in disguise, even if this concern is of more general than of personal character, and there is almost artistry in it. I think it reveals not too high an opinion of Crabbe, as well (but that might be me not understanding the fine distinctions of the English language).
And Crabbe, loosen your hold a little. If Longbottom suffocates it will mean a lot of tedious paperwork and I am afraid I shall have to mention it on your reference if ever you apply for a job. (OotP, Ch. 32)
Julia H. - May 7, 2008 9:58 am (#2127 of 2617)
I think it reveals not too high an opinion of Crabbe... (Dryleaves)
LOL, it certainly does! "... if ever you apply for a job." (Crabbe never does.)
Albus Severus Potter's initials are asp and that there seems to be some family speculation that he could end up in Slytherin? (Wynnleaf)
Wow, I never noticed this! Would it mean some uncanny influence by the "Severus" part of the name? Or just the force of the initials? Do these speculations concern the possibility of another book by Rowling (hinted at in the Epilogue)? At first sight Albus Severus does not seem to be somebody for Slytherin House. He is quite like Harry and it is to him that Harry acknowledges the internal "gryffindorness" of Snape, i.e., his extraordinary bravery. However, I recall an interview (I don't know where) with Rowling where she says that making a final decision on somebody's character (sorting) at such an early age without considering the possibility that people can change is unfair (or something similar). But, she adds, there can always come someone who has the ability to change the whole (Slytherin) House for the better from inside. (These are not her own words exactly but as far as I remember that is more or less what she says.) This is the only way I can imagine Albus Severus in Slytherin. (Albus and Severus together as "Albus Severus" redeeming Slytherin House - don't you think the idea may be worth a book?)
...I think such tactics are used by JKR throughout the series in order to misdirect us in our thinking about Snape. (Wynnleaf)
Yes, she is very good at that. It shows that she started to prepare the final surprise about Snape at the very beginning of the series, casting doubts about his trustability, then removing these doubts but in such a way that more and more of them linger still. When Snape does something good, it is almost always in the background and / or is shadowed by something bad in the foreground.
PS: Snape is suspected by Harry and seems to want to kill him. Then it turns out that Snape in fact saved Harry's life and that they were on the same side all along. However, Harry never talks about it with Snape, only with others and he learns that Snape hated his father (praised by others in the book) and probably saved Harry only to be "even" with James who had also saved Snape's life (both the reader and Harry suppose that it was in some noble, heroic way).
CoS: Snape enters the scene by wanting to have Harry expelled. A long scene about a situation unpleasant for the hero, who indeed has broken the law, by the way. Meanwhile, the reader almost forgets that before Snape's entrance, Harry and Ron are peering through a window trying to guess why Snape is not at the feast, expressing hopes that he is ill or has been sacked and Snape overhears the conversation. He is obviously angry, not only because the boys broke the law but because they talk about him like that. (Hogwarts is his home.) So, he threatens the boys with the possibility of expulsion. After DH, it is hard to believe that Snape really expected DD to expel Harry Potter, so it was probably just a "lesson" from Snape. It is never explained why Snape was not at the feast after all. Knowing now that Snape watched over Harry all the time, it is easy to imagine that he wanted to go and look for the boys somehow and saw them arriving and was going towards them when he heard them talk about him. (But we never find this out, so it remains a theory unfortunately.)
PoA: Snape is trying to watch over Harry while a dangerous murderer is believed to be looking for him but Snape is nasty and his nastiness is in contrast with Lupin's kindness, who seems to be genuinely concerned about Harry (teaches him the Patronus Charm). However, Lupin keeps the information of how Sirius could get into the castle a secret even when it is known that Sirius has been inside - but readers find it out only when they also find out that Sirius is not a murderer at all but a friend. From that moment, Snape's concern about Harry's safety seems to be totally pointless and only the nastiness remains.
GoF: Snape is suspected again. He is also nasty as ever. It turns out he was a DE. At the end of the book he saves Harry's life with DD and McGonagall but it is DD who is in the foreground. Snape joins the fight against LV but nobody knows what exactly he does. The question how DD knows that Snape can be trusted comes up for the first time.
OOTP: Snape is in the foreground but remains mysterious and ambiguous as he must. At the end of the book he saves Harry and his friends by alerting the order, however this happens off the page, while the scene where he is nasty to Harry (in the presence of Umbridge) happens in front of the reader. Harry (and by extension the reader) does not pay much attention to Snape saving his life because he is mourning Sirius, and even blames Snape for Sirius's death.
HBP: Only DD trusts Snape and it seems it is a mistake. Snape is kind to Narcissa and Draco but his usual self to Harry. He saves Draco in the foreground after the Sectumsempra. He also saves Harry's soul but this aspect remains in the background. In the end, he AK's DD, saves Draco and flees with the DE's. He also happens to drive them out of the castle before they could do any serious harm to anybody and saves Harry from the Cruciatus Curse but "explains" it with the Dark Lord's orders.
DH: JKR goes out of her way to give us more evidence about Snape being evil (I think this is the main reason behind the "betrayal" plan and George's ear) in order to fully "prepare" us for the major surprise in The Prince's Tale.
Hermione points out the great similarities between Snape's opening DADA class speech and Harry's comments the previous year about learning DADA. (Wynnleaf)
I love this part! Hermione at her best! IMO it is not only pointing out how JKR can misdirect us but also a reference to the idea that Harry and Snape have certain things in common despite the mutual loathing. This is something I'd really like to explore here on the Snape-thread once (if you don't mind). I think they even look similar (black hair, both of them are rather small and thin) but that is obviously not the main similarity.
Dryleaves - May 8, 2008 1:59 am (#2128 of 2617)
Hmm... The more Snape got suspected in the books, the more I grow to care for this character. His doubleness and the doubts about him makes him more and more alive as a character, and one particular scene where I felt a lot for him is when he shows his Dark Mark to Fudge. It is clear that he was a DE, but that he seems to be one no more. A scene like this could make the reader question where Snape's true loyalty lies, but it also make you wonder about who this person really is, what is his story, his motives, etc. The reader may suspect that there is an inner conflict that could be of great interest.
IMO it is not only pointing out how JKR can misdirect us but also a reference to the idea that Harry and Snape have certain things in common despite the mutual loathing. This is something I'd really like to explore here on the Snape-thread once (if you don't mind). I think they even look similar (black hair, both of them are rather small and thin) but that is obviously not the main similarity. (Julia)
Yes, this would be very interesting to discuss. I will think about it.
Julia H. - May 10, 2008 4:20 pm (#2129 of 2617)
Mona, our latest conversation on the Read A Long reminded me of lots of things but since I don't want to stretch the patience of the participants of the Read A Long, I have decided to bring these thoughts over here.
One part is still connected to Snape being "selfish" versus "selfless".
Do you mean Lily was also selfish when she shielded Harry with her own life? (Julia)
In a way, yes. We always consider those whom we love very much as part of ourselves. Lily's sacrifice was a good thing. But almost any parent would have done the same thing. It is a natural instinct to throw oneself between danger and the one we love, without even thinking about it. (Mona)
In my vocabulary, selfish has such a pejorative meaning that it simply cannot include this kind of thing and I don't know what I would call Pettigrew or Voldemort if Lily's sacrifice is selfish. (OK, they are called evil but IMO selfish at the same time.) However, I see that you agree that it was a good thing for Snape to try to save Lily and that it was a good thing that Lily saved her son - and it is here the thoughts start to come:
You seem to be saying (I hope I understand it correctly) that dying for someone we love very much is just natural ("selfish"), while dying for someone or someones who is/are not particularly important to us would be selfless. (Is that what you mean?) This reminds me of a 19th century novel in which the author says something that can be summarized like this: A man who is willing to die for a cause he believes in can be called a great man. A man who is willing to die for a cause he does not believe in, however, is a real hero. (In these terms, Snape risking his life for Lily would be "great" but Snape risking his life for Harry would be "heroic".) I think a logical question after the above thought can be: Where is the man who would be willing to die for a cause he does not believe in? Why would anyone do that? In the novel, there is an explanation: the "hero" who does not believe in and does not fight for the cause (BTW the cause is absolutely noble and the man in question is not morally bankrupt) dies (when the cause is lost) by pretending to be his brother, who fought for the cause and who is now facing arrest and execution. Due to this hero's voluntary self-sacrifice, instead of the man who believes in the cause, another man dies, one who does not believe in the cause. Fine. But he does not do it alone for the cause he does not believe in but also (and primarily) for the purpose of saving his brother, who he loves very much. Selfish or selfless? Heroic or natural? It depends on how we look at it. The two reasons cannot be separated from each other. In the same way, Snape risks his life (directly) for Harry, who he loathes. That would be super-selfless and super-heroic. But he also does this (indirectly) for Lily, who he loves. That would be just natural and great. Again, I don't think the two aspects can be separated. Snape himself says: to keep Lily Potter's son safe. He risks and sacrifices for years - not for Lily and not for Harry but for Lily's son. He even says Lily Potter's son, indicating that he was trying to protect Lily's son but at the same time a Potter. IMO, what Snape says expresses perfectly and beautifully how his love for Lily (a deeply personal feeling) is intermingled with (even) more selfless motivations.
I think people who risk their lives or make sacrifices for people they do not know or love will tend to have some other personal (selfish?) motivations for doing it, whether it is a personal experience in the past or their love for a country, or a general love for life or compassion or the good feeling the result gives... I don't know but I find it hard to believe that many people would sacrifice their lives without any other motivation just because they are so selfless. Then, if motivations are complex, why could we not say that on the hilltop, where Snape's motivation was to save someone he loved, he was also making a choice (in a more general sense) for that one single beam of light in him (against all the darkness) that love represented? Similarly, while Lily "only" did the natural thing when she sacrificed her life, was she not also fighting against a great evil power, against the principle of hatred ruining so many other lives and for the principle of love?
(... to be continued...)
wynnleaf - May 10, 2008 6:58 pm (#2130 of 2617)
Julia makes an excellent point with the expression "personal motivations." My feeling is that according to mona amon's comment, it would imply that anyone who acts sacrificially for "personal motivations" is selfish. But everything we do has some personal, that is internal, motivation. That is, there's a reason why we think it's important. Our inner decision or values may make a complete stranger's life seem important enough to risk our own life. But we reach that decision because we believe in our personal assessment and motivations. Does that make the decision selfish? No. Because acting on our personal motivations is not the same as acting for personal benefit.
Is it personal benefit to do something because we are personally motivated and therefore it is satisfying to act? I think that's really stretching it. One might as well say that the enjoyment that one gets out of giving a gift makes all gift giving selfish unless it's unpleasant.
And what about the person who acts without any thought at all to save another's life? What about the stranger who dashes into the street to pull a child out of the way of a passing car? Because that person didn't think at all, but just acted, are they somehow far more heroic than if they had risked their life to save their own child?
Personally, I think the parsing of heroism based on the notion that doing something for someone you love isn't as noble as doing something for someone who you dislike is actually missing the point. In my opinion, love is a great deal based upon action, not just a set of warm fuzzy feelings. Therefore, the notion of "loving your enemy," or just a stranger, would make the action of risking one's life to save the enemy or stranger the same thing as loving the enemy or stranger, and therefore the "stranger" becomes just as important to one's personal motivation as anyone else.
But the instinct to save one's own child is, according to JKR in an interview, something practically any mother would do. In fact, I don't think it's necessarily true. It's kind of true, but there are far too many parents who neglect their children or selfishly care for themselves over their child to think that any mother would do the same as Lily.
Dryleaves - May 11, 2008 3:48 am (#2131 of 2617)
Very good points, Julia and Wynnleaf.
In the discussion about Snape's selfishness on the hilltop I feel that the moral aspect is not so much in the "anything" as in what is said before it is pronounced. DD is disgusted with Snape when he hears about his request to Voldemort. Then Snape alters his request to DD from "save her" to save them ". This makes me think of a (I think) biblical story (I seem to have a lot of biblical associations when it comes to The Prince's tale )where two women are brought before King Solomo because they both claim to be the mother of an infant child. None of them will give in and there is no way of prooving to whom the child really belongs, so finally King Solomo says: "Let's cut the child in half and give the women one half each!" One of the women then says: "Well, that is just as good. Kill the child: then none of us will have it and we will be even", but the other cries: "No, let her have it! Just don't harm the child!" King Solomo decided she was the mother. When given the choice, Snape on the hilltop would rather see Lily live happily ever after together with James Potter and their son than have her for himself only. When realising that DD will not save Lily only, but also her family, he could just as well have said: "Let her die, then, if I can't have her anyway!" or "Just kill me, then, if I can't have her!" But he asks DD to save them all and agrees to take part in the protection. And I think this is at least less selfish than just wanting to have her for himself.
Then, if for example what Lily does when she protects Harry with her own life is selfish, there is perhaps no real need or use for the very word.
Julia H. - May 11, 2008 5:16 am (#2132 of 2617)
Edited May 11, 2008 6:26 am
When realising that DD will not save Lily only, but also her family... (Dryleaves)
It does not seem probable that this is what he realizes at this point. I think what he realizes is that DD expects him to think of the other two people involved in the danger as well. He is concerned about Lily only and he does not care for anyone else but he is not stupid: it is unlikely that he ever actually thinks that DD will save Lily for him and let her family die. This is what LV has promised to him, so if he wanted to save Lily exclusively for himself, the only thing he could do would be to hope that LV would keep his word. However, he knows that Lily has always come to the defence of anybody being attacked (Petunia, Mary, Snape) and LV has just identified the Potters to him as a couple who have thrice defied him (together!). Asking LV to spare Lily (an Order member) involves a certain risk. LV tends to suspect his servants rather easily, and we see how he reacts in GoF, when Pettigrew suggests capturing another enemy instead of the well-guarded Harry Potter or how easily he suspects that Draco may have decided to befriend Harry Potter (in DH). Snape could not ask LV to grant him anything more when Voldemort is determined to kill the child and the father is seen as the child's main protector. Besides, it is entirely up to LV whether he wants to grant this favour or not (it is not "in exchange" for anything). Even Lily is likely to be spared only if she does not interfere - but she is just the kind of person who will interfere and Snape knows her. So Snape decides to go to DD but when he does that, he must know (if at all he thinks about what will happen after Lily is saved) that it means that the whole family will be warned. He knows what he is doing is spoiling LV's whole plan, it is not just an extra security measure for Lily's sake. Besides, he might be killed or at least captured, arrested, put into Azkaban, his role in the prophecy business may be made known - or else may be killed by LV if LV discovers what he has done. This is all very likely and it means he cannot have any hope of saving Lily for himself, from the moment DD is involved in the rescue attempt and after all it is Snape who decides to alert DD.
A faithful follower still, but it is to his credit that he now finds it far more congenial to follow the light than the dark. (Mona from the Read A Long)
Mona, I was nitpicking a little here (sorry ), even though I understood that we essentially agreed. What caught my attention in this sentence was the word but. I wondered if the word (faithful) follower had a slightly negative meaning (something like "only a follower but at least following the right person"). Snape is a follower and for a while it may be the same to him what he follows but later, when he is "Dumbledore's man through and through" I think this changes. He is definitely not tempted when he is again in the company of "leader-type" Voldemort, not even when DD is dead, LV is indestructible and the light side seems to be losing. He keeps following DD and he follows his own choice.
Now I am reminded of another book ("children's book"?) in which a group of boys regularly play a game in which they form a hierarchical organization and of course everybody wants to be someone of a higher rank and there is only one of them who is happy to be a private only and who does not mind receiving orders from everyone else and obeying. When the game becomes unexpectedly serious, this little follower turns out to be very brave, very selfless and ultimately a hero.
Back to Snape: What does "being a follower" mean in his case? An innate trait, a situation in life, a choice or a sign of "immaturity", something that he has to grow out of? Twice he is shown in a quasi-leader position. Once when he takes charge among the DE's at the end of HBP: He is not a real leader, of course, because in reality he fights against those he is at the moment "leading" but he shows the ability to give orders and to become accepted as a leader in a situation of crisis. Another time is when he is Headmaster. Again, it is not a real leader position because he is not accepted by those he "leads". However, he shows the ability to bring important decisions and to work for those whose safety depends on him. He is a loner in the first place, of course, but on these occasions he seems to show certain qualities leaders are expected to have. Any opinions?
Dryleaves - May 11, 2008 9:50 am (#2133 of 2617)
I know I didn’t write it like that at all , but my point was not that Snape didn’t realise that DD would save all the Potters, I meant that DD’s ‘disgusting’-remark works as a test of Snape’s true intentions. He says (this is not an exact quote): “You do not care about the lives of her husband and child as long as you can have what you want.” Snape’s “Save them all, then” is a sign to DD that he really, truly cares about Lily, not that he just wants her for himself.
Then Snape as a leader or follower: We do see Snape in a leader position in the classroom as well. In CoS his behaviour in a classroom crisis is contrasted to Lockhart’s. When Lockhart releases the pixies he flees the turmoil he has caused, when Harry throws fireworks in potion class Snape restores order, makes the students line up to get an antidote and threatens the guilty one with expulsion. He takes controll of the situation.
Compared to DD and LV Snape is always second. Like the two of them Snape is a very intelligent and powerfull wizard and it is possible that his being second is not so much due to his lesser abilities as it is due to a personal disposition. Snape works silently, in the hidden, and I don’t think he minds this, even if he might need a bit of recognition once in a while. He makes his own decisions, but accordingly to the plan. Even if he is an ambitious Slytherin, I don’t think his ambition is to rule and lead others. I think he is more of a scientist and an artist regarding ambition and disposition. I think he wants recognition more than power. But he can take the lead if it is required of him.
Julia H. - May 11, 2008 1:04 pm (#2134 of 2617)
I meant that DD’s ‘disgusting’-remark works as a test of Snape’s true intentions. (Dryleaves)
I see now what you mean. I agreed with all the rest of your post except that half sentence.
We do see Snape in a leader position in the classroom as well.
Thanks for reminding me of this instance, yes. I am a teacher and I have never really thought that being a teacher in a classroom is a leadership position but of course in a sense it is.
I think he is more of a scientist and an artist regarding ambition and disposition. I think he wants recognition more than power.
I absolutely agree. Snape seems to be able to take control when it is necessary (in a crisis mainly) but does not seem to crave for a position of leadership or power. But I don't think that "wanting power" (or even "having power") always and necessarily overlaps with "having (some) qualities of a leader".
mona amon - May 11, 2008 7:25 pm (#2135 of 2617)
This reminds me of a 19th century novel
Julia, which novel?
In my vocabulary, selfish has such a pejorative meaning that it simply cannot include this kind of thing
Well maybe not absolutely selfish, but relatively, when compared to dying heroically to save others. It's almost the same as defending yourself from danger. Not selfish exactly, but something you are doing for yourself. What you and Wynnleaf have demonstrated is that this sort of thing is good, which I never disputed. I'm definitely not saying that saving strangers is the only noble thing to do. I'm not even saying that saving your own loved ones is not a noble thing to do. What I'm saying is that this sort of deed has nothing to do with one's moral state. Even a 'morally bankrupt' person is capable of this sort of heroism or self sacrifice, as long as they love someone as much as or more than they love themselves, and if that loved one is in danger. Narcissa would have done the same thing as the morally superior Lily if LV had burst in and threatened baby Draco. Bella wouldn't, but she loves Voldy above all others, LOL!
What caught my attention in this sentence was the word but. I wondered if the word (faithful) follower had a slightly negative meaning (something like "only a follower but at least following the right person"). (Julia)
Well it is a tricky sort of position. It does depend on who one chooses to follow. If the follower has the discernment enough to choose the right leader, then being a faithful follower need not be a negative thing.
Dryleaves - May 12, 2008 12:28 am (#2136 of 2617)
Julia, which novel? (mona amon)
Yes, I'd like to know that as well!
Julia H. - May 12, 2008 4:21 am (#2137 of 2617)
Edited May 12, 2008 5:37 am
Julia, which novel?
One that you may not find in the library round the corner but I found a text version on the internet, here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It is a Hungarian novel The Baron's Sons by M. Jókai. (Historical, romantic, epic, about patriotism, heroism and choices.) The part I referred to starts on page 297, with Chapter XXVII. However, the text is abridged and the short chapter containing the thought about the "true hero" is missing. A more exact rough translation - still only mine - is something like this: "He was the only hero among us ... to die for a cause one adores and believes in is human ambition but to die for a cause one adores but never believed in - it is a superhuman sacrifice. The former is a 'great man', the latter is a 'hero'."
If the follower has the discernment enough to choose the right leader, then being a faithful follower need not be a negative thing. (Mona)
That is what I am saying. I don't think "being a follower" has an absolute positive or negative value. Not everybody is born to be a leader. "Being a leader" is not negative or positive in itself either. It depends on who and where the person leads. This is the reason why I asked whether "being a follower (or leader)" is an innate characteristic or a situation or a choice or what.
Steve Newton - May 12, 2008 6:38 am (#2138 of 2617)
In the DH read along thread we have decided to do a series read along. On our agenda is a comparison/parallel of Harry and Snape. On the way to work this morning I had a thought, I know, very dangerous. Anyway, in SS/PS Ron sacrifices himself so that Harry can advance to the goal. This sounds familial so I'm thinking that perhaps there may be more parallels of Snape to Ron than Harry.
Julia H. - May 12, 2008 12:56 pm (#2139 of 2617)
Steve, I am very much interested in the Harry - Snape parallels and many very good points have already been brought up on the Read A Long, which I would really like to discuss in details. However, I am absolutely ready to investigate any Ron - Snape parallels as well. Since the idea (I guess) is really new (and it does seem a good one), we could start by collecting a few more points. (Ron's self-sacrifice in PS takes place just before Harry faces Voldemort for the first time - almost, not counting the one when he was a baby. Snape dies helping Harry just before Harry faces Voldemort for almost the last time - the last but one time before the final confrontation.)
Dryleaves - May 13, 2008 10:24 am (#2140 of 2617)
Ron's self-sacrifice in PS/SS takes place during a game of wizard's chess (that is for real) and in a way so does Snape's (but this time its for real-real). So maybe this scene is pointing forwards to the real game that is to come and that will demand sacrifices in order to reach the final victory, more than it shows any parallels between Ron and Snape. But I think we should be open to any parallels and of course this one is worth investigating!
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2141 to 2150
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:23 am
Soul Search - May 13, 2008 11:14 am (#2141 of 2617)
I am at a loss for Ron/Snape parallels. In fact, they seem rather opposites.
Ron has been hero Harry's loyal sidekick, almost from their first meeting. Snape was evil Voldemort's "sidekick," but not truely loyal.
Snape had a poor, lonely childhood; Ron a good one, with loving parents and lots of siblings.
Snape was (we think) academically inclined; Ron certainly wasn't.
Snape is driven; Ron is go-along.
Ron was part of a "gang;" Snape was pretty much a loner. (Not sure of Mulciber etal, but no one came to his rescue in the OotP pensive scene. He speaks of himself versus James etal as always four-on-one.)
Not sure what else for opposite, but I can't come up with any form of parallel.
Steve Newton - May 13, 2008 12:11 pm (#2142 of 2617)
They both have a sarcastic streak. I am not going to ponder right now but will keep an eye out on the read along.
wynnleaf - May 13, 2008 7:01 pm (#2143 of 2617)
Harry-Snape parallels seem all over the place and, I think, completely intentional by JKR. If there are Ron parallels, I can't really think of them, other than maybe coming from a poorer background like having used textbooks, but that's really not much of a parallel.
However, I think there are some situations or characteristics that JKR generally only gives characters who are on the good side. I can't think of a poor bad guy, with the exception of Tom Riddle and the Gaunts. Perhaps it's JKR's own background, but most of the characters who come from deprived backgrounds turn out to be good. Even Harry comes from a deprived background, even if he is actually wealthy. The flip side is that the wealthy ones, with the exception of Harry, have a streak of the bully in them and are spoiled. In fact, I felt it contributed to the likelihood that James wasn't the greatest fellow when JKR described him as being the "pampered" only child of wealthy parents.
Still, just because characters have some similar characteristics, such as being poor, doesn't really make a parallel between them.
For Snape, I think the strongest parallels are between Harry and Snape and between Dumbledore and Snape, but of course in different ways.
journeymom - May 15, 2008 4:35 pm (#2144 of 2617)
Ooooh, this a great conversation! I haven't visited the Snape thread in a while.
The chess game in PS: Seems to me that Ron's sacrifice in the game foreshadowed Dumbledore's death in HBP. Ron knew that in order for Harry to move on he, Ron, had to sacrifice his character.
It's true Snape did die before Harry went to meet Voldemort, paralelling Ron's sacrifice as well. But while Snape knew he might die, he certainly didn't go willingly.
Snape is still there in Philosopher's Stone. His poison puzzle comes after the chess game and is the last step before Harry faces Voldemort.
I agree, Snape more closely compares to Dumbledore and Harry. Ron is Harry's link to a big, healthy family.
Julia H. - May 16, 2008 2:27 am (#2145 of 2617)
But while Snape knew he might die, he certainly didn't go willingly. (Journeymom)
I think Snape made his decision when he accepted the task(s) DD gave him, especially when he agreed to "kill" DD. He accepted a situation which was bound to lead to his death almost surely since both sides had reasons to want to kill him from that moment on. Even as he was, technically speaking, still alive, he did knowingly and willingly sacrifice his life, at least the kind of life he had lived before and the life that had been (despite everything) worth living. Besides, the reason why he did no try to escape from the shack even when he realized that Voldemort wanted to kill him was that he wanted to do his duty and finish his task as long as there was the slightest chance that he could. But I also agree that there are much stronger parallels for Snape and Harry and Snape and Dumbledore than for Snape and anyone else.
Dryleaves has just solved a hangman on the games thread which I posted with the Harry-Snape parallels in mind. I think this sentence may be a symbolic foreshadowing of the parallels the reader is going to learn later (and if we ever need a motto for these parallels, it might be a good one).
"Dumbledore placed his long hands on either side of the pensieve and swirled it, rather as a gold prospector would pan for fragments of gold... and Harry saw his own face change smoothly into Snape's, who opened his mouth and spoke to the ceiling, his voice echoing slightly."
The "looking for fragments of gold" aspect is interesting, too.
Dryleaves - May 16, 2008 2:34 am (#2146 of 2617)
...and Harry saw his own face change smoothly into Snape's,...
I think this sentence may be a symbolic foreshadowing of the parallels the reader is going to learn later... (Julia)
I had the same thoughts when I solved your hangman. I suspected you were up to something...
Julia H. - May 22, 2008 10:27 pm (#2147 of 2617)
On the Read A Long thread, Jason Riddle posted the following thoughts about Snape. Since it is one of the relatively long posts and cannot be answered briefly, I'll give my answer in a separate post later. In the meantime it may provide food for thought for others who are interested.
Snape (facing the facts)
Certainly Snape was remorseful when he learned that Voldemort would target Lily, if by the word ‘remorse’ we mean he wished he hadn’t done it. But we must be careful not to twist Snape’s character into who we want him to be. Let’s face the facts. Snape was a DEATH EATER. He bore the dark mark. Snape could have entered into any number of respectable careers after Hogwarts. He didn’t. He chose to fight for Voldemort’s cause. Canon clearly shows that Snape was intelligent as a young man. So we cannot give him the same excuse we might give a Crabbe or a Goyle: that he was a mindless minion following the example set by friends or following the orders given by Voldemort with only a dull semi-conscious awareness of his actions and their consequences. Honesty compels us to admit that Snape knew exactly what he was doing when he joined the Dark Lord. He knows about Voldemort’s goals of a pure-blood monopoly on magic and the subjugation of muggles. And knowing this, why did he choose to fight for Voldemort’s cause? For the pay, health care, and vacation benefits? For the short hours and risk-free nature of the work? Because Voldemort is fun to hang around with? There are only two legitimate reasons why Snape would volunteer for the seemingly unpleasant job of Death Eater: First, for power (and, Dryleaves, greater power not equal power). A DE has the chance to exercise power over others (like the DEs at the Ministry). This is the reason Malfoy joined and is part of the reason why Peter joined (the other part being fear). Second, Snape must have actually enjoyed hurting mudbloods and muggles. These are simply what a Death Eater does. He liked humiliating, torturing, and spilling innocent blood. To say otherwise would be like saying that a man signed-up for Osama Bin Laden’s inner circle, but hated the idea of killing infidels. Those who defend Snape love to pretend that he did no wrong during his time as a DE; that he somehow sat idly in the shadows giving only verbal encouragement. Surely that is self-deception. At the least, he physically harmed others using magic (for all the “He never used physical abuse!” people out there). He may well have tortured and murdered. Although the books never say that he murdered (and note that they never say he didn’t!), Snape admits to Dumbledore that he (in the past) watched other people die. Certainly Snape was an accomplice in murders done by other DEs during the terror of LV’s first regime. Aiding a murder (desiring it and taking action to achieve it) is just as bad as casting the AK itself.
Many like to imagine that Snape had a 180 degree shift in his moral values the instant that LV targeted Lily. They paint what I like to call the “waking up from a trance” picture of Snape. When Lily’s life is threatened, Snape wakes up and says: “Wow, I never knew Voldemort was evil! All this time I thought I was fighting for justice and freedom. Whoops, my mistake! Now I’ll go join the REAL good guys.” In another version, Snape wakes up and declares: “Wow, I didn’t know that having a good friend killed felt this bad! All this time I thought people enjoyed it when we killed their loved ones. Oops, my mistake! Now that I see what horrible things I’ve done, I’m going to join the good side so I can REALLY help people.” As you can tell, neither picture provides a rational description of Snape’s thinking. Snape always knew that he was doing evil and causing suffering. He was comfortable with it. Lily’s death did not teach him anything about morality. What it did do was turn Voldemort into Snape’s sworn enemy.
Snape’s hatred of Voldemort(revenge), hatred of James/Sirius, love of Lily, and affection for Dumbledore are sufficient to explain all of his actions. There is no need (and little evidence) to say that he did something simply because it was right. Let’s look at why Snape was so loyal to Dumbledore. First, Dumbledore gave Snape a great bargain! Snape could have spent the rest of his life in Azkaban for his crimes. Dumbledore not only gets him off scot free, but gives him a comfortable position at Hogwarts. Snape can continue to satisfy his desire for power, to a small extent, as a teacher through his students. Second, Dumbledore is the wizard most likely to help Snape take revenge on Voldemort. Why didn’t Snape take revenge on Peter? He probably wanted to. But in Snape’s mind, Peter acted just like he himself acted (harming others in order to gain power and favor with Voldemort). Snape knows that, had he been secret keeper for some other family, he would have done the same thing. Voldemort, in contrast, betrayed Snape by killing Lily after he promised to spare her. Voldemort is who Snape really wants to see killed. By not killing Peter, Snape ensured that he would remain in Voldemort’s favor thereby helping Dumbledore’s plan to finish Voldemort. Of course, Snape never tried to kill LV outright because he knew that he could not match LV’s skill. Also, hatred of Voldemort perfectly explains why Snape protected the students from the Carrows (though only sometimes!). Anything that hinders LV, makes Snape happy. In addition, the Carrows, by being moronic and incompetent, probably annoyed Snape as much as Umbridge did. He probably enjoyed interfering with them.
Rapid fire: (“the best of Snape”?) His ability to love, nothing more. (Concern for Ginny?) He feared LV had returned which meant he had to return to his spy duties. (Or) He feared the school would close and he would lose his job. (Wolfsbane?) DD made him do it (likely). DD probably wouldn’t have been too happy if Snape messed up the potion and Lupin bit a few students. It was greatly in his own interest to make the potion right. (The Vow?) Snape wanted Bellatrix to trust him. He had already promised Dumbledore he would kill him. Julia, I think you’re reading too much into Snape’s body language there. (If DD knew Snape was sadistic/power hungry why did he trust Snape?) Snape will do “anything” that furthers the plan to kill LV or that hinders LV in general. His hatred of LV and desire for revenge outweigh his sadistic or power hungry tendencies. DD knows this and trusts him. He knows Snape would never be tempted to rejoin LV. (What would be a REAL test of Snape’s morality?) Lily comes back from the dead and says that she will marry Snape only under the condition that Snape rejoins LV and murders Harry. (Didn’t Snape believe only Harry could kill LV?) Snape knows Harry’s skills are average. He would be skeptical that Harry was up to the challenge. If Snape thought he had a shot of doing it himself, he would.
In summary, I stand by my original contention: It would have been foolish of Dumbledore to tell Snape about the Elder Wand. Stepping away from Snape’s motives and morals, I love Snape’s character (especially his wit) and have enjoyed reading about him. Some of his quotes [“Always” and “Look…at…me…”] always bring a lump to my throat. His efforts did have good overall consequences. Harry’s comment about Snape’s bravery is true. (Jason Riddle)
mona amon - May 22, 2008 11:22 pm (#2148 of 2617)
I have only time for one comment right now, and that is ROTFL!!!
I do not agree with half your points, Jason, but this is still the best post I've read about Snape in a long while!
I'll be back later!
Julia H. - May 23, 2008 12:29 am (#2149 of 2617)
Jason, you entitled your post "facing th facts". I guess facts in this case can only mean canon, so let me address this aspect of your post:
Snape was a DEATH EATER. He bore the dark mark. Snape could have entered into any number of respectable careers after Hogwarts. He didn’t. He chose to fight for Voldemort’s cause. Canon clearly shows that Snape was intelligent as a young man. So we cannot give him the same excuse we might give a Crabbe or a Goyle: that he was a mindless minion following the example set by friends or following the orders given by Voldemort with only a dull semi-conscious awareness of his actions and their consequences.
I agree that these are canon facts.
Honesty compels us to admit that Snape knew exactly what he was doing when he joined the Dark Lord. He knows about Voldemort’s goals of a pure-blood monopoly on magic and the subjugation of muggles.
I do hope that I am honest, still I cannot see any canon evidence that Snape exactly knew what Voldemort's goals were or that he saw them in the proper light. He may or may not have. Even intelligent people can be misled and it is canon that Regulus Black had a collection of yellow newspaper cuttings on his wall all about Voldemort. This implies that Voldemort had press publicity suitable to make him appear in a positive light. Regulus cannot have been stupid either, since he was able to find out and deduce information concerning what Voldemort kept in the cave was a Horcrux. I think it is a remarkable achievement, given that neither Lucius, nor Bellatrix, as high-ranking DE's, seem to have known what they were guarding for their master. LV is not likely to have trusted Regulus any more than these and information on Horcruxes in general seems to have been guarded by the "connoisseurs" otherwise Slughorn answering Riddle's question would not have the significance it has in canon. Regulus' example shows that Snape was not the only intelligent young man who had better feelings (like love for a muggle-born woman or truly caring for a house-elf) in direct opposition with Voldemort's ideology and still joined the DE's. Even Draco has to learn that being a DE is not exactly what he imagined it to be although his father is a DE and he can or could get more realistic information about Voldemort and DE-life than either Snape or Regulus may with any likelihood had. So canon does seem to support that Voldemort was able to mislead people (young and unexperienced and even otherwise intelligent people), even though, of course, not everyone. I am not saying, of course, that Snape did the right thing when he joined LV but I am saying that there is more canon evidence indicating that he did not know exactly what he was signing up for than evidence indicating that he did. Voldemort was targeting muggle-borns. Did Snape know this? We don't know. Lily was a muggle-born. Did Snape know this? Yes, he did. Intelligent as he was (according to canon), can we suppose that knowing these two facts, he was or would have been able to conclude "Voldemort was targeting Lily"? I think we can. Would he have joined an organization if he had fully realized what it meant? Given that we know it from canon how much Lily's life and safety meant to him, the likely answer is no.
There are only two legitimate reasons why Snape would volunteer for the seemingly unpleasant job of Death Eater...
You seem to be saying the only possible reasons could be power and enjoying to kill and torture. Now if you are saying that these are the only possible reasons why anyone anywhere would join an evil organization, I must say no. History has taught us that organizations with evil goals and ideology usually take care to present their goals in a favourable light to those people among whom they want to recruit new members. The circle of young people grown up in Slytherin is certainly a potential target group for recruiting in the case of DE's. Such organizations often refer to personal goals anyone might have or address the existing and legitimate problems of young people, offering a "solution" for them, e.g.: Poverty and low social status (no doubt felt by Snape among Slytherin pure-bloods), a feeling of being "left out" and alone (Snape was regularly targeted by the "good guys" in Hogwarts and he had no other friends than the Slytherin gang but these do not seem to be real friends to me) or not being understood (Snape's largely academic interest in the dark arts and his achievements in this field were looked upon with suspicion although as he himself shows later and as Professor Binns hints once, knowing the Dark Arts does not mean that this knowledge can only be used for evil purposes). In addition to this, the people among whom one grows up may count a lot, even if the person is intelligent. Intelligence itself has different kinds. While Snape probably has a very high IQ, his emotional quotient - including self-knowledge and the ability to be successful in social relationships, to read between the lines, to understand what is not explicitly said etc. does not seem to be exactly high at least in these years of his life. There are very many reasons why people - sometimes even well-meaning people, unfortunately [/b]- May join an organization like the DE's. I only mentioned a few.
If you mean to say that specifically for Snape there could only be two reasons why he joined Voldemort, then I would like to ask you to give me canon evidence where Snape is shown as someone enjoying torture (real torture, not simply being sarcastic or making empty threats or giving out unpleasant tasks as detention) and canon evidence that indicates Snape ever killed anyone. As far as I see, for all we know from canon, Snape may have joined Voldemort a few days before he heard the prophecy. In other words, we do not know how long he had been a DE or what other things he did besides the prophecy business but we know that nobody (DE's, Dumbledore, Snape or simply the author) ever alludes to any information concerning Snape ever killing or torturing anyone. However, there is plenty of circumstantial evidence in canon that he did not do these things.
To be continued...
Julia H. - May 23, 2008 2:38 am (#2150 of 2617)
Edited May 23, 2008 3:15 am
Although the books never say that he murdered (and note that they never say he didn’t!), Snape admits to Dumbledore that he (in the past) watched other people die. Certainly Snape was an accomplice in murders done by other DEs during the terror of LV’s first regime. Aiding a murder (desiring it and taking action to achieve it) is just as bad as casting the AK itself. (Jason)
Snape was certainly an accomplice to murders as far as he watched them and did not do anything against them and as far as he was a member of the organization. This was a part of what he had to atone for later. However, this simply does not mean that he enjoyed watching people being killed or tortured or that he had joined Voldemort with the purpose of killing and torturing. Once he was in the organization, he was in and on the way to further corruption but nothing shows that he ever got there where he could enjoy these things. As for giving orders to kill or torture - this is something we do not know. Was he ever (being a mere 20-year-old) in a position to give orders to other DE's at all?
I would say if in the books there is no indication that something important happened and there is no indication that the same thing did not happen, I will conclude that readers are not meant to think that this "something" happened. An author has a thousand means to make us know what is part of the story and it would be strange indeed if we had to prove that important things not mentioned anywhere in the books really are not part of the story. Does anyone suppose that Lupin as a werewolf bit a couple people (possibly including children) just because that is what werewolves do and after all he transformed every month and lost his human consciousness? There is nothing in canon indicating that he did and there is nothing indicating that he did not. I think this means that he did not bite anyone because if he had, it would be information important enough for the reader to know. The same could be said with reference to Snape, however, as I said, in his case there is circumstantial evidence that he did not kill or torture.
1) After LV's downfall Snape avoided punishment since DD vouched for him and gave evidence that Snape had changed and started to work for the order before LV's disappearance. Since this was enough, it implies there was nothing else held against him than the fact that he had joined the DE's. If he had committed murder or torture, he still would have had to answer for that but apparently his crime was only the fact that he had joined. It would have been much more difficult for him to return to the good side (I love the way DD talks about "return" and not "joining the good side") if he had committed these crimes because of the law and it would probably have been more difficult to win DD's benevolence. Karkaroff only mentioned Snape's name (in the Pensieve scene) when he was really hard-pressed for more names.
2) In The Prince's Tale, when DD tells Snape to kill him when the time comes, Snape is worried about his soul and DD does not say "it is all the same to you". DD also refers to the people Snape had watched die but not to people he had killed. I do not think that watching people being killed is exactly the same as committing the murder. This is not the logic of the book either. If Snape is worried about his soul (or if he implies that DD should be worried about it), IMO it implies one of two possibilities: Either he never ripped his soul (torturing people with delight may perhaps be enough to rip a soul but murder by all means) or if he did, he has reason to think that his soul has healed - this is something that can only happen through remorse (this is what Harry suggests LV should try) but we never get to see him feel remorse about anything else but the prophecy at least prior to DD's death. (When he cries in Sirius' room, it may be interpreted as remorse about the AK and/or about injuring George but then this shows he feels remorse for the wrong he did inadvertently or selflessly with noble purposes, so around at this point latest, we would see him feel remorse about any other specific crimes he ever committed - but no indication at all.)
3) Another piece of evidence is that LV sent Snape to Hogwarts as an applicant for a teacher's position. LV must have known that he could not send a mass murderer or someone who had fought against Order members, since the person would have had no chance to be given the job by DD. LV was not totally stupid: if he wanted his spy to be hired as a Hogwarts teacher, he had to choose someone relatively innocent. (I would say it would have made sense for him to send someone without the Dark Mark yet but of course there is no canon evidence indicating when Snape got his Dark Mark, so this is only a possibility, not a fact.) Canon evidence shows that LV had no idea about Snape's occlumency skills. However, he certainly knew about DD's extraordinary magical skills, moreover, he was afraid of DD. Given this, the logic that comes from it is quite consistent with the lack of evidence concerning Snape's other DE activities: Logic dictates that LV should send someone to DD who was not high-ranking or important enough to know about anything of importance that LV did not want DD to find out. If a spy is caught, he can be questioned, tortured and subjected to Legilimency or Veritaserum for information. For someone like LV (especially not knowing about the spy being able to practise occlumency), the surest way to prevent the problem must have been to send someone who could not tell DD or the aurors anything.
As for how Snape was able to just idly sit back: It is not explained but it can be explained. (I mean it is certainly not impossible.) However, he did not need to "sit back": he could have been a recent recruit or he could have been a trainee DE (he was young enough for both), while Voldemort sent out his more experienced and so more efficient servants to actual fights or other assignments or he could have kept Snape out of regular DE activities on purpose in order to prepare him for the job of a spy or he could have seen him as a young and talented Dark Arts expert who would be useful in other ways than most DE's. How many wizards we know about who were able to invent spells? Voldemort may or may not have known much about Snape's abilities but he certainly supposed that Snape had a chance to get the DADA job. Of course it cannot be ruled out that Snape himself cleverly and purposefully managed to avoid becoming a murderer because he did not like killing or for whatever reservations he may have had.
All in all, there is evidence suggesting that Snape did not become a murderer and (as far as I know) no evidence that suggests that he killed and/or tortured apart from the fact that he was a DE (which in itself is bad) but then we also have to suppose that all DE's are the same and have the same history (and all werewolves are the same and have the same history and all aurors are the same and have the same history etc.). However, what the HP books show us is a great variety if personal back-stories often with important similarities and important differences between them and this tendency imitates rather well what we can see in real life.
Another very long post, so other things must be addressed another time.
I am at a loss for Ron/Snape parallels. In fact, they seem rather opposites.
Ron has been hero Harry's loyal sidekick, almost from their first meeting. Snape was evil Voldemort's "sidekick," but not truely loyal.
Snape had a poor, lonely childhood; Ron a good one, with loving parents and lots of siblings.
Snape was (we think) academically inclined; Ron certainly wasn't.
Snape is driven; Ron is go-along.
Ron was part of a "gang;" Snape was pretty much a loner. (Not sure of Mulciber etal, but no one came to his rescue in the OotP pensive scene. He speaks of himself versus James etal as always four-on-one.)
Not sure what else for opposite, but I can't come up with any form of parallel.
Steve Newton - May 13, 2008 12:11 pm (#2142 of 2617)
They both have a sarcastic streak. I am not going to ponder right now but will keep an eye out on the read along.
wynnleaf - May 13, 2008 7:01 pm (#2143 of 2617)
Harry-Snape parallels seem all over the place and, I think, completely intentional by JKR. If there are Ron parallels, I can't really think of them, other than maybe coming from a poorer background like having used textbooks, but that's really not much of a parallel.
However, I think there are some situations or characteristics that JKR generally only gives characters who are on the good side. I can't think of a poor bad guy, with the exception of Tom Riddle and the Gaunts. Perhaps it's JKR's own background, but most of the characters who come from deprived backgrounds turn out to be good. Even Harry comes from a deprived background, even if he is actually wealthy. The flip side is that the wealthy ones, with the exception of Harry, have a streak of the bully in them and are spoiled. In fact, I felt it contributed to the likelihood that James wasn't the greatest fellow when JKR described him as being the "pampered" only child of wealthy parents.
Still, just because characters have some similar characteristics, such as being poor, doesn't really make a parallel between them.
For Snape, I think the strongest parallels are between Harry and Snape and between Dumbledore and Snape, but of course in different ways.
journeymom - May 15, 2008 4:35 pm (#2144 of 2617)
Ooooh, this a great conversation! I haven't visited the Snape thread in a while.
The chess game in PS: Seems to me that Ron's sacrifice in the game foreshadowed Dumbledore's death in HBP. Ron knew that in order for Harry to move on he, Ron, had to sacrifice his character.
It's true Snape did die before Harry went to meet Voldemort, paralelling Ron's sacrifice as well. But while Snape knew he might die, he certainly didn't go willingly.
Snape is still there in Philosopher's Stone. His poison puzzle comes after the chess game and is the last step before Harry faces Voldemort.
I agree, Snape more closely compares to Dumbledore and Harry. Ron is Harry's link to a big, healthy family.
Julia H. - May 16, 2008 2:27 am (#2145 of 2617)
But while Snape knew he might die, he certainly didn't go willingly. (Journeymom)
I think Snape made his decision when he accepted the task(s) DD gave him, especially when he agreed to "kill" DD. He accepted a situation which was bound to lead to his death almost surely since both sides had reasons to want to kill him from that moment on. Even as he was, technically speaking, still alive, he did knowingly and willingly sacrifice his life, at least the kind of life he had lived before and the life that had been (despite everything) worth living. Besides, the reason why he did no try to escape from the shack even when he realized that Voldemort wanted to kill him was that he wanted to do his duty and finish his task as long as there was the slightest chance that he could. But I also agree that there are much stronger parallels for Snape and Harry and Snape and Dumbledore than for Snape and anyone else.
Dryleaves has just solved a hangman on the games thread which I posted with the Harry-Snape parallels in mind. I think this sentence may be a symbolic foreshadowing of the parallels the reader is going to learn later (and if we ever need a motto for these parallels, it might be a good one).
"Dumbledore placed his long hands on either side of the pensieve and swirled it, rather as a gold prospector would pan for fragments of gold... and Harry saw his own face change smoothly into Snape's, who opened his mouth and spoke to the ceiling, his voice echoing slightly."
The "looking for fragments of gold" aspect is interesting, too.
Dryleaves - May 16, 2008 2:34 am (#2146 of 2617)
...and Harry saw his own face change smoothly into Snape's,...
I think this sentence may be a symbolic foreshadowing of the parallels the reader is going to learn later... (Julia)
I had the same thoughts when I solved your hangman. I suspected you were up to something...
Julia H. - May 22, 2008 10:27 pm (#2147 of 2617)
On the Read A Long thread, Jason Riddle posted the following thoughts about Snape. Since it is one of the relatively long posts and cannot be answered briefly, I'll give my answer in a separate post later. In the meantime it may provide food for thought for others who are interested.
Snape (facing the facts)
Certainly Snape was remorseful when he learned that Voldemort would target Lily, if by the word ‘remorse’ we mean he wished he hadn’t done it. But we must be careful not to twist Snape’s character into who we want him to be. Let’s face the facts. Snape was a DEATH EATER. He bore the dark mark. Snape could have entered into any number of respectable careers after Hogwarts. He didn’t. He chose to fight for Voldemort’s cause. Canon clearly shows that Snape was intelligent as a young man. So we cannot give him the same excuse we might give a Crabbe or a Goyle: that he was a mindless minion following the example set by friends or following the orders given by Voldemort with only a dull semi-conscious awareness of his actions and their consequences. Honesty compels us to admit that Snape knew exactly what he was doing when he joined the Dark Lord. He knows about Voldemort’s goals of a pure-blood monopoly on magic and the subjugation of muggles. And knowing this, why did he choose to fight for Voldemort’s cause? For the pay, health care, and vacation benefits? For the short hours and risk-free nature of the work? Because Voldemort is fun to hang around with? There are only two legitimate reasons why Snape would volunteer for the seemingly unpleasant job of Death Eater: First, for power (and, Dryleaves, greater power not equal power). A DE has the chance to exercise power over others (like the DEs at the Ministry). This is the reason Malfoy joined and is part of the reason why Peter joined (the other part being fear). Second, Snape must have actually enjoyed hurting mudbloods and muggles. These are simply what a Death Eater does. He liked humiliating, torturing, and spilling innocent blood. To say otherwise would be like saying that a man signed-up for Osama Bin Laden’s inner circle, but hated the idea of killing infidels. Those who defend Snape love to pretend that he did no wrong during his time as a DE; that he somehow sat idly in the shadows giving only verbal encouragement. Surely that is self-deception. At the least, he physically harmed others using magic (for all the “He never used physical abuse!” people out there). He may well have tortured and murdered. Although the books never say that he murdered (and note that they never say he didn’t!), Snape admits to Dumbledore that he (in the past) watched other people die. Certainly Snape was an accomplice in murders done by other DEs during the terror of LV’s first regime. Aiding a murder (desiring it and taking action to achieve it) is just as bad as casting the AK itself.
Many like to imagine that Snape had a 180 degree shift in his moral values the instant that LV targeted Lily. They paint what I like to call the “waking up from a trance” picture of Snape. When Lily’s life is threatened, Snape wakes up and says: “Wow, I never knew Voldemort was evil! All this time I thought I was fighting for justice and freedom. Whoops, my mistake! Now I’ll go join the REAL good guys.” In another version, Snape wakes up and declares: “Wow, I didn’t know that having a good friend killed felt this bad! All this time I thought people enjoyed it when we killed their loved ones. Oops, my mistake! Now that I see what horrible things I’ve done, I’m going to join the good side so I can REALLY help people.” As you can tell, neither picture provides a rational description of Snape’s thinking. Snape always knew that he was doing evil and causing suffering. He was comfortable with it. Lily’s death did not teach him anything about morality. What it did do was turn Voldemort into Snape’s sworn enemy.
Snape’s hatred of Voldemort(revenge), hatred of James/Sirius, love of Lily, and affection for Dumbledore are sufficient to explain all of his actions. There is no need (and little evidence) to say that he did something simply because it was right. Let’s look at why Snape was so loyal to Dumbledore. First, Dumbledore gave Snape a great bargain! Snape could have spent the rest of his life in Azkaban for his crimes. Dumbledore not only gets him off scot free, but gives him a comfortable position at Hogwarts. Snape can continue to satisfy his desire for power, to a small extent, as a teacher through his students. Second, Dumbledore is the wizard most likely to help Snape take revenge on Voldemort. Why didn’t Snape take revenge on Peter? He probably wanted to. But in Snape’s mind, Peter acted just like he himself acted (harming others in order to gain power and favor with Voldemort). Snape knows that, had he been secret keeper for some other family, he would have done the same thing. Voldemort, in contrast, betrayed Snape by killing Lily after he promised to spare her. Voldemort is who Snape really wants to see killed. By not killing Peter, Snape ensured that he would remain in Voldemort’s favor thereby helping Dumbledore’s plan to finish Voldemort. Of course, Snape never tried to kill LV outright because he knew that he could not match LV’s skill. Also, hatred of Voldemort perfectly explains why Snape protected the students from the Carrows (though only sometimes!). Anything that hinders LV, makes Snape happy. In addition, the Carrows, by being moronic and incompetent, probably annoyed Snape as much as Umbridge did. He probably enjoyed interfering with them.
Rapid fire: (“the best of Snape”?) His ability to love, nothing more. (Concern for Ginny?) He feared LV had returned which meant he had to return to his spy duties. (Or) He feared the school would close and he would lose his job. (Wolfsbane?) DD made him do it (likely). DD probably wouldn’t have been too happy if Snape messed up the potion and Lupin bit a few students. It was greatly in his own interest to make the potion right. (The Vow?) Snape wanted Bellatrix to trust him. He had already promised Dumbledore he would kill him. Julia, I think you’re reading too much into Snape’s body language there. (If DD knew Snape was sadistic/power hungry why did he trust Snape?) Snape will do “anything” that furthers the plan to kill LV or that hinders LV in general. His hatred of LV and desire for revenge outweigh his sadistic or power hungry tendencies. DD knows this and trusts him. He knows Snape would never be tempted to rejoin LV. (What would be a REAL test of Snape’s morality?) Lily comes back from the dead and says that she will marry Snape only under the condition that Snape rejoins LV and murders Harry. (Didn’t Snape believe only Harry could kill LV?) Snape knows Harry’s skills are average. He would be skeptical that Harry was up to the challenge. If Snape thought he had a shot of doing it himself, he would.
In summary, I stand by my original contention: It would have been foolish of Dumbledore to tell Snape about the Elder Wand. Stepping away from Snape’s motives and morals, I love Snape’s character (especially his wit) and have enjoyed reading about him. Some of his quotes [“Always” and “Look…at…me…”] always bring a lump to my throat. His efforts did have good overall consequences. Harry’s comment about Snape’s bravery is true. (Jason Riddle)
mona amon - May 22, 2008 11:22 pm (#2148 of 2617)
I have only time for one comment right now, and that is ROTFL!!!
I do not agree with half your points, Jason, but this is still the best post I've read about Snape in a long while!
I'll be back later!
Julia H. - May 23, 2008 12:29 am (#2149 of 2617)
Jason, you entitled your post "facing th facts". I guess facts in this case can only mean canon, so let me address this aspect of your post:
Snape was a DEATH EATER. He bore the dark mark. Snape could have entered into any number of respectable careers after Hogwarts. He didn’t. He chose to fight for Voldemort’s cause. Canon clearly shows that Snape was intelligent as a young man. So we cannot give him the same excuse we might give a Crabbe or a Goyle: that he was a mindless minion following the example set by friends or following the orders given by Voldemort with only a dull semi-conscious awareness of his actions and their consequences.
I agree that these are canon facts.
Honesty compels us to admit that Snape knew exactly what he was doing when he joined the Dark Lord. He knows about Voldemort’s goals of a pure-blood monopoly on magic and the subjugation of muggles.
I do hope that I am honest, still I cannot see any canon evidence that Snape exactly knew what Voldemort's goals were or that he saw them in the proper light. He may or may not have. Even intelligent people can be misled and it is canon that Regulus Black had a collection of yellow newspaper cuttings on his wall all about Voldemort. This implies that Voldemort had press publicity suitable to make him appear in a positive light. Regulus cannot have been stupid either, since he was able to find out and deduce information concerning what Voldemort kept in the cave was a Horcrux. I think it is a remarkable achievement, given that neither Lucius, nor Bellatrix, as high-ranking DE's, seem to have known what they were guarding for their master. LV is not likely to have trusted Regulus any more than these and information on Horcruxes in general seems to have been guarded by the "connoisseurs" otherwise Slughorn answering Riddle's question would not have the significance it has in canon. Regulus' example shows that Snape was not the only intelligent young man who had better feelings (like love for a muggle-born woman or truly caring for a house-elf) in direct opposition with Voldemort's ideology and still joined the DE's. Even Draco has to learn that being a DE is not exactly what he imagined it to be although his father is a DE and he can or could get more realistic information about Voldemort and DE-life than either Snape or Regulus may with any likelihood had. So canon does seem to support that Voldemort was able to mislead people (young and unexperienced and even otherwise intelligent people), even though, of course, not everyone. I am not saying, of course, that Snape did the right thing when he joined LV but I am saying that there is more canon evidence indicating that he did not know exactly what he was signing up for than evidence indicating that he did. Voldemort was targeting muggle-borns. Did Snape know this? We don't know. Lily was a muggle-born. Did Snape know this? Yes, he did. Intelligent as he was (according to canon), can we suppose that knowing these two facts, he was or would have been able to conclude "Voldemort was targeting Lily"? I think we can. Would he have joined an organization if he had fully realized what it meant? Given that we know it from canon how much Lily's life and safety meant to him, the likely answer is no.
There are only two legitimate reasons why Snape would volunteer for the seemingly unpleasant job of Death Eater...
You seem to be saying the only possible reasons could be power and enjoying to kill and torture. Now if you are saying that these are the only possible reasons why anyone anywhere would join an evil organization, I must say no. History has taught us that organizations with evil goals and ideology usually take care to present their goals in a favourable light to those people among whom they want to recruit new members. The circle of young people grown up in Slytherin is certainly a potential target group for recruiting in the case of DE's. Such organizations often refer to personal goals anyone might have or address the existing and legitimate problems of young people, offering a "solution" for them, e.g.: Poverty and low social status (no doubt felt by Snape among Slytherin pure-bloods), a feeling of being "left out" and alone (Snape was regularly targeted by the "good guys" in Hogwarts and he had no other friends than the Slytherin gang but these do not seem to be real friends to me) or not being understood (Snape's largely academic interest in the dark arts and his achievements in this field were looked upon with suspicion although as he himself shows later and as Professor Binns hints once, knowing the Dark Arts does not mean that this knowledge can only be used for evil purposes). In addition to this, the people among whom one grows up may count a lot, even if the person is intelligent. Intelligence itself has different kinds. While Snape probably has a very high IQ, his emotional quotient - including self-knowledge and the ability to be successful in social relationships, to read between the lines, to understand what is not explicitly said etc. does not seem to be exactly high at least in these years of his life. There are very many reasons why people - sometimes even well-meaning people, unfortunately [/b]- May join an organization like the DE's. I only mentioned a few.
If you mean to say that specifically for Snape there could only be two reasons why he joined Voldemort, then I would like to ask you to give me canon evidence where Snape is shown as someone enjoying torture (real torture, not simply being sarcastic or making empty threats or giving out unpleasant tasks as detention) and canon evidence that indicates Snape ever killed anyone. As far as I see, for all we know from canon, Snape may have joined Voldemort a few days before he heard the prophecy. In other words, we do not know how long he had been a DE or what other things he did besides the prophecy business but we know that nobody (DE's, Dumbledore, Snape or simply the author) ever alludes to any information concerning Snape ever killing or torturing anyone. However, there is plenty of circumstantial evidence in canon that he did not do these things.
To be continued...
Julia H. - May 23, 2008 2:38 am (#2150 of 2617)
Edited May 23, 2008 3:15 am
Although the books never say that he murdered (and note that they never say he didn’t!), Snape admits to Dumbledore that he (in the past) watched other people die. Certainly Snape was an accomplice in murders done by other DEs during the terror of LV’s first regime. Aiding a murder (desiring it and taking action to achieve it) is just as bad as casting the AK itself. (Jason)
Snape was certainly an accomplice to murders as far as he watched them and did not do anything against them and as far as he was a member of the organization. This was a part of what he had to atone for later. However, this simply does not mean that he enjoyed watching people being killed or tortured or that he had joined Voldemort with the purpose of killing and torturing. Once he was in the organization, he was in and on the way to further corruption but nothing shows that he ever got there where he could enjoy these things. As for giving orders to kill or torture - this is something we do not know. Was he ever (being a mere 20-year-old) in a position to give orders to other DE's at all?
I would say if in the books there is no indication that something important happened and there is no indication that the same thing did not happen, I will conclude that readers are not meant to think that this "something" happened. An author has a thousand means to make us know what is part of the story and it would be strange indeed if we had to prove that important things not mentioned anywhere in the books really are not part of the story. Does anyone suppose that Lupin as a werewolf bit a couple people (possibly including children) just because that is what werewolves do and after all he transformed every month and lost his human consciousness? There is nothing in canon indicating that he did and there is nothing indicating that he did not. I think this means that he did not bite anyone because if he had, it would be information important enough for the reader to know. The same could be said with reference to Snape, however, as I said, in his case there is circumstantial evidence that he did not kill or torture.
1) After LV's downfall Snape avoided punishment since DD vouched for him and gave evidence that Snape had changed and started to work for the order before LV's disappearance. Since this was enough, it implies there was nothing else held against him than the fact that he had joined the DE's. If he had committed murder or torture, he still would have had to answer for that but apparently his crime was only the fact that he had joined. It would have been much more difficult for him to return to the good side (I love the way DD talks about "return" and not "joining the good side") if he had committed these crimes because of the law and it would probably have been more difficult to win DD's benevolence. Karkaroff only mentioned Snape's name (in the Pensieve scene) when he was really hard-pressed for more names.
2) In The Prince's Tale, when DD tells Snape to kill him when the time comes, Snape is worried about his soul and DD does not say "it is all the same to you". DD also refers to the people Snape had watched die but not to people he had killed. I do not think that watching people being killed is exactly the same as committing the murder. This is not the logic of the book either. If Snape is worried about his soul (or if he implies that DD should be worried about it), IMO it implies one of two possibilities: Either he never ripped his soul (torturing people with delight may perhaps be enough to rip a soul but murder by all means) or if he did, he has reason to think that his soul has healed - this is something that can only happen through remorse (this is what Harry suggests LV should try) but we never get to see him feel remorse about anything else but the prophecy at least prior to DD's death. (When he cries in Sirius' room, it may be interpreted as remorse about the AK and/or about injuring George but then this shows he feels remorse for the wrong he did inadvertently or selflessly with noble purposes, so around at this point latest, we would see him feel remorse about any other specific crimes he ever committed - but no indication at all.)
3) Another piece of evidence is that LV sent Snape to Hogwarts as an applicant for a teacher's position. LV must have known that he could not send a mass murderer or someone who had fought against Order members, since the person would have had no chance to be given the job by DD. LV was not totally stupid: if he wanted his spy to be hired as a Hogwarts teacher, he had to choose someone relatively innocent. (I would say it would have made sense for him to send someone without the Dark Mark yet but of course there is no canon evidence indicating when Snape got his Dark Mark, so this is only a possibility, not a fact.) Canon evidence shows that LV had no idea about Snape's occlumency skills. However, he certainly knew about DD's extraordinary magical skills, moreover, he was afraid of DD. Given this, the logic that comes from it is quite consistent with the lack of evidence concerning Snape's other DE activities: Logic dictates that LV should send someone to DD who was not high-ranking or important enough to know about anything of importance that LV did not want DD to find out. If a spy is caught, he can be questioned, tortured and subjected to Legilimency or Veritaserum for information. For someone like LV (especially not knowing about the spy being able to practise occlumency), the surest way to prevent the problem must have been to send someone who could not tell DD or the aurors anything.
As for how Snape was able to just idly sit back: It is not explained but it can be explained. (I mean it is certainly not impossible.) However, he did not need to "sit back": he could have been a recent recruit or he could have been a trainee DE (he was young enough for both), while Voldemort sent out his more experienced and so more efficient servants to actual fights or other assignments or he could have kept Snape out of regular DE activities on purpose in order to prepare him for the job of a spy or he could have seen him as a young and talented Dark Arts expert who would be useful in other ways than most DE's. How many wizards we know about who were able to invent spells? Voldemort may or may not have known much about Snape's abilities but he certainly supposed that Snape had a chance to get the DADA job. Of course it cannot be ruled out that Snape himself cleverly and purposefully managed to avoid becoming a murderer because he did not like killing or for whatever reservations he may have had.
All in all, there is evidence suggesting that Snape did not become a murderer and (as far as I know) no evidence that suggests that he killed and/or tortured apart from the fact that he was a DE (which in itself is bad) but then we also have to suppose that all DE's are the same and have the same history (and all werewolves are the same and have the same history and all aurors are the same and have the same history etc.). However, what the HP books show us is a great variety if personal back-stories often with important similarities and important differences between them and this tendency imitates rather well what we can see in real life.
Another very long post, so other things must be addressed another time.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2151 to 2170
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:24 am
rambkowalczyk - May 23, 2008 10:47 am (#2151 of 2617)
My comments on Jason Riddle's post. Most I think reflects Julia H's opinion.
Honesty compels us to admit that Snape knew exactly what he was doing when he joined the Dark Lord.
agree partially. On the other hand Snape could have been deliberately lied to. For example, some of the German scientists who joined the Nazi party may have heard rumors of Hitler's hatred towards Jews and other minorities but were told by friends that these rumors were exaggerations. Many people who financially support Osama Bin Laden do not write a check to him but to an organization that advertises itself to be a charity that helps poor Muslims who are being persecuted. People in these positions have a responsibility to look beneath the surface to see what is really going on.
The books do not give a reason as to why Snape chose to be a Death Eater or what he knew beforehand.
There are only two legitimate reasons why Snape would volunteer for the seemingly unpleasant job of Death Eater...
Disagree--There is a third reason. Snape needed to belong and Death Eaters accepted him. Snape has always been portrayed as an oddball kid who doesn't quite fit in. In the Southern states men joined the KKK not necessarily because they hated black people but because they could join a club that accepted them and that by joining this club they thought good things could be done.
First, for power...
Snape may have wanted the power and influence that becoming a Death Eater can bring, but more than that I think he wanted the respect that he thought would come with the position.
Second, Snape must have actually enjoyed hurting mudbloods and muggles.
This statement although plausible doesn't have to be true. I can see Snape gloating if an enemy of his is hurt or humiliated, but this isn't the same as him actually hurting people and enjoying it. For instance in the first movie Harry is smiling when Dudley gets a tail, but no one takes it to mean that Harry is cruel.
I think as a Death Eater, Snape was perfectly willing to accept that other people were going to die in order for Voldemort to get what he wants. These other people were nameless and no one that he knew or cared about.
He may well have tortured and murdered.
No proof that he did or he didn't. But until Lily was targeted he probably did nothing to stop any atrocities. I think he went along with what was going on but did not actively start anything.
They paint what I like to call the “waking up from a trance” picture of Snape.
My version is along the lines. I thought I could accept the death of anybody for the cause, but the thought of Lily dying is wrong. I can't go on lying to myself anymore. I have got to do something.
Snape always knew that he was doing evil and causing suffering. He was comfortable with it.
I am sure that Snape justified the evil and hurt as something necessary to the cause. He had previously told himself that those who died or were in pain didn't matter because those people never did anything for him.
Snape’s hatred of Voldemort(revenge), hatred of James/Sirius, love of Lily, and affection for Dumbledore are sufficient to explain all of his actions. There is no need (and little evidence) to say that he did something simply because it was right.
This may have been true at the time he approached Dumbledore to protect Lily. But it seems that later in life, Snape is doing things because it is right, however the way JKR wrote the book, in Snape's mind, what is right is What would Lily do? At this point Lily is deified.
Dryleaves - May 23, 2008 12:35 pm (#2152 of 2617)
You can interpret a character in many different ways which is very fascinating. I think your analysis is very interesting Jason, but I have read Snape differently, and I think we all as readers twist a character a little as language is always ambiguous and arbitrary in some way and we all have different interpretation horizons.
I agree I expressed myself clumsily when I wrote about power, and I’m not sure I will do any better now. I don’t really see Snape as wanting power in the same sense as for example Voldemort or Lucius. I don’t think he wants world dominion and I don’t think it is really important to him to have a big influence over the Wizarding World and I don’t think he really wants to be Headmaster of Hogwarts. Where I do see him want power is in relation to the Marauders. The Marauders, or at least half of them, James and Sirius, have power. They are popular, they get away with a lot of things and James finally gets the girl. When Snape’s Slytherin friends use magic on other students ‘for fun’ it is Dark Magic, when the Marauders do something similar to Snape it’s a joke, and when he thinks they actually are trying to murder him it’s all seen as a ‘prank’. This is what his life is worth, but he does not think this is right. He thinks he is equal to the Marauders on an ‘objective’ level, but sees that he is not in the actual world. They always win, whatever they do. So I think Snape wants power to have a ‘fair’ chance to compete. And I think that he might find the DEs matching the power he associates with the Marauders, such as being pure-blood Gryffindors, as a DE it’s OK to be Slytherin, so yes, in a way he joins the DE to gain power, but I think you meant it in a slightly different way. I don’t see wanting power as such as Snape’s primary or ultimate goal in life, though, as it is for Voldemort. I think he wants something like the power to be listened to and to be taken seriously and to be recognized rather than to dominate others. I think Snape very often takes an underdog perspective and that his abuse of his power as a teacher is due to that he doesn’t really trust the power he has. He has the ability to make the students quiet and to pay attention in class, but sometimes he uses overkill strategies to keep up his authority. He is extremely sensitive to any comment that may undermine it. This seems especially to be the case regarding Harry but also other Gryffindor students who to Snape are closely related to the Marauders. On many occasions in the books I think that we see Snape using his authority in the right way without abusing it, even if he could have done so.
What Snape actually did during his DE days is unknown to us. DEs do horrible things, and it is quite possible that he took part in terrible actions, but just as the fact that we don’t know doesn’t mean he did nothing, it doesn’t mean that we must assume the worst either and make this period of his life the one that shows his true nature (when it shows nothing). In his actions shown in the books adult Snape doesn’t come across as such an all bad person to me, even if he certainly isn’t a nice one. Snape the child doesn’t seem especially bad either, though still not all nice and charming. Teenage Snape is shown to be heading down the wrong path, but he doesn’t really strike one as any worse than the Marauders. He probably did take part in terrible actions in some way as a DE, but that doesn’t mean that he is a power-hungry maniac who enjoys to see people suffer. When Snape is shown like that in the books it is through the eyes of Harry, but very often it turns out that Harry has misinterpreted what Snape is doing.
I think that Lily’s death means some sort of moral wake-up for Snape, even if it is not an immediate one. When Snape apologizes to Lily after having called her mudblood she asks why she would be any different from others of her birth. To him she is, but Lily’s death shows that there really are no such exceptions to the rule in the DE ideology and therefore I think he turns his back on it.
Another thing we strangely enough never are shown is Snape’s hatred of Voldemort and therefore I’m not sure whether we could say that revenge is the prime motivation for his actions. We are shown his being vindictive towards Sirius Black and the other Marauders, but never openly towards Voldemort. There is of course the narrative aspect of this: we mustn’t know Snape’s true allegiance for the sake of the plot; but not even when this is fully revealed we see him wanting revenge. I don’t know why, if it is because Voldemorts evil takes somewhat metaphysical proportions and simply can’t be blamed in itself, or something else, but the reason we are shown for Snape’s actions is his love for Lily. I’m not sure how to interpret this. As this after all is a character about whom a lot of things are untold or ambiguously told we will continue to have different interpretations of him.
Julia H. - May 23, 2008 2:53 pm (#2153 of 2617)
Edited May 23, 2008 3:52 pm
Many like to imagine that Snape had a 180 degree shift in his moral values the instant that LV targeted Lily. (Jason)
Perhaps there are many who like to imagine that. I personally cannot remember reading any posts that interpreted Snape's change in the ways you describe so sarcastically. I think in a sense it was a moment to wake or to shake him up but that was not a 180 degree shift by any means. He still had a long way to go before he completed that change but the hilltop scene was a defining moment, a turning point for him and he got to the hilltop because Lily was targeted by Voldemort. But his joining DD is not initiated by Lily's death. Originally, he went to DD and agreed to become his spy in order to protect Lily.
Instead of what you describe as Snape's "waking up", I think what happened was that this was the moment when Snape first chose the right way instead of the easy way. Whatever he did or experienced among the DE's, he managed to preserve his love for a woman, his childhood-friend, who he probably had not even seen for years and he was willing to risk his life to save her. This love for a muggleborn was in direct opposition to DE ideology and I see it as a pre-programmed device which was almost sure to turn him away from Voldemort, since Lily as a muggle-born and as an Order member was or would have been targeted by Voldemort even without the prophecy. Lily was important enough for him to choose the difficult right way when she was in danger and later because of her memory, while earlier ha may have simply chosen the easy way (for whatever reason) - which is bad and tragic enough even if he personally did not kill.
There is a film called "The Inner Circle" based (as far as I know) on a true story about a Russian man who, basically by accident, becomes a member of Stalin's "inner circle". He does not kill (it is not his job), he does not even witness the killings directly and does not order others to kill (he does not even have the authority) but he lets himself be manipulated and believes (?) that Stalin is a great leader and what he does is ultimately good. He is not power-hungry, he is not evil but he accepts the benefits he gets and does not (want to) see the truth behind them even when more and more definite clues are coming. Actually, he goes much farther than Snape accepting what is happening but his situation is also more difficult because there is no "Dumbledore" around. To me he comes across as both an accomplice and a victim. A tragic character. Ultimately, his life is ruined (his wife, who he loves, dies tragically) and he still cannot give up believing in what he has believed. It is important that he is not an idiot, in the film it is shown that he is not at all the only one manipulated to such extents. I think his main flaw is having chosen the "easy way" in a very difficult situation and turning away from the unpleasant truth even as it is becoming more and more obvious. He is being manipulated and, in a way, he also manipulates himself because acknowledging (at least to himself) that he has been manipulated and has become an accomplice is just too difficult.
Snape, however, does "wake up" and does say at one moment "no, I don't want this". It is not a 180 degree shift, only the first step.
In the books it is simply not shown that Snape's motivation is to take revenge on Voldemort. It is never even alluded to. Of course, readers can imagine things that are not in the books but why presenting them as "facts"? However, it is clearly shown that Snape became "Dumbledore's man through and through" because he loved Lily. No, it was not about the great bargain and not about a comfortable job or even "power". Snape looks rather like a suicidal person after Lily's death and DD gives him a life-purpose, which he accepts because he can do something for Lily (even if indirectly) and because of his remorse. It is canon what DD tells Harry in HBP: You have no idea of the remorse Professor Snape felt... I believe it to be the greatest regret of his life and the reason that he returned... No bargain: remorse.
Also, hatred of Voldemort perfectly explains why Snape protected the students from the Carrows (though only sometimes!).
I don't know why you think "sometimes". He probably protected them whenever he could. But it was not possible to always defend everyone. I don't think, however, that it can be explained simply by his hatred for LV. His protection of the students does not hinder Voldemort. It is not the students who are going to defeat him. Voldemort can perfectly be defeated even if the students suffer. Yet, Snape's job is to protect them and that is what he does.
I see you like to attach base motivations to whatever good Snape does. What I see, however, is that he consistently does the right things after his "return" and the explanation that he wants to protect people, that he takes his job seriously, that is he wants to do the right thing is a simpler and more general (and therefore "scientifically" speaking "better") explanation than finding a separate (and therefore "accidental") motivation for every single good deed. At the end of HBP, he is being chased form Hogwarts. Harry is running after him, trying to curse him. Snape, while fleeing, takes care to drive the DE's out of the castle. Then Harry is attacked, crucio-d by a DE. Snape loathes Harry, that is canon. Dumbledore is not there to watch him, he has just died. Everybody thinks Snape is an evil DE. He is going through a crisis. If he were sadistic and enjoyed seeing someone tortured, now he could simply let the DE's torture Harry a bit. It would not hinder LV's ultimate defeat: Harry could for sure survive a bit of torture and then go on carrying out DD's plan. What does Snape do according to canon? 'No!' roared Snape's voice and the pain stopped as suddenly as it had started. Snape comes with great force (this is the only time he "roars" in this scene) to Harry's defence immediately, when he could in fact torture him if he wanted. This is what he does when he is not watched by a boss and does not have to fear the consequences of doing the wrong thing. He does the right thing in spite of his fury and his despair at once and instinctively. The only reason I can think of is that it comes from within.
As for the vow, Snape could have put an end to the whole situation (and gain any true DE's approval or "trust") quite simply early on: 'If he has forbidden it, you ought not to speak'... 'There!' she said triumphantly to her sister. 'Even Snape says so'... That could have easily been the end of the conversation. Snape, a loyal DE would not listen to secrets the Dark Lord did not want Narcissa to talk about. Bellatrix would have been perfectly satisfied and the ladies could have gone home within five minutes. But then Snape mentioned that he knew about the plan and the conversation went on. Why? The only reason I can think of is that he wanted to give some comfort to Narcissa, which he did not have to do. Neither DD, nor LV required him to comfort her and it was not necessary for the purpose of defeating LV at all. It was Snape's own decision originating in compassion.
What you mention as the "only" possible test of Snape's morality seems to be rather shocking and somewhat twisted to me. Besides, this test is not available, in fact totally impossible, so saying that until we see him pass this test we are not to believe in his change or in his true improvement (whatever good things he does) sounds rather cruel and unjust to me.
Julia H. - May 23, 2008 4:27 pm (#2154 of 2617)
I don't know if I was clear enough but I included the reference to the movie as an example that joining an evil organization can have many ways and motivations. I think if evil organizations, regimes (etc.) had only those supporters who were themselves evil and sadistic, they would have far less followers and much less power. Successful evil organizations in history (i.e., those that did not remain for ever marginal and relatively powerless) have traditionally used manipulation in order to present their views as acceptable and to attract followers among ordinary people (even among more or less well-meaning people), typically using propaganda based on real problems while seemingly (and falsely) offering some kind of "solution". Followers are often victims as well. Of course, not everybody can be manipulated and people can be educated to be able to avoid these traps.
Soul Search - May 23, 2008 4:31 pm (#2155 of 2617)
Good characterizatons of Snape, but there are a few things I haven't been able to fit in. Maybe you all can help.
Sirius did not know Snape was a Death Eater. So, James and Lily likely did not know either. Dumbledore did know. They were all in the Order. This doesn't seem to fit. Was Snape's activities as a Death Eater so low key that it wasn't worth mentioning him to the Order? Did Dumbledore only learn Snape was a Death Eater after he caught him overhearing the prophecy? Even so, it seems Sirius, Lily, and James should have known Snape was a Death Eater.
From what we can tell, Snape had no discourse with Lily after their falling out outside Gryffindor tower and Snape did not see Lily after they left Hogwarts. Likely, Snape never saw Lily again, after Hogwarts.
The Potters "defied Voldemort three times" before the prophecy and were on the run and in hiding from Voldemort. Snape took no special action to warn them, or anything. Yet, when Voldemort specifically targeted Harry because of the prophecy Snape was willing to take the very dangerous step of going to Dumbledore and promising him "anything." Why take on protecting Lily then? Voldemort was already targeting the Potters. Why the dramatic change? He hadn't even seen Lily for years. She had married his enemy James and had his child. Because Snape was responsible for setting Voldemort on the Potters. Did Snape accept Lily being in danger as long as he wasn't responsible? Seems like it. This may define Snape's character, but I am not sure how.
The scene in PoA where Fudge is telling Snape he should get the Order of Merlin for "capturing" Sirius Black and "rescuing" Harry etal has always had me scratching my head. Snape is gushing with pleasure at Fudge's attention and the suggestion of an Order of Merlin. He is practically on bended knee to Fudge. Way out of character for the Snape we had seen up to then. Snape seems to have repressed a strong need for respect and recognition.
I see Snape as desiring recognition, respect, and even fame, but not being willing to take the responsibility that goes along. For example, he likes the respect of being Hogwarts potion master, but finds the students annoying.
wynnleaf - May 23, 2008 6:10 pm (#2156 of 2617)
The Potters "defied Voldemort three times" before the prophecy and were on the run and in hiding from Voldemort. Snape took no special action to warn them, or anything. Yet, when Voldemort specifically targeted Harry because of the prophecy Snape was willing to take the very dangerous step of going to Dumbledore and promising him "anything." Why take on protecting Lily then? Voldemort was already targeting the Potters. (Soul Search)
As I understand the time line, this is what happened:
James and Lily joined the Order and were in some way fighting LV. Snape heard part of the prophecy made about a child yet to be born and took that to LV. At some point, probably shortly after Harry's birth, LV decided the child was either Harry or Neville and decided to target the Potters. Snape went to DD probably in the early winter after Harry's birth, when Harry was about 4 months old. The leaves are off the trees though still on the ground and the wind is strong, as is typical of November in Scotland (which JKR would know quite well). The Potters go into hiding immediately after Harry's christening (JKR said this in an interview).
There are two possibilities about the timing. Dumbledore could have sent the Potters into hiding just because he, DD, assumed that LV might eventually target Harry since Harry fit the prophecy. Or, two, Snape went to Dumbledore just prior to Harry's christening and it was due to Snape's warning that the Potters went into hiding.
Either way, because JKR said they went into hiding just after the christening, and because Snape appears to have gone to Dumbledore in early winter, it seems that Snape either went to DD either just before or immediately after DD realized the Potters needed to hide. DD recommended they go into hiding either through process of deduction (realizing LV would eventually identify Harry as the child in the prophecy), or because Snape brought a warning.
Regarding the other posts about Snape, I agree with Julia, Ramb, and others.
Another point other didn't mention is that we see another example of a young Death Eater in Draco. Does Draco enjoy torturing people and killing? No, in fact we can be certain he doesn't. Does he really understand the realities of being a Death Eater prior to joining up? Obviously not. And yet if anyone should have been well informed, you'd think it would be Draco. If Draco, with his pro-Voldemort father and brought up as he was, still didn't truly understand what it meant to be a Death Eater until he got into it, why should we be surprised about young Snape joining up without truly understanding what DEs did, and without any personal enjoyment of torture or killing people.
As for Snape's liking Fudge's appreciation of what he did, why shouldn't he? It's not like much of anyone ever seems to appreciate him other than Dumbledore. One doesn't get the impression, later in OOTP, that the Order is particularly appreciative either. And as far as he and the general Wizarding World was concerned, he'd done a very, very good and brave thing. He went up against a mass murdering Death Eater and a werewolf in order to bring in the wanted murderer and protect some school kids. That's the way Snape sees it and in fact (regardless how much he disliked Sirius) that is what he did try to do. And plus, he'd hated Sirius for years, considering him a murderer, the betrayer of Lily, etc. Why wouldn't he feel deep satisfaction that Sirius was once again captured and that at least one person was congratulating him over his efforts?
tandaradei - May 24, 2008 9:38 am (#2157 of 2617)
Rolf, who is that "seventeen going on eighteen" lad in the musical Sound of Music, soon after becomes a Nazi Telegram Boy, and harrasses even Liesl somewhat. Later, when the family is trying to escape the Nazis, Captain Georg Ritter von Trapp challenges this Rolf, who is then point is a pistol-weilding guard searching for them. Captain von Trapp says, "You're only a boy. You don't really belong to them...Come away with us before it's too late...You'll never be one of them." His attempt does not appear successful, but the scene does, in my opinion, reveal much about the vulnerabilities of late teens.
I find enough similarities between these two works of fiction, to think that Snape's (and any late-teen's) loyalties must be taken with a grain of salt, when such a young character is being developed. Facts, here, should be well laid; before adult atrocities get assigned.
I'm just saying that "facts" sometimes have grey areas.
wynnleaf - May 24, 2008 11:28 am (#2158 of 2617)
Good points, tandaradei.
Another real life example is the way real life terrorist groups often target kids that feel very disenfranchised, although in real life groups, it might be by saying "everybody else is opposed to our group" or "the other group [country, ethnic group, regime] will destroy our way of life." But often the basic appeal is that "we're the only ones who really understand you and appreciate you." Once adolescents get involved, they often find themselves caught up in something they can't get out of without getting either killed, or risking their families. I've seen numerous reports that many of the young suicide bombers in the past years are blackmailed to either go through with the mission or risk the deaths of their families. Draco's situation, with the threats to his parents, is common in real life terrorism.
The notion that most of the youth that join terrorist groups do it because they want to kill and torture, or because they want to gain power in an elitist group, is actually not true. JKR's characters are often so excellent because she draws them like real-life people, even though they're living in that magical fantasy world.
By the way, the problem with the real-life appeal of "we're the only ones who understand you and appreciate you" is one of the reasons I have such a problem with the alienation of the kids in Slytherin. It sets up a situation where the kids in that House are more susceptible to that appeal, because since they were 11 years old, 3/4 of the kids they know dislike and distrust them for nothing more (initially) than a Sorting Hat calling out "Slytherin."
Jason Riddle - May 24, 2008 8:46 pm (#2159 of 2617)
----------------------------- Part 1 --------------
What Snape knew before joining LV:
One revealing quote is from Lily: “You can’t wait to join You-Know-Who, can you? … call me Mudblood? But you call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus.” [‘The Prince’s Tale’]. Snape and his Slytherin gang desire to join Voldemort. They also believe that muggle-borns are inferior. This is not a mere coincidence. Why would they look to Voldemort as a leader if they did not know what his view on muggle-borns was? Another (from Kreacher in ‘Kreacher’s Tale’) is: “For years he talked of the Dark Lord, who was going to bring the wizards out of hiding to rule the Muggles and the Muggle-borns… and when he was sixteen years old, Master Regulus joined the Dark Lord.” Regulus knew for years, while at Hogwarts, that muggle-borns would be targeted by LV. Certainly Snape, in the bosom of Slytherin and close to Lucius , would have known. Yes, Voldemort misled people, but not by pretending to be good (I doubt Regulus’s news articles about LV were positive. The general public feared him so much they wouldn’t speak his name. They celebrated his fall.). Snape, Regulus, and Draco knew about LV’s policies and agreed with them wholeheartedly. Neither Snape, nor Regulus, nor Draco rejected the life of a Death Eater because it was immoral. They rejected it because Voldemort personally harmed them. In Draco’s case, instead of getting power and recognition, he became Voldemort’s servant and a tool to manipulate Lucius and Narcissa. More fortunate DEs, like Yaxley or the Carrows, got placed into authoritative positions and were happy. They remained loyal to LV. DEs may have been misled in the sense that they never realized that becoming a DE might involve Voldemort hurting them (as opposed to just other people). Otherwise they were not misled. Voldemort is never shy about sharing his world-views in his speeches to the DEs. He readily tortures his enemies and feeds them to Nagini, right in front of them. None of the DEs are “manipulated” into thinking that Voldemort is a humanitarian (Julia, based on your summary, the movie doesn’t seem similar to this situation.).
Why he joined (Passive vs. Active support):
Becoming a Death Eater is a serious thing. A Death Eater has the Dark Mark burned permanently into his skin and swears eternal loyalty to Voldemort (LV ‘The Death Eaters’). On the Lexicon’s list, only 30-40 DEs are mentioned in the books. Even were there twice as many, this means that extremely few people in the Wizarding World and even very few Slytherins chose to become DEs. Voldemort probably had many passive supporters, especially among older wizarding families (Sirius’s mother might be an example). Many wizards were willing to implement Voldemort’s racist policies (like the people working under Umbridge in the Muggle-born Registration Commission). But only the rare individual desired to be in Voldemort’s inner circle, to become his devoted servant. Therefore a DE is not analogous to a German scientist, infantry soldier, or housewife (all of whom were following orders and/or the overwhelming will of the nation; at quite a distance from Hitler’s ideology). A DE supports Voldemort’s views so much, that he actively fights for them [This does not apply to a late entry DE like Peter, where fear strongly influences the decision to join]. The DE group was too small, too isolated, and too secretive for Snape to have been blindly abducted into their ranks like a kid into an inner-city gang. Social-isolation (from poverty and low E.Q.) and feeling misunderstood, alone, are not enough to explain Snape’s choice; a choice he KNEW (see first section) would involve the subjugation (killing, torturing, enslaving) of muggles and muggle-borns. Desire for power and enjoyment of causing suffering are the two necessary factors. These are not the only reasons why someone would join an evil organization. These are not the reasons why every other DE joined (like Peter or Draco). But these are Snape’s reasons. And yes! he must have ENJOYED hurting others. If he hated it or was completely neutral towards it, why would he have sought out Voldemort and volunteered his services? why would he give up the good career he could have had (being a capable wizard)? why would he risk Azkaban and his entire future? why bother?
Rowling deliberately shows us that young Snape cared little for muggles and muggle-borns: twice he watches Lily “greedily”, twice he calls Petunia a muggle (“She’s only a -- ”), he hesitates when Lily asks him if it matters that she’s a muggle, he causes the branch to fall on Petunia, after Lily tries to defend him he calls her a “filthy little Mudblood”, he calls all people of muggle parentage “mudblood” (from Lily). Snape makes an exception for Lily because of his childhood attachment to her. He desires her love and friendship. He probably imagines that he can testify that Lily is a worthy witch before LV and that this will be enough to protect her. Rowling hints at a desire for power: when Lily seems to siding with James, Snape says: “You’re not going to – I won’t let you” [he wants to control her]. And then, a hint of sadism: regarding what Mulciber tried to do to Mary: “That was nothing, It was a laugh, that’s all” [he finds the suffering of others funny]. All the reasons why Snape became a DE are printed in plain view on the pages of ‘The Prince’s Tale’. In fact, Snape’s desire for power and relish for cruelty cause him to reject Lily’s friendship after their confrontation in Gryffindor tower. Instead of abandoning Mulciber/Avery (and whatever “evil” things he was doing with them) and rekindling the friendship, he chooses Voldemort. [rambkowalczyk, I think you’re right. Desire for camaraderie may have been a third motivation for Snape becoming a DE. However, it was only a minor motivation. Snape is always portrayed as an anti-social, introverted type of individual who is fine being alone most of the time. Snape never needed friendship or a lot of acceptance (in contrast with Peter). After all, he gave up Lily’s friendship so that he could become a DE.]
Jason Riddle - May 24, 2008 8:47 pm (#2160 of 2617)
----------------------------- Part 2 ---------------
What Snape did as a Death Eater:
I agree that we should not introduce arbitrary events into the story when nothing implies that they occurred [like Lupin biting someone]. But Rowling does imply, in a limited manner, that Snape committed crimes. First, Rowling presents various DEs and gives many examples of them committing crimes past and present (killing, kidnapping, torturing). Second, Rowling states that Snape was formerly a DE. To assert that Snape committed crimes as a DE is not to introduce an arbitrary event into the story. Snape committing crimes is partially implied by the author, although we can’t prove anything beyond the prophecy. Why didn’t Rowling describe Snape’s crimes? The books are about Harry. They describe his journey and his growth. Although Snape is an important character, he can only take up so much page space, most of which must be focused on Snape’s actions in the present. Snape’s crimes are not terribly important to the story. Besides, how would Harry learn about them? Dumbledore would never tell him [and DD probably never knew exactly what they were himself].
You made a critical mistake in one of your arguments (Julia): Voldemort must have known that Snape was excellent at occlumency. You give the reason in your post: Voldemort knew Dumbledore was a powerful legilimens (and intelligent in general). How could LV possibly have believed that Snape had been a successful spy at Hogwarts all those years without knowing occlumency, without being able to lie? How could he have trusted Snape with the plan for Draco to kill DD if he didn’t believe Snape could hide it? Of all people, Voldemort chose Snape to be his spy because he knew Snape could do occlumency. Snape had proven to Voldemort that he was a capable DE that could handle the job. Bellatrix knew that Snape was a legilimens (related to occlumency) because she trained Draco in occlumency. She mistrusted Snape and feared he would read Draco’s plan to help Dumbledore. LV never worried about Snape’s occlumency abilities because he assumed his own skills could overcome them [“Do not lie to Lord Voldemort,… he always knows” from ‘The Riddle House’]. The identities of the DEs were kept very secret. Karkaroff said that nobody but LV knew who all the DEs were; the DEs wore masks on their missions; one of LV’s techniques was to ensure that nobody knew who was on which side. Therefore, nobody outside a few DEs knew what crimes Snape committed. Given that he successfully lied to Voldemort for years (later on), Snape’s occlumency skills were probably strong enough to allow him to hide some of his crimes from DD. Even if DD knew some of Snape’s crimes, Dumbledore minimized Snape’s wrongdoings when he gave his testimony to the Ministry (we know DD is capable of lying for the greater good). DD would certainly think it much better for Snape to repay society by protecting Harry at Hogwarts than for him to rot in Azkaban. And after all, his spying on Voldemort should count for something.
In ‘The Prince’s Tale’ Dumbledore says, regarding Draco: “That boy’s soul is not yet so damaged… I would not have it ripped apart on my account.” This statement, along with the circumstances of LV’s soul, shows that souls can be damaged in varying degrees. When Snape was concerned about his soul (and note that he didn’t care about Draco’s soul), Snape may have been worried about damaging it more than it already was. When Snape seems horrified that Dumbledore has raised Harry to be sacrificed, Dumbledore is shocked that Snape would even care: “Don’t be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?”. This is a strong hint that Snape has committed crimes involving murder (for example, kidnapping a ministry official and bringing him to Voldemort, who questions and murders him). Snape never revealed the extent of his crimes to Dumbledore (see above). So Dumbledore accused Snape of watching people die, something he could be certain Snape had done, as opposed to murder. Dumbledore is making a HUGE revelation to Snape: I have been planning for Harry, Lily’s child, to be killed by Voldemort since day 1. When Snape is outraged at this, Dumbledore does not say: “I know this must be hard for you to hear, Severus, but there is no other way…”. He believes that Snape wouldn’t care. The only reason that would DD would believe that, the only reason that DD would respond with a comment about watching others die is that Dumbledore believed Snape had committed fairly awful crimes in the past. Crimes that Snape was never really sorry for committing. Crimes similar to plotting someone’s death. If Dumbledore believed that Snape had done nothing as a DE or that he had been as helpless as Draco was when watching Charity Burbage die, DD would not have said what he said.
And there’s more evidence of Snape’s crimes. At Spinner’s End, Snape says to Bellatrix: “I spun him a tale of deepest remorse when I joined his staff, fresh from my Death Eater days…” Snape is speaking of his time as a DE before he joined Dumbledore. The phrase “my Death Eater days” implies that this was a time period in Snape’s life much longer than a week or even a month. According to Lily, Snape wanted to be a DE, even at Hogwarts. Whether it was several months or years, the duration of Snape’s DE life is evidence that Snape tortured and/or killed. We never hear about a DE training period, but, even if there was one, it probably involved hurting innocent people. If LV was training Snape to be a spy (meanwhile not letting him do anything else), what was he teaching Snape during all that time? Occlumency? Julia, your last suggestion, that Snape volunteered for the inner circle yet held reservations against murder, is self-refuting. How is that even possible?
When explaining to Bellatrix why he remained at Hogwarts after he thought Voldemort was dead, Snape says: “They were rounding up the Death Eaters, you know. Dumbledore’s protection kept me out of jail;”. Later, Snape repeats this idea: “Have you not understood me? It was only Dumbledore’s protection that was keeping me out of Azkaban!” In the minds of Bellatrix and Voldemort, if Snape was a true Death Eater, he should have stopped working for Dumbledore. If Snape was relatively innocent, why would either of them believe that Snape needed Dumbledore’s protection so badly. Bellatrix and Voldemort must have known that Snape committed enough crimes to earn him a long term in Azkaban. At the point in Karkaroff’s confessions where he names Severus Snape as a DE (‘The Pensieve’), Dumbledore declares that Snape was a DE, but had reformed. At this moment, Alastor Moody “was wearing a look of deep skepticism behind Dumbledore’s back.” Why would he be so skeptical of Snape, if Snape had done little of significance as a DE and had spent most of the time spying for Dumbledore? It seems reasonable that Moody knew Snape before he joined DD and that he, as an auror, had witnessed/heard about Snape committing atrocities.
Finally, the fact that Snape gave Voldemort the prophecy is evidence of Snape’s behavior as a Death Eater. Certainly he knew that Voldemort would kill whoever the prophecy referred to. When he meets Dumbledore on the hilltop, Snape admits that he asked Voldemort to spare Lily in exchange for her son and his father. So Snape was fine with killing an innocent unknown baby in order to please his master and later he was fine with killing Harry and James in order to save Lily. Where did we get the idea that Snape had reservations against murder? To conclude, evidence from canon clearly supports the idea that Snape tortured and perhaps murdered while he was a Death Eater.
Jason Riddle - May 24, 2008 8:48 pm (#2161 of 2617)
----------------------------- Part 3 ---------------
Snape post-DE, Remorse?:
I don’t know if you’ve (you = Julia) ever studied science, but the simplest theory is not necessarily the best. The best theory is the one that best matches the evidence. Einstein’s relativity is more complicated than Newtonian mechanics, but Einstein’s theory better describes the real world. My explanations of Snape’s actions are more consistent with Snape’s character than yours are. The books are loaded with examples of Snape torturing others and enjoying it. Pain (physical and emotional) exists in many different degrees of severity. Therefore torture also exists in different degrees, depending on the amount of pain caused (from a simple insult, to writing lines with Umbridge’s quill, to crucio). Since you asked, let me give some examples. In chapter 28 of GoF, Harry encounters Mr. Crouch by the Forbidden Forest and it is desperately important for Harry to fetch Dumbledore to deliver Crouch’s warning. Harry rushes up to the headmaster’s office only to be delayed by Snape who refuses to let Harry see Dumbledore, despite the emergency of the situation. Rowling spells it out: “Harry could tell Snape was thoroughly enjoying himself, denying Harry the thing he wanted when he was so panicky.” In chapter 18 of GoF, before a potions class, Harry and Draco attack each other and end up injuring Goyle and Hermione. Snape sends Goyle to the hospital wing and then examines Hermione, whose front teeth had grown past her collar. “Snape looked coldly at Hermione, then said, ‘I see no difference.’” Clearly, Snape is not the least bit sorry that he joined a group dedicated to suppressing muggle-borns. He still enjoys torturing muggle-borns. Although we never see Snape use crucio, he engages in a lot of low-grade torture.
The following is my guess at Snape’s thinking. Some of it is speculative, but I believe it best matches the evidence: Snape believes in the suppression of muggles and muggle-borns. He is sadistic and wants power. During his loyal DE days, he hates James/Sirius and loves Lily. When Voldemort threatens Lily, Snape realizes that he loves Lily more than he had previously admitted to himself. Although, Snape enjoys serving Voldemort, he has never been able to recapture that happiness which he felt when he was with her. Though he thought he could forget her, Snape cannot bear the thought of losing that which gave him his greatest joy (although he already has lost her; she is with James). Therefore, he seeks Dumbledore and promises to do “anything” to save her. At this point, Snape is still a Death Eater in his heart. He wishes he could continue his DE activities and still save Lily, but he cannot. He spies on his former master, for Dumbledore. He would double-cross DD, but Dumbledore could get Snape killed by informing Voldemort that Snape had betrayed him (by giving DD the warning). So Snape remains true to Dumbledore. During his first period as a spy, Snape develops a friendship with Dumbledore. Instead of sending Snape to Azkaban, Dumbledore forgives him, gives him a comfortable position at Hogwarts, and attempts to protect Lily. Dumbledore treats Snape better than LV ever had. He acknowledges Snape’s abilities and appreciates Snape’s efforts. Snape develops loyalty towards DD.
Then Lily is killed. Snape decides to remain at Hogwarts for the following reasons: it’s better than Azkaban or suicide, affection for DD, revenge against LV (when he eventually returns), and (of least importance) to protect Lily’s son. Snape’s desire for revenge keeps him on the good side over the years, but he is never remorseful and retains his desire for power, enjoyment of causing suffering, and his racist views. Consequently, he is cruel to students, to the extent he can get away with it, and favors the pure-blood Slytherins. Harry arrives at school and Snape’s treatment of him is hypocritical. He is especially cruel to Harry, but in some cases where Harry is in danger Snape saves him in order to honor Lily. LV returns and Snape returns to him as a spy. He is serving DD and seeking his revenge. When Snape learns about DD’s plan to sacrifice Harry, he doesn’t really care about Harry dying. He is merely upset that Dumbledore deceived him.
There’s a good reason why we never hear about Snape wanting revenge against Voldemort: Rowling wanted to keep Snape’s true loyalty secret until the very end. Revenge is a major part of Snape’s character: he’s always seeking revenge against James Potter and his gang, he tries to get revenge against Siruis in PoA, and he often takes revenge on Harry and his friends when they annoy him. I’m not sure how anyone could believe that it didn’t matter to Snape whether LV lived or died. Of course, he would want revenge! It is an unstated fact. I now see a better explanation of why Snape sometimes protected the students from the Carrows. DD’s portrait could travel around the castle and would know if Snape was letting them torture the students. Snape was loyal to Dumbledore and had promised to protect the students.
Julia mentions Snape’s behavior in ‘Flight of The Prince’. Snape leads the DEs out of the castle and Harry chases after them. Instead of quickly stunning Harry and escaping, Snape stops to taunt Harry. This is minutes after Harry witnessed Snape kill Dumbledore, a man who was a father to Harry, but Snape doesn’t seem to care. A DE uses crucio on Harry, but it is not clear how fast Snape intervenes. The reasons why Snape stopped the DE from torturing Harry do not include concern for Harry. Snape was obeying LV’s orders to not attack Harry. Snape promised Dumbledore, a person whom Snape cares about, that he would protect Harry. Harry is Lily’s son, so Snape occasionally takes offense when people, besides himself, get to torture Harry. Snape does not hesitate to attack. He needlessly hurts Harry twice: “There was a loud BANG and Harry was soaring backward, hitting the ground hard again,” and “he slashed at the air: Harry felt a white-hot, whiplike something hit him across the face and was slammed backward into the ground.” Snape may have intended to hurt Harry again, but Buckbeak attacks Snape, who flees. Notice that Snape continues to be cruel to Harry, even after he knows that Harry must go to his death.
Snape had at least two good reasons for making the Vow with Narcissa. When the sisters come to Spinner’s End, he sees an opportunity to silence other DEs that distrust him. He says to Bellatrix: “You can carry my words back to the others who whisper behind my back, and carry false tales of my treachery to the Dark Lord!” Snape needs to do more than just refuse to discuss the plan and dismiss them. Although Bellatrix seems to think Snape should do just that, it would only make it seem as if he were slithering out of action again. Snape impresses Bellatrix by revealing that he knows about the plan and amazes Bellatrix by actually promising to help Draco carry it out. Doing this costs Snape nothing, because he has already promised Dumbledore the same thing, and ensures the other DEs will continue to trust him. In addition, Snape is placing Narcissa and Lucius in his debt which might be useful to him one day.
We never see Snape remorseful about becoming a Death Eater or committing crimes. We never see him regret killing James. We never see him lament his abuse of the students. We never see him apologize to Harry for killing his parents or tormenting him. He feels remorse for having killed Lily, but that is all. Snape feels no remorse for anything else he did. There is no evidence to say that Snape was remorseful about cursing George or killing Dumbledore when he was crying in Sirius’s room. He was reading Lily’s letter. He was crying because he missed her. [Here’s some symbolism for you, Julia: “he ripped in two the photograph he was also holding, so that he kept the p
mona amon - May 24, 2008 9:18 pm (#2162 of 2617)
My comments about Jason's post (sorry if I'm repeating some things already said by others).
First of all, even though I do not agree with most of it, I really enjoyed it! It's a long time since we had a really good anti-Snape post on this thread.
He knows about Voldemort’s goals of a pure-blood monopoly on magic and the subjugation of muggles. And knowing this, why did he choose to fight for Voldemort’s cause?
I agree with you that he must have known what Voldemort's goals were. I do not see him as a brainwashed innocent. Moreover he had his friend Lily, who must have been constantly pointing out how evil they were. And yet he chooses to join LV, who is targetting the very group that Lily belongs to. Why does he do this? For power, and because he liked humiliating, torturing, and spilling innocent blood? I can think of some far more plausible reasons. Rage at Lily, chance to show off his skill in the dark arts, a place to fit in, all these could have played a part. For Snape I think his morbid fascination with the dark arts was an important reason. Finally a place where his talent will be appreciated. Young Snape, Draco, and Regulus either chose to ignore, or did not realise the full implications of joining Voldemort, just as the teenage Dumbledore chose to ignore the implications of Grindelwald's 'for the Greater Good' theories.
He may well have tortured and murdered.
Not at all likely, IMO. When Dumbledore talks to him about Draco's soul, that he does not want it to be torn on his account, Snape does not slink away shamefacedly into the shadows. He confronts Dumbledore indignantly with not caring about his soul. He surely wouldn't have shown so much confidence about the state of his soul if he had been torturing and murdering people.
On the other hand, he had spent quite enough time with Voldemort (at least two years, I would say), to have witnessed murders and been aware of others, and yet he was a perfectly enthusiastic DE on the night that he overheard Sybil's Prophecy. And that's pretty evil.
They paint what I like to call the “waking up from a trance” picture of Snape.
That's pretty much the way I see it. Till then he had put himself into a trance, blind to the suffering of others, no compassion, no conscience, and suddenly this bombshell. What was all this time only happening to others suddenly happens to him. Snape is jolted awake. No, he did not get an instant lesson in morality. But Voldemort targetting Lily definitely was a wake up call for Snape.
"Wow, I didn’t know that having a good friend killed felt this bad! All this time I thought people enjoyed it when we killed their loved ones."
I actually think that's a pretty good dig at the Snape of that period!
Snape’s hatred of Voldemort(revenge), hatred of James/Sirius, love of Lily, and affection for Dumbledore are sufficient to explain all of his actions.
But if the author wanted us to draw this conclusion, she would have to show us that Snape had revengeful feelings against Voldemort. Actually quite a few readers are puzzled about the complete absense of vindictiveness in Snape. I feel this fits in quite well with his character. Not everyone feels the need to 'avenge' the death of a loved one. He is quite happy to take revenge on Sirius when he thinks he is the betrayer, but that is mostly because of his already existing hatred for him. We see no hatred towards Wormtail, the actual betrayer, only contempt.
IMO, he seems to blame James for Lily's death more than anybody else. We see no feelings of remorse about his own part in it. No revengeful feelings against Voldemort or Wormtail. But we know, from what he tells Harry in POA, "Too arrogant to believe that he may be mistaken in his friends" (not the exact quote), that he feels it was James' foolish trust in the wrong person that lead to Lily's death.
I've run out of steam, so I'll stop here.
EDIT: Oops, cross posted with you, Jason. This was a reply to your previous post. I will read your three recent posts now.
mona amon - May 25, 2008 8:21 am (#2163 of 2617)
In Draco’s case, instead of getting power and recognition, he became Voldemort’s servant and a tool to manipulate Lucius and Narcissa.
He was also forced to torture people, and he clearly hated it.
Desire for power and enjoyment of causing suffering are the two necessary factors. These are not the only reasons why someone would join an evil organization. These are not the reasons why every other DE joined (like Peter or Draco). But these are Snape’s reasons. And yes! he must have ENJOYED hurting others. If he hated it or was completely neutral towards it, why would he have sought out Voldemort and volunteered his services? why would he give up the good career he could have had (being a capable wizard)? why would he risk Azkaban and his entire future? why bother?
Jason, aren't you contadicting yourself here? If Peter and Draco can volunteer their services to Voldemort without enjoying hurting others, why cannot Snape do the same?
twice he watches Lily “greedily"
Because he loves her, not because she's muggleborn.
twice he calls Petunia a muggle
Well he does think wizards are superior to muggles. What's the big deal. He's only nine years old and has a horrible muggle father as an example.
after Lily tries to defend him he calls her a “filthy little Mudblood”
People do things in extreme anger which they do not mean at all.
Snape says: “You’re not going to – I won’t let you” [he wants to control her].
But backs down immediately with just one look from her green eyes.
“That was nothing, It was a laugh, that’s all” [he finds the suffering of others funny].
Just like lily. She found Snape's suffering funny when he was being bullied by the Marauders.
I'll be back later to reply to parts 2 and 3.
wynnleaf - May 25, 2008 8:56 am (#2164 of 2617)
Well, of course mona amon makes good points.
But here's a few others.
1. JKR said it was important to show that Snape was "redeemed." I truly don't think JKR would consider Snape redeemed if he was still a Death Eater type at heart, but only following the Order's side because of a desire for revenge, love for Lily, and affection for DD. JKR also shows Narcissa opposing LV in order to protect a loved one, but JKR doesn't speak of that action as making Narcissa "redeemed."
2. The balance of evidence about Snape's activities while a true DE is that he did not perform atrocities such as murder and torture. We have the following evidence:
a) JKR's comment that Snape could see thestrals because "as a Death Eater, he had seen things." b) DD's comment that Snape had watched people die, but not that he had killed anyone himself. 3) Snape's concern that killing DD would affect his soul. 4) Bella's comments at Spinners End that characterize Snape as a do-nothing DE. 5) LV sent Snape to apply for a position at Hogwarts, so it is likely that he'd kept Snape's hands "clean" so that he could go before DD, a legilimens, and apply for a job. 6) Sirius' comment in GOF that there hadn't ever been a hint that Snape had been a Death Eater. 7) and finally, if Snape had loved to physically harm others, what better excuse could he have as a spy than to protect his "cover" and be a convincing DE? If he wanted to, he could have told DD that he had to participate in a bit of mayhem to protect his cover, but instead Bella accuses him of never doing anything.
Evidence that Snape did participate in such atrocities? "All Death Eaters do it." No, we aren't actually given any such evidence or indication, that all DEs did that. Assumption, not canon. I'm fine with making guesses and assumptions, but feel the better ones are based on canon. Basing a theory on a prior theory or assumption is going too far out on a limb for me.
3. The notion that there were only a few Death Eaters who had the Mark is apparently based on the idea that you can take the list of DEs mentioned in the series, multiply by maybe about 2, and get an approximate number of DEs. Based on that logic, how many aurors are there?? How about students at Hogwarts? How about people in the Wizarding World of Britain? Should we use that logic to determine those numbers as well? No, of course not. Conclusion? Using the number of DEs mentioned in the book as an indication of how many there were is faulty reasoning. Therefore using this to support the idea that young Snape was joining an extremely elite group of evil doers doesn't exactly hold up.
I'll stop there for the moment.
Jason Riddle - May 25, 2008 9:42 am (#2165 of 2617)
Sorry, the end of Part 3 got cut off. Here's the rest:
“he ripped in two the photograph he was also holding, so that he kept the part from which Lily laughed, throwing the portion showing James and Harry back onto the floor, under the chest of drawers…” He steals a letter and destroys a photograph which does not belong to him. He throws James and Harry on the floor. After all these years, he cares about Lily and nothing else; not about doing what is right. He literally tears the Potter family in two.]
Thank you, everyone who responded to my post (especially Julia and the legendary wynnleaf). Soul Search, thanks for mentioning Snape’s interaction with Fudge in PoA. I think this is a very interesting discussion.
Soul Search - May 25, 2008 10:22 am (#2166 of 2617)
(The Legendary) wynnleaf,
I think I didn't explain my point well a few posts back.
For a time before the prophecy, a war was going on with Voldemort and Death Eaters and the Order of the Pheonix as main participants. Lily (and James) were in the Order and opposing Voldemort. Voldemort had targeted the Potters and they were in hiding and moving around. Pettigrew was informing Voldemort of the Potters' whereabouts. The Potters escaped (defied) Voldemort three times. Lily was at serious risk at this time.
Snape was a Death Eater and Voldemort's minion. He had to have known Voldemort was after Lily. He did not try to help her, or anything. It seems, at this point, he had given her up.
So, Snape hears the prophecy and takes it to Voldemort, who now also wants to kill the Potters' son. Now Snape is so worried about Lily he takes the very risky actions of asking Voldemort to spare her and going to Dumbledore. Is Lily that much more at risk than before Snape gave Voldemort the prophecy? I don't really see it. Yet, Snape now takes some very risky actions. Why? I content Snape acted because now he, Snape, would blame himself for Lily's death at Voldemort's hand. This was his defining moment. He didn't mind Voldemort killing people, as long as he, Snape, wasn't responsible. Now it was just as if Snape killed her himself. He couldn't take this.
I would also suggest this is when he renewed his love, now perhaps just a friendship type of love, for Lily and became obsessed with her.
mona amon - May 25, 2008 10:33 am (#2167 of 2617)
Soul Search, Snape may not have been aware that Lily was in any particular danger or even that she and James defied LV three times. Voldemort would not have told him everything. He would have known that as a member of the Order of the Phoenix she was in general danger, but it was only when he finds out that Voldemort had decided to go after her that he runs to Dumbledore in a panic.
Dryleaves - May 25, 2008 10:50 am (#2168 of 2617)
The best theory is the one that best matches the evidence... My explanations of Snape’s actions are more consistent with Snape’s character than yours are. (Jason Riddle)
But the explanation is part of the character, if you change the explanation the character as a whole will look different. Even if we go to the books, things can be interpreted differently. For example you use Snape’s treatment of Hermione and his favourizing the Slytherins as examples of his racist values, but it is never actually shown in the books that this is the reason behind it. I think you base it on his childhood comments and on the fact that he was a member of a racist organisation. But there is another comment that may say something else, the one he gives to Phineas Nigellus in “The Prince’s Tale”: “Don’t use that word!”. I guess you could say that this word reminds him of a most unpleasant memory, but if he still had those values and treated Hermione according to them, why care when it is uttered about her? He doesn’t really have to do it to look good to portrait DD, because it is after all Phineas Nigellus that is to blame for the utterance. His values may have changed since he was a DE. There are other explanations of his treatment of Hermione. Besides the fact that she is a Gryffindor and a friend of Harry’s, she also has some traits that Snape seems not to like. Snape behaves quite differently from Hermione. He doesn’t jump up and down shouting “I know!” like she does, and he doesn’t quote from books to speak with the authority of others the way she does. He knows his abilities for sure, but he doesn’t boast the way Hermione does. In short, he actually thinks she is an insufferable know-it-all. His favourizing of the Slytherins may be explained by the fact that they are impopular and that he finds them disfavoured to the other houses, especially Gryffindor, and he may think this should be balanced.
I see Snape as a very insecure person, who is particularly vulnerable regarding his personal dignity, and when this is being attacked by for example the Marauders or students he freaks out. Voldemort’s killing of Lily doesn’t hit this vulnerable spot. It hits something else and therefore he may react differently to it. He is partly responsible himself. So we can’t be sure he feels the same hunger for revenge as he does towards the Marauders.
“he ripped in two the photograph he was also holding, so that he kept the part from which Lily laughed, throwing the portion showing James and Harry back onto the floor, under the chest of drawers…” He steals a letter and destroys a photograph which does not belong to him. He throws James and Harry on the floor. After all these years, he cares about Lily and nothing else; not about doing what is right. He literally tears the Potter family in two.]
But you could also see it like this: He needs comfort and encouragement, and as Lily is his motivation and the most positive thing in his life, she can maybe give it to him. But to be reminded at the same time that she chose someone else and that she wrote friendly letters to the man he considers his enemy won’t help him. He rips the photo and takes one part of the letter to create an illusion.
Orion - May 25, 2008 10:57 am (#2169 of 2617)
"...defied LV three times..." sounds like a plothole to me. The Potters were only 21 when they died, they had a little baby, and they spent a year in deep hiding, so after Hogwarts they must have been extremely active fighters to even have had the chance to defy LV in person, that is, becoming an issue for LV in the first place, and then getting into an open conflict with him, let alone three times. And Snape would have known at least a little bit about LV targetting the Potters, even if you consider LV's secrecy. It's not very convincing that Snape works actively for a leader who has attacked the love of his life three times already. Nobody can be that stupid. The "defied three times"-issue has bothered me for a long time. Maybe somebody has an explanation.
mona amon - May 25, 2008 11:00 am (#2170 of 2617)
Orion I think you are quite right. When you consider the time line it does seem like a plot hole.
My comments on Jason Riddle's post. Most I think reflects Julia H's opinion.
Honesty compels us to admit that Snape knew exactly what he was doing when he joined the Dark Lord.
agree partially. On the other hand Snape could have been deliberately lied to. For example, some of the German scientists who joined the Nazi party may have heard rumors of Hitler's hatred towards Jews and other minorities but were told by friends that these rumors were exaggerations. Many people who financially support Osama Bin Laden do not write a check to him but to an organization that advertises itself to be a charity that helps poor Muslims who are being persecuted. People in these positions have a responsibility to look beneath the surface to see what is really going on.
The books do not give a reason as to why Snape chose to be a Death Eater or what he knew beforehand.
There are only two legitimate reasons why Snape would volunteer for the seemingly unpleasant job of Death Eater...
Disagree--There is a third reason. Snape needed to belong and Death Eaters accepted him. Snape has always been portrayed as an oddball kid who doesn't quite fit in. In the Southern states men joined the KKK not necessarily because they hated black people but because they could join a club that accepted them and that by joining this club they thought good things could be done.
First, for power...
Snape may have wanted the power and influence that becoming a Death Eater can bring, but more than that I think he wanted the respect that he thought would come with the position.
Second, Snape must have actually enjoyed hurting mudbloods and muggles.
This statement although plausible doesn't have to be true. I can see Snape gloating if an enemy of his is hurt or humiliated, but this isn't the same as him actually hurting people and enjoying it. For instance in the first movie Harry is smiling when Dudley gets a tail, but no one takes it to mean that Harry is cruel.
I think as a Death Eater, Snape was perfectly willing to accept that other people were going to die in order for Voldemort to get what he wants. These other people were nameless and no one that he knew or cared about.
He may well have tortured and murdered.
No proof that he did or he didn't. But until Lily was targeted he probably did nothing to stop any atrocities. I think he went along with what was going on but did not actively start anything.
They paint what I like to call the “waking up from a trance” picture of Snape.
My version is along the lines. I thought I could accept the death of anybody for the cause, but the thought of Lily dying is wrong. I can't go on lying to myself anymore. I have got to do something.
Snape always knew that he was doing evil and causing suffering. He was comfortable with it.
I am sure that Snape justified the evil and hurt as something necessary to the cause. He had previously told himself that those who died or were in pain didn't matter because those people never did anything for him.
Snape’s hatred of Voldemort(revenge), hatred of James/Sirius, love of Lily, and affection for Dumbledore are sufficient to explain all of his actions. There is no need (and little evidence) to say that he did something simply because it was right.
This may have been true at the time he approached Dumbledore to protect Lily. But it seems that later in life, Snape is doing things because it is right, however the way JKR wrote the book, in Snape's mind, what is right is What would Lily do? At this point Lily is deified.
Dryleaves - May 23, 2008 12:35 pm (#2152 of 2617)
You can interpret a character in many different ways which is very fascinating. I think your analysis is very interesting Jason, but I have read Snape differently, and I think we all as readers twist a character a little as language is always ambiguous and arbitrary in some way and we all have different interpretation horizons.
I agree I expressed myself clumsily when I wrote about power, and I’m not sure I will do any better now. I don’t really see Snape as wanting power in the same sense as for example Voldemort or Lucius. I don’t think he wants world dominion and I don’t think it is really important to him to have a big influence over the Wizarding World and I don’t think he really wants to be Headmaster of Hogwarts. Where I do see him want power is in relation to the Marauders. The Marauders, or at least half of them, James and Sirius, have power. They are popular, they get away with a lot of things and James finally gets the girl. When Snape’s Slytherin friends use magic on other students ‘for fun’ it is Dark Magic, when the Marauders do something similar to Snape it’s a joke, and when he thinks they actually are trying to murder him it’s all seen as a ‘prank’. This is what his life is worth, but he does not think this is right. He thinks he is equal to the Marauders on an ‘objective’ level, but sees that he is not in the actual world. They always win, whatever they do. So I think Snape wants power to have a ‘fair’ chance to compete. And I think that he might find the DEs matching the power he associates with the Marauders, such as being pure-blood Gryffindors, as a DE it’s OK to be Slytherin, so yes, in a way he joins the DE to gain power, but I think you meant it in a slightly different way. I don’t see wanting power as such as Snape’s primary or ultimate goal in life, though, as it is for Voldemort. I think he wants something like the power to be listened to and to be taken seriously and to be recognized rather than to dominate others. I think Snape very often takes an underdog perspective and that his abuse of his power as a teacher is due to that he doesn’t really trust the power he has. He has the ability to make the students quiet and to pay attention in class, but sometimes he uses overkill strategies to keep up his authority. He is extremely sensitive to any comment that may undermine it. This seems especially to be the case regarding Harry but also other Gryffindor students who to Snape are closely related to the Marauders. On many occasions in the books I think that we see Snape using his authority in the right way without abusing it, even if he could have done so.
What Snape actually did during his DE days is unknown to us. DEs do horrible things, and it is quite possible that he took part in terrible actions, but just as the fact that we don’t know doesn’t mean he did nothing, it doesn’t mean that we must assume the worst either and make this period of his life the one that shows his true nature (when it shows nothing). In his actions shown in the books adult Snape doesn’t come across as such an all bad person to me, even if he certainly isn’t a nice one. Snape the child doesn’t seem especially bad either, though still not all nice and charming. Teenage Snape is shown to be heading down the wrong path, but he doesn’t really strike one as any worse than the Marauders. He probably did take part in terrible actions in some way as a DE, but that doesn’t mean that he is a power-hungry maniac who enjoys to see people suffer. When Snape is shown like that in the books it is through the eyes of Harry, but very often it turns out that Harry has misinterpreted what Snape is doing.
I think that Lily’s death means some sort of moral wake-up for Snape, even if it is not an immediate one. When Snape apologizes to Lily after having called her mudblood she asks why she would be any different from others of her birth. To him she is, but Lily’s death shows that there really are no such exceptions to the rule in the DE ideology and therefore I think he turns his back on it.
Another thing we strangely enough never are shown is Snape’s hatred of Voldemort and therefore I’m not sure whether we could say that revenge is the prime motivation for his actions. We are shown his being vindictive towards Sirius Black and the other Marauders, but never openly towards Voldemort. There is of course the narrative aspect of this: we mustn’t know Snape’s true allegiance for the sake of the plot; but not even when this is fully revealed we see him wanting revenge. I don’t know why, if it is because Voldemorts evil takes somewhat metaphysical proportions and simply can’t be blamed in itself, or something else, but the reason we are shown for Snape’s actions is his love for Lily. I’m not sure how to interpret this. As this after all is a character about whom a lot of things are untold or ambiguously told we will continue to have different interpretations of him.
Julia H. - May 23, 2008 2:53 pm (#2153 of 2617)
Edited May 23, 2008 3:52 pm
Many like to imagine that Snape had a 180 degree shift in his moral values the instant that LV targeted Lily. (Jason)
Perhaps there are many who like to imagine that. I personally cannot remember reading any posts that interpreted Snape's change in the ways you describe so sarcastically. I think in a sense it was a moment to wake or to shake him up but that was not a 180 degree shift by any means. He still had a long way to go before he completed that change but the hilltop scene was a defining moment, a turning point for him and he got to the hilltop because Lily was targeted by Voldemort. But his joining DD is not initiated by Lily's death. Originally, he went to DD and agreed to become his spy in order to protect Lily.
Instead of what you describe as Snape's "waking up", I think what happened was that this was the moment when Snape first chose the right way instead of the easy way. Whatever he did or experienced among the DE's, he managed to preserve his love for a woman, his childhood-friend, who he probably had not even seen for years and he was willing to risk his life to save her. This love for a muggleborn was in direct opposition to DE ideology and I see it as a pre-programmed device which was almost sure to turn him away from Voldemort, since Lily as a muggle-born and as an Order member was or would have been targeted by Voldemort even without the prophecy. Lily was important enough for him to choose the difficult right way when she was in danger and later because of her memory, while earlier ha may have simply chosen the easy way (for whatever reason) - which is bad and tragic enough even if he personally did not kill.
There is a film called "The Inner Circle" based (as far as I know) on a true story about a Russian man who, basically by accident, becomes a member of Stalin's "inner circle". He does not kill (it is not his job), he does not even witness the killings directly and does not order others to kill (he does not even have the authority) but he lets himself be manipulated and believes (?) that Stalin is a great leader and what he does is ultimately good. He is not power-hungry, he is not evil but he accepts the benefits he gets and does not (want to) see the truth behind them even when more and more definite clues are coming. Actually, he goes much farther than Snape accepting what is happening but his situation is also more difficult because there is no "Dumbledore" around. To me he comes across as both an accomplice and a victim. A tragic character. Ultimately, his life is ruined (his wife, who he loves, dies tragically) and he still cannot give up believing in what he has believed. It is important that he is not an idiot, in the film it is shown that he is not at all the only one manipulated to such extents. I think his main flaw is having chosen the "easy way" in a very difficult situation and turning away from the unpleasant truth even as it is becoming more and more obvious. He is being manipulated and, in a way, he also manipulates himself because acknowledging (at least to himself) that he has been manipulated and has become an accomplice is just too difficult.
Snape, however, does "wake up" and does say at one moment "no, I don't want this". It is not a 180 degree shift, only the first step.
In the books it is simply not shown that Snape's motivation is to take revenge on Voldemort. It is never even alluded to. Of course, readers can imagine things that are not in the books but why presenting them as "facts"? However, it is clearly shown that Snape became "Dumbledore's man through and through" because he loved Lily. No, it was not about the great bargain and not about a comfortable job or even "power". Snape looks rather like a suicidal person after Lily's death and DD gives him a life-purpose, which he accepts because he can do something for Lily (even if indirectly) and because of his remorse. It is canon what DD tells Harry in HBP: You have no idea of the remorse Professor Snape felt... I believe it to be the greatest regret of his life and the reason that he returned... No bargain: remorse.
Also, hatred of Voldemort perfectly explains why Snape protected the students from the Carrows (though only sometimes!).
I don't know why you think "sometimes". He probably protected them whenever he could. But it was not possible to always defend everyone. I don't think, however, that it can be explained simply by his hatred for LV. His protection of the students does not hinder Voldemort. It is not the students who are going to defeat him. Voldemort can perfectly be defeated even if the students suffer. Yet, Snape's job is to protect them and that is what he does.
I see you like to attach base motivations to whatever good Snape does. What I see, however, is that he consistently does the right things after his "return" and the explanation that he wants to protect people, that he takes his job seriously, that is he wants to do the right thing is a simpler and more general (and therefore "scientifically" speaking "better") explanation than finding a separate (and therefore "accidental") motivation for every single good deed. At the end of HBP, he is being chased form Hogwarts. Harry is running after him, trying to curse him. Snape, while fleeing, takes care to drive the DE's out of the castle. Then Harry is attacked, crucio-d by a DE. Snape loathes Harry, that is canon. Dumbledore is not there to watch him, he has just died. Everybody thinks Snape is an evil DE. He is going through a crisis. If he were sadistic and enjoyed seeing someone tortured, now he could simply let the DE's torture Harry a bit. It would not hinder LV's ultimate defeat: Harry could for sure survive a bit of torture and then go on carrying out DD's plan. What does Snape do according to canon? 'No!' roared Snape's voice and the pain stopped as suddenly as it had started. Snape comes with great force (this is the only time he "roars" in this scene) to Harry's defence immediately, when he could in fact torture him if he wanted. This is what he does when he is not watched by a boss and does not have to fear the consequences of doing the wrong thing. He does the right thing in spite of his fury and his despair at once and instinctively. The only reason I can think of is that it comes from within.
As for the vow, Snape could have put an end to the whole situation (and gain any true DE's approval or "trust") quite simply early on: 'If he has forbidden it, you ought not to speak'... 'There!' she said triumphantly to her sister. 'Even Snape says so'... That could have easily been the end of the conversation. Snape, a loyal DE would not listen to secrets the Dark Lord did not want Narcissa to talk about. Bellatrix would have been perfectly satisfied and the ladies could have gone home within five minutes. But then Snape mentioned that he knew about the plan and the conversation went on. Why? The only reason I can think of is that he wanted to give some comfort to Narcissa, which he did not have to do. Neither DD, nor LV required him to comfort her and it was not necessary for the purpose of defeating LV at all. It was Snape's own decision originating in compassion.
What you mention as the "only" possible test of Snape's morality seems to be rather shocking and somewhat twisted to me. Besides, this test is not available, in fact totally impossible, so saying that until we see him pass this test we are not to believe in his change or in his true improvement (whatever good things he does) sounds rather cruel and unjust to me.
Julia H. - May 23, 2008 4:27 pm (#2154 of 2617)
I don't know if I was clear enough but I included the reference to the movie as an example that joining an evil organization can have many ways and motivations. I think if evil organizations, regimes (etc.) had only those supporters who were themselves evil and sadistic, they would have far less followers and much less power. Successful evil organizations in history (i.e., those that did not remain for ever marginal and relatively powerless) have traditionally used manipulation in order to present their views as acceptable and to attract followers among ordinary people (even among more or less well-meaning people), typically using propaganda based on real problems while seemingly (and falsely) offering some kind of "solution". Followers are often victims as well. Of course, not everybody can be manipulated and people can be educated to be able to avoid these traps.
Soul Search - May 23, 2008 4:31 pm (#2155 of 2617)
Good characterizatons of Snape, but there are a few things I haven't been able to fit in. Maybe you all can help.
Sirius did not know Snape was a Death Eater. So, James and Lily likely did not know either. Dumbledore did know. They were all in the Order. This doesn't seem to fit. Was Snape's activities as a Death Eater so low key that it wasn't worth mentioning him to the Order? Did Dumbledore only learn Snape was a Death Eater after he caught him overhearing the prophecy? Even so, it seems Sirius, Lily, and James should have known Snape was a Death Eater.
From what we can tell, Snape had no discourse with Lily after their falling out outside Gryffindor tower and Snape did not see Lily after they left Hogwarts. Likely, Snape never saw Lily again, after Hogwarts.
The Potters "defied Voldemort three times" before the prophecy and were on the run and in hiding from Voldemort. Snape took no special action to warn them, or anything. Yet, when Voldemort specifically targeted Harry because of the prophecy Snape was willing to take the very dangerous step of going to Dumbledore and promising him "anything." Why take on protecting Lily then? Voldemort was already targeting the Potters. Why the dramatic change? He hadn't even seen Lily for years. She had married his enemy James and had his child. Because Snape was responsible for setting Voldemort on the Potters. Did Snape accept Lily being in danger as long as he wasn't responsible? Seems like it. This may define Snape's character, but I am not sure how.
The scene in PoA where Fudge is telling Snape he should get the Order of Merlin for "capturing" Sirius Black and "rescuing" Harry etal has always had me scratching my head. Snape is gushing with pleasure at Fudge's attention and the suggestion of an Order of Merlin. He is practically on bended knee to Fudge. Way out of character for the Snape we had seen up to then. Snape seems to have repressed a strong need for respect and recognition.
I see Snape as desiring recognition, respect, and even fame, but not being willing to take the responsibility that goes along. For example, he likes the respect of being Hogwarts potion master, but finds the students annoying.
wynnleaf - May 23, 2008 6:10 pm (#2156 of 2617)
The Potters "defied Voldemort three times" before the prophecy and were on the run and in hiding from Voldemort. Snape took no special action to warn them, or anything. Yet, when Voldemort specifically targeted Harry because of the prophecy Snape was willing to take the very dangerous step of going to Dumbledore and promising him "anything." Why take on protecting Lily then? Voldemort was already targeting the Potters. (Soul Search)
As I understand the time line, this is what happened:
James and Lily joined the Order and were in some way fighting LV. Snape heard part of the prophecy made about a child yet to be born and took that to LV. At some point, probably shortly after Harry's birth, LV decided the child was either Harry or Neville and decided to target the Potters. Snape went to DD probably in the early winter after Harry's birth, when Harry was about 4 months old. The leaves are off the trees though still on the ground and the wind is strong, as is typical of November in Scotland (which JKR would know quite well). The Potters go into hiding immediately after Harry's christening (JKR said this in an interview).
There are two possibilities about the timing. Dumbledore could have sent the Potters into hiding just because he, DD, assumed that LV might eventually target Harry since Harry fit the prophecy. Or, two, Snape went to Dumbledore just prior to Harry's christening and it was due to Snape's warning that the Potters went into hiding.
Either way, because JKR said they went into hiding just after the christening, and because Snape appears to have gone to Dumbledore in early winter, it seems that Snape either went to DD either just before or immediately after DD realized the Potters needed to hide. DD recommended they go into hiding either through process of deduction (realizing LV would eventually identify Harry as the child in the prophecy), or because Snape brought a warning.
Regarding the other posts about Snape, I agree with Julia, Ramb, and others.
Another point other didn't mention is that we see another example of a young Death Eater in Draco. Does Draco enjoy torturing people and killing? No, in fact we can be certain he doesn't. Does he really understand the realities of being a Death Eater prior to joining up? Obviously not. And yet if anyone should have been well informed, you'd think it would be Draco. If Draco, with his pro-Voldemort father and brought up as he was, still didn't truly understand what it meant to be a Death Eater until he got into it, why should we be surprised about young Snape joining up without truly understanding what DEs did, and without any personal enjoyment of torture or killing people.
As for Snape's liking Fudge's appreciation of what he did, why shouldn't he? It's not like much of anyone ever seems to appreciate him other than Dumbledore. One doesn't get the impression, later in OOTP, that the Order is particularly appreciative either. And as far as he and the general Wizarding World was concerned, he'd done a very, very good and brave thing. He went up against a mass murdering Death Eater and a werewolf in order to bring in the wanted murderer and protect some school kids. That's the way Snape sees it and in fact (regardless how much he disliked Sirius) that is what he did try to do. And plus, he'd hated Sirius for years, considering him a murderer, the betrayer of Lily, etc. Why wouldn't he feel deep satisfaction that Sirius was once again captured and that at least one person was congratulating him over his efforts?
tandaradei - May 24, 2008 9:38 am (#2157 of 2617)
Rolf, who is that "seventeen going on eighteen" lad in the musical Sound of Music, soon after becomes a Nazi Telegram Boy, and harrasses even Liesl somewhat. Later, when the family is trying to escape the Nazis, Captain Georg Ritter von Trapp challenges this Rolf, who is then point is a pistol-weilding guard searching for them. Captain von Trapp says, "You're only a boy. You don't really belong to them...Come away with us before it's too late...You'll never be one of them." His attempt does not appear successful, but the scene does, in my opinion, reveal much about the vulnerabilities of late teens.
I find enough similarities between these two works of fiction, to think that Snape's (and any late-teen's) loyalties must be taken with a grain of salt, when such a young character is being developed. Facts, here, should be well laid; before adult atrocities get assigned.
I'm just saying that "facts" sometimes have grey areas.
wynnleaf - May 24, 2008 11:28 am (#2158 of 2617)
Good points, tandaradei.
Another real life example is the way real life terrorist groups often target kids that feel very disenfranchised, although in real life groups, it might be by saying "everybody else is opposed to our group" or "the other group [country, ethnic group, regime] will destroy our way of life." But often the basic appeal is that "we're the only ones who really understand you and appreciate you." Once adolescents get involved, they often find themselves caught up in something they can't get out of without getting either killed, or risking their families. I've seen numerous reports that many of the young suicide bombers in the past years are blackmailed to either go through with the mission or risk the deaths of their families. Draco's situation, with the threats to his parents, is common in real life terrorism.
The notion that most of the youth that join terrorist groups do it because they want to kill and torture, or because they want to gain power in an elitist group, is actually not true. JKR's characters are often so excellent because she draws them like real-life people, even though they're living in that magical fantasy world.
By the way, the problem with the real-life appeal of "we're the only ones who understand you and appreciate you" is one of the reasons I have such a problem with the alienation of the kids in Slytherin. It sets up a situation where the kids in that House are more susceptible to that appeal, because since they were 11 years old, 3/4 of the kids they know dislike and distrust them for nothing more (initially) than a Sorting Hat calling out "Slytherin."
Jason Riddle - May 24, 2008 8:46 pm (#2159 of 2617)
----------------------------- Part 1 --------------
What Snape knew before joining LV:
One revealing quote is from Lily: “You can’t wait to join You-Know-Who, can you? … call me Mudblood? But you call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus.” [‘The Prince’s Tale’]. Snape and his Slytherin gang desire to join Voldemort. They also believe that muggle-borns are inferior. This is not a mere coincidence. Why would they look to Voldemort as a leader if they did not know what his view on muggle-borns was? Another (from Kreacher in ‘Kreacher’s Tale’) is: “For years he talked of the Dark Lord, who was going to bring the wizards out of hiding to rule the Muggles and the Muggle-borns… and when he was sixteen years old, Master Regulus joined the Dark Lord.” Regulus knew for years, while at Hogwarts, that muggle-borns would be targeted by LV. Certainly Snape, in the bosom of Slytherin and close to Lucius , would have known. Yes, Voldemort misled people, but not by pretending to be good (I doubt Regulus’s news articles about LV were positive. The general public feared him so much they wouldn’t speak his name. They celebrated his fall.). Snape, Regulus, and Draco knew about LV’s policies and agreed with them wholeheartedly. Neither Snape, nor Regulus, nor Draco rejected the life of a Death Eater because it was immoral. They rejected it because Voldemort personally harmed them. In Draco’s case, instead of getting power and recognition, he became Voldemort’s servant and a tool to manipulate Lucius and Narcissa. More fortunate DEs, like Yaxley or the Carrows, got placed into authoritative positions and were happy. They remained loyal to LV. DEs may have been misled in the sense that they never realized that becoming a DE might involve Voldemort hurting them (as opposed to just other people). Otherwise they were not misled. Voldemort is never shy about sharing his world-views in his speeches to the DEs. He readily tortures his enemies and feeds them to Nagini, right in front of them. None of the DEs are “manipulated” into thinking that Voldemort is a humanitarian (Julia, based on your summary, the movie doesn’t seem similar to this situation.).
Why he joined (Passive vs. Active support):
Becoming a Death Eater is a serious thing. A Death Eater has the Dark Mark burned permanently into his skin and swears eternal loyalty to Voldemort (LV ‘The Death Eaters’). On the Lexicon’s list, only 30-40 DEs are mentioned in the books. Even were there twice as many, this means that extremely few people in the Wizarding World and even very few Slytherins chose to become DEs. Voldemort probably had many passive supporters, especially among older wizarding families (Sirius’s mother might be an example). Many wizards were willing to implement Voldemort’s racist policies (like the people working under Umbridge in the Muggle-born Registration Commission). But only the rare individual desired to be in Voldemort’s inner circle, to become his devoted servant. Therefore a DE is not analogous to a German scientist, infantry soldier, or housewife (all of whom were following orders and/or the overwhelming will of the nation; at quite a distance from Hitler’s ideology). A DE supports Voldemort’s views so much, that he actively fights for them [This does not apply to a late entry DE like Peter, where fear strongly influences the decision to join]. The DE group was too small, too isolated, and too secretive for Snape to have been blindly abducted into their ranks like a kid into an inner-city gang. Social-isolation (from poverty and low E.Q.) and feeling misunderstood, alone, are not enough to explain Snape’s choice; a choice he KNEW (see first section) would involve the subjugation (killing, torturing, enslaving) of muggles and muggle-borns. Desire for power and enjoyment of causing suffering are the two necessary factors. These are not the only reasons why someone would join an evil organization. These are not the reasons why every other DE joined (like Peter or Draco). But these are Snape’s reasons. And yes! he must have ENJOYED hurting others. If he hated it or was completely neutral towards it, why would he have sought out Voldemort and volunteered his services? why would he give up the good career he could have had (being a capable wizard)? why would he risk Azkaban and his entire future? why bother?
Rowling deliberately shows us that young Snape cared little for muggles and muggle-borns: twice he watches Lily “greedily”, twice he calls Petunia a muggle (“She’s only a -- ”), he hesitates when Lily asks him if it matters that she’s a muggle, he causes the branch to fall on Petunia, after Lily tries to defend him he calls her a “filthy little Mudblood”, he calls all people of muggle parentage “mudblood” (from Lily). Snape makes an exception for Lily because of his childhood attachment to her. He desires her love and friendship. He probably imagines that he can testify that Lily is a worthy witch before LV and that this will be enough to protect her. Rowling hints at a desire for power: when Lily seems to siding with James, Snape says: “You’re not going to – I won’t let you” [he wants to control her]. And then, a hint of sadism: regarding what Mulciber tried to do to Mary: “That was nothing, It was a laugh, that’s all” [he finds the suffering of others funny]. All the reasons why Snape became a DE are printed in plain view on the pages of ‘The Prince’s Tale’. In fact, Snape’s desire for power and relish for cruelty cause him to reject Lily’s friendship after their confrontation in Gryffindor tower. Instead of abandoning Mulciber/Avery (and whatever “evil” things he was doing with them) and rekindling the friendship, he chooses Voldemort. [rambkowalczyk, I think you’re right. Desire for camaraderie may have been a third motivation for Snape becoming a DE. However, it was only a minor motivation. Snape is always portrayed as an anti-social, introverted type of individual who is fine being alone most of the time. Snape never needed friendship or a lot of acceptance (in contrast with Peter). After all, he gave up Lily’s friendship so that he could become a DE.]
Jason Riddle - May 24, 2008 8:47 pm (#2160 of 2617)
----------------------------- Part 2 ---------------
What Snape did as a Death Eater:
I agree that we should not introduce arbitrary events into the story when nothing implies that they occurred [like Lupin biting someone]. But Rowling does imply, in a limited manner, that Snape committed crimes. First, Rowling presents various DEs and gives many examples of them committing crimes past and present (killing, kidnapping, torturing). Second, Rowling states that Snape was formerly a DE. To assert that Snape committed crimes as a DE is not to introduce an arbitrary event into the story. Snape committing crimes is partially implied by the author, although we can’t prove anything beyond the prophecy. Why didn’t Rowling describe Snape’s crimes? The books are about Harry. They describe his journey and his growth. Although Snape is an important character, he can only take up so much page space, most of which must be focused on Snape’s actions in the present. Snape’s crimes are not terribly important to the story. Besides, how would Harry learn about them? Dumbledore would never tell him [and DD probably never knew exactly what they were himself].
You made a critical mistake in one of your arguments (Julia): Voldemort must have known that Snape was excellent at occlumency. You give the reason in your post: Voldemort knew Dumbledore was a powerful legilimens (and intelligent in general). How could LV possibly have believed that Snape had been a successful spy at Hogwarts all those years without knowing occlumency, without being able to lie? How could he have trusted Snape with the plan for Draco to kill DD if he didn’t believe Snape could hide it? Of all people, Voldemort chose Snape to be his spy because he knew Snape could do occlumency. Snape had proven to Voldemort that he was a capable DE that could handle the job. Bellatrix knew that Snape was a legilimens (related to occlumency) because she trained Draco in occlumency. She mistrusted Snape and feared he would read Draco’s plan to help Dumbledore. LV never worried about Snape’s occlumency abilities because he assumed his own skills could overcome them [“Do not lie to Lord Voldemort,… he always knows” from ‘The Riddle House’]. The identities of the DEs were kept very secret. Karkaroff said that nobody but LV knew who all the DEs were; the DEs wore masks on their missions; one of LV’s techniques was to ensure that nobody knew who was on which side. Therefore, nobody outside a few DEs knew what crimes Snape committed. Given that he successfully lied to Voldemort for years (later on), Snape’s occlumency skills were probably strong enough to allow him to hide some of his crimes from DD. Even if DD knew some of Snape’s crimes, Dumbledore minimized Snape’s wrongdoings when he gave his testimony to the Ministry (we know DD is capable of lying for the greater good). DD would certainly think it much better for Snape to repay society by protecting Harry at Hogwarts than for him to rot in Azkaban. And after all, his spying on Voldemort should count for something.
In ‘The Prince’s Tale’ Dumbledore says, regarding Draco: “That boy’s soul is not yet so damaged… I would not have it ripped apart on my account.” This statement, along with the circumstances of LV’s soul, shows that souls can be damaged in varying degrees. When Snape was concerned about his soul (and note that he didn’t care about Draco’s soul), Snape may have been worried about damaging it more than it already was. When Snape seems horrified that Dumbledore has raised Harry to be sacrificed, Dumbledore is shocked that Snape would even care: “Don’t be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?”. This is a strong hint that Snape has committed crimes involving murder (for example, kidnapping a ministry official and bringing him to Voldemort, who questions and murders him). Snape never revealed the extent of his crimes to Dumbledore (see above). So Dumbledore accused Snape of watching people die, something he could be certain Snape had done, as opposed to murder. Dumbledore is making a HUGE revelation to Snape: I have been planning for Harry, Lily’s child, to be killed by Voldemort since day 1. When Snape is outraged at this, Dumbledore does not say: “I know this must be hard for you to hear, Severus, but there is no other way…”. He believes that Snape wouldn’t care. The only reason that would DD would believe that, the only reason that DD would respond with a comment about watching others die is that Dumbledore believed Snape had committed fairly awful crimes in the past. Crimes that Snape was never really sorry for committing. Crimes similar to plotting someone’s death. If Dumbledore believed that Snape had done nothing as a DE or that he had been as helpless as Draco was when watching Charity Burbage die, DD would not have said what he said.
And there’s more evidence of Snape’s crimes. At Spinner’s End, Snape says to Bellatrix: “I spun him a tale of deepest remorse when I joined his staff, fresh from my Death Eater days…” Snape is speaking of his time as a DE before he joined Dumbledore. The phrase “my Death Eater days” implies that this was a time period in Snape’s life much longer than a week or even a month. According to Lily, Snape wanted to be a DE, even at Hogwarts. Whether it was several months or years, the duration of Snape’s DE life is evidence that Snape tortured and/or killed. We never hear about a DE training period, but, even if there was one, it probably involved hurting innocent people. If LV was training Snape to be a spy (meanwhile not letting him do anything else), what was he teaching Snape during all that time? Occlumency? Julia, your last suggestion, that Snape volunteered for the inner circle yet held reservations against murder, is self-refuting. How is that even possible?
When explaining to Bellatrix why he remained at Hogwarts after he thought Voldemort was dead, Snape says: “They were rounding up the Death Eaters, you know. Dumbledore’s protection kept me out of jail;”. Later, Snape repeats this idea: “Have you not understood me? It was only Dumbledore’s protection that was keeping me out of Azkaban!” In the minds of Bellatrix and Voldemort, if Snape was a true Death Eater, he should have stopped working for Dumbledore. If Snape was relatively innocent, why would either of them believe that Snape needed Dumbledore’s protection so badly. Bellatrix and Voldemort must have known that Snape committed enough crimes to earn him a long term in Azkaban. At the point in Karkaroff’s confessions where he names Severus Snape as a DE (‘The Pensieve’), Dumbledore declares that Snape was a DE, but had reformed. At this moment, Alastor Moody “was wearing a look of deep skepticism behind Dumbledore’s back.” Why would he be so skeptical of Snape, if Snape had done little of significance as a DE and had spent most of the time spying for Dumbledore? It seems reasonable that Moody knew Snape before he joined DD and that he, as an auror, had witnessed/heard about Snape committing atrocities.
Finally, the fact that Snape gave Voldemort the prophecy is evidence of Snape’s behavior as a Death Eater. Certainly he knew that Voldemort would kill whoever the prophecy referred to. When he meets Dumbledore on the hilltop, Snape admits that he asked Voldemort to spare Lily in exchange for her son and his father. So Snape was fine with killing an innocent unknown baby in order to please his master and later he was fine with killing Harry and James in order to save Lily. Where did we get the idea that Snape had reservations against murder? To conclude, evidence from canon clearly supports the idea that Snape tortured and perhaps murdered while he was a Death Eater.
Jason Riddle - May 24, 2008 8:48 pm (#2161 of 2617)
----------------------------- Part 3 ---------------
Snape post-DE, Remorse?:
I don’t know if you’ve (you = Julia) ever studied science, but the simplest theory is not necessarily the best. The best theory is the one that best matches the evidence. Einstein’s relativity is more complicated than Newtonian mechanics, but Einstein’s theory better describes the real world. My explanations of Snape’s actions are more consistent with Snape’s character than yours are. The books are loaded with examples of Snape torturing others and enjoying it. Pain (physical and emotional) exists in many different degrees of severity. Therefore torture also exists in different degrees, depending on the amount of pain caused (from a simple insult, to writing lines with Umbridge’s quill, to crucio). Since you asked, let me give some examples. In chapter 28 of GoF, Harry encounters Mr. Crouch by the Forbidden Forest and it is desperately important for Harry to fetch Dumbledore to deliver Crouch’s warning. Harry rushes up to the headmaster’s office only to be delayed by Snape who refuses to let Harry see Dumbledore, despite the emergency of the situation. Rowling spells it out: “Harry could tell Snape was thoroughly enjoying himself, denying Harry the thing he wanted when he was so panicky.” In chapter 18 of GoF, before a potions class, Harry and Draco attack each other and end up injuring Goyle and Hermione. Snape sends Goyle to the hospital wing and then examines Hermione, whose front teeth had grown past her collar. “Snape looked coldly at Hermione, then said, ‘I see no difference.’” Clearly, Snape is not the least bit sorry that he joined a group dedicated to suppressing muggle-borns. He still enjoys torturing muggle-borns. Although we never see Snape use crucio, he engages in a lot of low-grade torture.
The following is my guess at Snape’s thinking. Some of it is speculative, but I believe it best matches the evidence: Snape believes in the suppression of muggles and muggle-borns. He is sadistic and wants power. During his loyal DE days, he hates James/Sirius and loves Lily. When Voldemort threatens Lily, Snape realizes that he loves Lily more than he had previously admitted to himself. Although, Snape enjoys serving Voldemort, he has never been able to recapture that happiness which he felt when he was with her. Though he thought he could forget her, Snape cannot bear the thought of losing that which gave him his greatest joy (although he already has lost her; she is with James). Therefore, he seeks Dumbledore and promises to do “anything” to save her. At this point, Snape is still a Death Eater in his heart. He wishes he could continue his DE activities and still save Lily, but he cannot. He spies on his former master, for Dumbledore. He would double-cross DD, but Dumbledore could get Snape killed by informing Voldemort that Snape had betrayed him (by giving DD the warning). So Snape remains true to Dumbledore. During his first period as a spy, Snape develops a friendship with Dumbledore. Instead of sending Snape to Azkaban, Dumbledore forgives him, gives him a comfortable position at Hogwarts, and attempts to protect Lily. Dumbledore treats Snape better than LV ever had. He acknowledges Snape’s abilities and appreciates Snape’s efforts. Snape develops loyalty towards DD.
Then Lily is killed. Snape decides to remain at Hogwarts for the following reasons: it’s better than Azkaban or suicide, affection for DD, revenge against LV (when he eventually returns), and (of least importance) to protect Lily’s son. Snape’s desire for revenge keeps him on the good side over the years, but he is never remorseful and retains his desire for power, enjoyment of causing suffering, and his racist views. Consequently, he is cruel to students, to the extent he can get away with it, and favors the pure-blood Slytherins. Harry arrives at school and Snape’s treatment of him is hypocritical. He is especially cruel to Harry, but in some cases where Harry is in danger Snape saves him in order to honor Lily. LV returns and Snape returns to him as a spy. He is serving DD and seeking his revenge. When Snape learns about DD’s plan to sacrifice Harry, he doesn’t really care about Harry dying. He is merely upset that Dumbledore deceived him.
There’s a good reason why we never hear about Snape wanting revenge against Voldemort: Rowling wanted to keep Snape’s true loyalty secret until the very end. Revenge is a major part of Snape’s character: he’s always seeking revenge against James Potter and his gang, he tries to get revenge against Siruis in PoA, and he often takes revenge on Harry and his friends when they annoy him. I’m not sure how anyone could believe that it didn’t matter to Snape whether LV lived or died. Of course, he would want revenge! It is an unstated fact. I now see a better explanation of why Snape sometimes protected the students from the Carrows. DD’s portrait could travel around the castle and would know if Snape was letting them torture the students. Snape was loyal to Dumbledore and had promised to protect the students.
Julia mentions Snape’s behavior in ‘Flight of The Prince’. Snape leads the DEs out of the castle and Harry chases after them. Instead of quickly stunning Harry and escaping, Snape stops to taunt Harry. This is minutes after Harry witnessed Snape kill Dumbledore, a man who was a father to Harry, but Snape doesn’t seem to care. A DE uses crucio on Harry, but it is not clear how fast Snape intervenes. The reasons why Snape stopped the DE from torturing Harry do not include concern for Harry. Snape was obeying LV’s orders to not attack Harry. Snape promised Dumbledore, a person whom Snape cares about, that he would protect Harry. Harry is Lily’s son, so Snape occasionally takes offense when people, besides himself, get to torture Harry. Snape does not hesitate to attack. He needlessly hurts Harry twice: “There was a loud BANG and Harry was soaring backward, hitting the ground hard again,” and “he slashed at the air: Harry felt a white-hot, whiplike something hit him across the face and was slammed backward into the ground.” Snape may have intended to hurt Harry again, but Buckbeak attacks Snape, who flees. Notice that Snape continues to be cruel to Harry, even after he knows that Harry must go to his death.
Snape had at least two good reasons for making the Vow with Narcissa. When the sisters come to Spinner’s End, he sees an opportunity to silence other DEs that distrust him. He says to Bellatrix: “You can carry my words back to the others who whisper behind my back, and carry false tales of my treachery to the Dark Lord!” Snape needs to do more than just refuse to discuss the plan and dismiss them. Although Bellatrix seems to think Snape should do just that, it would only make it seem as if he were slithering out of action again. Snape impresses Bellatrix by revealing that he knows about the plan and amazes Bellatrix by actually promising to help Draco carry it out. Doing this costs Snape nothing, because he has already promised Dumbledore the same thing, and ensures the other DEs will continue to trust him. In addition, Snape is placing Narcissa and Lucius in his debt which might be useful to him one day.
We never see Snape remorseful about becoming a Death Eater or committing crimes. We never see him regret killing James. We never see him lament his abuse of the students. We never see him apologize to Harry for killing his parents or tormenting him. He feels remorse for having killed Lily, but that is all. Snape feels no remorse for anything else he did. There is no evidence to say that Snape was remorseful about cursing George or killing Dumbledore when he was crying in Sirius’s room. He was reading Lily’s letter. He was crying because he missed her. [Here’s some symbolism for you, Julia: “he ripped in two the photograph he was also holding, so that he kept the p
mona amon - May 24, 2008 9:18 pm (#2162 of 2617)
My comments about Jason's post (sorry if I'm repeating some things already said by others).
First of all, even though I do not agree with most of it, I really enjoyed it! It's a long time since we had a really good anti-Snape post on this thread.
He knows about Voldemort’s goals of a pure-blood monopoly on magic and the subjugation of muggles. And knowing this, why did he choose to fight for Voldemort’s cause?
I agree with you that he must have known what Voldemort's goals were. I do not see him as a brainwashed innocent. Moreover he had his friend Lily, who must have been constantly pointing out how evil they were. And yet he chooses to join LV, who is targetting the very group that Lily belongs to. Why does he do this? For power, and because he liked humiliating, torturing, and spilling innocent blood? I can think of some far more plausible reasons. Rage at Lily, chance to show off his skill in the dark arts, a place to fit in, all these could have played a part. For Snape I think his morbid fascination with the dark arts was an important reason. Finally a place where his talent will be appreciated. Young Snape, Draco, and Regulus either chose to ignore, or did not realise the full implications of joining Voldemort, just as the teenage Dumbledore chose to ignore the implications of Grindelwald's 'for the Greater Good' theories.
He may well have tortured and murdered.
Not at all likely, IMO. When Dumbledore talks to him about Draco's soul, that he does not want it to be torn on his account, Snape does not slink away shamefacedly into the shadows. He confronts Dumbledore indignantly with not caring about his soul. He surely wouldn't have shown so much confidence about the state of his soul if he had been torturing and murdering people.
On the other hand, he had spent quite enough time with Voldemort (at least two years, I would say), to have witnessed murders and been aware of others, and yet he was a perfectly enthusiastic DE on the night that he overheard Sybil's Prophecy. And that's pretty evil.
They paint what I like to call the “waking up from a trance” picture of Snape.
That's pretty much the way I see it. Till then he had put himself into a trance, blind to the suffering of others, no compassion, no conscience, and suddenly this bombshell. What was all this time only happening to others suddenly happens to him. Snape is jolted awake. No, he did not get an instant lesson in morality. But Voldemort targetting Lily definitely was a wake up call for Snape.
"Wow, I didn’t know that having a good friend killed felt this bad! All this time I thought people enjoyed it when we killed their loved ones."
I actually think that's a pretty good dig at the Snape of that period!
Snape’s hatred of Voldemort(revenge), hatred of James/Sirius, love of Lily, and affection for Dumbledore are sufficient to explain all of his actions.
But if the author wanted us to draw this conclusion, she would have to show us that Snape had revengeful feelings against Voldemort. Actually quite a few readers are puzzled about the complete absense of vindictiveness in Snape. I feel this fits in quite well with his character. Not everyone feels the need to 'avenge' the death of a loved one. He is quite happy to take revenge on Sirius when he thinks he is the betrayer, but that is mostly because of his already existing hatred for him. We see no hatred towards Wormtail, the actual betrayer, only contempt.
IMO, he seems to blame James for Lily's death more than anybody else. We see no feelings of remorse about his own part in it. No revengeful feelings against Voldemort or Wormtail. But we know, from what he tells Harry in POA, "Too arrogant to believe that he may be mistaken in his friends" (not the exact quote), that he feels it was James' foolish trust in the wrong person that lead to Lily's death.
I've run out of steam, so I'll stop here.
EDIT: Oops, cross posted with you, Jason. This was a reply to your previous post. I will read your three recent posts now.
mona amon - May 25, 2008 8:21 am (#2163 of 2617)
In Draco’s case, instead of getting power and recognition, he became Voldemort’s servant and a tool to manipulate Lucius and Narcissa.
He was also forced to torture people, and he clearly hated it.
Desire for power and enjoyment of causing suffering are the two necessary factors. These are not the only reasons why someone would join an evil organization. These are not the reasons why every other DE joined (like Peter or Draco). But these are Snape’s reasons. And yes! he must have ENJOYED hurting others. If he hated it or was completely neutral towards it, why would he have sought out Voldemort and volunteered his services? why would he give up the good career he could have had (being a capable wizard)? why would he risk Azkaban and his entire future? why bother?
Jason, aren't you contadicting yourself here? If Peter and Draco can volunteer their services to Voldemort without enjoying hurting others, why cannot Snape do the same?
twice he watches Lily “greedily"
Because he loves her, not because she's muggleborn.
twice he calls Petunia a muggle
Well he does think wizards are superior to muggles. What's the big deal. He's only nine years old and has a horrible muggle father as an example.
after Lily tries to defend him he calls her a “filthy little Mudblood”
People do things in extreme anger which they do not mean at all.
Snape says: “You’re not going to – I won’t let you” [he wants to control her].
But backs down immediately with just one look from her green eyes.
“That was nothing, It was a laugh, that’s all” [he finds the suffering of others funny].
Just like lily. She found Snape's suffering funny when he was being bullied by the Marauders.
I'll be back later to reply to parts 2 and 3.
wynnleaf - May 25, 2008 8:56 am (#2164 of 2617)
Well, of course mona amon makes good points.
But here's a few others.
1. JKR said it was important to show that Snape was "redeemed." I truly don't think JKR would consider Snape redeemed if he was still a Death Eater type at heart, but only following the Order's side because of a desire for revenge, love for Lily, and affection for DD. JKR also shows Narcissa opposing LV in order to protect a loved one, but JKR doesn't speak of that action as making Narcissa "redeemed."
2. The balance of evidence about Snape's activities while a true DE is that he did not perform atrocities such as murder and torture. We have the following evidence:
a) JKR's comment that Snape could see thestrals because "as a Death Eater, he had seen things." b) DD's comment that Snape had watched people die, but not that he had killed anyone himself. 3) Snape's concern that killing DD would affect his soul. 4) Bella's comments at Spinners End that characterize Snape as a do-nothing DE. 5) LV sent Snape to apply for a position at Hogwarts, so it is likely that he'd kept Snape's hands "clean" so that he could go before DD, a legilimens, and apply for a job. 6) Sirius' comment in GOF that there hadn't ever been a hint that Snape had been a Death Eater. 7) and finally, if Snape had loved to physically harm others, what better excuse could he have as a spy than to protect his "cover" and be a convincing DE? If he wanted to, he could have told DD that he had to participate in a bit of mayhem to protect his cover, but instead Bella accuses him of never doing anything.
Evidence that Snape did participate in such atrocities? "All Death Eaters do it." No, we aren't actually given any such evidence or indication, that all DEs did that. Assumption, not canon. I'm fine with making guesses and assumptions, but feel the better ones are based on canon. Basing a theory on a prior theory or assumption is going too far out on a limb for me.
3. The notion that there were only a few Death Eaters who had the Mark is apparently based on the idea that you can take the list of DEs mentioned in the series, multiply by maybe about 2, and get an approximate number of DEs. Based on that logic, how many aurors are there?? How about students at Hogwarts? How about people in the Wizarding World of Britain? Should we use that logic to determine those numbers as well? No, of course not. Conclusion? Using the number of DEs mentioned in the book as an indication of how many there were is faulty reasoning. Therefore using this to support the idea that young Snape was joining an extremely elite group of evil doers doesn't exactly hold up.
I'll stop there for the moment.
Jason Riddle - May 25, 2008 9:42 am (#2165 of 2617)
Sorry, the end of Part 3 got cut off. Here's the rest:
“he ripped in two the photograph he was also holding, so that he kept the part from which Lily laughed, throwing the portion showing James and Harry back onto the floor, under the chest of drawers…” He steals a letter and destroys a photograph which does not belong to him. He throws James and Harry on the floor. After all these years, he cares about Lily and nothing else; not about doing what is right. He literally tears the Potter family in two.]
Thank you, everyone who responded to my post (especially Julia and the legendary wynnleaf). Soul Search, thanks for mentioning Snape’s interaction with Fudge in PoA. I think this is a very interesting discussion.
Soul Search - May 25, 2008 10:22 am (#2166 of 2617)
(The Legendary) wynnleaf,
I think I didn't explain my point well a few posts back.
For a time before the prophecy, a war was going on with Voldemort and Death Eaters and the Order of the Pheonix as main participants. Lily (and James) were in the Order and opposing Voldemort. Voldemort had targeted the Potters and they were in hiding and moving around. Pettigrew was informing Voldemort of the Potters' whereabouts. The Potters escaped (defied) Voldemort three times. Lily was at serious risk at this time.
Snape was a Death Eater and Voldemort's minion. He had to have known Voldemort was after Lily. He did not try to help her, or anything. It seems, at this point, he had given her up.
So, Snape hears the prophecy and takes it to Voldemort, who now also wants to kill the Potters' son. Now Snape is so worried about Lily he takes the very risky actions of asking Voldemort to spare her and going to Dumbledore. Is Lily that much more at risk than before Snape gave Voldemort the prophecy? I don't really see it. Yet, Snape now takes some very risky actions. Why? I content Snape acted because now he, Snape, would blame himself for Lily's death at Voldemort's hand. This was his defining moment. He didn't mind Voldemort killing people, as long as he, Snape, wasn't responsible. Now it was just as if Snape killed her himself. He couldn't take this.
I would also suggest this is when he renewed his love, now perhaps just a friendship type of love, for Lily and became obsessed with her.
mona amon - May 25, 2008 10:33 am (#2167 of 2617)
Soul Search, Snape may not have been aware that Lily was in any particular danger or even that she and James defied LV three times. Voldemort would not have told him everything. He would have known that as a member of the Order of the Phoenix she was in general danger, but it was only when he finds out that Voldemort had decided to go after her that he runs to Dumbledore in a panic.
Dryleaves - May 25, 2008 10:50 am (#2168 of 2617)
The best theory is the one that best matches the evidence... My explanations of Snape’s actions are more consistent with Snape’s character than yours are. (Jason Riddle)
But the explanation is part of the character, if you change the explanation the character as a whole will look different. Even if we go to the books, things can be interpreted differently. For example you use Snape’s treatment of Hermione and his favourizing the Slytherins as examples of his racist values, but it is never actually shown in the books that this is the reason behind it. I think you base it on his childhood comments and on the fact that he was a member of a racist organisation. But there is another comment that may say something else, the one he gives to Phineas Nigellus in “The Prince’s Tale”: “Don’t use that word!”. I guess you could say that this word reminds him of a most unpleasant memory, but if he still had those values and treated Hermione according to them, why care when it is uttered about her? He doesn’t really have to do it to look good to portrait DD, because it is after all Phineas Nigellus that is to blame for the utterance. His values may have changed since he was a DE. There are other explanations of his treatment of Hermione. Besides the fact that she is a Gryffindor and a friend of Harry’s, she also has some traits that Snape seems not to like. Snape behaves quite differently from Hermione. He doesn’t jump up and down shouting “I know!” like she does, and he doesn’t quote from books to speak with the authority of others the way she does. He knows his abilities for sure, but he doesn’t boast the way Hermione does. In short, he actually thinks she is an insufferable know-it-all. His favourizing of the Slytherins may be explained by the fact that they are impopular and that he finds them disfavoured to the other houses, especially Gryffindor, and he may think this should be balanced.
I see Snape as a very insecure person, who is particularly vulnerable regarding his personal dignity, and when this is being attacked by for example the Marauders or students he freaks out. Voldemort’s killing of Lily doesn’t hit this vulnerable spot. It hits something else and therefore he may react differently to it. He is partly responsible himself. So we can’t be sure he feels the same hunger for revenge as he does towards the Marauders.
“he ripped in two the photograph he was also holding, so that he kept the part from which Lily laughed, throwing the portion showing James and Harry back onto the floor, under the chest of drawers…” He steals a letter and destroys a photograph which does not belong to him. He throws James and Harry on the floor. After all these years, he cares about Lily and nothing else; not about doing what is right. He literally tears the Potter family in two.]
But you could also see it like this: He needs comfort and encouragement, and as Lily is his motivation and the most positive thing in his life, she can maybe give it to him. But to be reminded at the same time that she chose someone else and that she wrote friendly letters to the man he considers his enemy won’t help him. He rips the photo and takes one part of the letter to create an illusion.
Orion - May 25, 2008 10:57 am (#2169 of 2617)
"...defied LV three times..." sounds like a plothole to me. The Potters were only 21 when they died, they had a little baby, and they spent a year in deep hiding, so after Hogwarts they must have been extremely active fighters to even have had the chance to defy LV in person, that is, becoming an issue for LV in the first place, and then getting into an open conflict with him, let alone three times. And Snape would have known at least a little bit about LV targetting the Potters, even if you consider LV's secrecy. It's not very convincing that Snape works actively for a leader who has attacked the love of his life three times already. Nobody can be that stupid. The "defied three times"-issue has bothered me for a long time. Maybe somebody has an explanation.
mona amon - May 25, 2008 11:00 am (#2170 of 2617)
Orion I think you are quite right. When you consider the time line it does seem like a plot hole.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2171 to 2190
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:34 am
Quinn Crockett - May 25, 2008 12:36 pm (#2171 of 2617)
Wow! What a fantastic discussion! Everyone has made very good points on either side of the argument and I find that I am swayed by whatever post I am reading. If I may offer a few comments:
Well he does think wizards are superior to muggles. What's the big deal. He's only nine years old and has a horrible muggle father as an example. - He also has an equally horrible Witch mother.
People do things in extreme anger which they do not mean at all. - People also say and do things that they normally keep suppressed.
[Lily] found Snape's suffering funny when he was being bullied by the Marauders. - I think she only found his dirty underpants funny.
I think Soul Search makes a great argument for Snape failing to act until he could no longer distance himself from any consequences.
Snape may not have been aware that Lily was in any particular danger or even that she and James defied LV three times. I would suggest that if that were true he would not have been concerned that Voldemort might target her because of the prophecy.
He knows his abilities for sure, but he doesn’t boast the way Hermione does. - This is interesting because I think he and Hermione are very similar. Both bookish and insecure, constantly worried about what others (who matter to their success) will think and heavily compensating for it. No, Snape doesn't boast about his abilities, but does put others down to feel superior. I see those as two sides of the same coin.
I think with regard to the "defied three times" it all comes down to how you interpret "defied". Isn't there a part where Dumbledore explains that, in Voldemort's mind, the Potters and the Longbottoms fit the criteria of the prophecy, whether or not the prophecy actually referred to them. And in the end Voldemort's interpretation is all that really mattered. Not that it couldn't also be a plot hole.
mona amon - May 25, 2008 12:46 pm (#2172 of 2617)
I think she only found his dirty underpants funny.
Maybe. But how do we know what Snape found funny in the Mary Mcdonald incident? Just because he calls it a laugh does not prove that he found other people's suffering funny.
Julia H. - May 25, 2008 1:17 pm (#2173 of 2617)
I don’t know if you’ve (you = Julia) ever studied science, but the simplest theory is not necessarily the best.(Jason)
Jason, I was not talking about a theory (like Einstein's) but about giving explanations for related things. By 'simplest' I meant 'the most general, allowing for the fewest exceptions and necessitating the fewest additions', not the 'easiest to understand'. Let me give you an example: Ornithologists observe that ostriches, emus and other birds of similar anatomy do not fly. The ornithologists want to explain this. What can they do? They can try and find a separate explanation for each of these species or they can look at the other similarities and come up with a single general explanation that explains why none of these birds can fly. Believe me, scientists will prefer the second option. We observe that Snape - after his return - quite consistently does the right things. You seem to be saying that Snape is sadistic and revengeful and try to explain each and every occasion when he does not act as either sadistic or revengeful with a different reason (fear of DD, fear LV, wanting Bellatrix to get out his house etc.), while a more general - and in this sense simpler - explanation is that he is not sadistic at all and revenge is not his main motivation. The examples you give me for Snape enjoying "torture" (like refusing to let Harry into DD's office, or his comment to Hermione or taunting Harry verbally) are simply not about torture. He can be nasty, indeed, but definitely not sadistic. McGonagall can also make nasty remarks at times. And what can we say about James and Sirius, the way they torture Snape and - according to the detention files - other fellow students? (Yes, their actions are much closer to torture than anything we see Snape doing.) In the "Flight of the Prince", I have the impression he reacts instantly when Harry is tortured. At the end of OOTP, when he appears to be sarcastic and indifferent because he must (in front of Umbridge and kids of DE's), he does tell Crabb to "loosen his hold" on Neville. An utterly sarcastic remark but ultimately aimed at decreasing someone's suffering. He does not have to say it, yet he says. I think Snape is just the opposite of Umbridge: He talks as if he were sadistic but his actions usually decrease others' suffering, while Umbridge talks like a "sweet little girl" but her actions cause suffering and she really seems to enjoy it.
Snape as a teenager: Lily asks him whether he knows what Mulciber did. He does not deny that he knows and says "it was a laugh". However, it does not mean that he was actually there. (Lily is not accusing him of being there at all.) Of course, he may have but he may only have heard the story from Mulciber and now repeat his version as well. (BTW the Marauders also "had a laugh" when Snape suffered, I see no difference here.) Actually, I think if Mary told Lily what had happened, she would probably have mentioned it to her if Lily's best friend had been there. Lily accuses him of wanting to be a DE. Unfortunately, she does not listen to his answer, so we do not know what Snape would say. For all what is in canon, there are several possibilities:
A) Lily is right.
B) Lily is not right but Snape becomes angry and defiant after her refusal and thinks, 'All right then, if you say so, why not?'
C) Snape does not seriously think about becoming a DE at that time, only later, when he has been estranged from Lily for years and has had no other "friends" than (would-be) DE's.
All of these are possible in accordance with canon. Actually JKR says somewhere that Snape thought Lily would like him if he became part of something big and impressive: that is more blindness than most readers would suppose but it seems JKR does not intend us to think that Snape joined LV because of the possibilities of torture and - more importantly - she never ever shows that this is the case.
Snape as DE: Jason, you assert that LV must know about Snape's occlumency skills on the basis that otherwise he would not send him to DD. I think we are shown that LV relies on legilimency very much as a way of checking his servants' loyalty: Snape emphasizes it. We see LV practising legilimency on Snape in DH and also boasting how he can see through them all. We get evidence how LV despises trust. Given that, I don't think LV would even basically trust someone he knows has occlumency skills - or knowing that one of his most confidential servants (what Snape becomes in the end) can do occlumency, he would still rely on legilimency as a means of checking whether he tells the truth or not. In DH, all DE's look elsewhere when LV checks Snape's mind, only Snape looks at him as if he were the only one who had nothing to hide. It is almost as if his occlumency skill made him seem even more reliable in LV's eyes, when compared with the others who do not dare to look into his eyes. When Snape returns to LV after LV's comeback, he has to explain quite a few things to him, as he explains to Bellatrix later. Some of his lies are rather weak, especially the one where he says he did not let Harry be killed in front of his eyes because DD would have been angry. LV was there in Quirrel's head and saw everything. He saw other teachers were there and still believed that Snape thought DD would have made him (of all people) responsible for Harry's death. I guess the only way Snape could prove he believed that was letting LV subject him to a legilimency test.
So how could LV send Snape to spy on DD in the first place? (Actually I don't think it was wise for any DE's who knew how to do occlumency to let LV know about it. It seems they are all afraid of him, even Bellatrix.) To me, it suggests that Snape was not a really important DE at the time. (We are never ever shown what his rank was before the prophecy, yet readers often assume that he held a high position - I never know why.) I am sure LV sent him to apply for that teaching job without knowing about his occlumency skills. It made it likely that he would be caught one day. If he seemed to be at the time a disposable servant, then LV only had to make it sure that he could tell DD nothing of importance if questioned. (Theory: Actually it is even possible that LV gave Snape this job because he realized that Snape would be no good - at least for the time being - if it came to AK-ing people. We know from canon that Unforgivables are not easy curses: not only because of the magical power necessary but because the person who casts them must really mean it. We see how Draco ultimately shrinks from trying, after a whole year of preparation. What would LV do to a servant not efficient enough to kill? Would he tell him, 'Sorry, sonny, you'd better apply for a country librarian's position, this job is not for you.'? Would he kill him? Or would he decide to put him to a different use? 'Nobody knows he is my servant. Maybe he will do as a spy. If not, not much is lost.' I am not saying this is what happened but it is not against canon.) So I do think, LV is not too worried about Snape when he sends him to DD. Moreover, Snape does not seem to be very professional as a young spy. He has to get a job to become a spy. He should put all his efforts into securing the job for himself in the first place. Instead, what does he do? He starts spying right away, before getting the job and spoils the whole interview. A totally unprofessional and very green young spy. (I guess he never read "How to behave during a job interview?" type of handbooks.) He tries too hard. (Does he have to prove himself?) It is only by accident that he overhears something of importance. Later, when LV returns, Snape is an established confidant of DD's, there is no need to worry that DD would suspect him or subject him to legilimency.
To be continued...
Julia H. - May 25, 2008 1:20 pm (#2174 of 2617)
Edited May 25, 2008 2:01 pm
"Fresh from my DE days": It is not new information. Yes, he was a DE. It is no proof that he tortured or killed. If you want to say that it is proof that he was a DE for a long time, well it is not. (He could be but we still don't know.) Does he tell Bellatrix when he spun that tale of remorse to DD? No. Is it logical that Bellatrix should know that Snape went to DD with his remorse a whole year before LV's downfall? No. Bellatrix probably thinks that Snape was "remorseful" after LV's downfall. That means even if Snape joined LV only a few days before the prophecy was made (I am not saying that he did, it is only an extreme example), Bellatrix can still think that Snape was a DE before LV's downfall for a year and three or four months. That would already qualify as "my DE days".
As for tearing up the photo: Well, he certainly has not reached the stage where he finds comfort in watching the pictures of Harry and James but nobody says he is an angel or a saint. He is not tearing up the family, only a photo and yes, it is only Lily whose memory he finds comfort in - big surprise. This is still not sadistic. He is going through a deep crisis, he is experiencing remorse and regret and mourning. He is alone, he has lost almost everything. He needs comfort.
You know, Jason, I don't think we can convince each other but there is one thing I really do not understand. In your interpretation Snape looks like the most commonplace, mindless "hero" of the dullest revenge movie, who does nothing but changes his allegiance from one gang to another out of revenge but otherwise is and remains a cruel gangster and a killing machine. Yet, you say you do not only "like" the character but also sympathize with him on certain occasions. Liking a character is of course possible for literary reasons only - but sympathizing with someone you describe in this way? If I interpreted the character as you do, I would never be able to feel any kind of sympathy towards him. In my interpretation, he is a man with complex feelings, with great and tragic mistakes and flaws but also with a great capacity to do good, struggling with his own demons more than with his enemies, one who goes a long, long way in a short life, one who - in the end - manages to (so to speak) cross his own shadow and ultimately becomes a true hero.
For others' comments: very good posts. I have just a few things to add.
I don't think Snape has to know about Lily and James defying LV three times. (Good observation of a plothole, BTW.) First of all we don't know what "defying" means. Secondly, LV will not tell Snape about everything he does. Even if he did, how do we know that LV knows James and Lily by their names? They are rather young Order members. Thirdly, it seems that Snape does not connect what the prophecy says with Lily and James. That suggests he does not know about the three times. The prophecy is made before Harry's birth (end of July). Snape goes to DD when there are no leaves on the trees. That implies LV himself must have taken his time figuring out the meaning of the prophecy. (How many couples have defied him three times? Or maybe he does not know which Order members are married to each other? Or which couples have children? Maybe he does not take the prophecy very seriously until he learns that Trelawney has got the job. Snape must have heard DD telling Sybill that he did not want any more Divination teachers. Could LV - Snape - think that the alleged prophecy was just a desperate attempt to convince DD? Does LV start investigate only when he learns that Trelawney has got the job, so DD must think the prophecy is real?) I think Snape would have wanted to save Lily if she had been targeted by all means. As it happened it was the prophecy that made him realize Lily was targeted. But his own involvement probably made him feel it more deeply.
As for Snape's Witch Mom: I think his father was far worse even if his mother was nothing wonderful either. His mother may have neglected him and may not have been kind to him but it was his father who was aggressive and who would not go with him to the railway station and who did not like "anything, much".
wynnleaf - May 25, 2008 2:45 pm (#2175 of 2617)
For a time before the prophecy, a war was going on with Voldemort and Death Eaters and the Order of the Phoenix as main participants. Lily (and James) were in the Order and opposing Voldemort. Voldemort had targeted the Potters and they were in hiding and moving around. Pettigrew was informing Voldemort of the Potters' whereabouts. The Potters escaped (defied) Voldemort three times. Lily was at serious risk at this time. (Soul Search)
You seem to be assuming that LV was targeting the Potters prior to hearing about the prophecy. Canon does not tell us this and JKR, in interviews, said that the Potters went into hiding immediately following Harry's christening, which pretty clearly implies that they went into hiding because LV was targeting Harry.
Actually, we don't have any particular evidence that Snape even knew the Potters were in the Order and getting into the typical danger that all Order members faced, until LV decided to target Harry. Basically, I think JKR pretty clearly wants us to believe that as soon as Snape thought Lily was in danger, he tried to save her.
Jason,
Not sure what to make of "legendary wynnleaf"! I probably talk too much about Snape.
I think JKR truly wants us to see Snape as a character with a lot more depth than your version of his character gives to him. More importantly, JKR did state that she wanted him to be seen as having been redeemed, and I think that has to have a place in the discussion, because I don't see your version of Snape as a redeemed character.
As regards the most simple answer versus the most complex, I think we have to remember that this is a completed work of fiction and no longer one where we're trying to figure out red herrings and "what's really going on." Sure, there's a lot that JKR didn't tell us, but in general, if she was going to show us something important that we need to know to understand a character, than she's already had her chance to do that. And of course, she's also tried to use interviews to make a few things more clear. But I don't think we can take the completed series and say a major character was a murderer or physically tortured people without canon ever saying he did, and with some internal evidence and comments of that character and others that imply that he didn't.
Of course, that doesn't mean that what JKR wrote was necessarily clear and I think some incidences The Prince's Tale are not very clear.
Nine year old Snape and muggles. We don't have evidence that he disliked all muggles as a kid, but that he had no interest in Petunia, because his primary interest was in Lily. Why was he interested in Lily? Because she was gorgeous and sweet? Well, no, I think it's pretty clear he was interested in her because she was a witch. And that's perfectly natural that young Snape would be very interested in getting to know the only other wizarding kid in the neighborhood, who also just happens to be a rather nice kid. Petunia is not particularly nice and I don't think Snape would have any interest in getting to know her. Why should he? She certainly doesn't seem to like him and is pretty dismissive of him as soon as they meet.
The "greedy" word bothers me some because some people interpret it as though this little nine year old neglected kid is somehow selfishly stalking Lily, rather than a nine year old kid desperately wanting to make contact with someone he thinks might be someone he can relate to.
JKR did give us the reason for Snape joining the DEs. She said he wanted to impress Lily and because he was really insecure, he wanted some larger stronger group to be a part of. JKR could have told us that Snape joined up because he wanted to kill and torture, but she just didn't give that as a reason.
By the way, DEs may have gone after muggles at the Tri Wizard Cup, but the main politics of LV was against muggleborn wizarding people. Except for Snape's use of the word in his teens, we don't get any indication that he disliked or hated muggleborns. Even Sirius, James and Lupin never at any time accuse him of these sorts of beliefs, and you'd think they'd do so if they knew about it. Lupin and Sirius mention Snape's interest in Dark Arts, but not a bias against muggleborns.
While Snape's possible bias against muggleborns during his teens is certainly debatable, I don't see any evidence that a desire to kill them was one of his reasons for joining LV.
I think she only found his dirty underpants funny. (Quinn Crockett)
Yes, but that's not a good thing, since they aren't described as dirty, but graying, which happens when white clothes get pretty old. The kids don't do their own laundry at Hogwarts -- apparently the House Elves take care of all cleaning. I always saw Snapes graying underwear as an indication of his very poor home, which makes Lily's comment (since she knows of his homelife) particularly cruel. That's a discussion all in itself. JKR seems to think readers should be able to tell in that scene that Lily really likes James. If we readers are supposed to tell it, couldn't Snape? I really don't care for Lily in this scene, like her grin at Snape's situation or her later implication to James that she'd forgive an unforced apology from Snape, but when he gives one, she won't forgive him.
rambkowalczyk - May 25, 2008 7:20 pm (#2176 of 2617)
The arguments given to prove Snape is sadistic don't add up for me. Sadistic is Umbridge. She tries to be nice to get what she wants; (She offers Harry tea with a false smile) she hides behind false respectability (She's only following ministry orders). Snape doesn't try to be nice. He is what he is.
wynnleaf - May 25, 2008 9:03 pm (#2177 of 2617)
ramb,
I agree. Snape doesn't try to hide his nastiness, so why should we suspect that he's hiding some further nastiness than what we see in canon?
Jason Riddle - May 25, 2008 10:37 pm (#2178 of 2617)
If we’re going to include Rowling’s out-of-book statements in our analysis of Snape, let’s be sure to include all of them and not just the ones that help our own arguments. Here are some that I collected from [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
“It’s fun to write about Snape because he’s a deeply horrible person.”
“Snape is the very sadistic teacher loosely based on a teacher I myself had, I have to say.”
“…teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher (Snape) does abuse his power.”
“You see I don’t see him really as a hero… He’s spiteful. He’s a bully. All these things are still true of Snape, even at the end of this book.” [Later she seems to change her mind about whether he’s a hero.]
When asked, “If Snape didn’t love Lily, would he have still tried to protect Harry?” Rowling answers, “No. He definitely wouldn’t have done. He wouldn’t have been remotely interested in what happened.”
“a very flawed hero… He remains rather cruel, a bully, riddled with bitterness and insecurity.”
When asked, “Did Lily ever have feelings back for Snape?” Rowling answers, “Yes… if he had not loved Dark magic so much, and been drawn to such loathsome people and acts.” [Apparently Snape was drawn to loathsome acts. Could that mean he enjoyed them?]
“like many insecure, vulnerable, people he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive… he was so blinded by his attraction to the dark side he thought she would find him impressive if he became a real Death Eater.”[Snape craves power. He is attracted to the “dark side”. What else can the “dark side” refer to, but cruelty and domination? I hate to disagree with Rowling about her own character, but I find it hard to believe that Snape thought becoming a DE would impress Lily. Lily points out her dislike of Mulciber, Avery, and dark magic. She later condemns Snape and breaks communication with him specifically BECAUSE he wanted to be a Death Eater. People sometimes deceive themselves in relationships, but Snape must have been utterly delusional to believe that. Also, notice that Rowling doesn’t say he joined in order to impress Lily, but only that Snape thought Lily would be impressed if he did. In other words, there are more reasons.]
“Snape is vindictive, he’s cruel. He’s not a big man. But he loves.” [‘vindictive’ means: 1. disposed to seek revenge 2. marked by or resulting from a desire to hurt]
All in all, it seems that Rowling agrees with me: Snape was sadistic and desired power. He sought revenge. He was not remorseful about anything but Lily’s death, even at the end. When Rowling says that Snape was “redeemed”, I think she means that Snape’s actions made up for his past crimes. This is true. Although his motives were selfish, although he was remorseless, his actions were brave. Snape’s efforts were critical to the final triumph of the good side. He righted the wrongs of his past. Therefore he is redeemed.
Jason Riddle - May 25, 2008 10:38 pm (#2179 of 2617)
wynnleaf
We actually DO have evidence that Snape hated all muggles as a kid. When Lily is in tears because Petunia rejected her, Snape can’t understand why this should upset her (“So what?”). When Lily retorts, “So she’s my sister!”, Snape says, “She’s only a [muggle]”. This shows Snape has a view of muggles that extends far beyond Petunia. To Snape, a muggle, even if she’s your sister, is not worth any pity. A muggle is not something to have feelings for. I know that Snape is only 11 years old [does abused 11 year old Harry say anything similar?], but still, this is evidence of his prejudice against muggles.
I find your analysis of ‘Snape’s worst memory’ to be incredibly backwards. Lily is wonderful in this scene. She has the moral fortitude and the bravery to walk into a crowd of people to stand up to the popular cool kids. She is not embarrassed to defend an unhygienic, unpopular outcast. She knows that Snape wants to be a Death Eater; she knows that Snape hangs around with people that use evil dark magic for fun, and she still defends him. Her friends can’t understand why she even talks to Snape, yet she comes to his rescue. The fact that she has a secret liking for James makes her actions twice as amazing. She denounces him and flatly refuses to go out with him. She threatens him with her wand. Lily sets aside her personal desires in the name of justice. Lily succeeds in getting James to release Snape. And what does Snape do in return? He spits in her face. “I don’t need help from FILTHY LITTLE MUDBLOODS like her!” He basically calls her a B-tch (wizard version) in front of everyone. Lily’s reaction is perfectly natural and perfectly justified. In fact, when James uses Snape’s ungrateful words to try to win her favor, she calls him on his arrogance and bullying. Even after she gives up on Snape, justice is more important to her than James is. Later that night, Lily does NOT break off the relationship because Snape called her a mudblood. It’s because after years of excuses, Snape refuses to reform. She knows that Snape IS sorry about what he said, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is that he calls ALL muggle-borns “Mudblood”. What matters is that he’s trying to become a Death Eater. Lily can’t condone it, can’t stand for it, any longer. Snape has chosen his path. She’s chosen hers.
Lily betrays the subtlest, most miniscule hint of a smile. A mere twitch in her otherwise “furious expression”. So what? She’s human. She resists the temptation to laugh at an amusing sight in order to protect Snape’s feelings. This shows she DOES have sympathy for Snape’s poor background. Given that Snape was choking on froth, then inching towards his wand, then hanging upside-down with his robes over his head, I doubt that he was aware of any “flirtation” between Lily and James. In fact, I don’t think anyone but J.K. Rowling was aware of it. I am at a loss when I wonder how Rowling could have written this scene with less flirtation: “She was looking at James with every sign of great dislike.” Perhaps Rowling meant some type of subconscious flirtation. Maybe Lily was angrier with James than she would have been with another boy. If so, it wouldn’t be apparent to anyone watching.
Also, using the number of DEs mentioned in the books as a means to estimate the total number of DEs is perfectly reasonable. In the case of aurors, students, or general wizards, there are indications that more exist than are given names. For example, at a quidditch match we hear about hundreds of students in the stands, most of whom are nameless. In the case of DEs, everything indicates a small elite group. For example, Voldemort’s role call in the graveyard scene of GoF. I know you’ve posted about how every Slytherin is practically forced into becoming a Death Eater, but the facts don’t bear it out. There are simply too few Death Eaters. Snape chose a radically different path, than the majority of Slytherins.
Jason Riddle - May 25, 2008 10:39 pm (#2180 of 2617)
Julia
I now understand what you meant about science. You’re right. If two competing theories give explanations for a set of phenomena (both match the evidence), the best theory is usually the one that is simplest and most general. However, it is important that both theories give good explanations of the relevant phenomena, before they are judged by simplicity. True, the theory that Snape acts out of a desire to do what is right, provides a simpler explanation of Snape’s good actions than my theory. Unfortunately, it fails to explain Snape’s cruelty to the students. My theory gives Snape multiple selfish motives. It’s a bit more complicated, but it explains all of Snape’s behavior. Rowling does like making complex realistic characters. In my opinion, Snape’s actions are motivated mostly by the following: sadism, desire for power, racism, hatred for James/Sirius, affection/loyalty towards Dumbledore, love for Lily, desire for revenge, and (after reading other posts) personal-insecurity. I think having multiple, sometimes conflicting, motives makes Snape the dark complex character Rowling meant him to be. It’s realistic.
Yes, other characters do hurtful things and enjoy it. Harry enjoying a bit of well-deserved revenge on Draco or McGonagall snapping at a negligent student are both acceptable behaviors. Snape enjoys harming others in situations that are morally deplorable. Snape, a grown man, bullies and frightens children who have done nothing to deserve it. He shares much in common with Umbridge, excepting her falsely sweet demeanor. Here are my responses to some of your points: At the end of OOTP, Snape is protecting Crabbe (a Slytherin), by preventing him from accidentally strangling Neville. It doesn’t matter that Snape wasn’t with Mulciber (I agree that he probably wasn’t there). Snape thought harming Mary was funny. Of course, it is possible that Lily was totally mistaken in thinking that Snape wanted to be a DE. But in order to accept that Rowling was giving us a false impression of Snape with Lily’s accusation, we would be forced to come up with a complex reason explaining: why Lily had been lead to think this, why Snape never reconciles with her (since Lily was mistaken), and why, after all that, Snape becomes a DE anyway? It’s much simpler and more honest to assume that Lily is right about Snape’s aspirations.
Regarding Snape’s occlumency: Again, it would be insane for LV to send a Death Eater to Dumbledore to be a spy who didn’t know occlumency. LV feels his powers are great enough to see into anyone’s mind. Snape is skilled enough that he makes it seem that he is not using occlumency when LV looks at him. This is one reason he trusts Snape. The other reasons are: Snape served him faithfully as a young DE, he kills Dumbldore, and he passes LV seemingly important information (like the date of Harry’s departure from #4PD). Spying is tricky work. Voldemort would not send a timid, incompetent DE to spy on his arch-nemesis. He usually kills incompetent people or makes them into his servants. I admit, Snape does seem foolish when he gets caught by Aberforth. I don’t have an explanation for that, yet. Snape tells Bellatrix that he was fresh from his death eater days at the time he joins Dumbledore’s staff. You are right that he could be referring to a time period significantly later than the time he actually came to Dumbledore. So my argument is a bit weaker there. However, we still know that joining LV was Snape’s teenage ambition. Also, we never hear about Snape doing anything other than being a DE after Hogwarts. So there’s still evidence that he was a DE for good period.
Too many objections have been posted for me to get to all of them. Dryleaves, thanks for reminding me that Snape tells Phineas Nigellus not to say mudblood. The word probably did remind Snape about Lily, but it also seems reasonable that Snape started to shed some of his racist beliefs at the end of his life. And Julia, I’ll do a post about why I like Snape and feel sorry for him later on.
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 2:51 am (#2181 of 2617)
Well, Jason, JKR still does not seem to be saying that Snape joined the DE's because he wanted to kill or torture - or that he did. She says he was insecure and vulnerable... blinded by his attraction to the dark side, not that he wanted to kill muggles. As for "attraction to the dark side": what we get plenty of canon evidence of is his attraction to the dark arts - and it seems to be largely academic. JKR says Snape is nasty and horrible and vindictive - but she does not say his whole motivation is revenge against Voldemort. She emphasizes that he loved and many of us are simply saying that this is his motivation for change. Besides, as you say, Rowling does seem to change her mind a couple of times (a "sadistic teacher" or a "flawed hero"?) and you yourself do not believe everything she says - you do not seem to believe that Snape wanted to impress Lily by joining the DE's (a far more innocent motivation than most readers would suppose) or that Lily is flirting with James in the Worst memory scene even though JKR says that this is what she intended. I personally try to limit my reference to her interviews and if I do refer to something she says I try to add whether I think she manages to convey what she says she wants to convey or not. She does not always do.
The fact is that she never gives us in her books one single example where Snape crosses an invisible line between nastiness and real sadism (she could but she does not), while she does give examples of truly sadistic characters. The fact is that she never refers to any other crimes Snape may have committed as a DE but she does seem to imply in several places in the books that he did not commit other major crimes that he could have been made to answer for or that might have harmed his soul. (Innocent until proved guilty…) BTW, Jason, you say the fact that it is not mentioned what Snape did after school besides being a DE proves that he did not do anything else. If I accept this argument of yours, will you accept mine that the fact that it is not mentioned that Snape committed any other crimes besides joining the organization, trying to spy on DD and taking the prophecy to LV is proof that he did not commit any other crimes? Nota bene, I am not saying it must have been his merit. It may have been because of pure chance or LV’s decision to keep his future spy’s hand clean or simply Snape’s ineptitude to kill. After all, why would LV send an efficient killing machine to a school to be a teacher and a spy? Or if he sends him there because of his brilliance and experience, then why does Snape act so stupidly and naively right at the beginning?
If you think fighting against evil just to take revenge is enough to heal souls - well it does not seem to be the logic of the HP books. I do not agree that mere revenge can redeem someone, especially if that person has committed so many crimes as you say Snape did and if that person does not become in his heart a better person. Another fact is that JKR does not show us that all DE's are the same but quite on the contrary. She provides very different back-stories for Snape, Regulus, Lucius, Draco, Pettigrew. So the "Snape is exactly the same as all other DE's" argument is not logical because simply there is no average DE shown in the books. JKR strongly implies that not all DE's identified truly and fully with Voldemort's real ideology. There is Regulus: Can he truly identify with an ideology that despises and targets muggles, muggle-borns and all non-human magical creatures and then choose voluntary death just because a house elf was tortured? No. He may believe so but it turns out that it is not so at all. Snape is a special DE because he loves Lily. Loving Lily is loving a muggle-born. Does someone who loves a muggle-born identify completely with DE ideology? Does someone who loves a woman so much he is willing to risk his life and freedom for her identify completely with an ideology based on hatred and selfishness? No. If Snape did not love Lily he would not have the same personality and would not have the same potential for change and redemption. I quite agree. But the fact is that he loves her deeply and this love and the ability for this kind of love is a very important part of his personality.
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 2:54 am (#2182 of 2617)
As for the possibilities of blindness, I would like to quote DD: Oh, I had a few scruples. I assuaged my conscience with empty words. It would all be for the greater good, and any harm done would be repaid a hundredfold in benefits for wizards. Did I know, in my heart of hearts, what Grindelwald was? I think I did, but I closed my eyes. I guess DD is not the only bright young man capable of such self-deceit.
Still another fact is that Rowling gives us plenty of examples where Snape (the changed or changing, improving Snape) reduces other people's suffering or saves or protects people's lives - not only Harry's and not only in direct connection with Lily. You seem to be saying that Snape - in order to follow DD's plan - represses his sadistic impulses all the time. I don't think a truly sadistic character could do that, especially, when he is not watched by DD. In fact, Snape is shown as very unwilling to harm anyone, even if it is part of DD's plan against LV. Snape does not want to AK DD. He protests at first and agrees only when DD talks about saving him from pain and humiliation. Would DD use this argument (and so successfully) if Snape were sadistic, enjoying other people's suffering? No. Snape is shocked when he learns that Harry will have to be killed by Voldemort, even if it must be for the purpose of defeating Voldemort. If he just wants revenge why care how this is achieved? (JKR did make interesting comments on this as well but I understand you cannot really quote everything she has ever said.) Later, in the chase, Snape risks his cover to try to save Lupin's life. Portrait DD has explicitly told him to play his part convincingly. I don't think attacking DE's is included in that. Snape has a very important role in DD's plan and he knows this. He is generally very careful to keep his cover but here he acts instinctively and at the moment's impulse. (At least I don't think he has much time to contemplate what to do.) This is another moment which shows what he is inclined to do instinctively.
I do not think my explanation regarding why Snape does the good things in the fight against Voldemort has to explain Snape the nasty teacher: it is simply not sadism or torture. He is irritated if the students do not know what they should know and he is especially irritated by Harry and we know the reason why. Yet, he will never let his loathing of Harry prevent him from saving him when Harry is in direct danger or from giving up his life to protect Harry's. However, if you want an explanation including Snape’s nasty behaviour, here it is: Snape fights against Voldemort because of his love for Lily and in order to atone for his guilt. Other aspects of the same reasons (the inability to get over an unhappy, tragic love and his secret guilt and remorse) make him for ever unhappy and bitter and often nasty especially where Harry Potter is concerned. He is a teacher for practically the same reasons (to fight against Voldemort and protect Harry) – the job is not suited to his talents and interests and it shows. Simple enough and includes the reason for his nastiness as a teacher and person. Other things that result from the same explanation are these: While he fights and atones, he gradually learns to value human life and eventually is able to give up his original goal (protecting Harry’s life) for a greater goal of protecting a lot of people and helping the “grown-up” Harry to achieve his goal rather than simply keeping him alive. He becomes used to saving people’s lives, especially those of children, thus reversing the sin he has to atone for (which was willingly joining a murderous organization and carelessly endangering other people’s lives, including that of a baby) and even learns to make use of his dark arts knowledge and interest in a positive way. Eventually, he becomes a person who is very unwilling to really harm others and who is absolutely willing to risk his life in every possible way to save others or to do his duty.
wynnleaf - May 26, 2008 5:14 am (#2183 of 2617)
If we’re going to include Rowling’s out-of-book statements in our analysis of Snape, let’s be sure to include all of them and not just the ones that help our own arguments. (Jason Riddle)
I am not sure that you know what my arguments actually are.
I never argue that Snape isn't cruel, or that Snape doesn't do certain vengeful things (like the way he treats Harry). However, you might note that the quotes you give from Rowling do not support anything much beyond that and certainly don't support some of your statements.
All in all, it seems that Rowling agrees with me: Snape was sadistic and desired power. (Jason)
The quotes you give are JKR commenting on Snape-as-teacher. She does not say that Snape's cruelty was physical nor does she ever give any examples of such in the books. She specifically gives reasons for his joining LV but she didn't say "desired power", but instead because "like many insecure, vulnerable, people he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive." Craving membership in something impressive, big and powerful is not the same as craving power itself. LV craves power. Snape craved being allied to it. Her comments on his abuse of power, as well as her examples in the books, are directly related to his actions in the classroom. And there, by the way, his "abuse" never is physical or reaches the level of Umbridge.
He sought revenge. (Jason)
JKR's comments about Snape are that he was vindictive. All the examples she gives are in regards to taking out his hatred of James on Harry. Her comment about being "vindictive" is tied directly to his not being a "big man" which is a manner of saying (at least in Britain) that he wasn't magnanimous , which is not something one would ever be toward LV, but more toward people one ought to forgive or overlook their faults.
He was not remorseful about anything but Lily’s death, even at the end. (Jason_
No, she never said that. She never said he wasn't remorseful about anything else. She did say that Snape wouldn't have gone into protecting Harry if he hadn't loved Lily. Yes, initially that's correct and she clearly shows that loving Lily was Snape's motivation for turning to DD and protecting Harry was his motivation for staying with DD after Lily's death. But it obviously didn't continue to be just about "protecting Harry" as JKR shows numerous instances of Snape protecting others besides Harry.
When Rowling says that Snape was “redeemed”, I think she means that Snape’s actions made up for his past crimes.
You think Snape could "make up" for killing and torturing other people by protecting one kid off-and-on for a few years and spending a few years risking his life just to get revenge on LV for killing one woman that he himself had a part in betraying? That "makes up" for killing and torturing others to the extent of proclaiming Snape "redeemed?" I disagree with this view of redemption which appears to include no real character change.
JKR both speaks in interviews and gives examples in the books of Snape being drawn to the Dark Arts. However we are never really told us exactly what makes anything "dark". For instances, Snape's question to Lily goes completely unanswered about why what the Marauders did wasn't so bad, but whatever Mulciber did to Mary McDonald was so awful. Lily gave no answer and no answer is ever offered regarding why Dark Arts are worse than other bad uses of magic. JKR says that Snape was drawn to "such loathsome acts and people" (which seems to be connected to her comment in the same sentence about being drawn to Dark Arts, so we still don't know what made the people or acts "loathsome."). But she does not say he was "drawn to kill and torture" so her statements do not back up your assertions.
In any case, you have done the same thing you suggested others avoid: disregard JKR when it doesn't suit the argument. Of course, JKR's interview comments are not always consistent with her books. And her early comments about Snape, prior to DH, and especially following the first book or two, may have a lot of misdirection in them, as she wanted readers to see Snape as really Bad so that she could build up her final surprises about Snape.
As far as the Worst Memory scene, or my thoughts on Lily, that should probably wait for another time as it is a full-blown discussion on its own.
mona amon - May 26, 2008 6:01 am (#2184 of 2617)
Jason, you have been using JKR's quotes to prove your points whenever they fit, but disagree with her whenever they don't. While I may disagree with you about what she means when she says Snape is cruel, sadistic and a bully, I can't altogether dismiss her remarks. If she says that in the Worst Memory scene Lily did not dislike James at all, quite the contrary actually, we have to accept that she wrote the scene with that in her mind, although we are free to interpret it in any way the text suggests to us.
To me Lily's smirk (and it does not matter exactly what it was she found funny) indicates that she did not take his predicament very seriously. Unlike Harry she did not see rage or humiliation there, she only saw greying underpants. So her seeming anger at James is not at all in proportion with what she is actually feeling. It seems to me that she no longer feels any friendship for Snape and is attracted to James (and I'm not blaming her for this). She sees a good opportunity to show off in front of him, gets on to her moral high hippogriff and starts giving him a lecture while poor Sev continues to hang upside down in his greying underpants. If she was really interested in rescuing him she would have gone up to him and ended the spell herself.
More on cruel, sadistic and bullying- He is cruel with his words. And he does bully the students. And he does get some enjoyment from people's discomposure when he has insulted them or broken their potion sample or whatever. This can be called sadistic. She based Snape on one of her own teachers, and no doubt Snape's students would call him cruel , sadistic, etc. But how does feeling a bit of malicious glee when he insults others transform into getting pleasure from killing and torturing? There are only two instances when he is shown to be physically rough- when he flings Harry to the floor after he finds him peeking into his memories, and when he whips him across the face with a spell when he is fleeing Hogwarts. Both were done, not for sport, but in extreme anger, and Lupin also does the same thing to Harry when he's mad at him.
Vindictive- He is shown to be vindictive towards Sirius and Lupin. He is definitely taking revenge on James through Harry. He is also vindictive to Harry on his own account. So yes, he's pretty vindictive. But the point is there's never even the slightest hint of vindictive feelings towards Voldemort. JKR has been very careful here. We are clearly not supposed to conclude that he was doing all that he did out of some base motives of revenge.
ETA:Rowling answers, “Yes… if he had not loved Dark magic so much, and been drawn to such loathsome people and acts.” [Apparently Snape was drawn to loathsome acts. Could that mean he enjoyed them?]
Wow, that's a tough one to answer. Does anyone have any idea? I wish she had specified what she meant by 'loathsome acts'. I think she was talking about the Dark Arts, which we all know he was fascinated with.
We can keep debating his character while JKR keeps proclaiming that he's a cruel, sarcastic bully who was brave and who loved, but she gives Harry the last word about him. He feels he is worthy of forgiveness (would a sadistic torturer and murderer be worthy of forgiveness?) and worthy of being regarded as a hero (or why would he name his son after him?) JKR would never have her beloved protagonist name his son after a torturer or murderer, however brave he may have been.
Crossposted with Wynnleaf so I seem to have repeated some of her points, but anyway...
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 7:49 am (#2185 of 2617)
Wow, that's a tough one to answer. Does anyone have any idea? I wish she had specified what she meant by 'loathsome acts'. I think she was talking about the Dark Arts, which we all know he was fascinated with. (Mona)
Yes, what we know from the books is Snape's fascination with the dark arts. I don't think "being drawn to" any acts means either that the person necessarily does the acts in question or that he enjoys it. Look at Draco. He was certainly drawn to loathsome people and acts. He was preparing to kill DD for about a year. (Loathsome act.) He was proud and he was boasting about it. Yet, when DD was at his mercy, disarmed and weak - did he eventually try to cast the killing curse? No. Did he enjoy the situation? Definitely no. He let a group of "loathsome people" into his school. Yet, when he found that Greyback was there as well, he was apparently horrified. Was it more than he had expected? Yes. Did he enjoy being a DE after that? Not at all. What JKR says about Snape could be said about Draco. It does not necessarily mean any more in Snape's case. JKR could have been much more explicit if she had wanted us to believe that Snape was a murderer and a torturer but she was not. Least of all in her books.
A very good point about Harry's last word. I also agree with Wynnleaf that revenge does not lead to redemption.
tandaradei - May 26, 2008 8:38 am (#2186 of 2617)
My wife is drawn to murder mysteries, but so far I still feel comfortable in bed with her.
As to Jo's comments, I am much less comfortable with all of them than any of you folks seem to be. Remember her hint to us about what Half-Blood Prince would be? Her sentence describing Scrimgeour? Talk about useless, misdirecting drivel.... Jo is an obsessively secretive and misleading person, who IMO has been obstructive to any helpfulness about plot. I do appreciate her opinions about her characters, but even then cannot disassociate her tendency to mislead even now. As to where she's leading us, let's talk Dumbledore -- gay, or just a kid with a crush? Depends on the interview and Jo's inclinations of the moment.
Again, look at the movies. After SS/PS we have seen less and less of Snape, until he had become barely an afterthought ... and what did Jo tell the directors about this? I'm guessing, squat. When the HP series will again be remade in the movies, I ask you, do you think the directors will upgrade Snape's role throughout, or, as apparently hinted by Jo to this set of directors, remove him from any position of importance?
Just saying, canon means soooo much more to me than Jo's hints and comments.
rambkowalczyk - May 26, 2008 12:36 pm (#2187 of 2617)
The word sadistic seems to have many layers of cruelty. JKR says Snape is a sadistic teacher reminding her of someone she used to have. But does she mean that Snape likes to use the Cruciatius Curse and torture people before they die? I think we are talking about two definitions of sadism.
If Snape is sadistic (in the torture to death meaning), why then does he try to save Lupin from being harmed by another Death Eater. Why not just use a little Sectumsempera on Lupin and watch him bleed to death? I believe JKR wants to show that Snape has changed.
wynnleaf - May 26, 2008 1:08 pm (#2188 of 2617)
Again, look at the movies. After SS/PS we have seen less and less of Snape, until he had become barely an afterthought ... and what did Jo tell the directors about this? I'm guessing, squat. When the HP series will again be remade in the movies, I ask you, do you think the directors will upgrade Snape's role throughout, or, as apparently hinted by Jo to this set of directors, remove him from any position of importance? (tandaradei)
If the books retain popularity for decades, I imagine a future filming of the series would put a lot more emphasis on Snape, as well as more on Dumbledore. They are the most complex characters, after all.
My guess is that JKR was comfortable with downplaying Snape's character in the films because when you see the character in the films, he just doesn't come across as quite so bad. Some people blame that on the actor, but that same actor has played quite a number of full-blown villains with plenty of believability.
I also note that in the films things that the "good kids" do are often toned down or removed when seeing those things on film would take away a lot of the sympathy for the Trio. So we don't see the Trio and friends hex Draco and friends into unconsciousness on the train in GOF and OOTP, leave them for hours and walk over their bodies on the way out. You don't see fake-Moody actually bounce Draco-ferret on the pavement repeatedly, instead just floating him in the air, because the Trio laughing over Draco really getting hurt wouldn't be so funny if you could see it.
Snape's character in the films has the same problem. We don't get to see the Trio set off an explosion in class that injures other kids and see Snape send them off to the hospital, and then threaten whoever did it with expulsion. It wouldn't work because in COS we're supposed to be cheering for Harry which would be difficult if we actually saw the kids injured through his plan. Snape has a lot of harsh words in the books, but if you put it all on film, he still wouldn't look like more than just a strict, harsh teacher. And just imagine putting that scene on film from GOF, where he pulls back his sleeve and shows Fudge his arm, or where he goes with glittering eyes and pale face to Voldemort.
Thing is, in the films we no longer interpret everything through Harry's point of view. So it would have been harder to keep up the illusion that Snape was Really Bad. I think JKR would have wanted Snape's character played down in the films for that reason if for no other, because she really wanted to keep people guessing until the end.
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 1:37 pm (#2189 of 2617)
And just imagine putting that scene on film from GOF, where he pulls back his sleeve and shows Fudge his arm, or where he goes with glittering eyes and pale face to Voldemort. (Wynnleaf)
I would just love to see those scenes...
Dryleaves - May 26, 2008 1:45 pm (#2190 of 2617)
And just imagine putting that scene on film from GOF, where he pulls back his sleeve and shows Fudge his arm, or where he goes with glittering eyes and pale face to Voldemort. (Wynnleaf)
I would just love to see those scenes... (Julia)
I would love a Snape movie...
Wow! What a fantastic discussion! Everyone has made very good points on either side of the argument and I find that I am swayed by whatever post I am reading. If I may offer a few comments:
Well he does think wizards are superior to muggles. What's the big deal. He's only nine years old and has a horrible muggle father as an example. - He also has an equally horrible Witch mother.
People do things in extreme anger which they do not mean at all. - People also say and do things that they normally keep suppressed.
[Lily] found Snape's suffering funny when he was being bullied by the Marauders. - I think she only found his dirty underpants funny.
I think Soul Search makes a great argument for Snape failing to act until he could no longer distance himself from any consequences.
Snape may not have been aware that Lily was in any particular danger or even that she and James defied LV three times. I would suggest that if that were true he would not have been concerned that Voldemort might target her because of the prophecy.
He knows his abilities for sure, but he doesn’t boast the way Hermione does. - This is interesting because I think he and Hermione are very similar. Both bookish and insecure, constantly worried about what others (who matter to their success) will think and heavily compensating for it. No, Snape doesn't boast about his abilities, but does put others down to feel superior. I see those as two sides of the same coin.
I think with regard to the "defied three times" it all comes down to how you interpret "defied". Isn't there a part where Dumbledore explains that, in Voldemort's mind, the Potters and the Longbottoms fit the criteria of the prophecy, whether or not the prophecy actually referred to them. And in the end Voldemort's interpretation is all that really mattered. Not that it couldn't also be a plot hole.
mona amon - May 25, 2008 12:46 pm (#2172 of 2617)
I think she only found his dirty underpants funny.
Maybe. But how do we know what Snape found funny in the Mary Mcdonald incident? Just because he calls it a laugh does not prove that he found other people's suffering funny.
Julia H. - May 25, 2008 1:17 pm (#2173 of 2617)
I don’t know if you’ve (you = Julia) ever studied science, but the simplest theory is not necessarily the best.(Jason)
Jason, I was not talking about a theory (like Einstein's) but about giving explanations for related things. By 'simplest' I meant 'the most general, allowing for the fewest exceptions and necessitating the fewest additions', not the 'easiest to understand'. Let me give you an example: Ornithologists observe that ostriches, emus and other birds of similar anatomy do not fly. The ornithologists want to explain this. What can they do? They can try and find a separate explanation for each of these species or they can look at the other similarities and come up with a single general explanation that explains why none of these birds can fly. Believe me, scientists will prefer the second option. We observe that Snape - after his return - quite consistently does the right things. You seem to be saying that Snape is sadistic and revengeful and try to explain each and every occasion when he does not act as either sadistic or revengeful with a different reason (fear of DD, fear LV, wanting Bellatrix to get out his house etc.), while a more general - and in this sense simpler - explanation is that he is not sadistic at all and revenge is not his main motivation. The examples you give me for Snape enjoying "torture" (like refusing to let Harry into DD's office, or his comment to Hermione or taunting Harry verbally) are simply not about torture. He can be nasty, indeed, but definitely not sadistic. McGonagall can also make nasty remarks at times. And what can we say about James and Sirius, the way they torture Snape and - according to the detention files - other fellow students? (Yes, their actions are much closer to torture than anything we see Snape doing.) In the "Flight of the Prince", I have the impression he reacts instantly when Harry is tortured. At the end of OOTP, when he appears to be sarcastic and indifferent because he must (in front of Umbridge and kids of DE's), he does tell Crabb to "loosen his hold" on Neville. An utterly sarcastic remark but ultimately aimed at decreasing someone's suffering. He does not have to say it, yet he says. I think Snape is just the opposite of Umbridge: He talks as if he were sadistic but his actions usually decrease others' suffering, while Umbridge talks like a "sweet little girl" but her actions cause suffering and she really seems to enjoy it.
Snape as a teenager: Lily asks him whether he knows what Mulciber did. He does not deny that he knows and says "it was a laugh". However, it does not mean that he was actually there. (Lily is not accusing him of being there at all.) Of course, he may have but he may only have heard the story from Mulciber and now repeat his version as well. (BTW the Marauders also "had a laugh" when Snape suffered, I see no difference here.) Actually, I think if Mary told Lily what had happened, she would probably have mentioned it to her if Lily's best friend had been there. Lily accuses him of wanting to be a DE. Unfortunately, she does not listen to his answer, so we do not know what Snape would say. For all what is in canon, there are several possibilities:
A) Lily is right.
B) Lily is not right but Snape becomes angry and defiant after her refusal and thinks, 'All right then, if you say so, why not?'
C) Snape does not seriously think about becoming a DE at that time, only later, when he has been estranged from Lily for years and has had no other "friends" than (would-be) DE's.
All of these are possible in accordance with canon. Actually JKR says somewhere that Snape thought Lily would like him if he became part of something big and impressive: that is more blindness than most readers would suppose but it seems JKR does not intend us to think that Snape joined LV because of the possibilities of torture and - more importantly - she never ever shows that this is the case.
Snape as DE: Jason, you assert that LV must know about Snape's occlumency skills on the basis that otherwise he would not send him to DD. I think we are shown that LV relies on legilimency very much as a way of checking his servants' loyalty: Snape emphasizes it. We see LV practising legilimency on Snape in DH and also boasting how he can see through them all. We get evidence how LV despises trust. Given that, I don't think LV would even basically trust someone he knows has occlumency skills - or knowing that one of his most confidential servants (what Snape becomes in the end) can do occlumency, he would still rely on legilimency as a means of checking whether he tells the truth or not. In DH, all DE's look elsewhere when LV checks Snape's mind, only Snape looks at him as if he were the only one who had nothing to hide. It is almost as if his occlumency skill made him seem even more reliable in LV's eyes, when compared with the others who do not dare to look into his eyes. When Snape returns to LV after LV's comeback, he has to explain quite a few things to him, as he explains to Bellatrix later. Some of his lies are rather weak, especially the one where he says he did not let Harry be killed in front of his eyes because DD would have been angry. LV was there in Quirrel's head and saw everything. He saw other teachers were there and still believed that Snape thought DD would have made him (of all people) responsible for Harry's death. I guess the only way Snape could prove he believed that was letting LV subject him to a legilimency test.
So how could LV send Snape to spy on DD in the first place? (Actually I don't think it was wise for any DE's who knew how to do occlumency to let LV know about it. It seems they are all afraid of him, even Bellatrix.) To me, it suggests that Snape was not a really important DE at the time. (We are never ever shown what his rank was before the prophecy, yet readers often assume that he held a high position - I never know why.) I am sure LV sent him to apply for that teaching job without knowing about his occlumency skills. It made it likely that he would be caught one day. If he seemed to be at the time a disposable servant, then LV only had to make it sure that he could tell DD nothing of importance if questioned. (Theory: Actually it is even possible that LV gave Snape this job because he realized that Snape would be no good - at least for the time being - if it came to AK-ing people. We know from canon that Unforgivables are not easy curses: not only because of the magical power necessary but because the person who casts them must really mean it. We see how Draco ultimately shrinks from trying, after a whole year of preparation. What would LV do to a servant not efficient enough to kill? Would he tell him, 'Sorry, sonny, you'd better apply for a country librarian's position, this job is not for you.'? Would he kill him? Or would he decide to put him to a different use? 'Nobody knows he is my servant. Maybe he will do as a spy. If not, not much is lost.' I am not saying this is what happened but it is not against canon.) So I do think, LV is not too worried about Snape when he sends him to DD. Moreover, Snape does not seem to be very professional as a young spy. He has to get a job to become a spy. He should put all his efforts into securing the job for himself in the first place. Instead, what does he do? He starts spying right away, before getting the job and spoils the whole interview. A totally unprofessional and very green young spy. (I guess he never read "How to behave during a job interview?" type of handbooks.) He tries too hard. (Does he have to prove himself?) It is only by accident that he overhears something of importance. Later, when LV returns, Snape is an established confidant of DD's, there is no need to worry that DD would suspect him or subject him to legilimency.
To be continued...
Julia H. - May 25, 2008 1:20 pm (#2174 of 2617)
Edited May 25, 2008 2:01 pm
"Fresh from my DE days": It is not new information. Yes, he was a DE. It is no proof that he tortured or killed. If you want to say that it is proof that he was a DE for a long time, well it is not. (He could be but we still don't know.) Does he tell Bellatrix when he spun that tale of remorse to DD? No. Is it logical that Bellatrix should know that Snape went to DD with his remorse a whole year before LV's downfall? No. Bellatrix probably thinks that Snape was "remorseful" after LV's downfall. That means even if Snape joined LV only a few days before the prophecy was made (I am not saying that he did, it is only an extreme example), Bellatrix can still think that Snape was a DE before LV's downfall for a year and three or four months. That would already qualify as "my DE days".
As for tearing up the photo: Well, he certainly has not reached the stage where he finds comfort in watching the pictures of Harry and James but nobody says he is an angel or a saint. He is not tearing up the family, only a photo and yes, it is only Lily whose memory he finds comfort in - big surprise. This is still not sadistic. He is going through a deep crisis, he is experiencing remorse and regret and mourning. He is alone, he has lost almost everything. He needs comfort.
You know, Jason, I don't think we can convince each other but there is one thing I really do not understand. In your interpretation Snape looks like the most commonplace, mindless "hero" of the dullest revenge movie, who does nothing but changes his allegiance from one gang to another out of revenge but otherwise is and remains a cruel gangster and a killing machine. Yet, you say you do not only "like" the character but also sympathize with him on certain occasions. Liking a character is of course possible for literary reasons only - but sympathizing with someone you describe in this way? If I interpreted the character as you do, I would never be able to feel any kind of sympathy towards him. In my interpretation, he is a man with complex feelings, with great and tragic mistakes and flaws but also with a great capacity to do good, struggling with his own demons more than with his enemies, one who goes a long, long way in a short life, one who - in the end - manages to (so to speak) cross his own shadow and ultimately becomes a true hero.
For others' comments: very good posts. I have just a few things to add.
I don't think Snape has to know about Lily and James defying LV three times. (Good observation of a plothole, BTW.) First of all we don't know what "defying" means. Secondly, LV will not tell Snape about everything he does. Even if he did, how do we know that LV knows James and Lily by their names? They are rather young Order members. Thirdly, it seems that Snape does not connect what the prophecy says with Lily and James. That suggests he does not know about the three times. The prophecy is made before Harry's birth (end of July). Snape goes to DD when there are no leaves on the trees. That implies LV himself must have taken his time figuring out the meaning of the prophecy. (How many couples have defied him three times? Or maybe he does not know which Order members are married to each other? Or which couples have children? Maybe he does not take the prophecy very seriously until he learns that Trelawney has got the job. Snape must have heard DD telling Sybill that he did not want any more Divination teachers. Could LV - Snape - think that the alleged prophecy was just a desperate attempt to convince DD? Does LV start investigate only when he learns that Trelawney has got the job, so DD must think the prophecy is real?) I think Snape would have wanted to save Lily if she had been targeted by all means. As it happened it was the prophecy that made him realize Lily was targeted. But his own involvement probably made him feel it more deeply.
As for Snape's Witch Mom: I think his father was far worse even if his mother was nothing wonderful either. His mother may have neglected him and may not have been kind to him but it was his father who was aggressive and who would not go with him to the railway station and who did not like "anything, much".
wynnleaf - May 25, 2008 2:45 pm (#2175 of 2617)
For a time before the prophecy, a war was going on with Voldemort and Death Eaters and the Order of the Phoenix as main participants. Lily (and James) were in the Order and opposing Voldemort. Voldemort had targeted the Potters and they were in hiding and moving around. Pettigrew was informing Voldemort of the Potters' whereabouts. The Potters escaped (defied) Voldemort three times. Lily was at serious risk at this time. (Soul Search)
You seem to be assuming that LV was targeting the Potters prior to hearing about the prophecy. Canon does not tell us this and JKR, in interviews, said that the Potters went into hiding immediately following Harry's christening, which pretty clearly implies that they went into hiding because LV was targeting Harry.
Actually, we don't have any particular evidence that Snape even knew the Potters were in the Order and getting into the typical danger that all Order members faced, until LV decided to target Harry. Basically, I think JKR pretty clearly wants us to believe that as soon as Snape thought Lily was in danger, he tried to save her.
Jason,
Not sure what to make of "legendary wynnleaf"! I probably talk too much about Snape.
I think JKR truly wants us to see Snape as a character with a lot more depth than your version of his character gives to him. More importantly, JKR did state that she wanted him to be seen as having been redeemed, and I think that has to have a place in the discussion, because I don't see your version of Snape as a redeemed character.
As regards the most simple answer versus the most complex, I think we have to remember that this is a completed work of fiction and no longer one where we're trying to figure out red herrings and "what's really going on." Sure, there's a lot that JKR didn't tell us, but in general, if she was going to show us something important that we need to know to understand a character, than she's already had her chance to do that. And of course, she's also tried to use interviews to make a few things more clear. But I don't think we can take the completed series and say a major character was a murderer or physically tortured people without canon ever saying he did, and with some internal evidence and comments of that character and others that imply that he didn't.
Of course, that doesn't mean that what JKR wrote was necessarily clear and I think some incidences The Prince's Tale are not very clear.
Nine year old Snape and muggles. We don't have evidence that he disliked all muggles as a kid, but that he had no interest in Petunia, because his primary interest was in Lily. Why was he interested in Lily? Because she was gorgeous and sweet? Well, no, I think it's pretty clear he was interested in her because she was a witch. And that's perfectly natural that young Snape would be very interested in getting to know the only other wizarding kid in the neighborhood, who also just happens to be a rather nice kid. Petunia is not particularly nice and I don't think Snape would have any interest in getting to know her. Why should he? She certainly doesn't seem to like him and is pretty dismissive of him as soon as they meet.
The "greedy" word bothers me some because some people interpret it as though this little nine year old neglected kid is somehow selfishly stalking Lily, rather than a nine year old kid desperately wanting to make contact with someone he thinks might be someone he can relate to.
JKR did give us the reason for Snape joining the DEs. She said he wanted to impress Lily and because he was really insecure, he wanted some larger stronger group to be a part of. JKR could have told us that Snape joined up because he wanted to kill and torture, but she just didn't give that as a reason.
By the way, DEs may have gone after muggles at the Tri Wizard Cup, but the main politics of LV was against muggleborn wizarding people. Except for Snape's use of the word in his teens, we don't get any indication that he disliked or hated muggleborns. Even Sirius, James and Lupin never at any time accuse him of these sorts of beliefs, and you'd think they'd do so if they knew about it. Lupin and Sirius mention Snape's interest in Dark Arts, but not a bias against muggleborns.
While Snape's possible bias against muggleborns during his teens is certainly debatable, I don't see any evidence that a desire to kill them was one of his reasons for joining LV.
I think she only found his dirty underpants funny. (Quinn Crockett)
Yes, but that's not a good thing, since they aren't described as dirty, but graying, which happens when white clothes get pretty old. The kids don't do their own laundry at Hogwarts -- apparently the House Elves take care of all cleaning. I always saw Snapes graying underwear as an indication of his very poor home, which makes Lily's comment (since she knows of his homelife) particularly cruel. That's a discussion all in itself. JKR seems to think readers should be able to tell in that scene that Lily really likes James. If we readers are supposed to tell it, couldn't Snape? I really don't care for Lily in this scene, like her grin at Snape's situation or her later implication to James that she'd forgive an unforced apology from Snape, but when he gives one, she won't forgive him.
rambkowalczyk - May 25, 2008 7:20 pm (#2176 of 2617)
The arguments given to prove Snape is sadistic don't add up for me. Sadistic is Umbridge. She tries to be nice to get what she wants; (She offers Harry tea with a false smile) she hides behind false respectability (She's only following ministry orders). Snape doesn't try to be nice. He is what he is.
wynnleaf - May 25, 2008 9:03 pm (#2177 of 2617)
ramb,
I agree. Snape doesn't try to hide his nastiness, so why should we suspect that he's hiding some further nastiness than what we see in canon?
Jason Riddle - May 25, 2008 10:37 pm (#2178 of 2617)
If we’re going to include Rowling’s out-of-book statements in our analysis of Snape, let’s be sure to include all of them and not just the ones that help our own arguments. Here are some that I collected from [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
“It’s fun to write about Snape because he’s a deeply horrible person.”
“Snape is the very sadistic teacher loosely based on a teacher I myself had, I have to say.”
“…teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher (Snape) does abuse his power.”
“You see I don’t see him really as a hero… He’s spiteful. He’s a bully. All these things are still true of Snape, even at the end of this book.” [Later she seems to change her mind about whether he’s a hero.]
When asked, “If Snape didn’t love Lily, would he have still tried to protect Harry?” Rowling answers, “No. He definitely wouldn’t have done. He wouldn’t have been remotely interested in what happened.”
“a very flawed hero… He remains rather cruel, a bully, riddled with bitterness and insecurity.”
When asked, “Did Lily ever have feelings back for Snape?” Rowling answers, “Yes… if he had not loved Dark magic so much, and been drawn to such loathsome people and acts.” [Apparently Snape was drawn to loathsome acts. Could that mean he enjoyed them?]
“like many insecure, vulnerable, people he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive… he was so blinded by his attraction to the dark side he thought she would find him impressive if he became a real Death Eater.”[Snape craves power. He is attracted to the “dark side”. What else can the “dark side” refer to, but cruelty and domination? I hate to disagree with Rowling about her own character, but I find it hard to believe that Snape thought becoming a DE would impress Lily. Lily points out her dislike of Mulciber, Avery, and dark magic. She later condemns Snape and breaks communication with him specifically BECAUSE he wanted to be a Death Eater. People sometimes deceive themselves in relationships, but Snape must have been utterly delusional to believe that. Also, notice that Rowling doesn’t say he joined in order to impress Lily, but only that Snape thought Lily would be impressed if he did. In other words, there are more reasons.]
“Snape is vindictive, he’s cruel. He’s not a big man. But he loves.” [‘vindictive’ means: 1. disposed to seek revenge 2. marked by or resulting from a desire to hurt]
All in all, it seems that Rowling agrees with me: Snape was sadistic and desired power. He sought revenge. He was not remorseful about anything but Lily’s death, even at the end. When Rowling says that Snape was “redeemed”, I think she means that Snape’s actions made up for his past crimes. This is true. Although his motives were selfish, although he was remorseless, his actions were brave. Snape’s efforts were critical to the final triumph of the good side. He righted the wrongs of his past. Therefore he is redeemed.
Jason Riddle - May 25, 2008 10:38 pm (#2179 of 2617)
wynnleaf
We actually DO have evidence that Snape hated all muggles as a kid. When Lily is in tears because Petunia rejected her, Snape can’t understand why this should upset her (“So what?”). When Lily retorts, “So she’s my sister!”, Snape says, “She’s only a [muggle]”. This shows Snape has a view of muggles that extends far beyond Petunia. To Snape, a muggle, even if she’s your sister, is not worth any pity. A muggle is not something to have feelings for. I know that Snape is only 11 years old [does abused 11 year old Harry say anything similar?], but still, this is evidence of his prejudice against muggles.
I find your analysis of ‘Snape’s worst memory’ to be incredibly backwards. Lily is wonderful in this scene. She has the moral fortitude and the bravery to walk into a crowd of people to stand up to the popular cool kids. She is not embarrassed to defend an unhygienic, unpopular outcast. She knows that Snape wants to be a Death Eater; she knows that Snape hangs around with people that use evil dark magic for fun, and she still defends him. Her friends can’t understand why she even talks to Snape, yet she comes to his rescue. The fact that she has a secret liking for James makes her actions twice as amazing. She denounces him and flatly refuses to go out with him. She threatens him with her wand. Lily sets aside her personal desires in the name of justice. Lily succeeds in getting James to release Snape. And what does Snape do in return? He spits in her face. “I don’t need help from FILTHY LITTLE MUDBLOODS like her!” He basically calls her a B-tch (wizard version) in front of everyone. Lily’s reaction is perfectly natural and perfectly justified. In fact, when James uses Snape’s ungrateful words to try to win her favor, she calls him on his arrogance and bullying. Even after she gives up on Snape, justice is more important to her than James is. Later that night, Lily does NOT break off the relationship because Snape called her a mudblood. It’s because after years of excuses, Snape refuses to reform. She knows that Snape IS sorry about what he said, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is that he calls ALL muggle-borns “Mudblood”. What matters is that he’s trying to become a Death Eater. Lily can’t condone it, can’t stand for it, any longer. Snape has chosen his path. She’s chosen hers.
Lily betrays the subtlest, most miniscule hint of a smile. A mere twitch in her otherwise “furious expression”. So what? She’s human. She resists the temptation to laugh at an amusing sight in order to protect Snape’s feelings. This shows she DOES have sympathy for Snape’s poor background. Given that Snape was choking on froth, then inching towards his wand, then hanging upside-down with his robes over his head, I doubt that he was aware of any “flirtation” between Lily and James. In fact, I don’t think anyone but J.K. Rowling was aware of it. I am at a loss when I wonder how Rowling could have written this scene with less flirtation: “She was looking at James with every sign of great dislike.” Perhaps Rowling meant some type of subconscious flirtation. Maybe Lily was angrier with James than she would have been with another boy. If so, it wouldn’t be apparent to anyone watching.
Also, using the number of DEs mentioned in the books as a means to estimate the total number of DEs is perfectly reasonable. In the case of aurors, students, or general wizards, there are indications that more exist than are given names. For example, at a quidditch match we hear about hundreds of students in the stands, most of whom are nameless. In the case of DEs, everything indicates a small elite group. For example, Voldemort’s role call in the graveyard scene of GoF. I know you’ve posted about how every Slytherin is practically forced into becoming a Death Eater, but the facts don’t bear it out. There are simply too few Death Eaters. Snape chose a radically different path, than the majority of Slytherins.
Jason Riddle - May 25, 2008 10:39 pm (#2180 of 2617)
Julia
I now understand what you meant about science. You’re right. If two competing theories give explanations for a set of phenomena (both match the evidence), the best theory is usually the one that is simplest and most general. However, it is important that both theories give good explanations of the relevant phenomena, before they are judged by simplicity. True, the theory that Snape acts out of a desire to do what is right, provides a simpler explanation of Snape’s good actions than my theory. Unfortunately, it fails to explain Snape’s cruelty to the students. My theory gives Snape multiple selfish motives. It’s a bit more complicated, but it explains all of Snape’s behavior. Rowling does like making complex realistic characters. In my opinion, Snape’s actions are motivated mostly by the following: sadism, desire for power, racism, hatred for James/Sirius, affection/loyalty towards Dumbledore, love for Lily, desire for revenge, and (after reading other posts) personal-insecurity. I think having multiple, sometimes conflicting, motives makes Snape the dark complex character Rowling meant him to be. It’s realistic.
Yes, other characters do hurtful things and enjoy it. Harry enjoying a bit of well-deserved revenge on Draco or McGonagall snapping at a negligent student are both acceptable behaviors. Snape enjoys harming others in situations that are morally deplorable. Snape, a grown man, bullies and frightens children who have done nothing to deserve it. He shares much in common with Umbridge, excepting her falsely sweet demeanor. Here are my responses to some of your points: At the end of OOTP, Snape is protecting Crabbe (a Slytherin), by preventing him from accidentally strangling Neville. It doesn’t matter that Snape wasn’t with Mulciber (I agree that he probably wasn’t there). Snape thought harming Mary was funny. Of course, it is possible that Lily was totally mistaken in thinking that Snape wanted to be a DE. But in order to accept that Rowling was giving us a false impression of Snape with Lily’s accusation, we would be forced to come up with a complex reason explaining: why Lily had been lead to think this, why Snape never reconciles with her (since Lily was mistaken), and why, after all that, Snape becomes a DE anyway? It’s much simpler and more honest to assume that Lily is right about Snape’s aspirations.
Regarding Snape’s occlumency: Again, it would be insane for LV to send a Death Eater to Dumbledore to be a spy who didn’t know occlumency. LV feels his powers are great enough to see into anyone’s mind. Snape is skilled enough that he makes it seem that he is not using occlumency when LV looks at him. This is one reason he trusts Snape. The other reasons are: Snape served him faithfully as a young DE, he kills Dumbldore, and he passes LV seemingly important information (like the date of Harry’s departure from #4PD). Spying is tricky work. Voldemort would not send a timid, incompetent DE to spy on his arch-nemesis. He usually kills incompetent people or makes them into his servants. I admit, Snape does seem foolish when he gets caught by Aberforth. I don’t have an explanation for that, yet. Snape tells Bellatrix that he was fresh from his death eater days at the time he joins Dumbledore’s staff. You are right that he could be referring to a time period significantly later than the time he actually came to Dumbledore. So my argument is a bit weaker there. However, we still know that joining LV was Snape’s teenage ambition. Also, we never hear about Snape doing anything other than being a DE after Hogwarts. So there’s still evidence that he was a DE for good period.
Too many objections have been posted for me to get to all of them. Dryleaves, thanks for reminding me that Snape tells Phineas Nigellus not to say mudblood. The word probably did remind Snape about Lily, but it also seems reasonable that Snape started to shed some of his racist beliefs at the end of his life. And Julia, I’ll do a post about why I like Snape and feel sorry for him later on.
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 2:51 am (#2181 of 2617)
Well, Jason, JKR still does not seem to be saying that Snape joined the DE's because he wanted to kill or torture - or that he did. She says he was insecure and vulnerable... blinded by his attraction to the dark side, not that he wanted to kill muggles. As for "attraction to the dark side": what we get plenty of canon evidence of is his attraction to the dark arts - and it seems to be largely academic. JKR says Snape is nasty and horrible and vindictive - but she does not say his whole motivation is revenge against Voldemort. She emphasizes that he loved and many of us are simply saying that this is his motivation for change. Besides, as you say, Rowling does seem to change her mind a couple of times (a "sadistic teacher" or a "flawed hero"?) and you yourself do not believe everything she says - you do not seem to believe that Snape wanted to impress Lily by joining the DE's (a far more innocent motivation than most readers would suppose) or that Lily is flirting with James in the Worst memory scene even though JKR says that this is what she intended. I personally try to limit my reference to her interviews and if I do refer to something she says I try to add whether I think she manages to convey what she says she wants to convey or not. She does not always do.
The fact is that she never gives us in her books one single example where Snape crosses an invisible line between nastiness and real sadism (she could but she does not), while she does give examples of truly sadistic characters. The fact is that she never refers to any other crimes Snape may have committed as a DE but she does seem to imply in several places in the books that he did not commit other major crimes that he could have been made to answer for or that might have harmed his soul. (Innocent until proved guilty…) BTW, Jason, you say the fact that it is not mentioned what Snape did after school besides being a DE proves that he did not do anything else. If I accept this argument of yours, will you accept mine that the fact that it is not mentioned that Snape committed any other crimes besides joining the organization, trying to spy on DD and taking the prophecy to LV is proof that he did not commit any other crimes? Nota bene, I am not saying it must have been his merit. It may have been because of pure chance or LV’s decision to keep his future spy’s hand clean or simply Snape’s ineptitude to kill. After all, why would LV send an efficient killing machine to a school to be a teacher and a spy? Or if he sends him there because of his brilliance and experience, then why does Snape act so stupidly and naively right at the beginning?
If you think fighting against evil just to take revenge is enough to heal souls - well it does not seem to be the logic of the HP books. I do not agree that mere revenge can redeem someone, especially if that person has committed so many crimes as you say Snape did and if that person does not become in his heart a better person. Another fact is that JKR does not show us that all DE's are the same but quite on the contrary. She provides very different back-stories for Snape, Regulus, Lucius, Draco, Pettigrew. So the "Snape is exactly the same as all other DE's" argument is not logical because simply there is no average DE shown in the books. JKR strongly implies that not all DE's identified truly and fully with Voldemort's real ideology. There is Regulus: Can he truly identify with an ideology that despises and targets muggles, muggle-borns and all non-human magical creatures and then choose voluntary death just because a house elf was tortured? No. He may believe so but it turns out that it is not so at all. Snape is a special DE because he loves Lily. Loving Lily is loving a muggle-born. Does someone who loves a muggle-born identify completely with DE ideology? Does someone who loves a woman so much he is willing to risk his life and freedom for her identify completely with an ideology based on hatred and selfishness? No. If Snape did not love Lily he would not have the same personality and would not have the same potential for change and redemption. I quite agree. But the fact is that he loves her deeply and this love and the ability for this kind of love is a very important part of his personality.
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 2:54 am (#2182 of 2617)
As for the possibilities of blindness, I would like to quote DD: Oh, I had a few scruples. I assuaged my conscience with empty words. It would all be for the greater good, and any harm done would be repaid a hundredfold in benefits for wizards. Did I know, in my heart of hearts, what Grindelwald was? I think I did, but I closed my eyes. I guess DD is not the only bright young man capable of such self-deceit.
Still another fact is that Rowling gives us plenty of examples where Snape (the changed or changing, improving Snape) reduces other people's suffering or saves or protects people's lives - not only Harry's and not only in direct connection with Lily. You seem to be saying that Snape - in order to follow DD's plan - represses his sadistic impulses all the time. I don't think a truly sadistic character could do that, especially, when he is not watched by DD. In fact, Snape is shown as very unwilling to harm anyone, even if it is part of DD's plan against LV. Snape does not want to AK DD. He protests at first and agrees only when DD talks about saving him from pain and humiliation. Would DD use this argument (and so successfully) if Snape were sadistic, enjoying other people's suffering? No. Snape is shocked when he learns that Harry will have to be killed by Voldemort, even if it must be for the purpose of defeating Voldemort. If he just wants revenge why care how this is achieved? (JKR did make interesting comments on this as well but I understand you cannot really quote everything she has ever said.) Later, in the chase, Snape risks his cover to try to save Lupin's life. Portrait DD has explicitly told him to play his part convincingly. I don't think attacking DE's is included in that. Snape has a very important role in DD's plan and he knows this. He is generally very careful to keep his cover but here he acts instinctively and at the moment's impulse. (At least I don't think he has much time to contemplate what to do.) This is another moment which shows what he is inclined to do instinctively.
I do not think my explanation regarding why Snape does the good things in the fight against Voldemort has to explain Snape the nasty teacher: it is simply not sadism or torture. He is irritated if the students do not know what they should know and he is especially irritated by Harry and we know the reason why. Yet, he will never let his loathing of Harry prevent him from saving him when Harry is in direct danger or from giving up his life to protect Harry's. However, if you want an explanation including Snape’s nasty behaviour, here it is: Snape fights against Voldemort because of his love for Lily and in order to atone for his guilt. Other aspects of the same reasons (the inability to get over an unhappy, tragic love and his secret guilt and remorse) make him for ever unhappy and bitter and often nasty especially where Harry Potter is concerned. He is a teacher for practically the same reasons (to fight against Voldemort and protect Harry) – the job is not suited to his talents and interests and it shows. Simple enough and includes the reason for his nastiness as a teacher and person. Other things that result from the same explanation are these: While he fights and atones, he gradually learns to value human life and eventually is able to give up his original goal (protecting Harry’s life) for a greater goal of protecting a lot of people and helping the “grown-up” Harry to achieve his goal rather than simply keeping him alive. He becomes used to saving people’s lives, especially those of children, thus reversing the sin he has to atone for (which was willingly joining a murderous organization and carelessly endangering other people’s lives, including that of a baby) and even learns to make use of his dark arts knowledge and interest in a positive way. Eventually, he becomes a person who is very unwilling to really harm others and who is absolutely willing to risk his life in every possible way to save others or to do his duty.
wynnleaf - May 26, 2008 5:14 am (#2183 of 2617)
If we’re going to include Rowling’s out-of-book statements in our analysis of Snape, let’s be sure to include all of them and not just the ones that help our own arguments. (Jason Riddle)
I am not sure that you know what my arguments actually are.
I never argue that Snape isn't cruel, or that Snape doesn't do certain vengeful things (like the way he treats Harry). However, you might note that the quotes you give from Rowling do not support anything much beyond that and certainly don't support some of your statements.
All in all, it seems that Rowling agrees with me: Snape was sadistic and desired power. (Jason)
The quotes you give are JKR commenting on Snape-as-teacher. She does not say that Snape's cruelty was physical nor does she ever give any examples of such in the books. She specifically gives reasons for his joining LV but she didn't say "desired power", but instead because "like many insecure, vulnerable, people he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive." Craving membership in something impressive, big and powerful is not the same as craving power itself. LV craves power. Snape craved being allied to it. Her comments on his abuse of power, as well as her examples in the books, are directly related to his actions in the classroom. And there, by the way, his "abuse" never is physical or reaches the level of Umbridge.
He sought revenge. (Jason)
JKR's comments about Snape are that he was vindictive. All the examples she gives are in regards to taking out his hatred of James on Harry. Her comment about being "vindictive" is tied directly to his not being a "big man" which is a manner of saying (at least in Britain) that he wasn't magnanimous , which is not something one would ever be toward LV, but more toward people one ought to forgive or overlook their faults.
He was not remorseful about anything but Lily’s death, even at the end. (Jason_
No, she never said that. She never said he wasn't remorseful about anything else. She did say that Snape wouldn't have gone into protecting Harry if he hadn't loved Lily. Yes, initially that's correct and she clearly shows that loving Lily was Snape's motivation for turning to DD and protecting Harry was his motivation for staying with DD after Lily's death. But it obviously didn't continue to be just about "protecting Harry" as JKR shows numerous instances of Snape protecting others besides Harry.
When Rowling says that Snape was “redeemed”, I think she means that Snape’s actions made up for his past crimes.
You think Snape could "make up" for killing and torturing other people by protecting one kid off-and-on for a few years and spending a few years risking his life just to get revenge on LV for killing one woman that he himself had a part in betraying? That "makes up" for killing and torturing others to the extent of proclaiming Snape "redeemed?" I disagree with this view of redemption which appears to include no real character change.
JKR both speaks in interviews and gives examples in the books of Snape being drawn to the Dark Arts. However we are never really told us exactly what makes anything "dark". For instances, Snape's question to Lily goes completely unanswered about why what the Marauders did wasn't so bad, but whatever Mulciber did to Mary McDonald was so awful. Lily gave no answer and no answer is ever offered regarding why Dark Arts are worse than other bad uses of magic. JKR says that Snape was drawn to "such loathsome acts and people" (which seems to be connected to her comment in the same sentence about being drawn to Dark Arts, so we still don't know what made the people or acts "loathsome."). But she does not say he was "drawn to kill and torture" so her statements do not back up your assertions.
In any case, you have done the same thing you suggested others avoid: disregard JKR when it doesn't suit the argument. Of course, JKR's interview comments are not always consistent with her books. And her early comments about Snape, prior to DH, and especially following the first book or two, may have a lot of misdirection in them, as she wanted readers to see Snape as really Bad so that she could build up her final surprises about Snape.
As far as the Worst Memory scene, or my thoughts on Lily, that should probably wait for another time as it is a full-blown discussion on its own.
mona amon - May 26, 2008 6:01 am (#2184 of 2617)
Jason, you have been using JKR's quotes to prove your points whenever they fit, but disagree with her whenever they don't. While I may disagree with you about what she means when she says Snape is cruel, sadistic and a bully, I can't altogether dismiss her remarks. If she says that in the Worst Memory scene Lily did not dislike James at all, quite the contrary actually, we have to accept that she wrote the scene with that in her mind, although we are free to interpret it in any way the text suggests to us.
To me Lily's smirk (and it does not matter exactly what it was she found funny) indicates that she did not take his predicament very seriously. Unlike Harry she did not see rage or humiliation there, she only saw greying underpants. So her seeming anger at James is not at all in proportion with what she is actually feeling. It seems to me that she no longer feels any friendship for Snape and is attracted to James (and I'm not blaming her for this). She sees a good opportunity to show off in front of him, gets on to her moral high hippogriff and starts giving him a lecture while poor Sev continues to hang upside down in his greying underpants. If she was really interested in rescuing him she would have gone up to him and ended the spell herself.
More on cruel, sadistic and bullying- He is cruel with his words. And he does bully the students. And he does get some enjoyment from people's discomposure when he has insulted them or broken their potion sample or whatever. This can be called sadistic. She based Snape on one of her own teachers, and no doubt Snape's students would call him cruel , sadistic, etc. But how does feeling a bit of malicious glee when he insults others transform into getting pleasure from killing and torturing? There are only two instances when he is shown to be physically rough- when he flings Harry to the floor after he finds him peeking into his memories, and when he whips him across the face with a spell when he is fleeing Hogwarts. Both were done, not for sport, but in extreme anger, and Lupin also does the same thing to Harry when he's mad at him.
Vindictive- He is shown to be vindictive towards Sirius and Lupin. He is definitely taking revenge on James through Harry. He is also vindictive to Harry on his own account. So yes, he's pretty vindictive. But the point is there's never even the slightest hint of vindictive feelings towards Voldemort. JKR has been very careful here. We are clearly not supposed to conclude that he was doing all that he did out of some base motives of revenge.
ETA:Rowling answers, “Yes… if he had not loved Dark magic so much, and been drawn to such loathsome people and acts.” [Apparently Snape was drawn to loathsome acts. Could that mean he enjoyed them?]
Wow, that's a tough one to answer. Does anyone have any idea? I wish she had specified what she meant by 'loathsome acts'. I think she was talking about the Dark Arts, which we all know he was fascinated with.
We can keep debating his character while JKR keeps proclaiming that he's a cruel, sarcastic bully who was brave and who loved, but she gives Harry the last word about him. He feels he is worthy of forgiveness (would a sadistic torturer and murderer be worthy of forgiveness?) and worthy of being regarded as a hero (or why would he name his son after him?) JKR would never have her beloved protagonist name his son after a torturer or murderer, however brave he may have been.
Crossposted with Wynnleaf so I seem to have repeated some of her points, but anyway...
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 7:49 am (#2185 of 2617)
Wow, that's a tough one to answer. Does anyone have any idea? I wish she had specified what she meant by 'loathsome acts'. I think she was talking about the Dark Arts, which we all know he was fascinated with. (Mona)
Yes, what we know from the books is Snape's fascination with the dark arts. I don't think "being drawn to" any acts means either that the person necessarily does the acts in question or that he enjoys it. Look at Draco. He was certainly drawn to loathsome people and acts. He was preparing to kill DD for about a year. (Loathsome act.) He was proud and he was boasting about it. Yet, when DD was at his mercy, disarmed and weak - did he eventually try to cast the killing curse? No. Did he enjoy the situation? Definitely no. He let a group of "loathsome people" into his school. Yet, when he found that Greyback was there as well, he was apparently horrified. Was it more than he had expected? Yes. Did he enjoy being a DE after that? Not at all. What JKR says about Snape could be said about Draco. It does not necessarily mean any more in Snape's case. JKR could have been much more explicit if she had wanted us to believe that Snape was a murderer and a torturer but she was not. Least of all in her books.
A very good point about Harry's last word. I also agree with Wynnleaf that revenge does not lead to redemption.
tandaradei - May 26, 2008 8:38 am (#2186 of 2617)
My wife is drawn to murder mysteries, but so far I still feel comfortable in bed with her.
As to Jo's comments, I am much less comfortable with all of them than any of you folks seem to be. Remember her hint to us about what Half-Blood Prince would be? Her sentence describing Scrimgeour? Talk about useless, misdirecting drivel.... Jo is an obsessively secretive and misleading person, who IMO has been obstructive to any helpfulness about plot. I do appreciate her opinions about her characters, but even then cannot disassociate her tendency to mislead even now. As to where she's leading us, let's talk Dumbledore -- gay, or just a kid with a crush? Depends on the interview and Jo's inclinations of the moment.
Again, look at the movies. After SS/PS we have seen less and less of Snape, until he had become barely an afterthought ... and what did Jo tell the directors about this? I'm guessing, squat. When the HP series will again be remade in the movies, I ask you, do you think the directors will upgrade Snape's role throughout, or, as apparently hinted by Jo to this set of directors, remove him from any position of importance?
Just saying, canon means soooo much more to me than Jo's hints and comments.
rambkowalczyk - May 26, 2008 12:36 pm (#2187 of 2617)
The word sadistic seems to have many layers of cruelty. JKR says Snape is a sadistic teacher reminding her of someone she used to have. But does she mean that Snape likes to use the Cruciatius Curse and torture people before they die? I think we are talking about two definitions of sadism.
If Snape is sadistic (in the torture to death meaning), why then does he try to save Lupin from being harmed by another Death Eater. Why not just use a little Sectumsempera on Lupin and watch him bleed to death? I believe JKR wants to show that Snape has changed.
wynnleaf - May 26, 2008 1:08 pm (#2188 of 2617)
Again, look at the movies. After SS/PS we have seen less and less of Snape, until he had become barely an afterthought ... and what did Jo tell the directors about this? I'm guessing, squat. When the HP series will again be remade in the movies, I ask you, do you think the directors will upgrade Snape's role throughout, or, as apparently hinted by Jo to this set of directors, remove him from any position of importance? (tandaradei)
If the books retain popularity for decades, I imagine a future filming of the series would put a lot more emphasis on Snape, as well as more on Dumbledore. They are the most complex characters, after all.
My guess is that JKR was comfortable with downplaying Snape's character in the films because when you see the character in the films, he just doesn't come across as quite so bad. Some people blame that on the actor, but that same actor has played quite a number of full-blown villains with plenty of believability.
I also note that in the films things that the "good kids" do are often toned down or removed when seeing those things on film would take away a lot of the sympathy for the Trio. So we don't see the Trio and friends hex Draco and friends into unconsciousness on the train in GOF and OOTP, leave them for hours and walk over their bodies on the way out. You don't see fake-Moody actually bounce Draco-ferret on the pavement repeatedly, instead just floating him in the air, because the Trio laughing over Draco really getting hurt wouldn't be so funny if you could see it.
Snape's character in the films has the same problem. We don't get to see the Trio set off an explosion in class that injures other kids and see Snape send them off to the hospital, and then threaten whoever did it with expulsion. It wouldn't work because in COS we're supposed to be cheering for Harry which would be difficult if we actually saw the kids injured through his plan. Snape has a lot of harsh words in the books, but if you put it all on film, he still wouldn't look like more than just a strict, harsh teacher. And just imagine putting that scene on film from GOF, where he pulls back his sleeve and shows Fudge his arm, or where he goes with glittering eyes and pale face to Voldemort.
Thing is, in the films we no longer interpret everything through Harry's point of view. So it would have been harder to keep up the illusion that Snape was Really Bad. I think JKR would have wanted Snape's character played down in the films for that reason if for no other, because she really wanted to keep people guessing until the end.
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 1:37 pm (#2189 of 2617)
And just imagine putting that scene on film from GOF, where he pulls back his sleeve and shows Fudge his arm, or where he goes with glittering eyes and pale face to Voldemort. (Wynnleaf)
I would just love to see those scenes...
Dryleaves - May 26, 2008 1:45 pm (#2190 of 2617)
And just imagine putting that scene on film from GOF, where he pulls back his sleeve and shows Fudge his arm, or where he goes with glittering eyes and pale face to Voldemort. (Wynnleaf)
I would just love to see those scenes... (Julia)
I would love a Snape movie...
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2191 to 2210
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:38 am
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 1:51 pm (#2191 of 2617)
Oh, yes, good idea! (Wishful thinking...)
Jason Riddle - May 26, 2008 1:54 pm (#2192 of 2617)
Rowling’s words
wynnleaf, Snape does not undergo a personality change when the students leave his classroom. We cannot separate Snape as a teacher from Snape as a person. If someone is a kind teacher, then they are a kind person. Rowling says Snape is a “very sadistic teacher”. This means he is a very sadistic person. You cannot be a sadistic teacher, but actually be a benevolent person. Snape WAS physically abusive. Mona amon gives some of the examples of this. His abuse of Harry arguably surpasses that of Umbridge.
How could Snape want to be apart of a powerful organization, yet not want power? A person who does not desire power would see no attraction in a powerful organization. Voldemort wanted power. Snape wanted to join him so he could be powerful like Voldemort was. Rowling did not say that Snape was only vindictive towards James or Harry. In the books, Snape is vindictive towards anyone who crosses him. We are not shown, at least directly, that Snape wanted revenge on Voldemort. Rowling hid this, so as not to spoil the secret of Snape’s true allegiance.
You may disagree with Rowling’s view of redemption, but she’s the author and her views should influence our interpretation of the books. Rowling says Snape is spiteful and a bully even at his death. She says he “REMAINS rather cruel, a bully”. Finally, she says, “Snape is vindictive, he’s cruel. He’s not a big man. But he loves.” Since Rowling made this statement after the last book came out and since she’s speaking in the present tense, she is speaking about Snape at the end of the series, at the end of his character growth. Snape is still cruel and vindictive. Therefore he cannot be truly sorry, he cannot be truly remorseful, about having become a Death Eater, about having committed crimes against muggle-borns, or about having abused children. He is only remorseful about those actions which led to Lily’s death. In Rowling’s mind, a cruel bully can still be redeemed. A vengeful man can still be redeemed. Snape’s actions were brave and they contributed to LV’s downfall. This is why Snape is redeemed. Redemption achieved without much character change. Harry, a very forgiving person, names his son after Severus because he was incredibly brave, not because he was a good person.
Regarding dark magic, I think Rowling gives us a fairly good idea about what dark magic is, without giving an exact definition. Dark magic consists of spells that were created and used for evil purposes like causing pain or controlling others (imperio). Using them correctly usually involves invoking emotions of anger or hatred. The fact that Snape was interested in learning this type of magic fits perfectly with his desire for power and his desire to hurt others. The phrases “attraction to the dark side”, “loved Dark magic so much”, and “drawn to such loathsome people and acts” are confirmations of these desires. We don’t need to know what the loathsome acts were. It is enough that they are loathsome. While James learns that his use of dark magic was wrong and risks his life to fight against Voldemort, Snape fights for Voldemort. Snape’s interest in the dark side was much more than academic.
Mona amon, I suggest you go back and read ‘Snape’s Worst Memory’ again. Lily does NOT smirk! Her “furious expression” twitches. [Notice also that Snape never saw this because he was upside-down with his robes over his head]. She sees that Snape is being humiliated and does everything she can to stop it, short of attacking James. Lily displays no hint of attraction towards James. She announces to James, before a crowd of students, that she would rather go out with the giant squid, than with him. She says that he makes her sick. James certainly doesn’t take her words as a sign of attraction. He’s furious after she leaves. Nor is Lily showing off. Everything she says to James about his behavior is true. Lily is being heroic.
I will address other objections as I have time, especially the questions in Julia’s post. It would be nice to have a few allies, though! I wonder where TomProffitt is. LOL, tandaradei. Does your wife know you posted that?
Quinn Crockett - May 26, 2008 2:41 pm (#2193 of 2617)
I have to say, I think that Rowling created a rare jewel with the Snape character. But I think I agree with Jason in that I have a hard time believing that Snape had some secret benevolent inner life.
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 4:09 pm (#2194 of 2617)
There are only two instances when he is shown to be physically rough- when he flings Harry to the floor after he finds him peeking into his memories, and when he whips him across the face with a spell when he is fleeing Hogwarts. Both were done, not for sport, but in extreme anger, and Lupin also does the same thing to Harry when he's mad at him. (Mona)
Jason, as far as I understand Mona says these are the only two incidents and she seems to cite them as exceptions rather than the rule. I agree with this. In both cases Snape is in extreme stress. Then there is Lupin: is he also physically abusive and sadistic?
His abuse of Harry arguably surpasses that of Umbridge. (Jason)
Whatever you mean by this... Punching him in extreme stress and anger and being regularly sarcastic, strict and harsh towards Harry (with no physical injury done, much less anything that would last in the long run) surpasses forcing Harry to write in his own blood and to make those unhealing scars on the back of his hand, forming very humiliating words that remain there for ever? Marking him as a liar? Doing the latter repeatedly and all in cold blood, watching the effects, if the scars are deep enough, if the pain is unbearable enough? Would you, Jason, in Harry's place choose Umbridge's punishment for yourself over Snape's treatment?
If JKR says Snape is sadistic, then she has a definition for this word different from mine and - it seems - different from many others'. Actually, it may be different from yours, since you keep saying that Snape tortured and killed and enjoyed it, while JKR simply does not show Snape doing any of these things. It seems by "sadistic" she means something that is mostly verbal and very rarely physical and even then only in extreme emotional situations. (Snape is an emotionally unstable person.) As for his interest in the Dark Arts, it is shown mainly as academic. He wrote long answers in his O.W.L. exam and invented spells. This is what we know. And we see him use Sectumsempra once - to save Lupin's life - and AK once - we know the story. In CoS, Professor Binns says if a wizard does not use Dark Magic, that does not have to mean he does not know Dark Magic. I guess it can also mean that knowing Dark Magic does not equal using it. BTW, we see the good guys in DH use Dark Magic more than we ever get to see Snape in seven books. However, we repeatedly see Snape use his Dark Arts knowledge to heal and to save lives (Draco, DD, Katie Bell, Wolfsbane Potion for Lupin). If JKR wanted to portray him as a sadistic person (one who enjoys causing physical pain) - then she did a very bad job indeed because she did not portray him as such in her books.
In Rowling’s mind, a cruel bully can still be redeemed. A vengeful man can still be redeemed. Snape’s actions were brave and they contributed to LV’s downfall. This is why Snape is redeemed. Redemption achieved without much character change. (Jason)
In this case, I seriously must ask the question what redemption means. According to what you are saying, DD could have paid (if he had enough Galleons) any number of DE's to change sides and help him defeat Voldemort and they all would have been redeemed if brave enough. I really do not see any difference between this and your version of Snape's "redemption".
A person who does not desire power would see no attraction in a powerful organization. Voldemort wanted power. Snape wanted to join him so he could be powerful like Voldemort was.
Poor Voldy, this suggests every DE was so ambitious that they all wanted his power. Had he suspected, he would have killed them all at once. BTW, the Ministry of Magic is a powerful organization as well. Does every little clerk aspire to the Minister's job there? (People like Cattermole or Arthur Weasley as well?)
Harry, a very forgiving person, names his son after Severus because he was incredibly brave, not because he was a good person.
I would use a different word, not "forgiving", to describe a person naming his child after somebody who was not "a good person". I mean you can forgive your worst enemy if you are a forgiving person but you do not name your child after somebody you have simply forgiven. It requires much more than forgiveness.
Snape fights for Voldemort.
Snape fights against Voldemort.
Rowling hid this, so as not to spoil the secret of Snape’s true allegiance.
The fact is that in DH, finally, Rowling reveals Snape's true story and Snape's true allegiance in The Prince's Tale and she there makes it absolutely clear (whether that is what she wanted or not I could not tell) that Snape's motivation was not revenge but love. She still fails to show us "sadistic Snape" but she does show a Snape who gradually improves and changes. As the series is written, The Prince's Tale and Harry's words to LV and to his son are the last words about Snape. They are about love and remorse and bravery and change and redemption.
wynnleaf - May 26, 2008 4:50 pm (#2195 of 2617)
You cannot be a sadistic teacher, but actually be a benevolent person. (Jason)
Who has been saying Snape was benevolent?? I missed that post.
Perhaps you have never personally known teachers who were just as sarcastic and insulting in the classroom. I have and many others have. JKR thoroughly disliked this sort of teacher. Others actually kind of like this kind of teacher. In either case, teachers like that can't be counted on to enjoy physically torturing and killing people. Just because someone manages their classroom in a manner JKR feels is sadistic doesn't make them a killer or torturer. If JKR sees Snape as having done that, perhaps you could explain why, in thousands of pages and 7 books and literally hundreds of interviews, she's never said Snape killed or tortured anyone?
Snape WAS physically abusive. Mona amon gives some of the examples of this. (Jason)
Mona amon didn't give "some" examples, she gave the only examples of Snape using physical responses to a student. Both were under extreme provocation, one while Snape was under direct attack from said student. I do not consider either "abuse" or in any way similar to Umbridge, much less worse. If you do, it is clear that your understanding of abuse and sadism is completely different from mine.
Rowling says Snape is spiteful and a bully even at his death. (Jason)
But spite is not the same as abuse, nor is someone who bullies necessarily torturing and killing people.
Snape is still cruel and vindictive. Therefore he cannot be truly sorry, he cannot be truly remorseful...(Jason)
No. A person may act in cruel or vindictive ways in some areas, while still being remorseful about other areas. A person who is remorseful does not expunge all their faults in order to be remorseful. However, it is a general understanding that remorse is necessary for redemption. It certainly is within the overall system of faith that JKR espouses to the point of using her beliefs to shape her books.
Dark magic consists of spells that were created and used for evil purposes like causing pain or controlling others. (Jason)
This is your assumption, not something clear in the books. It's okay as a working theory, but the biggest problem with it is that JKR never addresses all of those many spells that can kill, maim, torture and control minds and never explains why they aren't dark.
Further, in the books JKR calls werewolves "dark" yet we know that Lupin is a good guy. She doesn't explain why someone may be dark and good at once. She doesn't explain why good characters can use Unforgiveables and none of the other good guys think it's bad at all -- it appears that intent is all that counts as McGonagall calls Harry "gallant" for torturing another person with crucio for insulting her. Snape's question to Lily about the difference was already being asked by fans repeatedly. Her silence and JKR's silence on the subject stands out starkly, especially in the face of JKR having Snape question it.
How could Snape want to be apart of a powerful organization, yet not want power? (Jason)
Rather easily and people do it all the time. People who feel very vulnerable and insecure often want the feeling that some other powerful group or entity is backing them up and giving them feelings of security, self-worth, appreciation, etc. It doesn't mean they want to wield power over others.
Quinn Crockett - May 26, 2008 9:27 pm (#2196 of 2617)
I've been following this debate very closely and it seems to me that people are getting hung up on Rowling's use of the word "sadistic" when to describe Professor Snape. While the word does originate with the Marquis de Sade, who had a legendary penchant for physical pain as a form of- shall we just say "entertainment"- the word's general usage refers simply to anyone who derives pleasure from the misery or suffering of others.
To me, this does describe Professor Snape pretty well. No, he doesn't use physical torture to achieve this - at least not that we've ever been shown in the story the way we have with Umbridge. But in my opinion, pressing someone's buttons, psychologically speaking, isn't really any different. There used to be a public service announcement where I grew up that said, "Words can hit as hard as a fist." The way Professor Snape talks to Harry reminds me of that.
How could Snape want to be apart of a powerful organization, yet not want power? (Jason)
Rather easily and people do it all the time. People who feel very vulnerable and insecure often want the feeling that some other powerful group or entity is backing them up and giving them feelings of security, self-worth, appreciation, etc. It doesn't mean they want to wield power over others. - Wynnleaf (cool name! what does it mean?)
This is a very interesting point, to me, this speculation of the what the adolescent Severus Snape was thinking about when he joined the Death Eaters. Like Jason, my view is that if we base our judgment on the behavior of the adult Professor Snape and the way we see how he treats his students, then it does kind of strike me that he seems to enjoy being in a position of power.
Yet at the same time, when the opportunity arises for him to become Headmaster, he seems reluctant about it. Not just in Deathly Hallows, because of Voldemort and his agenda; but even in the Chamber of Secrets when Draco suggests it, he seemed genuinely modest about the idea that his name might have been put forth to the Board of Governors, which kind of goes along with what Wynnleaf was saying.
Poor Voldy, this suggests every DE was so ambitious that they all wanted his power. Had he suspected, he would have killed them all at once. BTW, the Ministry of Magic is a powerful organization as well. Does every little clerk aspire to the Minister's job there? (People like Cattermole or Arthur Weasley as well?) - Julia H.
I think this is an interesting comparison, Julia (that's my girlfriend's name, by the way). Because in fact the Ministry did become an agency of the Death Eaters.
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 10:48 pm (#2197 of 2617)
Well, the point debated right now is not so much whether Snape is verbally "sadistic" or not but whether this proves (in lack of any other evidence) that Snape enjoys physical torture and that he must have been a serial killer and torturer in his DE days and whether it is only (selfish) revenge against LV that motivates him throughout the 7 books or more noble feelings in the first place (such as remorse and love), whether he as a character develops between the hilltop scene and the scene in which he sacrifices his life for the greater good and under what conditions redemption is possible at all.
Quinn Crockett - May 26, 2008 11:18 pm (#2198 of 2617)
Could he have remorse for becoming a Death Eater if that last conversation with Lily suddenly came rushing back to him? What I mean is, why couldn't he have had a sort of "Oh my god! What have I done?" kind of moment? - even though JKR tells us outright that, had Lily not been targeted, Snape would never have cared what happened to either James or Harry.
But Lily was targeted and that changed everything for him. Everything Snape had done up to that moment suddenly took on a whole different meaning. Now, there was a context to it, and that context was the sense of devastation and loss his "side" had caused to innocent people. Even if Snape himself never actively participated in any of the atrocities inflicted, maybe just knowing that someone he cared about would now be among the victims meant he could no longer look upon them with the same detached view.
I hope this makes sense to you all.
Dryleaves - May 27, 2008 1:46 am (#2199 of 2617)
...the word's [sadistic] general usage refers simply to anyone who derives pleasure from the misery or suffering of others. To me, this does describe Professor Snape pretty well. (Quinn Crockett)
But if you define torture by among other things a simple insult, then it must be something else than the readiness to torture other people that makes the DEs such a small, exclusive group. You can't use one definition of torture to prove that Snape indeed does torture other people and then deduce from this "fact" that he likes to hurt others severely and even kill them. I think you could call Snape's behaviour "sadistic" sometimes if we use the word in the general way, but this still doesn't mean that he loves to inflict great pain and cause severe injuries. In the books we see Snape behave in a certain way that does not include the advanced torture or killing for the mere pleasure of it.
"Words can hit as hard as a fist." (Quinn Crockett)
Yes, they can, but again, we actually see what damage Snape does. There is no such damage done as Jason implies he committed as a DE, it's all on a different level.
I agree with Mona (and others) on his use of physical violence. These occasions are more to see as exceptions than as rules and the situations are such where a lot of, if not most, people (Mahatma Gandhi excluded) would be prepared to use some amount of violence. And it has nothing to do with pure enjoyment of pain and suffering.
When it concerns Snape and power I think you can want power in different ways too. James Potter is not the President of the USA or Prime Minister of GB, nor does he own a big company, etc, but he has loving, caring parents, money, intelligence, good looks and charm, and most people instinctively like him, he gets away with quite a lot of things, he has friends on his side. He doesn't have to fight his way through the world. This is a kind of power. Snape has intelligence, but notices that this is not enough. I think Snape has rather high thoughts of himself, but still realizes what place in the world he is given by other people. I think what he wants is to be somebody who counts, who is recognized, but that doesn't mean he wants power the way Voldemort does, to rule and control others just for the sake of ruling and controlling them. He wants to fight his situation, but does this rather desperately, not in the most effective of ways, not in a noble way, but in a not at all unusual way. This doesn't excuse him or make him an all great guy, but it is a different character than that Jason describes.
But Lily was targeted and that changed everything for him. Everything Snape had done up to that moment suddenly took on a whole different meaning. Now, there was a context to it, and that context was the sense of devastation and loss his "side" had caused to innocent people. Even if Snape himself never actively participated in any of the atrocities inflicted, maybe just knowing that someone he cared about would now be among the victims meant he could no longer look upon them with the same detached view. (Quinn Crockett)
I believe it is something like this. Lily didn't see herself as an exception, though Snape himself did so, and Lily being targeted showed that the DE ideology didn't allow any exceptions like this either. He really might have felt he couldn't stand behind such an organisation anymore, and I also think part of his image of himself was crushed as well.
Snape is very arrogant and wants to be right, and so he remains throughout his life. He has this notion that he is right and the Marauders have done him wrong. With the targeting of Lily this picture is somewhat shattered. He can't fully deny his own responsibility in what has happened, even if he still tries to blame others. Sirius being a murderer is in accordance with his opinion of Sirius and shows that he was right all the time, then it turns out he wasn't right about this either, but he tries to deny it as long as he can.
Snape has both very high and very low opinions of himself at the same time. His nastiness is sometimes weirdly double-edged. When he taunts Tonks about her new patronus we first don't know what it really means, that he is really nasty towards a person whose love is unrequited, but we later learn this. Then, in DH we learn that Snape's situation is similar to Tonks's, which gives yet one dimension to the first scene. When it comes to Snape's horrible treatment of Harry, I think that Harry is not only a child to Snape, he is also a live, walking monument of Snape's worst shortcomings, worst mistakes and of his guilt. Harry is both his father, who Snape in fact feels inferior to, and all that is left of Lily, whom he loved more than anyone. Harry is the reminder that Lily chose someone else (and this was partly Snape's own fault, according to his memories) and the reminder that she is dead, partly due to Snapes own actions. The mind is a complex and many-layered thing... At least I like to think so.
rambkowalczyk - May 27, 2008 4:44 am (#2200 of 2617)
Jason in a previous post said it wasn't possible to be a benevolent person and a sadistic person. I have to disagree.
Fake Moody pretty much had us all fooled. When he bounced Draco, the ferret, everyone (except Hermione) saw it as payback for a cowardly act.(Draco cursing Harry behind his back). We saw Neville become quite upset over Moody demonstrating the Cruciatius curse, but no one on first read thought he was sadistic. More importantly when he gave Neville that book on exotic magical plants everyone thought he was being kind and nurturing towards him.
I agree the way the book was written, the evidence is there that Snape did not undergo a major change in terms of his vindictiveness and that it is possible he died still hating Harry.
But this point of view doesn't explain why Snape went out of his way to save Lupin. I believe once Snape committed himself to helping Dumbledore he did begin to change internally. I think once Voldemort came back, Snape changed more. Maybe it was Voldemort's 'apology' for not saving Lily. He still hates Harry, because Harry reminds him too much of James. But the fact that he saved Lupin, a person he despises as much as Harry, and whose life of death didn't really matter with regards to defeating Voldemort shows the possibility that Snape is trying to lose his vindictiveness.
Julia H. - May 27, 2008 6:12 am (#2201 of 2617)
Edited May 27, 2008 7:02 am
"Words can hit as hard as a fist." (Quinn Crockett)
Yes. I think we all know how Snape talks because we have plenty of canon evidence. Some people include this kind of verbal behaviour in the definition of the word "sadistic", some do not. I, personally, do not because then I would not know what to call the kind of sadism associated with Umbridge or the Carrows. My opinion is that whatever we call the way Snape verbally taunts Harry and the way Umbridge tortures the students, we should not call them by the same name because the two are fundamentally different. IMO at least, but I guess it is only someone who has suffered both physical torture and verbal taunting that can really tell whether there is an important difference between the two or not. However, the point is, we all talk about the same thing when we talk about Snape taunting Harry (or other students) since we all read the same books. The question is whether this behaviour is sufficient evidence to pronounce that someone who talks like this must be a person enjoying physically torturing others or not.
As for further evidence:
We never see Snape physically torture anyone (the two instances where he is physically rough towards Harry are exceptions and originate in exceptional anger and as responses to provocation rather than in any delight derived from hurting someone).
We never see him kill anyone except when he AK's DD but - ironically - he agrees to do it to help an old man avoid pain and humiliation. There is circumstantial evidence that he did not kill before.
We know he was a DE for a relatively short period in his life. We do not exactly know what led him to LV but we have found that various reasons are possible. Nothing indicates that being power-hungry or agressive or sadistic is any more likely to have been the reason than for example, wanting to belong somewhere (granted, to the wrong place) or the influence of former house mates (including once prefect Lucius).
We know he left LV to save someone's life, risking his own.
The argument that everybody who has ever joined the DE's loves to kill and torture: this is simply not shown to be true. Draco clearly does not enjoy killing or torturing. Sirius about Regulus and his family (OOTP):
convinced that to be a Black made you practically royal... my idiot brother, soft enough to believe them... Stupid idiot... he joined the Death Eaters... 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 implies Regulus joined before "Voldemort showed his true colours" and Regulus was younger than Snape. It is clear that there were people who realized what he was but apparently not everybody. All in all, Regulus was extremely shocked because of the torture of a house elf, so he cannot have been a torture loving little monster. (Sirius simply calls him "an idiot".) So canon gives us several examples showing that not only sadistic people joined the DE's. Therefore the argument that Snape must have been sadistic because he was a DE does not work. Sure, DE's are often sadistic but then JKR shows us that they torture or kill. If we imagine the prototypical DE, we will probably imagine a cruel and sadistic murderer. However, Snape is not the prototypical DE. Neither is Regulus. The prototypical DE would not end up dying for the cause of the light side.
We know that Snape - in the new war against Voldemort - often saves people from death or torture and is very unwilling to let people die. (Lately, only those whom I could not save...) Think of DD, Harry, Lupin... This is evidence against Snape being sadistic at all, especially given that we never see him torture or kill.
There is an argument that Snape only represses his sadistic impulses for the purpose of being able to take revenge on LV. On the one hand, it is hard to believe that those impulses if they exist can be so well repressed and for such a long time. On the other hand, if we rely on this argument, then anybody can be labelled as sadistic. How do we know that DD has not simply repressed his fundamentally sadistic nature for the past hundred years? How does anyone know that I, personally, who have never killed or tortured do not only repress my sadistic impulses? Take any person and prove that he or she is not a sadistic person who simply represses their sadism for some reason. Impossible. Therefore, in such cases, only positive evidence can count, which proves that someone is indeed sadistic and has committed torture and murder. Then it all comes down to the question whether the way Snape talks to his students (especially Harry) is in itself sufficient evidence to prove that he has indeed murdered and tortured and enjoyed it, moreover that he does not even change during the seven books. I don't think it is sufficient at all.
Julia H. - May 27, 2008 7:23 am (#2202 of 2617)
But the fact that he saved Lupin, a person he despises as much as Harry, and whose life of death didn't really matter with regards to defeating Voldemort shows the possibility that Snape is trying to lose his vindictiveness. (Ramb)
Good observation. But even if Snape has a vindictive nature (and is vindictive towards the Marauders), his main motivation to help defeat Voldemort is not vindictiveness but remorse and love - as far as we can believe The Prince's Tale is Snape's true story. Just because somebody is vindictive towards certain people, it does not mean that this is the only way he can be motivated. James is also vindictive: when Lily refuses him, he takes revenge on Snape and continues to torture and humiliate him. Sirius is vindictive: he wants to kill Pettigrew and he needs Harry to remind him that Pettigrew alive is the evidence of his innocence. Even Lupin wants to kill Pettigrew, clearly out of revenge. Yet, nobody suggests that this is the reason or even the main reason why they fight against Voldemort when Voldemort returns.
As for Snape, I agree that once he starts doing the right things (like saving people's lives), it gradually becomes a habit for him and he changes. He is guided by his undying love for Lily and because of this love, he interprets his duty towards her in the broadest possible sense. I also think that he feels remorse for ever having been a DE and this, together with the sacrifices he makes and what he suffers because of these sacrifices, is what leads to his redemption through even more changes.
Dryleaves - May 28, 2008 12:49 am (#2203 of 2617)
Just because somebody is vindictive towards certain people, it does not mean that this is the only way he can be motivated. (Julia)
I think this is important, because people have many different personality traits and how and when they come to show themselves depend on a lot of things. Snape - Marauders and Snape - Voldemort are two completely different situations. So are Lily choosing another boyfriend and Lily being threatened to death and finally killed. We don't have to assume that Snape, having a vindictive nature, has to react in the same way to these situations. In one situation he has to prove that he is actually just as good as James and even a bit better, in the other Lily is in mortal peril because of what he himself has done. Then another characteristic in him comes up to the surface: the ability to love and genuinely care for another person and do this so much that he is prepared to risk his life for this person. And later, when Lily is dead, he still cares about her, so that he agrees to protect her son, even if this son is a reminder of the fact that she choose someone else and even if he looks just like James.
Snape cares deeply, genuinely and unconditionally, but we only see him care like this for two people, Lily and DD. But I think Julia is on to something when she writes "the broadest possible sense". Lily is targeted because Snape didn't care much about other people. That is why he could give Voldemort the prophecy. Lily is killed. By caring in a more general sense, and here I don't mean liking or being nice to other people, but caring about their lives, whether they live or die, he can atone for what he did (and would be less likely to make the mistake again if a similar situation ever would occur). This is a change of point of view and a change of practice, and maybe it finally leads to some deeper changes of character as well. It is a process. When naming his son I think Harry recognizes that Snape was sincere in his atonement after all and that he was brave in being so. Maybe it is not facing Voldemort that Harry finds important in Snape's bravery (Harry has after all done that himself), but the fact that Snape had the courage to face himself.
Jason Riddle - May 28, 2008 6:47 pm (#2204 of 2617)
Snape, The myth of protecting the students
Here is most of the information we receive about life at Hogwarts under headmaster Snape (mostly gathered from chapters 29 and 30):
- Neville’s appearance: “He appeared to have suffered several gashes to his face and his clothes were ripped and torn.” “One of his eyes was swollen yellow and purple, there were gouge marks on his face, and his general air of unkemptness suggested that he had been living rough.”
-Neville, about his injuries says: “What? This? This is nothing. Seamus is worse.” Later, Seamus’s face is described as “bruised and puffy”.
-Terry Boot was beaten up by a Carrow at dinner in the Great Hall just for yelling about the fact that Harry had broken into Gringotts. Either Snape was absent from dinner or he allowed it to happen.
-Neville, regarding the Carrows: “They do more than teach. They’re in charge of all discipline. They like punishment, the Carrows.” [Harry: “Like Umbridge?”] “Nah, they make her look tame. The other teachers are all supposed to refer us to the Carrows if we do anything wrong.” The students suffer much more under Snape than under Umbridge. Who created the “refer to Carrows” policy?
-They practice the Cruciatus Curse on people who’ve earned detentions. Crabbe and Goyle are especially proficient at this.
- Neville: “Doesn’t matter. They don’t want to spill too much pure blood, so they’ll torture us a bit if we’re mouthy but they won’t actually kill us.” Neville says this in a “matter-of-fact” tone. Torture seems fairly common under Snape’s leadership.
-Neville: “We used to sneak out at night and put graffiti on the walls: Dumbledore’s Army, Still Recruiting, stuff like that. Snape hated it.” Of course, Snape must pretend to hate it. However, it’s clear that Neville groups him together with the Carrows.
-Neville: “Michael Corner went and got caught releasing a first-year they’d chained up, and they tortured him pretty badly.” Apparently Snape was okay with allowing the chaining up of 11-12 year olds. Or, if he was unaware of it, he wasn’t overly concerned with watching what the Carrows were doing.
-Things are so bad that a group of about twenty people are hiding in the room of requirement. [“…he, Ron, and Hermione were engulfed… by what seemed to be more than twenty people…”]. Neville says, “Everyone in this room’s been fighting and they’ve been driven in here because the Carrows were hunting them down.” I suppose that the Carrows were “hunting” them in order to torture them or send them to Azkaban. Not surprisingly, none of Snape’s precious Slytherins were forced into hiding.
-The Ravenclaws seem terrified of Amycus Carrow. Even though they know Professor McGonagall is with him, “the few Ravenclaws who had remained behind sprinted for the stairs as Amycus burst over the threshold, brandishing his wand.” When he sees his sister unconscious, he says: “What’ve they done, the little whelps? I’ll Cruciate the lot of ‘em till they tell me who did it…”
-When Snape asks where the Carrows are, McGonagall says, “Wherever you told them to be, I expect, Severus.” Although Minerva is lying, it seems that she believes the Carrows follow Snape’s orders.
-After Snape jumps out of a window, “’No, he’s not dead,’ said McGonagall bitterly.”
-The Gryffindors, Hufflepuffs, and Ravenclaws cheer when McGonagall tells them that Snape has left.
The question is: Where is headmaster Snape in all of this? Where is the man who gave Dumbledore his word that he would do everything in his power to protect the students? The Carrow siblings are depicted as incompetent. They can’t get into Ravenclaw tower by themselves. Snape is certainly clever enough to think of ways to hinder them. Yet they seem to have an unlimited ability to punish students. Neville suggests that the only thing limiting their actions is a desire not to spill magical blood [Voldemort confirms in his speeches that his general policy is not to spill magical blood]. We are never told that Snape directly participates in the torturing. Neville describes the Carrows as mostly operating on their own. However, Rowling doesn’t show us a single instance of Snape acting to protect students. He seems to let the Carrows have their way. There isn’t even circumstantial evidence that Snape protected anyone. Nobody, neither students nor teachers, seemed aware that Snape was placing any kind of limitation on what the Carrows could do. All were glad when he left. Of course, it’s possible that Snape was unable to intervene in any of the cases of torture because he needed to preserve his cover. In any case, Snape never protected students. To say that he did, is to create events that are beyond canon.
Jason Riddle - May 28, 2008 6:48 pm (#2205 of 2617)
Stealing the sword and its consequences
The most frequently cited evidence for Snape’s protection of the students is that Snape sent Ginny, Neville, and Luna to the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid after the attempted theft of Gryffindor’s sword. The reader knows this because, in ‘The Goblin’s Revenge’, that is what Phineas Nigellus tells the trio. Phineas, being bound to various portraits, probably witnessed Snape announcing the punishment to the three students. The exact nature of the punishment is never confirmed by another character. However, there’s something amiss. In the same chapter, Dean asks what happened to Ginny and the others after Snape caught them. Griphook responds, “Oh, they were punished, and cruelly,” and then, “They suffered no serious injury, as far as I am aware.” Griphook heard the story from Bill Weasely (they both worked at Gringotts) who probably heard from Ginny herself or another family member. Why is Griphook under the impression that the punishment was cruel? In one scenario, Griphook feels that being sent to a dangerous forest to work for a half-giant is a cruel punishment. But Bill told Griphook that the students suffered no serious injury. Apparently Bill told Griphook this without managing to convey the idea that the punishment was actually light, without saying something like: “Oh, but Hagrid’s a family friend. Nothing happened to them. They’re perfectly okay.” Of course, it’s possible that Bill said something as plain as: “Snape made them do work for Hagrid in the Forbidden Forest, but they weren’t seriously injured.” but it seems a little strange. And there’s another problem. Griphook is familiar with Hagrid. They see each other, albeit briefly, in Harry’s first trip to the bank. Since Hagrid generally comes across as friendly, it seems strange that Griphook would leap to the conclusion that doing work for Hagrid constitutes cruel punishment. In a second (more likely?) scenario, the Carrows punish the students on top of Snape’s punishment. Phineas never witnesses this. Ginny tells Bill about being crucioed or locked up or whatever and this is why Griphook describes the punishment as cruel. Snape doesn’t prevent the Carrows from punishing them.
Even if we ignore Griphook and credit Snape with giving the students a fake punishment in order to prevent the Carrows from giving them a severe one, this is still a rather weak and indirect example of protection. A more direct example of protection might be the following: Snape notices that a group of students have been caught by the Carrows for some form of insubordination and are being punished. He physically stops the punishment, releases the students, and deals with the Carrows using lies (covering for the students’ actions), memory charms, or other means. In the case of Ginny, Luna, and Neville, Snape is not intervening to help them. He doesn’t risk anything by sending them to Hagrid. Saying that Snape protected them is the same as saying that I’m protecting you from dying in a fire by not setting your house on fire. Someone might point to Snape’s handling of the three students as an example of him not exhibiting sadistic tendencies (after all, he COULD have sent them to the Carrows). However, like Phineas, Dumbledore (not to mention all the other headmasters) would have been carefully watching Snape as he gave the three students their punishment. Snape is usually careful not to harm students in the presence of other adults.
By the way, I’m not ignoring anyone’s post or questions. I will post my responses after I’ve written them. Oh, and YES Julia: I would much prefer a few detentions with Umbridge (special quill and all) to years worth of abuse and humiliation from Snape.
PeskyPixie - May 29, 2008 12:31 am (#2206 of 2617)
"He seems to let the Carrows have their way. There isn’t even circumstantial evidence that Snape protected anyone. Nobody, neither students nor teachers, seemed aware that Snape was placing any kind of limitation on what the Carrows could do." -Jason Riddle
Jason, I'm not sure whether you're serious or just helping push forward the debate? I had considered doing the latter during the slow times on this thread.
Anywho, it's common knowledge that Voldy is in charge of Hogwarts. Snape is a puppet principal just as the other guy (can't remember the name at the moment) is a puppet Minister for Magic. Voldy calls the shots. If word gets out that Snape is treating kids with detention to hot chocolate with marshmallows in his office, then he is toast and a hardcore DE will replace him at Hogwarts ... and he can't risk that for the sake of the students and the fact that he needs access to Dumbledore's portrait.
The fact that teachers who are Order members maintain their teaching positions, kids caught breaking into the Headmaster's study are punished by having to hang out with Hagrid, indicate that Snape is doing all he can by being passive when a DE is expected to be aggressive. Also, even though Snape's hands are tied he tries to protect his kids by having them avoid potentially risky situations to begin with. He brings back some of Umbridge's nutty decrees to prevent students from meeting in groups because that is how the DA was formed and if DA activity starts again, protection from DE punishments will be a near impossible manouvre for Snape. When Neville, Ginny and Luna become trouble-making ringleaders Snape probably longs for the 'good old days', when he could jam them onto benches in his dungeon and have them disembowel toads by the barrel!
"Since Hagrid generally comes across as friendly, it seems strange that Griphook would leap to the conclusion that doing work for Hagrid constitutes cruel punishment."
Being sent into the dangerous (to put it mildly) Forbidden Forest with a half-giant oaf. Oh yeah, if I were a goblin I'd be lining up for my turn.
"In a second (more likely?) scenario, the Carrows punish the students on top of Snape’s punishment. Phineas never witnesses this. Ginny tells Bill about being crucioed or locked up or whatever and this is why Griphook describes the punishment as cruel. Snape doesn’t prevent the Carrows from punishing them."
I have no idea on which canon moments you have based this scenario. Please clarify.
If anything, I've always blamed Hagrid's lack of brains for the kids' injuries. When are Neville and his friends badly injured? After Hagrid has had to flee Hogwarts on account of nearly being arrested for unnecessary activities. Snape and Hagrid have this perfect non-verbal system worked out to protect 'good' Hogwarts students without sticky issues being raised, and Hagrid doesn't have the sense to guard this arrangement with his life. Unbelievable ... but perhaps I'm expecting too much from a simpleton (I'm being honest here, not insulting the big guy whom I otherwise love).
"Saying that Snape protected them is the same as saying that I’m protecting you from dying in a fire by not setting your house on fire." -Jason Riddle
Sorry, but that's not a good example. It would be more accurate to say that Snape saved one from their burning house by leaving the back door open and giving them a shove in its direction.
I feel you're disappointed that Snape does not react like Sirius/James. Snape is simply not the dashing Gryffindor type who acts first and thinks later. He and Dumbledore have agreed that he needs to stay in Voldy's 'good books' as long as possible and the easiest way to do that is to act the part of a DE well. Is there any point to risking his position by having confrontations with the Carrows when he can just as easily protect his students by shipping them off to Hagrid? I certainly see no reason for such silliness when there are more important things to do.
I just don't see Snape as all that harmful in a person's life in the long scheme of things. I've had my share of Snapes; my friends and I laugh ourselves silly about them now. Even at Hogwarts, he's really nothing more than a highly informative teacher with a sarcastic personality, especially towards dunderheads. Harry and his buddies are a special case as their mere presence seems to land ol' Sev on a shrink's couch. However, in HBP, he is decent enough in his interactions with other students. He's no Flitwick, but nothing more than a McGonagall, really. I'd take Snape over Umbridge any day as I'm a bit of a Hermione with schoolwork and at most Snape would ignore me or occasionally call me a know-it-all. Eh. Big deal.
Dryleaves - May 29, 2008 1:33 am (#2207 of 2617)
I might repeat what Pesky Pixie wrote, but I write a post anyway.
I think we have to ask ourselves what Snape's position and powers really are. In "The Prince's Tale" DD says to Snape: "I am counting upon you to remain in Lord Voldemort's good books as long as possible, or Hogwarts will be left to the mercy of the Carrows..." I think this indicates that DD believes that the Carrows will have something to do with the school when it falls into Voldemorts grip, regardless of Snape. As Pesky writes, it is Voldemort that in fact is in charge of Hogwarts. The Carrows are not only teachers, they are also in charge of the discipline and they seem to have a position rather independent from the Headmaster, even if he formally is their boss. Snape is supposed to agree with this.
Snape promised to do everything in his power to protect the students. What he can do then is to prevent them from doing anything that would deserve punishment, or make sure they are caught by the right people if they do, or have a sort of punishment that seems cruel, but in fact doesn't cause the students any harm.
That Neville groups Snape with the Carrows and that McGonagall believes they follow his orders don't prove that Snape doesn't protect the students at all. He would do a really lousy job for DD if they didn't believe this and would have been sacked (and probably worse)way before McGonagall et al. chase him from the castle. And then Hogwarts would have been left to the mercy of the Carrows. I believe there is a limit to how many times you could lie and use memory charms before it starts to look suspicious. Snape and the Carrows are not the only DE at Hogwarts. There are also students whose parents are followers of Voldemort.
In any case, Snape never protected students. To say that he did, is to create events that are beyond canon. (Jason)
But then you do yourself create events that are beyond canon when you assume that the Carrows punished the students on top of Snape's punishment. There is nothing in the text to suggest it. The Forbidden Forest is a dangerous place and therefore this punishment could be considered "cruel". An alternative explanation why Bill refers to it in this way could be that he assumes that Snape's intention was for the punishment to actually be cruel, because Bill believes that Snape is a DE and (like yourself) from this concludes that he must be cruel and have evil intentions.
You say that Snape is usually careful not to harm students in the presence of other adults. My impression is that he probably restrains himself a little when other adults are around, and when contradicted or reproached by them he often stops, but I don't think he really behaves that differently when watched and not. (And I don't think he really harms the students either, but I guess that is a question of definition. Nevlle, for example, is being just as badly treated by his grandmother and his uncle Algie, as they are first afraid he is a squib and then think he is not as good as his parents were.) When DD is absent Snape still follows DD's orders. Umbridge, on the other hand, is actually shown to be prepared to perform the Cruciatus curse on a student as long as her boss doesn't know about it.
Dryleaves - May 29, 2008 7:25 am (#2208 of 2617)
Jason, I'm just curious, but why would you prefer Umbridge to Snape?
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 8:18 am (#2209 of 2617)
Maybe it is not facing Voldemort that Harry finds important in Snape's bravery (Harry has after all done that himself), but the fact that Snape had the courage to face himself. (Dryleaves)
I think both. Harry is very brave himself and since he has faced Voldemort several times, he knows what it is like and he understands what it must have been like to face him again and again on a regular basis, even if not in a fight but "simply" deceiving him and all his DE's in the knowledge that one single mistake might be enough to end the game for ever and in the knowledge that Snape – a powerful wizard as he was - would be no match in a fight to invincible, indestructible Voldemort. And Snape did not only face Voldemort, he also agreed to do the most thankless of jobs DD could assign to anyone and to accept that terrible situation of isolation and disgrace while carrying out the plan. That required a different type of bravery. But then, as you say, Harry probably also understood how difficult it must have been for Snape to face himself, his own mistakes and flaws and his past and to try to put the wrong he once did right.
Oh, and YES Julia: I would much prefer a few detentions with Umbridge (special quill and all) to years worth of abuse and humiliation from Snape. (Jason)
Jason, I respect it if you feel in this way but then why are you saying “years” in the case of Snape and “a few detentions” in the case of Umbridge? Why not take equal measure of the two (either years in both cases or a few occasions in both cases) to really compare the two. Maybe you would rather take Umbridge for years than Snape. All right.
In my opinion, Snape does not do lasting harm to anyone (and certainly never harms the students physically) and his anger is typically directed at students who break the rules or who do not know or do what they should. Admittedly, not a great pedagogical approach but at least he takes his subject and his job absolutely seriously and teaches and wants the students to learn. Harry and his friends are special cases but, while I give Snape full credit for the start of their enmity, later Harry often does or seems to do something that makes Snape rightfully angry and explains (if not necessarily fully justifies) Snape’s behaviour. (This may not always be obvious since we see everything through Harry’s eyes and he often does not seem to connect things.) After the first few years, the students do not seem to be afraid of Snape and there are quite a few (Gryffindor) students who choose his class after the O.W.L. exams when it is not obligatory any more. It is obvious that they must work hard in his class and that he is easily irritated but it also becomes obvious that there is a line Snape will never cross in his nastiness. Snape is the kind of strict and sarcastic teacher against whom there is always at least one type of comfort (from teenagers onwards): friendship and solidarity. Students often try to deceive him together and help each other avoid punishment and sometimes stand up to him openly together – the dangers of this may raise the adrenalin level but are not too serious.
Umbridge is totally different. To start with, she does not even teach. Her purpose is to keep the students ignorant and for this particular purpose, she is prepared to do anything, including intimidation, turning students against each other (she is very successful at that) and torture. The scars caused by her special quill are not only painful and ignominious but also stay in the student’s skin for ever. Sure, those who do not contradict her, may remain unharmed but they will not learn anything either- and in this way only humble subjects or would be victims are brought up. She pretends to be nice and understanding and tries to win the trust of students like Marietta – for her own purposes. She is evidently excited when she is about to use the Cruciatus Curse.
Unlike Umbridge, Snape never forces (or encourages) the children to do something that lowers their self-esteem or destroys their characters.
wynnleaf - May 29, 2008 8:50 am (#2210 of 2617)
Regarding Jason's post, Pesky, Julia and Dryleaves all had good points. Here's a few of my own.
The whole argument about Griphook thinking the forest punishment was harsh isn't evidence for much of anything. Griphook may be familiar with Hagrid dropping by to run errands for DD, but Griphook didn't go to Hogwarts and it's unlikely he had any idea what a complete pushover Hagrid was in both teaching and discipline. The idea that Snape thought it a harsh punishment to send anyone to detention with Hagrid is practically ludicrous, since Snape had lived at Hogwarts about 24 years and must have known exactly how Hagrid would treat the students.
The notion that Snape could keep his cover with LV while simultaneously stopping LV's appointed Death Eaters, the Carrows, from following LV's orders to them is also pretty amazing. It seems pretty obvious that he'd be unable to directly thwart any of their plans, and instead have to work around them.
He physically stops the punishment, releases the students, and deals with the Carrows using lies (covering for the students’ actions), memory charms, or other means. (Jason Riddle)
In a school where even DD says that things that are supposed to be secrets get around the school very rapidly, how long would Snape be able to use this sort of method before plenty of DE kids learned what he was up to and reported it? And how long would it take before the better kids and the rest of the teachers caught on to Snape's true loyalties? He can't go around obliviating everybody.
So how does Snape protect the students? 1. He keeps people he knows to be Order members, or at least skilled wizards who want to protect students, on at the school and in positions of power (McGonagall, Flitwick and others, all the Heads of House are good guys, etc.). 2. When he directly catches students in the act of misbehaving or, in the case of the sword, doing something completely against LV, he gives them very soft punishment which can, to those not "in the know" seem harsh.
JKR spends almost no time with Snape directly on the page in contemporaneous scenes to the rest of DH. So we only get to hear from other characters about Snape as headmaster. Would Snape want to do anything that made others think he was protecting the students from the Carrows? Of course not. So it's perfectly understandable that he only be seen by others as doing things that look like a good loyal DE. However, JKR gives us this one example of Snape giving out a punishment and the fact that it's with Hagrid of all people should clue us in to the fact that Snape is trying to use methods that look harsh on the surface, but are in fact pretty soft. Another device JKR uses to show us that Snape is protecting students is his conversations with DD, in which we learn that the plan between DD and Snape was for Snape to stay at Hogwarts in order to help protect students. We further learn that Snape has for some time protected all he can against death.
It's also important to remember that the series is closed. Prior to DH, it was legitimate speculation to use arguments like "I think Snape is really doing horribly dreadful things off the page. JKR didn't show us or tell us this, but we can deduce it." No, that was fine when we knew that there were further books down the road where JKR might reveal what "really happened." But no such books are coming. If JKR gave us info that Snape and DD's plan was for Snape to protect the students, and also showed us that Snape was loyal to DD, we have to assume that he was indeed following DD's plan and protecting the students as much as possible, given the circumstances.
Ditto for the "Snape really tortured and killed and JKR just didn't show us on the page" argument. The series is over. If she didn't tell us it happened, gave no direct evidence that it happened, and gave a fair amount of evidence that it didn't happen, then it probably didn't happen. Because after all folks, what "happened" or "didn't happen" is what occurred in JKR's head, not it real life. We're not solving a crime scene here or a yet-to-be-completed detective novel. She gives us clues about what remained in her head, versus making it to the paper, but what's on paper is all we've got to go by.
Oh, yes, good idea! (Wishful thinking...)
Jason Riddle - May 26, 2008 1:54 pm (#2192 of 2617)
Rowling’s words
wynnleaf, Snape does not undergo a personality change when the students leave his classroom. We cannot separate Snape as a teacher from Snape as a person. If someone is a kind teacher, then they are a kind person. Rowling says Snape is a “very sadistic teacher”. This means he is a very sadistic person. You cannot be a sadistic teacher, but actually be a benevolent person. Snape WAS physically abusive. Mona amon gives some of the examples of this. His abuse of Harry arguably surpasses that of Umbridge.
How could Snape want to be apart of a powerful organization, yet not want power? A person who does not desire power would see no attraction in a powerful organization. Voldemort wanted power. Snape wanted to join him so he could be powerful like Voldemort was. Rowling did not say that Snape was only vindictive towards James or Harry. In the books, Snape is vindictive towards anyone who crosses him. We are not shown, at least directly, that Snape wanted revenge on Voldemort. Rowling hid this, so as not to spoil the secret of Snape’s true allegiance.
You may disagree with Rowling’s view of redemption, but she’s the author and her views should influence our interpretation of the books. Rowling says Snape is spiteful and a bully even at his death. She says he “REMAINS rather cruel, a bully”. Finally, she says, “Snape is vindictive, he’s cruel. He’s not a big man. But he loves.” Since Rowling made this statement after the last book came out and since she’s speaking in the present tense, she is speaking about Snape at the end of the series, at the end of his character growth. Snape is still cruel and vindictive. Therefore he cannot be truly sorry, he cannot be truly remorseful, about having become a Death Eater, about having committed crimes against muggle-borns, or about having abused children. He is only remorseful about those actions which led to Lily’s death. In Rowling’s mind, a cruel bully can still be redeemed. A vengeful man can still be redeemed. Snape’s actions were brave and they contributed to LV’s downfall. This is why Snape is redeemed. Redemption achieved without much character change. Harry, a very forgiving person, names his son after Severus because he was incredibly brave, not because he was a good person.
Regarding dark magic, I think Rowling gives us a fairly good idea about what dark magic is, without giving an exact definition. Dark magic consists of spells that were created and used for evil purposes like causing pain or controlling others (imperio). Using them correctly usually involves invoking emotions of anger or hatred. The fact that Snape was interested in learning this type of magic fits perfectly with his desire for power and his desire to hurt others. The phrases “attraction to the dark side”, “loved Dark magic so much”, and “drawn to such loathsome people and acts” are confirmations of these desires. We don’t need to know what the loathsome acts were. It is enough that they are loathsome. While James learns that his use of dark magic was wrong and risks his life to fight against Voldemort, Snape fights for Voldemort. Snape’s interest in the dark side was much more than academic.
Mona amon, I suggest you go back and read ‘Snape’s Worst Memory’ again. Lily does NOT smirk! Her “furious expression” twitches. [Notice also that Snape never saw this because he was upside-down with his robes over his head]. She sees that Snape is being humiliated and does everything she can to stop it, short of attacking James. Lily displays no hint of attraction towards James. She announces to James, before a crowd of students, that she would rather go out with the giant squid, than with him. She says that he makes her sick. James certainly doesn’t take her words as a sign of attraction. He’s furious after she leaves. Nor is Lily showing off. Everything she says to James about his behavior is true. Lily is being heroic.
I will address other objections as I have time, especially the questions in Julia’s post. It would be nice to have a few allies, though! I wonder where TomProffitt is. LOL, tandaradei. Does your wife know you posted that?
Quinn Crockett - May 26, 2008 2:41 pm (#2193 of 2617)
I have to say, I think that Rowling created a rare jewel with the Snape character. But I think I agree with Jason in that I have a hard time believing that Snape had some secret benevolent inner life.
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 4:09 pm (#2194 of 2617)
There are only two instances when he is shown to be physically rough- when he flings Harry to the floor after he finds him peeking into his memories, and when he whips him across the face with a spell when he is fleeing Hogwarts. Both were done, not for sport, but in extreme anger, and Lupin also does the same thing to Harry when he's mad at him. (Mona)
Jason, as far as I understand Mona says these are the only two incidents and she seems to cite them as exceptions rather than the rule. I agree with this. In both cases Snape is in extreme stress. Then there is Lupin: is he also physically abusive and sadistic?
His abuse of Harry arguably surpasses that of Umbridge. (Jason)
Whatever you mean by this... Punching him in extreme stress and anger and being regularly sarcastic, strict and harsh towards Harry (with no physical injury done, much less anything that would last in the long run) surpasses forcing Harry to write in his own blood and to make those unhealing scars on the back of his hand, forming very humiliating words that remain there for ever? Marking him as a liar? Doing the latter repeatedly and all in cold blood, watching the effects, if the scars are deep enough, if the pain is unbearable enough? Would you, Jason, in Harry's place choose Umbridge's punishment for yourself over Snape's treatment?
If JKR says Snape is sadistic, then she has a definition for this word different from mine and - it seems - different from many others'. Actually, it may be different from yours, since you keep saying that Snape tortured and killed and enjoyed it, while JKR simply does not show Snape doing any of these things. It seems by "sadistic" she means something that is mostly verbal and very rarely physical and even then only in extreme emotional situations. (Snape is an emotionally unstable person.) As for his interest in the Dark Arts, it is shown mainly as academic. He wrote long answers in his O.W.L. exam and invented spells. This is what we know. And we see him use Sectumsempra once - to save Lupin's life - and AK once - we know the story. In CoS, Professor Binns says if a wizard does not use Dark Magic, that does not have to mean he does not know Dark Magic. I guess it can also mean that knowing Dark Magic does not equal using it. BTW, we see the good guys in DH use Dark Magic more than we ever get to see Snape in seven books. However, we repeatedly see Snape use his Dark Arts knowledge to heal and to save lives (Draco, DD, Katie Bell, Wolfsbane Potion for Lupin). If JKR wanted to portray him as a sadistic person (one who enjoys causing physical pain) - then she did a very bad job indeed because she did not portray him as such in her books.
In Rowling’s mind, a cruel bully can still be redeemed. A vengeful man can still be redeemed. Snape’s actions were brave and they contributed to LV’s downfall. This is why Snape is redeemed. Redemption achieved without much character change. (Jason)
In this case, I seriously must ask the question what redemption means. According to what you are saying, DD could have paid (if he had enough Galleons) any number of DE's to change sides and help him defeat Voldemort and they all would have been redeemed if brave enough. I really do not see any difference between this and your version of Snape's "redemption".
A person who does not desire power would see no attraction in a powerful organization. Voldemort wanted power. Snape wanted to join him so he could be powerful like Voldemort was.
Poor Voldy, this suggests every DE was so ambitious that they all wanted his power. Had he suspected, he would have killed them all at once. BTW, the Ministry of Magic is a powerful organization as well. Does every little clerk aspire to the Minister's job there? (People like Cattermole or Arthur Weasley as well?)
Harry, a very forgiving person, names his son after Severus because he was incredibly brave, not because he was a good person.
I would use a different word, not "forgiving", to describe a person naming his child after somebody who was not "a good person". I mean you can forgive your worst enemy if you are a forgiving person but you do not name your child after somebody you have simply forgiven. It requires much more than forgiveness.
Snape fights for Voldemort.
Snape fights against Voldemort.
Rowling hid this, so as not to spoil the secret of Snape’s true allegiance.
The fact is that in DH, finally, Rowling reveals Snape's true story and Snape's true allegiance in The Prince's Tale and she there makes it absolutely clear (whether that is what she wanted or not I could not tell) that Snape's motivation was not revenge but love. She still fails to show us "sadistic Snape" but she does show a Snape who gradually improves and changes. As the series is written, The Prince's Tale and Harry's words to LV and to his son are the last words about Snape. They are about love and remorse and bravery and change and redemption.
wynnleaf - May 26, 2008 4:50 pm (#2195 of 2617)
You cannot be a sadistic teacher, but actually be a benevolent person. (Jason)
Who has been saying Snape was benevolent?? I missed that post.
Perhaps you have never personally known teachers who were just as sarcastic and insulting in the classroom. I have and many others have. JKR thoroughly disliked this sort of teacher. Others actually kind of like this kind of teacher. In either case, teachers like that can't be counted on to enjoy physically torturing and killing people. Just because someone manages their classroom in a manner JKR feels is sadistic doesn't make them a killer or torturer. If JKR sees Snape as having done that, perhaps you could explain why, in thousands of pages and 7 books and literally hundreds of interviews, she's never said Snape killed or tortured anyone?
Snape WAS physically abusive. Mona amon gives some of the examples of this. (Jason)
Mona amon didn't give "some" examples, she gave the only examples of Snape using physical responses to a student. Both were under extreme provocation, one while Snape was under direct attack from said student. I do not consider either "abuse" or in any way similar to Umbridge, much less worse. If you do, it is clear that your understanding of abuse and sadism is completely different from mine.
Rowling says Snape is spiteful and a bully even at his death. (Jason)
But spite is not the same as abuse, nor is someone who bullies necessarily torturing and killing people.
Snape is still cruel and vindictive. Therefore he cannot be truly sorry, he cannot be truly remorseful...(Jason)
No. A person may act in cruel or vindictive ways in some areas, while still being remorseful about other areas. A person who is remorseful does not expunge all their faults in order to be remorseful. However, it is a general understanding that remorse is necessary for redemption. It certainly is within the overall system of faith that JKR espouses to the point of using her beliefs to shape her books.
Dark magic consists of spells that were created and used for evil purposes like causing pain or controlling others. (Jason)
This is your assumption, not something clear in the books. It's okay as a working theory, but the biggest problem with it is that JKR never addresses all of those many spells that can kill, maim, torture and control minds and never explains why they aren't dark.
Further, in the books JKR calls werewolves "dark" yet we know that Lupin is a good guy. She doesn't explain why someone may be dark and good at once. She doesn't explain why good characters can use Unforgiveables and none of the other good guys think it's bad at all -- it appears that intent is all that counts as McGonagall calls Harry "gallant" for torturing another person with crucio for insulting her. Snape's question to Lily about the difference was already being asked by fans repeatedly. Her silence and JKR's silence on the subject stands out starkly, especially in the face of JKR having Snape question it.
How could Snape want to be apart of a powerful organization, yet not want power? (Jason)
Rather easily and people do it all the time. People who feel very vulnerable and insecure often want the feeling that some other powerful group or entity is backing them up and giving them feelings of security, self-worth, appreciation, etc. It doesn't mean they want to wield power over others.
Quinn Crockett - May 26, 2008 9:27 pm (#2196 of 2617)
I've been following this debate very closely and it seems to me that people are getting hung up on Rowling's use of the word "sadistic" when to describe Professor Snape. While the word does originate with the Marquis de Sade, who had a legendary penchant for physical pain as a form of- shall we just say "entertainment"- the word's general usage refers simply to anyone who derives pleasure from the misery or suffering of others.
To me, this does describe Professor Snape pretty well. No, he doesn't use physical torture to achieve this - at least not that we've ever been shown in the story the way we have with Umbridge. But in my opinion, pressing someone's buttons, psychologically speaking, isn't really any different. There used to be a public service announcement where I grew up that said, "Words can hit as hard as a fist." The way Professor Snape talks to Harry reminds me of that.
How could Snape want to be apart of a powerful organization, yet not want power? (Jason)
Rather easily and people do it all the time. People who feel very vulnerable and insecure often want the feeling that some other powerful group or entity is backing them up and giving them feelings of security, self-worth, appreciation, etc. It doesn't mean they want to wield power over others. - Wynnleaf (cool name! what does it mean?)
This is a very interesting point, to me, this speculation of the what the adolescent Severus Snape was thinking about when he joined the Death Eaters. Like Jason, my view is that if we base our judgment on the behavior of the adult Professor Snape and the way we see how he treats his students, then it does kind of strike me that he seems to enjoy being in a position of power.
Yet at the same time, when the opportunity arises for him to become Headmaster, he seems reluctant about it. Not just in Deathly Hallows, because of Voldemort and his agenda; but even in the Chamber of Secrets when Draco suggests it, he seemed genuinely modest about the idea that his name might have been put forth to the Board of Governors, which kind of goes along with what Wynnleaf was saying.
Poor Voldy, this suggests every DE was so ambitious that they all wanted his power. Had he suspected, he would have killed them all at once. BTW, the Ministry of Magic is a powerful organization as well. Does every little clerk aspire to the Minister's job there? (People like Cattermole or Arthur Weasley as well?) - Julia H.
I think this is an interesting comparison, Julia (that's my girlfriend's name, by the way). Because in fact the Ministry did become an agency of the Death Eaters.
Julia H. - May 26, 2008 10:48 pm (#2197 of 2617)
Well, the point debated right now is not so much whether Snape is verbally "sadistic" or not but whether this proves (in lack of any other evidence) that Snape enjoys physical torture and that he must have been a serial killer and torturer in his DE days and whether it is only (selfish) revenge against LV that motivates him throughout the 7 books or more noble feelings in the first place (such as remorse and love), whether he as a character develops between the hilltop scene and the scene in which he sacrifices his life for the greater good and under what conditions redemption is possible at all.
Quinn Crockett - May 26, 2008 11:18 pm (#2198 of 2617)
Could he have remorse for becoming a Death Eater if that last conversation with Lily suddenly came rushing back to him? What I mean is, why couldn't he have had a sort of "Oh my god! What have I done?" kind of moment? - even though JKR tells us outright that, had Lily not been targeted, Snape would never have cared what happened to either James or Harry.
But Lily was targeted and that changed everything for him. Everything Snape had done up to that moment suddenly took on a whole different meaning. Now, there was a context to it, and that context was the sense of devastation and loss his "side" had caused to innocent people. Even if Snape himself never actively participated in any of the atrocities inflicted, maybe just knowing that someone he cared about would now be among the victims meant he could no longer look upon them with the same detached view.
I hope this makes sense to you all.
Dryleaves - May 27, 2008 1:46 am (#2199 of 2617)
...the word's [sadistic] general usage refers simply to anyone who derives pleasure from the misery or suffering of others. To me, this does describe Professor Snape pretty well. (Quinn Crockett)
But if you define torture by among other things a simple insult, then it must be something else than the readiness to torture other people that makes the DEs such a small, exclusive group. You can't use one definition of torture to prove that Snape indeed does torture other people and then deduce from this "fact" that he likes to hurt others severely and even kill them. I think you could call Snape's behaviour "sadistic" sometimes if we use the word in the general way, but this still doesn't mean that he loves to inflict great pain and cause severe injuries. In the books we see Snape behave in a certain way that does not include the advanced torture or killing for the mere pleasure of it.
"Words can hit as hard as a fist." (Quinn Crockett)
Yes, they can, but again, we actually see what damage Snape does. There is no such damage done as Jason implies he committed as a DE, it's all on a different level.
I agree with Mona (and others) on his use of physical violence. These occasions are more to see as exceptions than as rules and the situations are such where a lot of, if not most, people (Mahatma Gandhi excluded) would be prepared to use some amount of violence. And it has nothing to do with pure enjoyment of pain and suffering.
When it concerns Snape and power I think you can want power in different ways too. James Potter is not the President of the USA or Prime Minister of GB, nor does he own a big company, etc, but he has loving, caring parents, money, intelligence, good looks and charm, and most people instinctively like him, he gets away with quite a lot of things, he has friends on his side. He doesn't have to fight his way through the world. This is a kind of power. Snape has intelligence, but notices that this is not enough. I think Snape has rather high thoughts of himself, but still realizes what place in the world he is given by other people. I think what he wants is to be somebody who counts, who is recognized, but that doesn't mean he wants power the way Voldemort does, to rule and control others just for the sake of ruling and controlling them. He wants to fight his situation, but does this rather desperately, not in the most effective of ways, not in a noble way, but in a not at all unusual way. This doesn't excuse him or make him an all great guy, but it is a different character than that Jason describes.
But Lily was targeted and that changed everything for him. Everything Snape had done up to that moment suddenly took on a whole different meaning. Now, there was a context to it, and that context was the sense of devastation and loss his "side" had caused to innocent people. Even if Snape himself never actively participated in any of the atrocities inflicted, maybe just knowing that someone he cared about would now be among the victims meant he could no longer look upon them with the same detached view. (Quinn Crockett)
I believe it is something like this. Lily didn't see herself as an exception, though Snape himself did so, and Lily being targeted showed that the DE ideology didn't allow any exceptions like this either. He really might have felt he couldn't stand behind such an organisation anymore, and I also think part of his image of himself was crushed as well.
Snape is very arrogant and wants to be right, and so he remains throughout his life. He has this notion that he is right and the Marauders have done him wrong. With the targeting of Lily this picture is somewhat shattered. He can't fully deny his own responsibility in what has happened, even if he still tries to blame others. Sirius being a murderer is in accordance with his opinion of Sirius and shows that he was right all the time, then it turns out he wasn't right about this either, but he tries to deny it as long as he can.
Snape has both very high and very low opinions of himself at the same time. His nastiness is sometimes weirdly double-edged. When he taunts Tonks about her new patronus we first don't know what it really means, that he is really nasty towards a person whose love is unrequited, but we later learn this. Then, in DH we learn that Snape's situation is similar to Tonks's, which gives yet one dimension to the first scene. When it comes to Snape's horrible treatment of Harry, I think that Harry is not only a child to Snape, he is also a live, walking monument of Snape's worst shortcomings, worst mistakes and of his guilt. Harry is both his father, who Snape in fact feels inferior to, and all that is left of Lily, whom he loved more than anyone. Harry is the reminder that Lily chose someone else (and this was partly Snape's own fault, according to his memories) and the reminder that she is dead, partly due to Snapes own actions. The mind is a complex and many-layered thing... At least I like to think so.
rambkowalczyk - May 27, 2008 4:44 am (#2200 of 2617)
Jason in a previous post said it wasn't possible to be a benevolent person and a sadistic person. I have to disagree.
Fake Moody pretty much had us all fooled. When he bounced Draco, the ferret, everyone (except Hermione) saw it as payback for a cowardly act.(Draco cursing Harry behind his back). We saw Neville become quite upset over Moody demonstrating the Cruciatius curse, but no one on first read thought he was sadistic. More importantly when he gave Neville that book on exotic magical plants everyone thought he was being kind and nurturing towards him.
I agree the way the book was written, the evidence is there that Snape did not undergo a major change in terms of his vindictiveness and that it is possible he died still hating Harry.
But this point of view doesn't explain why Snape went out of his way to save Lupin. I believe once Snape committed himself to helping Dumbledore he did begin to change internally. I think once Voldemort came back, Snape changed more. Maybe it was Voldemort's 'apology' for not saving Lily. He still hates Harry, because Harry reminds him too much of James. But the fact that he saved Lupin, a person he despises as much as Harry, and whose life of death didn't really matter with regards to defeating Voldemort shows the possibility that Snape is trying to lose his vindictiveness.
Julia H. - May 27, 2008 6:12 am (#2201 of 2617)
Edited May 27, 2008 7:02 am
"Words can hit as hard as a fist." (Quinn Crockett)
Yes. I think we all know how Snape talks because we have plenty of canon evidence. Some people include this kind of verbal behaviour in the definition of the word "sadistic", some do not. I, personally, do not because then I would not know what to call the kind of sadism associated with Umbridge or the Carrows. My opinion is that whatever we call the way Snape verbally taunts Harry and the way Umbridge tortures the students, we should not call them by the same name because the two are fundamentally different. IMO at least, but I guess it is only someone who has suffered both physical torture and verbal taunting that can really tell whether there is an important difference between the two or not. However, the point is, we all talk about the same thing when we talk about Snape taunting Harry (or other students) since we all read the same books. The question is whether this behaviour is sufficient evidence to pronounce that someone who talks like this must be a person enjoying physically torturing others or not.
As for further evidence:
We never see Snape physically torture anyone (the two instances where he is physically rough towards Harry are exceptions and originate in exceptional anger and as responses to provocation rather than in any delight derived from hurting someone).
We never see him kill anyone except when he AK's DD but - ironically - he agrees to do it to help an old man avoid pain and humiliation. There is circumstantial evidence that he did not kill before.
We know he was a DE for a relatively short period in his life. We do not exactly know what led him to LV but we have found that various reasons are possible. Nothing indicates that being power-hungry or agressive or sadistic is any more likely to have been the reason than for example, wanting to belong somewhere (granted, to the wrong place) or the influence of former house mates (including once prefect Lucius).
We know he left LV to save someone's life, risking his own.
The argument that everybody who has ever joined the DE's loves to kill and torture: this is simply not shown to be true. Draco clearly does not enjoy killing or torturing. Sirius about Regulus and his family (OOTP):
convinced that to be a Black made you practically royal... my idiot brother, soft enough to believe them... Stupid idiot... he joined the Death Eaters... 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 implies Regulus joined before "Voldemort showed his true colours" and Regulus was younger than Snape. It is clear that there were people who realized what he was but apparently not everybody. All in all, Regulus was extremely shocked because of the torture of a house elf, so he cannot have been a torture loving little monster. (Sirius simply calls him "an idiot".) So canon gives us several examples showing that not only sadistic people joined the DE's. Therefore the argument that Snape must have been sadistic because he was a DE does not work. Sure, DE's are often sadistic but then JKR shows us that they torture or kill. If we imagine the prototypical DE, we will probably imagine a cruel and sadistic murderer. However, Snape is not the prototypical DE. Neither is Regulus. The prototypical DE would not end up dying for the cause of the light side.
We know that Snape - in the new war against Voldemort - often saves people from death or torture and is very unwilling to let people die. (Lately, only those whom I could not save...) Think of DD, Harry, Lupin... This is evidence against Snape being sadistic at all, especially given that we never see him torture or kill.
There is an argument that Snape only represses his sadistic impulses for the purpose of being able to take revenge on LV. On the one hand, it is hard to believe that those impulses if they exist can be so well repressed and for such a long time. On the other hand, if we rely on this argument, then anybody can be labelled as sadistic. How do we know that DD has not simply repressed his fundamentally sadistic nature for the past hundred years? How does anyone know that I, personally, who have never killed or tortured do not only repress my sadistic impulses? Take any person and prove that he or she is not a sadistic person who simply represses their sadism for some reason. Impossible. Therefore, in such cases, only positive evidence can count, which proves that someone is indeed sadistic and has committed torture and murder. Then it all comes down to the question whether the way Snape talks to his students (especially Harry) is in itself sufficient evidence to prove that he has indeed murdered and tortured and enjoyed it, moreover that he does not even change during the seven books. I don't think it is sufficient at all.
Julia H. - May 27, 2008 7:23 am (#2202 of 2617)
But the fact that he saved Lupin, a person he despises as much as Harry, and whose life of death didn't really matter with regards to defeating Voldemort shows the possibility that Snape is trying to lose his vindictiveness. (Ramb)
Good observation. But even if Snape has a vindictive nature (and is vindictive towards the Marauders), his main motivation to help defeat Voldemort is not vindictiveness but remorse and love - as far as we can believe The Prince's Tale is Snape's true story. Just because somebody is vindictive towards certain people, it does not mean that this is the only way he can be motivated. James is also vindictive: when Lily refuses him, he takes revenge on Snape and continues to torture and humiliate him. Sirius is vindictive: he wants to kill Pettigrew and he needs Harry to remind him that Pettigrew alive is the evidence of his innocence. Even Lupin wants to kill Pettigrew, clearly out of revenge. Yet, nobody suggests that this is the reason or even the main reason why they fight against Voldemort when Voldemort returns.
As for Snape, I agree that once he starts doing the right things (like saving people's lives), it gradually becomes a habit for him and he changes. He is guided by his undying love for Lily and because of this love, he interprets his duty towards her in the broadest possible sense. I also think that he feels remorse for ever having been a DE and this, together with the sacrifices he makes and what he suffers because of these sacrifices, is what leads to his redemption through even more changes.
Dryleaves - May 28, 2008 12:49 am (#2203 of 2617)
Just because somebody is vindictive towards certain people, it does not mean that this is the only way he can be motivated. (Julia)
I think this is important, because people have many different personality traits and how and when they come to show themselves depend on a lot of things. Snape - Marauders and Snape - Voldemort are two completely different situations. So are Lily choosing another boyfriend and Lily being threatened to death and finally killed. We don't have to assume that Snape, having a vindictive nature, has to react in the same way to these situations. In one situation he has to prove that he is actually just as good as James and even a bit better, in the other Lily is in mortal peril because of what he himself has done. Then another characteristic in him comes up to the surface: the ability to love and genuinely care for another person and do this so much that he is prepared to risk his life for this person. And later, when Lily is dead, he still cares about her, so that he agrees to protect her son, even if this son is a reminder of the fact that she choose someone else and even if he looks just like James.
Snape cares deeply, genuinely and unconditionally, but we only see him care like this for two people, Lily and DD. But I think Julia is on to something when she writes "the broadest possible sense". Lily is targeted because Snape didn't care much about other people. That is why he could give Voldemort the prophecy. Lily is killed. By caring in a more general sense, and here I don't mean liking or being nice to other people, but caring about their lives, whether they live or die, he can atone for what he did (and would be less likely to make the mistake again if a similar situation ever would occur). This is a change of point of view and a change of practice, and maybe it finally leads to some deeper changes of character as well. It is a process. When naming his son I think Harry recognizes that Snape was sincere in his atonement after all and that he was brave in being so. Maybe it is not facing Voldemort that Harry finds important in Snape's bravery (Harry has after all done that himself), but the fact that Snape had the courage to face himself.
Jason Riddle - May 28, 2008 6:47 pm (#2204 of 2617)
Snape, The myth of protecting the students
Here is most of the information we receive about life at Hogwarts under headmaster Snape (mostly gathered from chapters 29 and 30):
- Neville’s appearance: “He appeared to have suffered several gashes to his face and his clothes were ripped and torn.” “One of his eyes was swollen yellow and purple, there were gouge marks on his face, and his general air of unkemptness suggested that he had been living rough.”
-Neville, about his injuries says: “What? This? This is nothing. Seamus is worse.” Later, Seamus’s face is described as “bruised and puffy”.
-Terry Boot was beaten up by a Carrow at dinner in the Great Hall just for yelling about the fact that Harry had broken into Gringotts. Either Snape was absent from dinner or he allowed it to happen.
-Neville, regarding the Carrows: “They do more than teach. They’re in charge of all discipline. They like punishment, the Carrows.” [Harry: “Like Umbridge?”] “Nah, they make her look tame. The other teachers are all supposed to refer us to the Carrows if we do anything wrong.” The students suffer much more under Snape than under Umbridge. Who created the “refer to Carrows” policy?
-They practice the Cruciatus Curse on people who’ve earned detentions. Crabbe and Goyle are especially proficient at this.
- Neville: “Doesn’t matter. They don’t want to spill too much pure blood, so they’ll torture us a bit if we’re mouthy but they won’t actually kill us.” Neville says this in a “matter-of-fact” tone. Torture seems fairly common under Snape’s leadership.
-Neville: “We used to sneak out at night and put graffiti on the walls: Dumbledore’s Army, Still Recruiting, stuff like that. Snape hated it.” Of course, Snape must pretend to hate it. However, it’s clear that Neville groups him together with the Carrows.
-Neville: “Michael Corner went and got caught releasing a first-year they’d chained up, and they tortured him pretty badly.” Apparently Snape was okay with allowing the chaining up of 11-12 year olds. Or, if he was unaware of it, he wasn’t overly concerned with watching what the Carrows were doing.
-Things are so bad that a group of about twenty people are hiding in the room of requirement. [“…he, Ron, and Hermione were engulfed… by what seemed to be more than twenty people…”]. Neville says, “Everyone in this room’s been fighting and they’ve been driven in here because the Carrows were hunting them down.” I suppose that the Carrows were “hunting” them in order to torture them or send them to Azkaban. Not surprisingly, none of Snape’s precious Slytherins were forced into hiding.
-The Ravenclaws seem terrified of Amycus Carrow. Even though they know Professor McGonagall is with him, “the few Ravenclaws who had remained behind sprinted for the stairs as Amycus burst over the threshold, brandishing his wand.” When he sees his sister unconscious, he says: “What’ve they done, the little whelps? I’ll Cruciate the lot of ‘em till they tell me who did it…”
-When Snape asks where the Carrows are, McGonagall says, “Wherever you told them to be, I expect, Severus.” Although Minerva is lying, it seems that she believes the Carrows follow Snape’s orders.
-After Snape jumps out of a window, “’No, he’s not dead,’ said McGonagall bitterly.”
-The Gryffindors, Hufflepuffs, and Ravenclaws cheer when McGonagall tells them that Snape has left.
The question is: Where is headmaster Snape in all of this? Where is the man who gave Dumbledore his word that he would do everything in his power to protect the students? The Carrow siblings are depicted as incompetent. They can’t get into Ravenclaw tower by themselves. Snape is certainly clever enough to think of ways to hinder them. Yet they seem to have an unlimited ability to punish students. Neville suggests that the only thing limiting their actions is a desire not to spill magical blood [Voldemort confirms in his speeches that his general policy is not to spill magical blood]. We are never told that Snape directly participates in the torturing. Neville describes the Carrows as mostly operating on their own. However, Rowling doesn’t show us a single instance of Snape acting to protect students. He seems to let the Carrows have their way. There isn’t even circumstantial evidence that Snape protected anyone. Nobody, neither students nor teachers, seemed aware that Snape was placing any kind of limitation on what the Carrows could do. All were glad when he left. Of course, it’s possible that Snape was unable to intervene in any of the cases of torture because he needed to preserve his cover. In any case, Snape never protected students. To say that he did, is to create events that are beyond canon.
Jason Riddle - May 28, 2008 6:48 pm (#2205 of 2617)
Stealing the sword and its consequences
The most frequently cited evidence for Snape’s protection of the students is that Snape sent Ginny, Neville, and Luna to the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid after the attempted theft of Gryffindor’s sword. The reader knows this because, in ‘The Goblin’s Revenge’, that is what Phineas Nigellus tells the trio. Phineas, being bound to various portraits, probably witnessed Snape announcing the punishment to the three students. The exact nature of the punishment is never confirmed by another character. However, there’s something amiss. In the same chapter, Dean asks what happened to Ginny and the others after Snape caught them. Griphook responds, “Oh, they were punished, and cruelly,” and then, “They suffered no serious injury, as far as I am aware.” Griphook heard the story from Bill Weasely (they both worked at Gringotts) who probably heard from Ginny herself or another family member. Why is Griphook under the impression that the punishment was cruel? In one scenario, Griphook feels that being sent to a dangerous forest to work for a half-giant is a cruel punishment. But Bill told Griphook that the students suffered no serious injury. Apparently Bill told Griphook this without managing to convey the idea that the punishment was actually light, without saying something like: “Oh, but Hagrid’s a family friend. Nothing happened to them. They’re perfectly okay.” Of course, it’s possible that Bill said something as plain as: “Snape made them do work for Hagrid in the Forbidden Forest, but they weren’t seriously injured.” but it seems a little strange. And there’s another problem. Griphook is familiar with Hagrid. They see each other, albeit briefly, in Harry’s first trip to the bank. Since Hagrid generally comes across as friendly, it seems strange that Griphook would leap to the conclusion that doing work for Hagrid constitutes cruel punishment. In a second (more likely?) scenario, the Carrows punish the students on top of Snape’s punishment. Phineas never witnesses this. Ginny tells Bill about being crucioed or locked up or whatever and this is why Griphook describes the punishment as cruel. Snape doesn’t prevent the Carrows from punishing them.
Even if we ignore Griphook and credit Snape with giving the students a fake punishment in order to prevent the Carrows from giving them a severe one, this is still a rather weak and indirect example of protection. A more direct example of protection might be the following: Snape notices that a group of students have been caught by the Carrows for some form of insubordination and are being punished. He physically stops the punishment, releases the students, and deals with the Carrows using lies (covering for the students’ actions), memory charms, or other means. In the case of Ginny, Luna, and Neville, Snape is not intervening to help them. He doesn’t risk anything by sending them to Hagrid. Saying that Snape protected them is the same as saying that I’m protecting you from dying in a fire by not setting your house on fire. Someone might point to Snape’s handling of the three students as an example of him not exhibiting sadistic tendencies (after all, he COULD have sent them to the Carrows). However, like Phineas, Dumbledore (not to mention all the other headmasters) would have been carefully watching Snape as he gave the three students their punishment. Snape is usually careful not to harm students in the presence of other adults.
By the way, I’m not ignoring anyone’s post or questions. I will post my responses after I’ve written them. Oh, and YES Julia: I would much prefer a few detentions with Umbridge (special quill and all) to years worth of abuse and humiliation from Snape.
PeskyPixie - May 29, 2008 12:31 am (#2206 of 2617)
"He seems to let the Carrows have their way. There isn’t even circumstantial evidence that Snape protected anyone. Nobody, neither students nor teachers, seemed aware that Snape was placing any kind of limitation on what the Carrows could do." -Jason Riddle
Jason, I'm not sure whether you're serious or just helping push forward the debate? I had considered doing the latter during the slow times on this thread.
Anywho, it's common knowledge that Voldy is in charge of Hogwarts. Snape is a puppet principal just as the other guy (can't remember the name at the moment) is a puppet Minister for Magic. Voldy calls the shots. If word gets out that Snape is treating kids with detention to hot chocolate with marshmallows in his office, then he is toast and a hardcore DE will replace him at Hogwarts ... and he can't risk that for the sake of the students and the fact that he needs access to Dumbledore's portrait.
The fact that teachers who are Order members maintain their teaching positions, kids caught breaking into the Headmaster's study are punished by having to hang out with Hagrid, indicate that Snape is doing all he can by being passive when a DE is expected to be aggressive. Also, even though Snape's hands are tied he tries to protect his kids by having them avoid potentially risky situations to begin with. He brings back some of Umbridge's nutty decrees to prevent students from meeting in groups because that is how the DA was formed and if DA activity starts again, protection from DE punishments will be a near impossible manouvre for Snape. When Neville, Ginny and Luna become trouble-making ringleaders Snape probably longs for the 'good old days', when he could jam them onto benches in his dungeon and have them disembowel toads by the barrel!
"Since Hagrid generally comes across as friendly, it seems strange that Griphook would leap to the conclusion that doing work for Hagrid constitutes cruel punishment."
Being sent into the dangerous (to put it mildly) Forbidden Forest with a half-giant oaf. Oh yeah, if I were a goblin I'd be lining up for my turn.
"In a second (more likely?) scenario, the Carrows punish the students on top of Snape’s punishment. Phineas never witnesses this. Ginny tells Bill about being crucioed or locked up or whatever and this is why Griphook describes the punishment as cruel. Snape doesn’t prevent the Carrows from punishing them."
I have no idea on which canon moments you have based this scenario. Please clarify.
If anything, I've always blamed Hagrid's lack of brains for the kids' injuries. When are Neville and his friends badly injured? After Hagrid has had to flee Hogwarts on account of nearly being arrested for unnecessary activities. Snape and Hagrid have this perfect non-verbal system worked out to protect 'good' Hogwarts students without sticky issues being raised, and Hagrid doesn't have the sense to guard this arrangement with his life. Unbelievable ... but perhaps I'm expecting too much from a simpleton (I'm being honest here, not insulting the big guy whom I otherwise love).
"Saying that Snape protected them is the same as saying that I’m protecting you from dying in a fire by not setting your house on fire." -Jason Riddle
Sorry, but that's not a good example. It would be more accurate to say that Snape saved one from their burning house by leaving the back door open and giving them a shove in its direction.
I feel you're disappointed that Snape does not react like Sirius/James. Snape is simply not the dashing Gryffindor type who acts first and thinks later. He and Dumbledore have agreed that he needs to stay in Voldy's 'good books' as long as possible and the easiest way to do that is to act the part of a DE well. Is there any point to risking his position by having confrontations with the Carrows when he can just as easily protect his students by shipping them off to Hagrid? I certainly see no reason for such silliness when there are more important things to do.
I just don't see Snape as all that harmful in a person's life in the long scheme of things. I've had my share of Snapes; my friends and I laugh ourselves silly about them now. Even at Hogwarts, he's really nothing more than a highly informative teacher with a sarcastic personality, especially towards dunderheads. Harry and his buddies are a special case as their mere presence seems to land ol' Sev on a shrink's couch. However, in HBP, he is decent enough in his interactions with other students. He's no Flitwick, but nothing more than a McGonagall, really. I'd take Snape over Umbridge any day as I'm a bit of a Hermione with schoolwork and at most Snape would ignore me or occasionally call me a know-it-all. Eh. Big deal.
Dryleaves - May 29, 2008 1:33 am (#2207 of 2617)
I might repeat what Pesky Pixie wrote, but I write a post anyway.
I think we have to ask ourselves what Snape's position and powers really are. In "The Prince's Tale" DD says to Snape: "I am counting upon you to remain in Lord Voldemort's good books as long as possible, or Hogwarts will be left to the mercy of the Carrows..." I think this indicates that DD believes that the Carrows will have something to do with the school when it falls into Voldemorts grip, regardless of Snape. As Pesky writes, it is Voldemort that in fact is in charge of Hogwarts. The Carrows are not only teachers, they are also in charge of the discipline and they seem to have a position rather independent from the Headmaster, even if he formally is their boss. Snape is supposed to agree with this.
Snape promised to do everything in his power to protect the students. What he can do then is to prevent them from doing anything that would deserve punishment, or make sure they are caught by the right people if they do, or have a sort of punishment that seems cruel, but in fact doesn't cause the students any harm.
That Neville groups Snape with the Carrows and that McGonagall believes they follow his orders don't prove that Snape doesn't protect the students at all. He would do a really lousy job for DD if they didn't believe this and would have been sacked (and probably worse)way before McGonagall et al. chase him from the castle. And then Hogwarts would have been left to the mercy of the Carrows. I believe there is a limit to how many times you could lie and use memory charms before it starts to look suspicious. Snape and the Carrows are not the only DE at Hogwarts. There are also students whose parents are followers of Voldemort.
In any case, Snape never protected students. To say that he did, is to create events that are beyond canon. (Jason)
But then you do yourself create events that are beyond canon when you assume that the Carrows punished the students on top of Snape's punishment. There is nothing in the text to suggest it. The Forbidden Forest is a dangerous place and therefore this punishment could be considered "cruel". An alternative explanation why Bill refers to it in this way could be that he assumes that Snape's intention was for the punishment to actually be cruel, because Bill believes that Snape is a DE and (like yourself) from this concludes that he must be cruel and have evil intentions.
You say that Snape is usually careful not to harm students in the presence of other adults. My impression is that he probably restrains himself a little when other adults are around, and when contradicted or reproached by them he often stops, but I don't think he really behaves that differently when watched and not. (And I don't think he really harms the students either, but I guess that is a question of definition. Nevlle, for example, is being just as badly treated by his grandmother and his uncle Algie, as they are first afraid he is a squib and then think he is not as good as his parents were.) When DD is absent Snape still follows DD's orders. Umbridge, on the other hand, is actually shown to be prepared to perform the Cruciatus curse on a student as long as her boss doesn't know about it.
Dryleaves - May 29, 2008 7:25 am (#2208 of 2617)
Jason, I'm just curious, but why would you prefer Umbridge to Snape?
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 8:18 am (#2209 of 2617)
Maybe it is not facing Voldemort that Harry finds important in Snape's bravery (Harry has after all done that himself), but the fact that Snape had the courage to face himself. (Dryleaves)
I think both. Harry is very brave himself and since he has faced Voldemort several times, he knows what it is like and he understands what it must have been like to face him again and again on a regular basis, even if not in a fight but "simply" deceiving him and all his DE's in the knowledge that one single mistake might be enough to end the game for ever and in the knowledge that Snape – a powerful wizard as he was - would be no match in a fight to invincible, indestructible Voldemort. And Snape did not only face Voldemort, he also agreed to do the most thankless of jobs DD could assign to anyone and to accept that terrible situation of isolation and disgrace while carrying out the plan. That required a different type of bravery. But then, as you say, Harry probably also understood how difficult it must have been for Snape to face himself, his own mistakes and flaws and his past and to try to put the wrong he once did right.
Oh, and YES Julia: I would much prefer a few detentions with Umbridge (special quill and all) to years worth of abuse and humiliation from Snape. (Jason)
Jason, I respect it if you feel in this way but then why are you saying “years” in the case of Snape and “a few detentions” in the case of Umbridge? Why not take equal measure of the two (either years in both cases or a few occasions in both cases) to really compare the two. Maybe you would rather take Umbridge for years than Snape. All right.
In my opinion, Snape does not do lasting harm to anyone (and certainly never harms the students physically) and his anger is typically directed at students who break the rules or who do not know or do what they should. Admittedly, not a great pedagogical approach but at least he takes his subject and his job absolutely seriously and teaches and wants the students to learn. Harry and his friends are special cases but, while I give Snape full credit for the start of their enmity, later Harry often does or seems to do something that makes Snape rightfully angry and explains (if not necessarily fully justifies) Snape’s behaviour. (This may not always be obvious since we see everything through Harry’s eyes and he often does not seem to connect things.) After the first few years, the students do not seem to be afraid of Snape and there are quite a few (Gryffindor) students who choose his class after the O.W.L. exams when it is not obligatory any more. It is obvious that they must work hard in his class and that he is easily irritated but it also becomes obvious that there is a line Snape will never cross in his nastiness. Snape is the kind of strict and sarcastic teacher against whom there is always at least one type of comfort (from teenagers onwards): friendship and solidarity. Students often try to deceive him together and help each other avoid punishment and sometimes stand up to him openly together – the dangers of this may raise the adrenalin level but are not too serious.
Umbridge is totally different. To start with, she does not even teach. Her purpose is to keep the students ignorant and for this particular purpose, she is prepared to do anything, including intimidation, turning students against each other (she is very successful at that) and torture. The scars caused by her special quill are not only painful and ignominious but also stay in the student’s skin for ever. Sure, those who do not contradict her, may remain unharmed but they will not learn anything either- and in this way only humble subjects or would be victims are brought up. She pretends to be nice and understanding and tries to win the trust of students like Marietta – for her own purposes. She is evidently excited when she is about to use the Cruciatus Curse.
Unlike Umbridge, Snape never forces (or encourages) the children to do something that lowers their self-esteem or destroys their characters.
wynnleaf - May 29, 2008 8:50 am (#2210 of 2617)
Regarding Jason's post, Pesky, Julia and Dryleaves all had good points. Here's a few of my own.
The whole argument about Griphook thinking the forest punishment was harsh isn't evidence for much of anything. Griphook may be familiar with Hagrid dropping by to run errands for DD, but Griphook didn't go to Hogwarts and it's unlikely he had any idea what a complete pushover Hagrid was in both teaching and discipline. The idea that Snape thought it a harsh punishment to send anyone to detention with Hagrid is practically ludicrous, since Snape had lived at Hogwarts about 24 years and must have known exactly how Hagrid would treat the students.
The notion that Snape could keep his cover with LV while simultaneously stopping LV's appointed Death Eaters, the Carrows, from following LV's orders to them is also pretty amazing. It seems pretty obvious that he'd be unable to directly thwart any of their plans, and instead have to work around them.
He physically stops the punishment, releases the students, and deals with the Carrows using lies (covering for the students’ actions), memory charms, or other means. (Jason Riddle)
In a school where even DD says that things that are supposed to be secrets get around the school very rapidly, how long would Snape be able to use this sort of method before plenty of DE kids learned what he was up to and reported it? And how long would it take before the better kids and the rest of the teachers caught on to Snape's true loyalties? He can't go around obliviating everybody.
So how does Snape protect the students? 1. He keeps people he knows to be Order members, or at least skilled wizards who want to protect students, on at the school and in positions of power (McGonagall, Flitwick and others, all the Heads of House are good guys, etc.). 2. When he directly catches students in the act of misbehaving or, in the case of the sword, doing something completely against LV, he gives them very soft punishment which can, to those not "in the know" seem harsh.
JKR spends almost no time with Snape directly on the page in contemporaneous scenes to the rest of DH. So we only get to hear from other characters about Snape as headmaster. Would Snape want to do anything that made others think he was protecting the students from the Carrows? Of course not. So it's perfectly understandable that he only be seen by others as doing things that look like a good loyal DE. However, JKR gives us this one example of Snape giving out a punishment and the fact that it's with Hagrid of all people should clue us in to the fact that Snape is trying to use methods that look harsh on the surface, but are in fact pretty soft. Another device JKR uses to show us that Snape is protecting students is his conversations with DD, in which we learn that the plan between DD and Snape was for Snape to stay at Hogwarts in order to help protect students. We further learn that Snape has for some time protected all he can against death.
It's also important to remember that the series is closed. Prior to DH, it was legitimate speculation to use arguments like "I think Snape is really doing horribly dreadful things off the page. JKR didn't show us or tell us this, but we can deduce it." No, that was fine when we knew that there were further books down the road where JKR might reveal what "really happened." But no such books are coming. If JKR gave us info that Snape and DD's plan was for Snape to protect the students, and also showed us that Snape was loyal to DD, we have to assume that he was indeed following DD's plan and protecting the students as much as possible, given the circumstances.
Ditto for the "Snape really tortured and killed and JKR just didn't show us on the page" argument. The series is over. If she didn't tell us it happened, gave no direct evidence that it happened, and gave a fair amount of evidence that it didn't happen, then it probably didn't happen. Because after all folks, what "happened" or "didn't happen" is what occurred in JKR's head, not it real life. We're not solving a crime scene here or a yet-to-be-completed detective novel. She gives us clues about what remained in her head, versus making it to the paper, but what's on paper is all we've got to go by.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2211 to 2230
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:40 am
Soul Search - May 29, 2008 10:03 am (#2211 of 2617)
wynnleaf,
Well stated about what is in canon is what we must use for any analysis of Snape. I agree.
I conclude:
Snape DID protect students as well as he could. No one died! A few bruises and scars is nothing compared to what the Carrows were capable of inflicting. Snape's protection was subtle and not out in the open for DEs to see and suspect.
Snape did nothing as a DE, or any other time, that would seriously harm his soul. Even as a young DE, he wasn't into killing or anything like that. Snape, like Regulus, joined the DE ranks based on mostly Voldemort's propaganda and he was quickly disillusioned by the reality. That made it easy for him to go to Dumbledore and change sides.
Hogwarts Class of 85 - May 29, 2008 11:10 am (#2212 of 2617)
I find it very difficult to believe that Snape never murdered or at least tortured in his DE days (but I am not sure that this is something he enjoyed). Do we see any DEs who don't do one or the other? Yes, we see Regulus leave when he sees the way HIS house elf is ill-treated, but we have no idea what he got up to prior to this. We see the way Voldemort makes Draco torture against his will. I would suspect if Voldemort said "kill him" - you did and I can't see him having people in his inner sanctum who he deemed above murder and torture.
I have always taken Snape's concern about his soul in HBP to concern for his rehabilitated soul. Having spent years regretting his involvement with Voldemort, he (and I) believe that his soul would be restored (or at least on the way to restoration).
Quinn Crockett - May 29, 2008 11:19 am (#2213 of 2617)
Awesome debate here!
Snape and Hagrid have this perfect non-verbal system worked out to protect 'good' Hogwarts students without sticky issues being raised, and Hagrid doesn't have the sense to guard this arrangement with his life. - Pesky Pixie
I was just wondering what "arrangement" you are talking about. I don't recall reading that. In any case, why are you so hard on Hagrid? No one from the Order believed Snape was not a Death Eater after he killed Dumbledore, which was the whole point, after all. And Hagrid, who saw Dumbledore as a surrogate father, would have been more angry than anyone over what Snape had (seemingly) done.
Since Hagrid generally comes across as friendly, it seems strange that Griphook would leap to the conclusion that doing work for Hagrid constitutes cruel punishment." - Jason Riddle
I can kind of see what Jason is saying here. Hagrid is well-known in the Wizard community, and anyone who knows him knows that he would never intentionally hurt anyone. It's only those who don't know Hagrid who think he is some sort of monster. Griphook is someone who is acquainted with Hagrid, even if he doesn't know him intimately.
Nevlle, for example, is being just as badly treated by his grandmother and his uncle Algie, as they are first afraid he is a squib and then think he is not as good as his parents were. - Dryleaves
I don't recall reading that they treated him badly, only that they didn't think he had any magic and were overjoyed when they discovered that he was a Wizard after all. Of course we think Augusta Longbottom is rather hard on Neville, but I have always sort of chalked that up to the fact that she is very strong and gregarious whereas Neville isn't - at first. It's hard for outgoing people to identify with the more shy and introverted, I think. Especially if it's kind of a rarity in your family. Besides, in the end she completely makes up for it all.
It's also important to remember that the series is closed. Prior to DH, it was legitimate speculation to use arguments like "I think Snape is really doing horribly dreadful things off the page. JKR didn't show us or tell us this, but we can deduce it." - Wynnleaf
I definitely agree with this in principle. But at the same time, I don't see what difference it makes if some readers choose to believe that Prof. Snape was a thoroughly wicked and horrible Death Eater who actually tortured and murdered people in his youth, and others choose to believe that he was more of a bystander. (Personally, I don't see how he could altogether have avoided participating in at least a one or two of these incidents. But of course that is simply my personal interpretation of the character.)
ETA: I have always taken Snape's concern about his soul in HBP to concern for his rehabilitated soul. Having spent years regretting his involvement with Voldemort, he (and I) believe that his soul would be restored (or at least on the way to restoration). - Hogwarts Class
Actually, so have I.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 11:32 am (#2214 of 2617)
Snape protecting the students.:
I completely agree with Pesky, Dryleaves, Wynnleaf and Soul Search (great summary, concise and up to the point!). In a regime that Voldemort created (modelled pretty much on historical totalitarian regimes) everyone is a potential spy. The Carrows (or parent DE’s) would not be stopped by any scruples from reporting information about Snape to Voldemort if they found out anything. (That there are such things is indicated in HBP: ”You can carry my words back to the others who whisper behind my back, and carry false tales of my treachery to the Dark Lord!) In the following, I am trying not to repeat what the others have already said only add a few more observations.
In The Prince’s Tale, Snape is presented as a man of his words. He makes several major promises from the hilltop scene onwards and he always keeps his word. Furthermore, he turns out to be “Dumbledore’s man through and through”, one who strictly follows DD’s orders at whatever cost to himself. He dies carrying out DD’s order. How does DD want him to protect the students?
I have your word that you will do all in your power to protect the students of Hogwarts? … I am counting upon you to remain in Lord Voldemort’s good books as long as possible, or Hogwarts will be left to the mercy of the Carrows…
Snape is not supposed to do miracles: He is supposed to remain in a position to do as much as can be done to protect the students. The only purpose of DD’s “betrayal plan” (before the chase) is to secure Snape’s position with Voldemort so that Snape could become the headmaster. Without Snape, teachers and students would be in a much greater danger. (Even if you argue that Snape did a bad job protecting the students, it does not mean that this was intentional. But I think he did as good a job as possible under the circumstances.)
I think the story of the sword has been perfectly explained by Pesky, Dryleaves and Wynnleaf. However, there are other hints concerning the way Snape protected the students. Since JKR keeps Snape’s true allegiance a secret until the end of DH, readers must be able to read between the lines to discover the hints (apart from the story of the sword). Before Ron leaves the other two in the forest, the Trio talk to Phineas Nigellus (about the punishment). Then Ron is so nervous that he identifies himself to Phineas Nigellus (who is duty-bound to assist Snape) as a Weasley (he is allegedly at home seriously ill). Not long after that, Harry and Hermione learn that Ginny is not allowed to go out of Hogwarts. Why? Because the village is full of DE’s. If Ron was careless enough to reveal himself in front of Phineas Nigellus as being on the run with Harry, he could be discovered by others as well. In the village, Ginny (about the last Weasley who is not in hiding) could easily be kidnapped and her family blackmailed. As we know, this is exactly what happens to Luna, whose father openly supports Harry. However, Luna is not kidnapped while in Hogwarts either, only on her way home. I guess this kind of protection – to protect those who were in bigger danger – had priority over protecting the students form the Carrows’ painful “detentions”.
However, Snape did try to protect the students from the Carrows as well. The sword story (Hagrid) is an example of that as well as other things mentioned in the previous posts. Another observation:
”I didn’t know that it was your night to patrol the corridors, Minerva.” (Snape)
It does sound as if the teachers patrolled the corridors at night with Snape’s permission or, rather, at his orders. We know from Neville that the teachers were supposed to report the students to the Carrows but they did not do it. This was evidently something that Snape must have expected (knowing his colleagues as he knew them). I am quite sure that if the teachers caught any rebels doing anything illegal, they did their best to cover it up. Snape could not be everywhere all the time, so he made it possible for the other teachers to participate in the protection of the students. BTW keeping McGonagall and Hagrid safe in the school (Arthur and Bill do not go to work to the Ministry after a while because they would be in danger) must have been an important achievement in itself, which had to be balanced somehow towards the Carrows so that Snape’s true goals should not become easily obvious. But I see another reason why patrolling was necessary:
You must know they’ve got all the secret passageways covered at both ends, dementors all around the boundary walls, regular patrols inside the school from what my sources tell me. (Aberforth)
So dementors outside, regular patrols (like McGonagall) inside: I think it is rather obvious. The dementors were more dangerous than the Carrows.
Neville says with reference to DA activities: Snape hated it.
He must have looked angry and I’m not at all sure it was totally just pretence. He knew it was not the DA that was going to defeat Voldemort and what they did was making it more difficult to protect them. We see Snape was furious right as he was saving Dumbledore’s life. He was talking to him as no other teachers in the books, asking him furiously why he was not more careful. He is not indifferent. His fury is a sign of his concern. He may well have been angry with DA members in a similar way.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 11:55 am (#2215 of 2617)
Hogwarts Class and Quinn,
Everybody is entitled to their own interpretation, of course, but Snape's past happens to be a discussion topic here right now. That is why we are talking about it. Whether Snape murdered or not: I think there have been quite a few posts explaining why it fits in with canon more that Snape did not kill. The state of his soul is just one of the arguments, there are others (like nobody seems to know about anything Snape did and LV would not have sent him to DD if he had been a known DE and Snape simply does not look or behave like a hardened criminal). We can imagine events off-page but then we must know that this is our imagination not canon. However, nobody has said (as far as I know) that Snape avoided becoming a murderer by openly refusing to kill when Voldemort told him so. There are other possibilities but none of them is confirmed in canon, so we have no idea how exactly he avoided committing other crimes. What is canon is that he was very young and we do not even know for sure when he joined. To Bellatrix he says: fresh from my Death Eater days... He could say "years", he does not want to play down his role as a DE, quite on the contrary! But he says "days"... Then we know it from canon that killing is not very easy. Casting Unforgivables is not easy at least in the beginning. Bellatrix explains why. Then LV chose Snape for the role of a spy. He must have had a reason (and it seems it was not Snape's experience and brilliance as a spy).
BTW, nobody has said that joining in itself was not bad enough or that it was not in itself something to atone for and feel remorse for.
As for Hagrid: I don't think Hagrid was the "cruel" part of the detention, I think it was the Forbidden Forest - provided Griphook knew at all what exactly the punishment was and he did not just assume that it must have been something cruel. He mentions no details.
PeskyPixie - May 29, 2008 12:12 pm (#2216 of 2617)
"Snape and Hagrid have this perfect non-verbal system worked out to protect 'good' Hogwarts students without sticky issues being raised, and Hagrid doesn't have the sense to guard this arrangement with his life." - PeskyPixie
"I was just wondering what "arrangement" you are talking about. I don't recall reading that." -Quinn Crockett
Snape knows he can protect his students by sending them to work in the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid rather than be punished by the Carrows. Hagrid, on the other hand, doesn't need to know where Snape's loyalties lie to hold up his end of this informal 'arrangement' (for want of a better word; I apologize if its use is a point of confusion again). He only needs to know that he himself can protect any child sent to him for punishment, and he needs to be a responsible adult and treasure this role above any other he takes on that year. Holding a 'Support Harry Potter' party while surrounded by DEs and DE spawn is nothing short of stupid (Lupin says, "'Support Harry Potter' parties are unwise in the present climate")and thoughtless and demonstrates that Hagrid, as an adult who can protect persecuted children, does not take his job seriously. In character? Of course, but I don't believe in 'laughing it off', just because it happens to be Hagrid. He's a great guy, a truly innocent being, but he goofs up big here.
"In any case, why are you so hard on Hagrid? No one from the Order believed Snape was not a Death Eater after he killed Dumbledore, which was the whole point, after all. And Hagrid, who saw Dumbledore as a surrogate father, would have been more angry than anyone over what Snape had (seemingly) done." -Quinn Crockett
I don't see the logic behind this sentence as a response to the ideas presented in my post. Are you perhaps suggesting that because Hagrid watches his foster brother (i.e. Snape) kill his foster father, and that the staff does not trust Snape, Hagrid should somehow be applauded for his thoughtlessness which destroys the safety punished children have with him? Is he expected to expose kids sent to him by Snape to his anger towards Snape? I honestly don't understand what you're getting at here. From my interpretation, Hagrid (completely in character) gets carried away by the fun he has with the kids sent to him by Snape, poking fun at LV, DEs and Snape, and toasting Harry, and does not watch out for himself or his charges. I don't think anger towards Snape would ever cause Hagrid to push kids towards danger; it's only his immaturity which does that, and I can't overlook such immaturity by an adult during a time of war.
Anyways, back to Severus ...
Orion - May 29, 2008 12:24 pm (#2217 of 2617)
"Then LV chose Snape for the role of a spy. He must have had a reason (and it seems it was not Snape's experience and brilliance as a spy).2 (Pesky)
You seem to refer to the "mistake" Snape makes when he is sent to his job interview. Forumers have mentioned that it is extremely stupid to listen in to another interview (and getting caught) when it's more important to get the job.
IMO, Snape did quite the right thing, seen from the perspective of LV: He took the chance to spy right at the moment and he had the incredible luck that Trelawney had her spot of inspiration right at the moment and blurted out her stupid prophecy. For LV the prophecy was probably more important than a spy at Hogwarts.
That is completely unimportant, I know. Just ignore this post, please.
Dryleaves - May 29, 2008 12:32 pm (#2218 of 2617)
I don't recall reading that they treated him badly, only that they didn't think he had any magic and were overjoyed when they discovered that he was a Wizard after all. (Quinn Crockett)
Here is a quote from PS/SS, chapter seven:
My great-uncle Algie kept trying to catch me off my guard and force some magic out of me - he pushed me off the end of Blackpool pier once, I nearly drowned - but nothing happened until I was eight. Great-uncle Algie came round for tea and he was hanging me out of an upstairs window by the ankles when my great-auntie Enid offered him a meringue and he accidentally let go.
Snape calls Neville "idiot boy" and threatens to poison his toad. Not nice things to do, but why so much worse than this? He never harms Neville for real, and, at least how I interpret it, cares about Neville's safety when it is actually threatened (for example by asking Crabbe to loosen his hold a little or sending him to the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid).
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 12:48 pm (#2219 of 2617)
Orion, it was actually Julia not Pesky. Yes, that is what I referred to. Of course, Snape happened to overhear something extremely important to LV but that was pure accident. He cannot have anticipated it. He was listening to another job interview. And he let himself be caught. Totally unprofessional. If he had been caught five minutes earlier, he would have had to go back to LV to report that the interview had been unsuccessful. (It did not even take place.) And he would have had nothing to offer as compensation. I don't think an experienced spy (like the one Snape became later) would have behaved like this. Neither would an experienced DE. (I guess it was dangerous to spoil an assignment LV had given him for the sake of ideas of his own.) He was not only young, he was green.
Quinn Crockett - May 29, 2008 12:50 pm (#2220 of 2617)
Are you perhaps suggesting that because Hagrid watches his foster brother (i.e. Snape) kill his foster father, and that the staff does not trust Snape, Hagrid should somehow be applauded for his thoughtlessness which destroys the safety punished children have with him? - Pesky Pixie
Uh, not at all. I just didn't know what you were referring to. Thank you for clarifying.
And Dryleaves, thank you also for that citation. I see now what you mean as well.
I guess I'll just go back to lurking. You guys are a little too hard core about all this for my taste.
Dryleaves - May 29, 2008 1:10 pm (#2221 of 2617)
I guess I'll just go back to lurking. You guys are a little too hard core about all this for my taste. (Quinn Crockett)
No! Well, if you think we are maniacs and want to keep away for your own safety I guess it's OK , but I have really appreciated your posts. The discussions are more fun when several people with different thougts and ideas take part in them.
PeskyPixie - May 29, 2008 1:13 pm (#2222 of 2617)
Absolutely, Dryleaves! The incensed debates on the Snape thread were one of the main reasons I joined the forum to begin with.
We have a reputation for being a tough bunch (just ask the Sirius fans ), but we are friends at the end of the day and respect one another's opinions.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 1:27 pm (#2223 of 2617)
Edited May 29, 2008 2:28 pm
Quinn Crockett, I agree with Dryleaves and Pesky. We do tend to answer when we are addressed but we enjoy reading different opinions and ... well, debate a little. I also appreciated your posts, really.
Even if we do not agree on everything, I think the point about healing or restored souls is a thought provoking one. There is very little in canon about it but that is why it may be interesting one day to talk about. We only know that murder rips the soul but there must be other things that harm it (whether by "ripping" or otherwise...) and there is of course the question of healing - and remorse.
Edit: Actually the point whether Snape committed other crimes that we do not know about or not is important because of his remorse. While a general involvement (having joined, even if for a short time, being if only a silent accomplice) can be, IMO, included in the remorse we see him experience (Lily-related), actively committed various crimes would need to be addressed separately in the remorse and atonement process if it is to be effective, if we can talk about redemption at all (secret - "unwritten" - crimes and similarly secret remorse do not seem to be relevant in the context of the novel).
Soul Search - May 29, 2008 3:48 pm (#2224 of 2617)
Snape only cared about Lily. Any reported remorse would only be for his having gotten her killed by Voldemort. Snape would not feel remorse for any other dastardly acts he may have performed.
wynnleaf - May 29, 2008 4:02 pm (#2225 of 2617)
Snape only cared about Lily. Any reported remorse would only be for his having gotten her killed by Voldemort. Snape would not feel remorse for any other dastardly acts he may have performed. (Soul Search)
I agree that this was true when Snape first turned to Dumbledore and JKR said that if it hadn't been for loving Lily, Snape wouldn't have cared about Harry's fate.
But the idea that Snape continued to only feel remorse for his part in Lily's death is, in my opinion, incompatible with Snape's statement that he had reached the point of no longer being able to stand by and watch others die if he could save them.
If a person cares enough to save others from death in the present because that person cannot bear to stand by and watch deaths if they can be prevented, then it stands to reason that they probably feel great regret for those times when they did stand by and allow people to die in the past. And if a person regrets having stood by and allowed others to die, it stands to reason that that person even more regrets any part they had in directly participating in other Evil things.
Jason Riddle - May 29, 2008 4:15 pm (#2226 of 2617)
PeskyPixie and Dryleaves, well I do like to debate, but all of my posts on Snape have been serious (except when I’ve used sarcasm). I’m trying to correct some of the misconceptions people have about Snape. Unfortunately, some people only look at the last bit of ‘Deathly Hallows’ when they look at Snape’s character. They make him a much better man than he was. Being a fan of Snape myself, I sometimes have to stop myself from giving Snape undeserved credit. Using evidence from all 7 books, I’m encouraging people to see Snape in a more balanced, more realistic way. I agree that Snape couldn’t protect every student without being caught by Voldemort and replaced. I also agree that we cannot prove that Snape did not protect anyone [just like I cannot prove that Snape harmed anyone as a DE]. However there’s no evidence that Snape protected anyone. Snape could have protected students by having them do detentions with him instead of with the Carrows (cleaning dirty cauldrons not eating marshmallows), but no one mentions it. In fact, the school policy is that all punishments are delegated to the Carrows. Snape could have called McGonagall into his office, explained his true position (using DD’s portrait as evidence), and coordinated with her to protect students. But Snape never coordinates with any of the teachers. The teachers seem to loath Snape. Voldemort claims that he has “great respect for the teachers of Hogwarts.” Perhaps, Voldemort, who you say was really in charge, made the decision to keep the current staff of Hogwarts, not Snape. The book NEVER says: that Snape tried to stop students from engaging in rule-breaking behavior, that he invoked an Umbridge decree to prevent the DA from reforming, or that he had a secret non-verbal pact with Hagrid for giving fake punishments to students. These are possibilities, Pesky, but Rowling gives no indication that they are true. If anything, the descriptions we are given about Hogwarts suggest that Snape let the Carrows do whatever they wanted to: cruios in detentions, chaining up first-years, beating up students, etc.
Pesky, although Griphook obviously wouldn’t enjoy working for Hagrid, it’s questionable whether Griphook would consider it cruel, especially since Griphook has met Hagrid. How much would Griphook, who considers himself above wizarding affairs, know about the forest outside Hogwarts? Having worked with dragons and dangerous anti-theft enchantments, how cruel would he consider being sent to the forest to be? Dryleaves, your alternative explanation for Bill’s description doesn’t make sense. Why would Bill say, “My sister and her friends were punished cruelly, but they weren’t seriously injured,” just because he thought Snape’s intention was to be cruel? Peskyleaves, I agree that my theory about the Carrows giving an additional punishment is purely guesswork. The only canon fact it uses is that Griphook told Dean that the students were punished cruelly, but without serious injury. My point was simply that everyone assumes that Snape prevented the Carrows from punishing Ginny, Neville, and Luna. We don’t actually know this and it’s strange that Griphook got the impression from Bill that the punishment was cruel. Pesky, Snape’s actions are not comparable to pushing someone out of a burning building. As far as we know, when Snape caught the students smuggling the sword down the stairs, they were not already in trouble with the Carrows (i.e. the house was not on fire to begin with). Snape would have had to deliberately hand them over to the Carrows in order for them to be in trouble (i.e. Snape would have to set fire to the house). Snape chooses not to do this. Therefore, Snape is not rescuing them from harm (protecting), but merely not harming them (giving them to the Carrows). This is just like preventing burn injuries, by not setting fire to the house.
If I was in Slytherin (with pure blood), I would definitely prefer Snape as a teacher. I would probably be able to learn a lot from him. Otherwise I would prefer Umbridge. As long as you don’t interfere with her policies or break into her office, she doesn’t hurt you. Snape tries to hurt you, even if you haven’t done anything to deserve it. I would learn less from Umbridge, but I would probably try counter that with self-study.
wynnleaf, It’s absolutely possible that Snape could have kept his kept his cover with LV while protecting the students. In HBP when Snape is escaping, he interrupts a DE who is using crucio on Harry [“No! …Have you forgotten our orders? Potter belongs to the Dark Lord – we are to leave him! Go! Go!”]. Was he worried about his cover then? In OotP Snape tells Crabbe to loosen his hold on Neville [“And Crabbe, loosen your hold a little, if Longbottom suffocates it will mean a lot of tedious paperwork, and I am afraid I shall have to mention it on your reference if ever you apply for a job.”]. Was Snape worried that Crabbe, son of a DE, would inform Voldemort that Snape had protected Neville thereby revealing his true loyalties? Snape could have used similar tactics to stop Crabbe from using crucio on students in detention, but he doesn’t. Snape is intelligent, skilled at magic, and well practiced in deception. Certainly he was capable of protecting students from being tortured while still seeming like a loyal DE. All Snape had to do was more of what he had done in previous years. He could have had all student punishments referred to himself. Upon receiving students for detention, he could make them sweep the dungeons, scrub toilets, or some other harmless activity. To add authenticity, Snape would include liberal amounts of taunting and insults. Snape could have formed his own version of the Inquisitorial Squad (the Snape Squad), composed of DE children and other Voldemort supporters. The job of this group would be to identify rule-breaking students and bring them directly to Snape (thereby avoiding the Carrows). Nobody would be surprised if Snape didn’t get along well with the Carrows. The Death Eaters commonly argue amongst themselves. Instead, we learn that the Carrows are in charge of all punishment and that Snape is conspicuously absent from most of what they do. If Snape could deceive Voldemort while passing information on him to Dumbledore, Snape could fool the incompetent Carrow siblings while managing to keep most students from getting tortured.
The series is closed, but we don’t have to assume that Snape tried his utmost to protect the students. When Dumbledore asks Snape to protect the students, Snape gives “a stiff nod”. He doesn’t say, “Of course, Dumbeldore. I wouldn’t want to see any of them come to harm.” Snape agrees grudgingly, as if he thinks protecting students is a waste of time, as if he wouldn’t have bothered had Dumbledore not thought to ask him. Indeed, it’s suspicious enough that Dumbledore has to make Snape promise to protect the students. It seems natural, given his attitude, that he doesn’t try very hard to protect the students. Neville’s gouged face is a reflection of his apathy. Rowling could have slipped in an example of him protecting students, but she didn’t. We never get a memory of that. Snape protecting students as headmaster is not canon. I think Rowling meant for us to see that Snape is not a good guardian.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 4:39 pm (#2227 of 2617)
Soul Search, I think the scene in which Snape is crying in Sirius Black's room points to different directions. He is holding Lily's letter in his hands but at the same time he is in the Order's headquarters (and he had not gone there to find Lily's letter in the first place), in the house of Sirius, after being forced to take part in the chase in which Harry was almost caught and in which he inadvertently injured George gravely. Lily's letter is about Harry, James and Dumbledore (even Petunia is mentioned). Lily is in the centre but all around Lily, there are the various people who have played important roles in Snape's life - mostly those who appear in the other memories given to Harry. It is as if he were symbolically surrounded by all the people who can remind him of his loss and of his mistakes.
I do think he came to feel remorse for having been a part of the organization that killed and tortured and I think he eventually would have come to feel remorse for any specific crimes if he had committed them. I think there is redemption in the end but it is only possible if he atoned for everything he had to atone for and if he had changed in his heart, too.
If a person cares enough to save others from death in the present because that person cannot bear to stand by and watch deaths if they can be prevented, then it stands to reason that they probably feel great regret for those times when they did stand by and allow people to die in the past. And if a person regrets having stood by and allowed others to die, it stands to reason that that person even more regrets any part they had in directly participating in other Evil things. (wynnleaf)
Yes, this is change. I absolutely agree.
What he does as atonement matches the wrong he did before: He played a part in the death of Lily and James, so he gives up his life to the protection of their son. He did not care for others except for one person, so he starts saving and protecting many lives and whenever he can. He did not care for a baby and he ends up protecting children. I think it is important.
Soul Search - May 29, 2008 4:54 pm (#2228 of 2617)
I think the most telling scene is in Dumbledore's office, when Dumbledore suggests Snape might care a little for Harry and Snape responds "FOR HIM!" and then produces the doe patronus. Snape only cares for Lily.
He might feel regret for those he watched die and even more regret for his "choices" in his early life ... but he only feels remorse for Lily. But maybe that is enough.
Jason Riddle - May 29, 2008 5:33 pm (#2229 of 2617)
Julia
I just thought I should mention this: In ‘The Prince’s Tale’ Harry views Snape accidentally hitting George and next views him in Sirius’s bedroom. However, in an interview shortly after the publication of ‘Deathly Hallows’, a fan asked Rowling: “How did Snape get into Grimmauld place to get the second half of the letter, if there were protection spells on the house stopping Snape getting in?” Rowling gave this answer: “Snape entered the house immediately after Dumbledore’s death, before Moody put up the spells against him.” I guess this means that Harry saw Snape’s memories out of order. Besides that, I agree with Soul Search’s post. I can’t see Snape in tears about anyone besides Lily. If Snape was remorseful for anything else, which I don’t think he was, his remorse would be in the form of a quiet apology. “Snape took the page, bearing Lily’s signature, and her love, and tucked it inside his robes.” It seems like Rowling is emphasizing Lily here. Snape leaves the rest of the letter, and the people it represents, behind.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 5:35 pm (#2230 of 2617)
I’m trying to correct some of the misconceptions people have about Snape. Unfortunately, some people only look at the last bit of ‘Deathly Hallows’ when they look at Snape’s character. They make him a much better man than he was. (Jason)
So, ideas based on DH are misconceptions that you feel your duty to correct. I see. And I thought The Prince's Tale was there to show the readers the real Snape and his real story.
Being a fan of Snape myself, I sometimes have to stop myself from giving Snape undeserved credit.
I don't see this danger and I still don't understand how you can be a fan of a character so horrible as you seem to think Snape to be.
However there’s no evidence that Snape protected anyone. It seems we collected a fair amount of canon evidence in previous posts.
Snape could have protected students by having them do detentions with him instead of with the Carrows (cleaning dirty cauldrons not eating marshmallows), but no one mentions it. In fact, the school policy is that all punishments are delegated to the Carrows.
As far as I remember what we know is that the other teachers have to report the students to the Carrows but they don't do it. I think the Carrows will punish whoever they themselves catch and Snape cannot openly and generally ban this because of reasons discussed before and because the Carrows are not the greatest danger for the students.
Snape could have called McGonagall into his office, explained his true position (using DD’s portrait as evidence), and coordinated with her to protect students. But Snape never coordinates with any of the teachers. The teachers seem to loath Snape.
He has to keep his cover, it is essential. Voldemort is a great Legilimense and very few people are good enough at Occlumency.
Voldemort claims that he has “great respect for the teachers of Hogwarts.” Perhaps, Voldemort, who you say was really in charge, made the decision to keep the current staff of Hogwarts, not Snape.
Voldemort tends to tell lies. I'd give more credit to Snape. You claim to be a Snape fan but you apparently esteem characters like Umbridge or Voldemort more than Snape. Hagrid and McGonagall are Order members. Order members are being rounded up all over the country at Voldemort's orders.
The book NEVER says: that Snape tried to stop students from engaging in rule-breaking behavior, that he invoked an Umbridge decree to prevent the DA from reforming, or that he had a secret non-verbal pact with Hagrid for giving fake punishments to students. These are possibilities, Pesky, but Rowling gives no indication that they are true.
We never see Snape's perspective on these things, however, the facts that are canon point to the direction that Snape took all possible measures to protect the students or to reduce the harms that can happen to them. I pointed out earlier that there were other, greater dangers, not only the Carrows Snape had to defend students from.
If anything, the descriptions we are given about Hogwarts suggest that Snape let the Carrows do whatever they wanted to: cruios in detentions, chaining up first-years, beating up students, etc.
This is what the Carrows do, not Snape.
The only canon fact it uses is that Griphook told Dean that the students were punished cruelly, but without serious injury. My point was simply that everyone assumes that Snape prevented the Carrows from punishing Ginny, Neville, and Luna.
Phineas Nigellus was in the school, Griphook was not. Nothing indicates that Griphook knew any particular details. It is Phineas who gives an exact account of the punishment.
Pesky, Snape’s actions are not comparable to pushing someone out of a burning building. As far as we know, when Snape caught the students smuggling the sword down the stairs, they were not already in trouble with the Carrows (i.e. the house was not on fire to begin with). Snape would have had to deliberately hand them over to the Carrows in order for them to be in trouble (i.e. Snape would have to set fire to the house). Snape chooses not to do this. Therefore, Snape is not rescuing them from harm (protecting), but merely not harming them (giving them to the Carrows). This is just like preventing burn injuries, by not setting fire to the house.
These are only assumptions. The Carrows could have been nearby just as well. Or Snape may have wanted to get the students out of the building while he can arrange for the fake sword. Others might have been nearby. The students could have told the tale and that they were not punished. Snape had to do something but he did not harm them. The house is on fire all the time and Snape is inside while he is showing the way out to others.
wynnleaf,
Well stated about what is in canon is what we must use for any analysis of Snape. I agree.
I conclude:
Snape DID protect students as well as he could. No one died! A few bruises and scars is nothing compared to what the Carrows were capable of inflicting. Snape's protection was subtle and not out in the open for DEs to see and suspect.
Snape did nothing as a DE, or any other time, that would seriously harm his soul. Even as a young DE, he wasn't into killing or anything like that. Snape, like Regulus, joined the DE ranks based on mostly Voldemort's propaganda and he was quickly disillusioned by the reality. That made it easy for him to go to Dumbledore and change sides.
Hogwarts Class of 85 - May 29, 2008 11:10 am (#2212 of 2617)
I find it very difficult to believe that Snape never murdered or at least tortured in his DE days (but I am not sure that this is something he enjoyed). Do we see any DEs who don't do one or the other? Yes, we see Regulus leave when he sees the way HIS house elf is ill-treated, but we have no idea what he got up to prior to this. We see the way Voldemort makes Draco torture against his will. I would suspect if Voldemort said "kill him" - you did and I can't see him having people in his inner sanctum who he deemed above murder and torture.
I have always taken Snape's concern about his soul in HBP to concern for his rehabilitated soul. Having spent years regretting his involvement with Voldemort, he (and I) believe that his soul would be restored (or at least on the way to restoration).
Quinn Crockett - May 29, 2008 11:19 am (#2213 of 2617)
Awesome debate here!
Snape and Hagrid have this perfect non-verbal system worked out to protect 'good' Hogwarts students without sticky issues being raised, and Hagrid doesn't have the sense to guard this arrangement with his life. - Pesky Pixie
I was just wondering what "arrangement" you are talking about. I don't recall reading that. In any case, why are you so hard on Hagrid? No one from the Order believed Snape was not a Death Eater after he killed Dumbledore, which was the whole point, after all. And Hagrid, who saw Dumbledore as a surrogate father, would have been more angry than anyone over what Snape had (seemingly) done.
Since Hagrid generally comes across as friendly, it seems strange that Griphook would leap to the conclusion that doing work for Hagrid constitutes cruel punishment." - Jason Riddle
I can kind of see what Jason is saying here. Hagrid is well-known in the Wizard community, and anyone who knows him knows that he would never intentionally hurt anyone. It's only those who don't know Hagrid who think he is some sort of monster. Griphook is someone who is acquainted with Hagrid, even if he doesn't know him intimately.
Nevlle, for example, is being just as badly treated by his grandmother and his uncle Algie, as they are first afraid he is a squib and then think he is not as good as his parents were. - Dryleaves
I don't recall reading that they treated him badly, only that they didn't think he had any magic and were overjoyed when they discovered that he was a Wizard after all. Of course we think Augusta Longbottom is rather hard on Neville, but I have always sort of chalked that up to the fact that she is very strong and gregarious whereas Neville isn't - at first. It's hard for outgoing people to identify with the more shy and introverted, I think. Especially if it's kind of a rarity in your family. Besides, in the end she completely makes up for it all.
It's also important to remember that the series is closed. Prior to DH, it was legitimate speculation to use arguments like "I think Snape is really doing horribly dreadful things off the page. JKR didn't show us or tell us this, but we can deduce it." - Wynnleaf
I definitely agree with this in principle. But at the same time, I don't see what difference it makes if some readers choose to believe that Prof. Snape was a thoroughly wicked and horrible Death Eater who actually tortured and murdered people in his youth, and others choose to believe that he was more of a bystander. (Personally, I don't see how he could altogether have avoided participating in at least a one or two of these incidents. But of course that is simply my personal interpretation of the character.)
ETA: I have always taken Snape's concern about his soul in HBP to concern for his rehabilitated soul. Having spent years regretting his involvement with Voldemort, he (and I) believe that his soul would be restored (or at least on the way to restoration). - Hogwarts Class
Actually, so have I.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 11:32 am (#2214 of 2617)
Snape protecting the students.:
I completely agree with Pesky, Dryleaves, Wynnleaf and Soul Search (great summary, concise and up to the point!). In a regime that Voldemort created (modelled pretty much on historical totalitarian regimes) everyone is a potential spy. The Carrows (or parent DE’s) would not be stopped by any scruples from reporting information about Snape to Voldemort if they found out anything. (That there are such things is indicated in HBP: ”You can carry my words back to the others who whisper behind my back, and carry false tales of my treachery to the Dark Lord!) In the following, I am trying not to repeat what the others have already said only add a few more observations.
In The Prince’s Tale, Snape is presented as a man of his words. He makes several major promises from the hilltop scene onwards and he always keeps his word. Furthermore, he turns out to be “Dumbledore’s man through and through”, one who strictly follows DD’s orders at whatever cost to himself. He dies carrying out DD’s order. How does DD want him to protect the students?
I have your word that you will do all in your power to protect the students of Hogwarts? … I am counting upon you to remain in Lord Voldemort’s good books as long as possible, or Hogwarts will be left to the mercy of the Carrows…
Snape is not supposed to do miracles: He is supposed to remain in a position to do as much as can be done to protect the students. The only purpose of DD’s “betrayal plan” (before the chase) is to secure Snape’s position with Voldemort so that Snape could become the headmaster. Without Snape, teachers and students would be in a much greater danger. (Even if you argue that Snape did a bad job protecting the students, it does not mean that this was intentional. But I think he did as good a job as possible under the circumstances.)
I think the story of the sword has been perfectly explained by Pesky, Dryleaves and Wynnleaf. However, there are other hints concerning the way Snape protected the students. Since JKR keeps Snape’s true allegiance a secret until the end of DH, readers must be able to read between the lines to discover the hints (apart from the story of the sword). Before Ron leaves the other two in the forest, the Trio talk to Phineas Nigellus (about the punishment). Then Ron is so nervous that he identifies himself to Phineas Nigellus (who is duty-bound to assist Snape) as a Weasley (he is allegedly at home seriously ill). Not long after that, Harry and Hermione learn that Ginny is not allowed to go out of Hogwarts. Why? Because the village is full of DE’s. If Ron was careless enough to reveal himself in front of Phineas Nigellus as being on the run with Harry, he could be discovered by others as well. In the village, Ginny (about the last Weasley who is not in hiding) could easily be kidnapped and her family blackmailed. As we know, this is exactly what happens to Luna, whose father openly supports Harry. However, Luna is not kidnapped while in Hogwarts either, only on her way home. I guess this kind of protection – to protect those who were in bigger danger – had priority over protecting the students form the Carrows’ painful “detentions”.
However, Snape did try to protect the students from the Carrows as well. The sword story (Hagrid) is an example of that as well as other things mentioned in the previous posts. Another observation:
”I didn’t know that it was your night to patrol the corridors, Minerva.” (Snape)
It does sound as if the teachers patrolled the corridors at night with Snape’s permission or, rather, at his orders. We know from Neville that the teachers were supposed to report the students to the Carrows but they did not do it. This was evidently something that Snape must have expected (knowing his colleagues as he knew them). I am quite sure that if the teachers caught any rebels doing anything illegal, they did their best to cover it up. Snape could not be everywhere all the time, so he made it possible for the other teachers to participate in the protection of the students. BTW keeping McGonagall and Hagrid safe in the school (Arthur and Bill do not go to work to the Ministry after a while because they would be in danger) must have been an important achievement in itself, which had to be balanced somehow towards the Carrows so that Snape’s true goals should not become easily obvious. But I see another reason why patrolling was necessary:
You must know they’ve got all the secret passageways covered at both ends, dementors all around the boundary walls, regular patrols inside the school from what my sources tell me. (Aberforth)
So dementors outside, regular patrols (like McGonagall) inside: I think it is rather obvious. The dementors were more dangerous than the Carrows.
Neville says with reference to DA activities: Snape hated it.
He must have looked angry and I’m not at all sure it was totally just pretence. He knew it was not the DA that was going to defeat Voldemort and what they did was making it more difficult to protect them. We see Snape was furious right as he was saving Dumbledore’s life. He was talking to him as no other teachers in the books, asking him furiously why he was not more careful. He is not indifferent. His fury is a sign of his concern. He may well have been angry with DA members in a similar way.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 11:55 am (#2215 of 2617)
Hogwarts Class and Quinn,
Everybody is entitled to their own interpretation, of course, but Snape's past happens to be a discussion topic here right now. That is why we are talking about it. Whether Snape murdered or not: I think there have been quite a few posts explaining why it fits in with canon more that Snape did not kill. The state of his soul is just one of the arguments, there are others (like nobody seems to know about anything Snape did and LV would not have sent him to DD if he had been a known DE and Snape simply does not look or behave like a hardened criminal). We can imagine events off-page but then we must know that this is our imagination not canon. However, nobody has said (as far as I know) that Snape avoided becoming a murderer by openly refusing to kill when Voldemort told him so. There are other possibilities but none of them is confirmed in canon, so we have no idea how exactly he avoided committing other crimes. What is canon is that he was very young and we do not even know for sure when he joined. To Bellatrix he says: fresh from my Death Eater days... He could say "years", he does not want to play down his role as a DE, quite on the contrary! But he says "days"... Then we know it from canon that killing is not very easy. Casting Unforgivables is not easy at least in the beginning. Bellatrix explains why. Then LV chose Snape for the role of a spy. He must have had a reason (and it seems it was not Snape's experience and brilliance as a spy).
BTW, nobody has said that joining in itself was not bad enough or that it was not in itself something to atone for and feel remorse for.
As for Hagrid: I don't think Hagrid was the "cruel" part of the detention, I think it was the Forbidden Forest - provided Griphook knew at all what exactly the punishment was and he did not just assume that it must have been something cruel. He mentions no details.
PeskyPixie - May 29, 2008 12:12 pm (#2216 of 2617)
"Snape and Hagrid have this perfect non-verbal system worked out to protect 'good' Hogwarts students without sticky issues being raised, and Hagrid doesn't have the sense to guard this arrangement with his life." - PeskyPixie
"I was just wondering what "arrangement" you are talking about. I don't recall reading that." -Quinn Crockett
Snape knows he can protect his students by sending them to work in the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid rather than be punished by the Carrows. Hagrid, on the other hand, doesn't need to know where Snape's loyalties lie to hold up his end of this informal 'arrangement' (for want of a better word; I apologize if its use is a point of confusion again). He only needs to know that he himself can protect any child sent to him for punishment, and he needs to be a responsible adult and treasure this role above any other he takes on that year. Holding a 'Support Harry Potter' party while surrounded by DEs and DE spawn is nothing short of stupid (Lupin says, "'Support Harry Potter' parties are unwise in the present climate")and thoughtless and demonstrates that Hagrid, as an adult who can protect persecuted children, does not take his job seriously. In character? Of course, but I don't believe in 'laughing it off', just because it happens to be Hagrid. He's a great guy, a truly innocent being, but he goofs up big here.
"In any case, why are you so hard on Hagrid? No one from the Order believed Snape was not a Death Eater after he killed Dumbledore, which was the whole point, after all. And Hagrid, who saw Dumbledore as a surrogate father, would have been more angry than anyone over what Snape had (seemingly) done." -Quinn Crockett
I don't see the logic behind this sentence as a response to the ideas presented in my post. Are you perhaps suggesting that because Hagrid watches his foster brother (i.e. Snape) kill his foster father, and that the staff does not trust Snape, Hagrid should somehow be applauded for his thoughtlessness which destroys the safety punished children have with him? Is he expected to expose kids sent to him by Snape to his anger towards Snape? I honestly don't understand what you're getting at here. From my interpretation, Hagrid (completely in character) gets carried away by the fun he has with the kids sent to him by Snape, poking fun at LV, DEs and Snape, and toasting Harry, and does not watch out for himself or his charges. I don't think anger towards Snape would ever cause Hagrid to push kids towards danger; it's only his immaturity which does that, and I can't overlook such immaturity by an adult during a time of war.
Anyways, back to Severus ...
Orion - May 29, 2008 12:24 pm (#2217 of 2617)
"Then LV chose Snape for the role of a spy. He must have had a reason (and it seems it was not Snape's experience and brilliance as a spy).2 (Pesky)
You seem to refer to the "mistake" Snape makes when he is sent to his job interview. Forumers have mentioned that it is extremely stupid to listen in to another interview (and getting caught) when it's more important to get the job.
IMO, Snape did quite the right thing, seen from the perspective of LV: He took the chance to spy right at the moment and he had the incredible luck that Trelawney had her spot of inspiration right at the moment and blurted out her stupid prophecy. For LV the prophecy was probably more important than a spy at Hogwarts.
That is completely unimportant, I know. Just ignore this post, please.
Dryleaves - May 29, 2008 12:32 pm (#2218 of 2617)
I don't recall reading that they treated him badly, only that they didn't think he had any magic and were overjoyed when they discovered that he was a Wizard after all. (Quinn Crockett)
Here is a quote from PS/SS, chapter seven:
My great-uncle Algie kept trying to catch me off my guard and force some magic out of me - he pushed me off the end of Blackpool pier once, I nearly drowned - but nothing happened until I was eight. Great-uncle Algie came round for tea and he was hanging me out of an upstairs window by the ankles when my great-auntie Enid offered him a meringue and he accidentally let go.
Snape calls Neville "idiot boy" and threatens to poison his toad. Not nice things to do, but why so much worse than this? He never harms Neville for real, and, at least how I interpret it, cares about Neville's safety when it is actually threatened (for example by asking Crabbe to loosen his hold a little or sending him to the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid).
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 12:48 pm (#2219 of 2617)
Orion, it was actually Julia not Pesky. Yes, that is what I referred to. Of course, Snape happened to overhear something extremely important to LV but that was pure accident. He cannot have anticipated it. He was listening to another job interview. And he let himself be caught. Totally unprofessional. If he had been caught five minutes earlier, he would have had to go back to LV to report that the interview had been unsuccessful. (It did not even take place.) And he would have had nothing to offer as compensation. I don't think an experienced spy (like the one Snape became later) would have behaved like this. Neither would an experienced DE. (I guess it was dangerous to spoil an assignment LV had given him for the sake of ideas of his own.) He was not only young, he was green.
Quinn Crockett - May 29, 2008 12:50 pm (#2220 of 2617)
Are you perhaps suggesting that because Hagrid watches his foster brother (i.e. Snape) kill his foster father, and that the staff does not trust Snape, Hagrid should somehow be applauded for his thoughtlessness which destroys the safety punished children have with him? - Pesky Pixie
Uh, not at all. I just didn't know what you were referring to. Thank you for clarifying.
And Dryleaves, thank you also for that citation. I see now what you mean as well.
I guess I'll just go back to lurking. You guys are a little too hard core about all this for my taste.
Dryleaves - May 29, 2008 1:10 pm (#2221 of 2617)
I guess I'll just go back to lurking. You guys are a little too hard core about all this for my taste. (Quinn Crockett)
No! Well, if you think we are maniacs and want to keep away for your own safety I guess it's OK , but I have really appreciated your posts. The discussions are more fun when several people with different thougts and ideas take part in them.
PeskyPixie - May 29, 2008 1:13 pm (#2222 of 2617)
Absolutely, Dryleaves! The incensed debates on the Snape thread were one of the main reasons I joined the forum to begin with.
We have a reputation for being a tough bunch (just ask the Sirius fans ), but we are friends at the end of the day and respect one another's opinions.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 1:27 pm (#2223 of 2617)
Edited May 29, 2008 2:28 pm
Quinn Crockett, I agree with Dryleaves and Pesky. We do tend to answer when we are addressed but we enjoy reading different opinions and ... well, debate a little. I also appreciated your posts, really.
Even if we do not agree on everything, I think the point about healing or restored souls is a thought provoking one. There is very little in canon about it but that is why it may be interesting one day to talk about. We only know that murder rips the soul but there must be other things that harm it (whether by "ripping" or otherwise...) and there is of course the question of healing - and remorse.
Edit: Actually the point whether Snape committed other crimes that we do not know about or not is important because of his remorse. While a general involvement (having joined, even if for a short time, being if only a silent accomplice) can be, IMO, included in the remorse we see him experience (Lily-related), actively committed various crimes would need to be addressed separately in the remorse and atonement process if it is to be effective, if we can talk about redemption at all (secret - "unwritten" - crimes and similarly secret remorse do not seem to be relevant in the context of the novel).
Soul Search - May 29, 2008 3:48 pm (#2224 of 2617)
Snape only cared about Lily. Any reported remorse would only be for his having gotten her killed by Voldemort. Snape would not feel remorse for any other dastardly acts he may have performed.
wynnleaf - May 29, 2008 4:02 pm (#2225 of 2617)
Snape only cared about Lily. Any reported remorse would only be for his having gotten her killed by Voldemort. Snape would not feel remorse for any other dastardly acts he may have performed. (Soul Search)
I agree that this was true when Snape first turned to Dumbledore and JKR said that if it hadn't been for loving Lily, Snape wouldn't have cared about Harry's fate.
But the idea that Snape continued to only feel remorse for his part in Lily's death is, in my opinion, incompatible with Snape's statement that he had reached the point of no longer being able to stand by and watch others die if he could save them.
If a person cares enough to save others from death in the present because that person cannot bear to stand by and watch deaths if they can be prevented, then it stands to reason that they probably feel great regret for those times when they did stand by and allow people to die in the past. And if a person regrets having stood by and allowed others to die, it stands to reason that that person even more regrets any part they had in directly participating in other Evil things.
Jason Riddle - May 29, 2008 4:15 pm (#2226 of 2617)
PeskyPixie and Dryleaves, well I do like to debate, but all of my posts on Snape have been serious (except when I’ve used sarcasm). I’m trying to correct some of the misconceptions people have about Snape. Unfortunately, some people only look at the last bit of ‘Deathly Hallows’ when they look at Snape’s character. They make him a much better man than he was. Being a fan of Snape myself, I sometimes have to stop myself from giving Snape undeserved credit. Using evidence from all 7 books, I’m encouraging people to see Snape in a more balanced, more realistic way. I agree that Snape couldn’t protect every student without being caught by Voldemort and replaced. I also agree that we cannot prove that Snape did not protect anyone [just like I cannot prove that Snape harmed anyone as a DE]. However there’s no evidence that Snape protected anyone. Snape could have protected students by having them do detentions with him instead of with the Carrows (cleaning dirty cauldrons not eating marshmallows), but no one mentions it. In fact, the school policy is that all punishments are delegated to the Carrows. Snape could have called McGonagall into his office, explained his true position (using DD’s portrait as evidence), and coordinated with her to protect students. But Snape never coordinates with any of the teachers. The teachers seem to loath Snape. Voldemort claims that he has “great respect for the teachers of Hogwarts.” Perhaps, Voldemort, who you say was really in charge, made the decision to keep the current staff of Hogwarts, not Snape. The book NEVER says: that Snape tried to stop students from engaging in rule-breaking behavior, that he invoked an Umbridge decree to prevent the DA from reforming, or that he had a secret non-verbal pact with Hagrid for giving fake punishments to students. These are possibilities, Pesky, but Rowling gives no indication that they are true. If anything, the descriptions we are given about Hogwarts suggest that Snape let the Carrows do whatever they wanted to: cruios in detentions, chaining up first-years, beating up students, etc.
Pesky, although Griphook obviously wouldn’t enjoy working for Hagrid, it’s questionable whether Griphook would consider it cruel, especially since Griphook has met Hagrid. How much would Griphook, who considers himself above wizarding affairs, know about the forest outside Hogwarts? Having worked with dragons and dangerous anti-theft enchantments, how cruel would he consider being sent to the forest to be? Dryleaves, your alternative explanation for Bill’s description doesn’t make sense. Why would Bill say, “My sister and her friends were punished cruelly, but they weren’t seriously injured,” just because he thought Snape’s intention was to be cruel? Peskyleaves, I agree that my theory about the Carrows giving an additional punishment is purely guesswork. The only canon fact it uses is that Griphook told Dean that the students were punished cruelly, but without serious injury. My point was simply that everyone assumes that Snape prevented the Carrows from punishing Ginny, Neville, and Luna. We don’t actually know this and it’s strange that Griphook got the impression from Bill that the punishment was cruel. Pesky, Snape’s actions are not comparable to pushing someone out of a burning building. As far as we know, when Snape caught the students smuggling the sword down the stairs, they were not already in trouble with the Carrows (i.e. the house was not on fire to begin with). Snape would have had to deliberately hand them over to the Carrows in order for them to be in trouble (i.e. Snape would have to set fire to the house). Snape chooses not to do this. Therefore, Snape is not rescuing them from harm (protecting), but merely not harming them (giving them to the Carrows). This is just like preventing burn injuries, by not setting fire to the house.
If I was in Slytherin (with pure blood), I would definitely prefer Snape as a teacher. I would probably be able to learn a lot from him. Otherwise I would prefer Umbridge. As long as you don’t interfere with her policies or break into her office, she doesn’t hurt you. Snape tries to hurt you, even if you haven’t done anything to deserve it. I would learn less from Umbridge, but I would probably try counter that with self-study.
wynnleaf, It’s absolutely possible that Snape could have kept his kept his cover with LV while protecting the students. In HBP when Snape is escaping, he interrupts a DE who is using crucio on Harry [“No! …Have you forgotten our orders? Potter belongs to the Dark Lord – we are to leave him! Go! Go!”]. Was he worried about his cover then? In OotP Snape tells Crabbe to loosen his hold on Neville [“And Crabbe, loosen your hold a little, if Longbottom suffocates it will mean a lot of tedious paperwork, and I am afraid I shall have to mention it on your reference if ever you apply for a job.”]. Was Snape worried that Crabbe, son of a DE, would inform Voldemort that Snape had protected Neville thereby revealing his true loyalties? Snape could have used similar tactics to stop Crabbe from using crucio on students in detention, but he doesn’t. Snape is intelligent, skilled at magic, and well practiced in deception. Certainly he was capable of protecting students from being tortured while still seeming like a loyal DE. All Snape had to do was more of what he had done in previous years. He could have had all student punishments referred to himself. Upon receiving students for detention, he could make them sweep the dungeons, scrub toilets, or some other harmless activity. To add authenticity, Snape would include liberal amounts of taunting and insults. Snape could have formed his own version of the Inquisitorial Squad (the Snape Squad), composed of DE children and other Voldemort supporters. The job of this group would be to identify rule-breaking students and bring them directly to Snape (thereby avoiding the Carrows). Nobody would be surprised if Snape didn’t get along well with the Carrows. The Death Eaters commonly argue amongst themselves. Instead, we learn that the Carrows are in charge of all punishment and that Snape is conspicuously absent from most of what they do. If Snape could deceive Voldemort while passing information on him to Dumbledore, Snape could fool the incompetent Carrow siblings while managing to keep most students from getting tortured.
The series is closed, but we don’t have to assume that Snape tried his utmost to protect the students. When Dumbledore asks Snape to protect the students, Snape gives “a stiff nod”. He doesn’t say, “Of course, Dumbeldore. I wouldn’t want to see any of them come to harm.” Snape agrees grudgingly, as if he thinks protecting students is a waste of time, as if he wouldn’t have bothered had Dumbledore not thought to ask him. Indeed, it’s suspicious enough that Dumbledore has to make Snape promise to protect the students. It seems natural, given his attitude, that he doesn’t try very hard to protect the students. Neville’s gouged face is a reflection of his apathy. Rowling could have slipped in an example of him protecting students, but she didn’t. We never get a memory of that. Snape protecting students as headmaster is not canon. I think Rowling meant for us to see that Snape is not a good guardian.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 4:39 pm (#2227 of 2617)
Soul Search, I think the scene in which Snape is crying in Sirius Black's room points to different directions. He is holding Lily's letter in his hands but at the same time he is in the Order's headquarters (and he had not gone there to find Lily's letter in the first place), in the house of Sirius, after being forced to take part in the chase in which Harry was almost caught and in which he inadvertently injured George gravely. Lily's letter is about Harry, James and Dumbledore (even Petunia is mentioned). Lily is in the centre but all around Lily, there are the various people who have played important roles in Snape's life - mostly those who appear in the other memories given to Harry. It is as if he were symbolically surrounded by all the people who can remind him of his loss and of his mistakes.
I do think he came to feel remorse for having been a part of the organization that killed and tortured and I think he eventually would have come to feel remorse for any specific crimes if he had committed them. I think there is redemption in the end but it is only possible if he atoned for everything he had to atone for and if he had changed in his heart, too.
If a person cares enough to save others from death in the present because that person cannot bear to stand by and watch deaths if they can be prevented, then it stands to reason that they probably feel great regret for those times when they did stand by and allow people to die in the past. And if a person regrets having stood by and allowed others to die, it stands to reason that that person even more regrets any part they had in directly participating in other Evil things. (wynnleaf)
Yes, this is change. I absolutely agree.
What he does as atonement matches the wrong he did before: He played a part in the death of Lily and James, so he gives up his life to the protection of their son. He did not care for others except for one person, so he starts saving and protecting many lives and whenever he can. He did not care for a baby and he ends up protecting children. I think it is important.
Soul Search - May 29, 2008 4:54 pm (#2228 of 2617)
I think the most telling scene is in Dumbledore's office, when Dumbledore suggests Snape might care a little for Harry and Snape responds "FOR HIM!" and then produces the doe patronus. Snape only cares for Lily.
He might feel regret for those he watched die and even more regret for his "choices" in his early life ... but he only feels remorse for Lily. But maybe that is enough.
Jason Riddle - May 29, 2008 5:33 pm (#2229 of 2617)
Julia
I just thought I should mention this: In ‘The Prince’s Tale’ Harry views Snape accidentally hitting George and next views him in Sirius’s bedroom. However, in an interview shortly after the publication of ‘Deathly Hallows’, a fan asked Rowling: “How did Snape get into Grimmauld place to get the second half of the letter, if there were protection spells on the house stopping Snape getting in?” Rowling gave this answer: “Snape entered the house immediately after Dumbledore’s death, before Moody put up the spells against him.” I guess this means that Harry saw Snape’s memories out of order. Besides that, I agree with Soul Search’s post. I can’t see Snape in tears about anyone besides Lily. If Snape was remorseful for anything else, which I don’t think he was, his remorse would be in the form of a quiet apology. “Snape took the page, bearing Lily’s signature, and her love, and tucked it inside his robes.” It seems like Rowling is emphasizing Lily here. Snape leaves the rest of the letter, and the people it represents, behind.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 5:35 pm (#2230 of 2617)
I’m trying to correct some of the misconceptions people have about Snape. Unfortunately, some people only look at the last bit of ‘Deathly Hallows’ when they look at Snape’s character. They make him a much better man than he was. (Jason)
So, ideas based on DH are misconceptions that you feel your duty to correct. I see. And I thought The Prince's Tale was there to show the readers the real Snape and his real story.
Being a fan of Snape myself, I sometimes have to stop myself from giving Snape undeserved credit.
I don't see this danger and I still don't understand how you can be a fan of a character so horrible as you seem to think Snape to be.
However there’s no evidence that Snape protected anyone. It seems we collected a fair amount of canon evidence in previous posts.
Snape could have protected students by having them do detentions with him instead of with the Carrows (cleaning dirty cauldrons not eating marshmallows), but no one mentions it. In fact, the school policy is that all punishments are delegated to the Carrows.
As far as I remember what we know is that the other teachers have to report the students to the Carrows but they don't do it. I think the Carrows will punish whoever they themselves catch and Snape cannot openly and generally ban this because of reasons discussed before and because the Carrows are not the greatest danger for the students.
Snape could have called McGonagall into his office, explained his true position (using DD’s portrait as evidence), and coordinated with her to protect students. But Snape never coordinates with any of the teachers. The teachers seem to loath Snape.
He has to keep his cover, it is essential. Voldemort is a great Legilimense and very few people are good enough at Occlumency.
Voldemort claims that he has “great respect for the teachers of Hogwarts.” Perhaps, Voldemort, who you say was really in charge, made the decision to keep the current staff of Hogwarts, not Snape.
Voldemort tends to tell lies. I'd give more credit to Snape. You claim to be a Snape fan but you apparently esteem characters like Umbridge or Voldemort more than Snape. Hagrid and McGonagall are Order members. Order members are being rounded up all over the country at Voldemort's orders.
The book NEVER says: that Snape tried to stop students from engaging in rule-breaking behavior, that he invoked an Umbridge decree to prevent the DA from reforming, or that he had a secret non-verbal pact with Hagrid for giving fake punishments to students. These are possibilities, Pesky, but Rowling gives no indication that they are true.
We never see Snape's perspective on these things, however, the facts that are canon point to the direction that Snape took all possible measures to protect the students or to reduce the harms that can happen to them. I pointed out earlier that there were other, greater dangers, not only the Carrows Snape had to defend students from.
If anything, the descriptions we are given about Hogwarts suggest that Snape let the Carrows do whatever they wanted to: cruios in detentions, chaining up first-years, beating up students, etc.
This is what the Carrows do, not Snape.
The only canon fact it uses is that Griphook told Dean that the students were punished cruelly, but without serious injury. My point was simply that everyone assumes that Snape prevented the Carrows from punishing Ginny, Neville, and Luna.
Phineas Nigellus was in the school, Griphook was not. Nothing indicates that Griphook knew any particular details. It is Phineas who gives an exact account of the punishment.
Pesky, Snape’s actions are not comparable to pushing someone out of a burning building. As far as we know, when Snape caught the students smuggling the sword down the stairs, they were not already in trouble with the Carrows (i.e. the house was not on fire to begin with). Snape would have had to deliberately hand them over to the Carrows in order for them to be in trouble (i.e. Snape would have to set fire to the house). Snape chooses not to do this. Therefore, Snape is not rescuing them from harm (protecting), but merely not harming them (giving them to the Carrows). This is just like preventing burn injuries, by not setting fire to the house.
These are only assumptions. The Carrows could have been nearby just as well. Or Snape may have wanted to get the students out of the building while he can arrange for the fake sword. Others might have been nearby. The students could have told the tale and that they were not punished. Snape had to do something but he did not harm them. The house is on fire all the time and Snape is inside while he is showing the way out to others.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2231 to 2270
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:04 pm
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 5:36 pm (#2231 of 2617)
Otherwise I would prefer Umbridge. As long as you don’t interfere with her policies or break into her office, she doesn’t hurt you.
If you lie low and put up with her lies and ways and don't mind not being taught.
Snape tries to hurt you, even if you haven’t done anything to deserve it.
For example?
I would learn less from Umbridge, but I would probably try counter that with self-study.
Great teacher.
wynnleaf, It’s absolutely possible that Snape could have kept his kept his cover with LV while protecting the students. In HBP when Snape is escaping, he interrupts a DE who is using crucio on Harry [“No! …Have you forgotten our orders? Potter belongs to the Dark Lord – we are to leave him! Go! Go!”]. Was he worried about his cover then?
He was not worried because LV really thought that he must kill Potter and really gave this order. Snape had just done a great "service" to LV, he would not be suspected right now.
Snape is intelligent, skilled at magic, and well practiced in deception. Certainly he was capable of protecting students from being tortured while still seeming like a loyal DE. All Snape had to do was more of what he had done in previous years.
I think that is what he did. But he had to be careful so it should not be noticed. He is skilled enough to protect the students while deceiving everybody (perhaps even some readers ).
Snape could have formed his own version of the Inquisitorial Squad (the Snape Squad), composed of DE children and other Voldemort supporters. The job of this group would be to identify rule-breaking students and bring them directly to Snape (thereby avoiding the Carrows).
I think the canon ideas that teachers patrolled the corridors and that they had to report wrong-doers were at least as good.
Nobody would be surprised if Snape didn’t get along well with the Carrows.
Voldemort maybe. Or the Carrows themselves.
Instead, we learn that the Carrows are in charge of all punishment and that Snape is conspicuously absent from most of what they do.
Perhaps the Carrows only punish students behind Snape's back. When Snape is not absent, there is no Crucio.
If Snape could deceive Voldemort while passing information on him to Dumbledore, Snape could fool the incompetent Carrow siblings while managing to keep most students from getting tortured.
The Carrows are sadistic. They will notice if they are not allowed to torture.
When Dumbledore asks Snape to protect the students, Snape gives “a stiff nod”. He doesn’t say, “Of course, Dumbeldore. I wouldn’t want to see any of them come to harm.” Snape agrees grudgingly, as if he thinks protecting students is a waste of time, as if he wouldn’t have bothered had Dumbledore not thought to ask him.
I don't think this is what it means. I think DD is repeatedly satisfied with Snape's nod because he knows that it is enough, Snape has given his word and will keep it. He does not want the Unbreakable Vow because he knows Snape. Snape always keeps his word. This is canon.
Indeed, it’s suspicious enough that Dumbledore has to make Snape promise to protect the students. It seems natural, given his attitude, that he doesn’t try very hard to protect the students.
I don't know what you mean. Snape has been protecting students for 7 books. I think the readers need to know that DD wanted Snape to be the headmaster and why - to make it clear that it was not his ambition. Also, "doing everything in his power" does not only include the protection itself but creating the possibility that starts with AK-ing DD.
Neville’s gouged face is a reflection of his apathy.
Apathy? I did not have this impression.
Rowling could have slipped in an example of him protecting students, but she didn’t. We never get a memory of that. Snape protecting students as headmaster is not canon. I think Rowling meant for us to see that Snape is not a good guardian.
It is canon and there are examples (though not a memory) but you have to be able to notice the clues. You seem to have read the surface only.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 5:47 pm (#2232 of 2617)
Jason, I know about the interview in which JKR says that Snape enters 12GP right after AK-ing DD. This is also a good place for these feelings to surface but it does not make sense that Harry does not see the memories in order. All the other memories are in order. The interview is not enough, JKR should change the book or the interview will be forgotten. I don't think Moody's charm should prevent Snape from entering. He can fly after all, he does not have to use the door. Also, the enchantment (Dusty) is based on the conception that Snape is a murderer, which he is not. Harry's protection at the Dursley's is based on the conception that Petunia is Lily's sister. I don't think the protection would work if Petunia's being Lily's sister were a mistake only. So why should Moody's protection work when Snape did not really murder DD?
I agree that Lily is in the centre for Snape but through his love for her, he understands other things. Even if he does not learn to love James. Lily is in the centre of his remorse as well as in the centre of his sin. Whatever he has to atone for is related to Lily and can be symbolized by Lily alone. That is why his atonement and remorse can be full even though it is channelled through his love for Lily alone.
wynnleaf - May 29, 2008 6:55 pm (#2233 of 2617)
Soul Search,
When Snape uses his patronus in The Princes Tale, he is responding directly to DD's comment about his perhaps caring about Harry. JKR made it clear that Snape continued to dislike Harry, so it makes sense that his protecting Harry never became because of a care for Harry personally, but because of his love for Lily. But to go from that to the notion that therefore Snape didn't care about anyone or anything else, or feel any remorse except over Lily just doesn't really work as it doesn't follow directly from the fact that Snape doesn't like Harry.
mona amon - May 29, 2008 11:38 pm (#2234 of 2617)
I seem to have missed a long and interesting debate!
Julia, I think we have to conclude that Snape's memories are in chronological order, except for one. I don't see how he could have gotten around Moody's protections, which were set up against the one who 'killed' Dumbledore. Snape did not murder Dumbledore, since Dumbledore asked him to do it, but he certainly killed him. And we have the further evidence of the interview to show us what JKR's intent really was.
Julia H. - May 30, 2008 12:19 am (#2235 of 2617)
Mona, what about flying? "Dusty" seems to guard the entrance but what if Snape gets through an upstairs window?
JKR's interview will not necessarily be read by readers of DH. I first heard about this interview on this Forum. If I had not joined the Forum, perhaps I would never have found out what JKR's intent was and I bet there are lots and lots of HP readers who do not read the interviews. The change between this scene and the previous one (spell hitting George): is a simple And next. We don't see Harry flying backwards in time and there is no reason to change the chronology. Without the interview, it is not more logical or obvious that there is a sudden change in chronology than the idea that Snape did get in somehow in spite of Moody's charms. (It is magic against magic.)
Otherwise it is fine for me if Snape goes to 12GP after DD's death. The scene is just as meaningful and the information on DD in Lily's letter becomes much more intriguing: Snape has just killed DD, his mentor and surrogate father at his own orders, he is in despair, he is an outcast, the new situation must be terrible and almost unbearable - he has every reason to cry. Then in this situation, he finds Lily's letter with lots of things in it for him to react to, including the hint on young DD's mistake (prior to the publication of Rita's book), the revelation that perfect father figure DD may have made a mistake similar to Snape's.
When Snape uses his patronus in The Princes Tale, he is responding directly to DD's comment about his perhaps caring about Harry. (Wynneaf)
I think his reaction to the news that Harry must be killed by LV is somewhat in contradiction with complete denial. I guess Harry's life now means to Snape at least as much as the life of every other person he won't just watch die if he can help. Maybe there is a changing attitude to Harry that Snape desperately denies, I don't know. But he is not indifferent. I agree that whatever he feels towards Harry as a person, he may still feel remorse for having chosen the wrong way once.
Dryleaves - May 30, 2008 1:22 am (#2236 of 2617)
Dryleaves, your alternative explanation for Bill’s description doesn’t make sense. Why would Bill say, “My sister and her friends were punished cruelly, but they weren’t seriously injured,” just because he thought Snape’s intention was to be cruel? (Jason)
Well, maybe it doesn't. And I don't mean to say this is the way it was. What I meant was that we don't really know how Bill received the information in the first place or what he told Griphook, and that it is possible that they both, and their original source, even if it is Ginny herself, may all be influenced by what they expect to be true and therefore also express it in these terms. Harry and Hermione react differently when they hear about what the punishment actually was. They are relieved as they had expected something worse, and I assume that what you mean is that so must all the others have felt. But they never mention what the punishment consisted of and we can't be sure they even knew, even if it was Bill who told Griphook (as we don't know what he actually told him). What we learn in this chapter is that Snape have been fooled to believe that he is depositing the real sword at Gringotts when it is a fake and that he gave Ginny, Neville and Luna a punishment that Harry and Hermione (Ron is hungry and under the influence of the locket) consider a relatively mild one. In "The Prince's Tale" we learn that he knew the sword was a fake and that he helped Harry to get the real one. We also learn that he promised DD to protect the students.
Unfortunately, some people only look at the last bit of ‘Deathly Hallows’ when they look at Snape’s character. (Jason)
I think the chapter "The Prince's Tale" is meant to be a key to the interpretation of Snape's character. It is not the whole truth, but it gives us an indication to how the ambiguity in the descriptions of the earlier books could be read. Then I must say I never saw Snape as an "evil" character before DH, even if I tried to be open to the possibility after HBP. Unpleasant, yes, and I was often angry with him for the way he treated his students, but I never thought he truly wanted to harm them, I thought there were quite a lot of evidence or indications to the contrary. So I don't think the end of DH is that different from what we actually see earlier, only that this time we get the picture more directly from Snape, while we only saw Harry's perspective before.
Julia H. - May 30, 2008 1:56 am (#2237 of 2617)
If Snape was remorseful for anything else, which I don’t think he was, his remorse would be in the form of a quiet apology. (Jason)
By "being remorseful about anything else" I mean a general remorse for his bad choices (like having been a DE). I think this is what he should be remorseful besides being specifically remorseful for the prophecy and the part he played in the Potters' death. Actually, the fact that he also tried to save the Potters and did everything he could to save them (including continually risking his life) and that Pettigrew's betrayal was the final reason why his efforts were unsuccessful underlines the importance of this general remorse, which however can be centred around Lily, who is the original reason and permanent symbol of his change.
As for "a quiet apology", that was what he tried at 16 towards Lily. It was not enough. Now he does not apologize (quietly or loudly - that is Karkaroff's way) - and I don't know to whom specifically he could address such an apology, especially in the given situation, - but he lives a life of atonement, redeeming himself with actions, and that is (IMO) much more than any apology. Remorse does not equal an apology. Either one is possible without the other. Remorse is something that happens inside. Its outside manifestation has various possible ways, including an apology, atonement or even suicide or going mad with remorse. Snape's way is the active atonement (as well as a change of personality, I guess) to respond to his remorse, which, however, is not the remorse itself.
mona amon - May 30, 2008 4:51 am (#2238 of 2617)
"Dusty" seems to guard the entrance but what if Snape gets through an upstairs window?
JKR's interview will not necessarily be read by readers of DH. (Julia)
I'm sure all possible points of entry were protected, although we only see the one at the front door. Mad-eye did not know that Snape could fly like a bat, but he knew that he could fly in on a broomstick.
I used what JKR said in the interview to figure out her real intent. Of course a person who has not read it will probably conclude that he came to #12 GP after the Seven Potters Chase, just as I did the first time I read DH.
But it makes a lot more sense to me if he came there immediately after the death of DD, to be alone and mourn for the one he was forced to kill.
If she was to put it in chronological order this memory will have to come immediately after the 'after all this time? Always!' memory and before the one where portrait DD tells him he has to betray the Order's plans. I'm not sure if it would really fit in there. Perhaps Jo did not realise how much significance we would attach to such details, Lol!
Julia H. - May 30, 2008 5:04 am (#2239 of 2617)
I'm sure all possible points of entry were protected, although we only see the one at the front door. Mad-eye did not know that Snape could fly like a bat, but he knew that he could fly in on a broomstick. (Mona)
"... the other side can do magic too..."
If she was to put it in chronological order this memory will have to come immediately after the 'after all this time? Always!' memory and before the one where portrait DD tells him he has to betray the Order's plans. I'm not sure if it would really fit in there. (Mona)
Why not? As it is, the change from the scene where Snape last talks to living DD to the scene where he first talks to the portrait is quite abrupt. Seeing him mourning between the two scenes would be good, IMO. It would emphasize that the change is not merely ... hm... technical for him and of course the interpretation possibilities would be different. Nothing calls for a sudden change in chronology at this one point and it is very difficult to guess that this is what we are meant to think. Jo could have at least mentioned that Harry was flying backwards in time. (?)
Dryleaves - May 30, 2008 5:08 am (#2240 of 2617)
Perhaps Jo did not realise how much significance we would attach to such details, Lol! (mona amon)
But she ought to have guessed it, wouldn't she? Maybe it is as you say Mona, that she abandoned the chronology because she thought it would fit the narrative better, but as the rest of the memories are chronological it is a bit confusing. I am not all that happy with her interview amendments to the story, like this one or her statement that DD was in love with Grindelwald. I think it should have been clear (or at least hinted at) in the books.
Orion - May 31, 2008 1:27 pm (#2241 of 2617)
Everybody avoids the most obvious conclusion that Rowling was surprised when the question how Snape could get aroung the protections was sprung at her and tried to react at the spur of the moment. She meant Snape to enter after the seven Potters chase, but she forgot the enchantments, being only human and no supercomputer, and she made up a quick explanation. So she created a bigger contradiction as if she had admitted she forgot the protections or simply said "Snape was a very skilled wizard and overcame Moody's protections quite easily."
Dryleaves - Jun 1, 2008 2:14 am (#2242 of 2617)
Orion, you are like the child in the story of The Emperor's New Clothes...!
wynnleaf - Jun 1, 2008 4:55 am (#2243 of 2617)
Orion, I completely agree. In any case, I thought Moody's "trap" was kind of ridiculous and didn't take into account, for instance, nonverbal spells at which Snape excelled. And why should Snape fear a phantom of DD anyway? I never got that. In any case, I thought a number of things JKR has said to "explain" DH were pretty much made up on the spot because she can't very well say "I must have made a mistake."
mona amon - Jun 1, 2008 8:50 am (#2244 of 2617)
I still feel that what she said in the interview was what she really intended, Snape went to #12 immediately after Dumbledore's death. For whatever reason he goes there, to mourn for DD or to clean up before DEs try to get in, it makes sense to do it as soon as possible, before the Order has a chance to put up protective enchantments against him. Why would he go there almost two months later and risk getting caught by the Order?
Julia H. - Jun 1, 2008 12:12 pm (#2245 of 2617)
Edited Jun 1, 2008 1:28 pm
To me both scenarios make perfect sense. Snape had a very good reason to mourn right after DD's death, this is obvious I guess. After the chase, I think what made him go there in desperation was the "betrayal plan" he had been made to participate in and the fact that he had inadvertently caused a very serious injury and that Harry had very nearly been caught - I think he felt responsibility for all these things and it would explain why he went precisely to the Order's former headquarters. IMO, it would explain his somewhat changed attitude to DD's portrait in the next memory scene as well.
We don't know what happens in JKR's mind but the "mistake version with on-the-spot explanation" seems to be rather probable to me. (There are other contradictions in the books as well. In HBP, Snape says he had 16 years of information on DD to give Voldemort when he returned - according to my calculations, it was more like 14 years.) The reasoning that Snape was able to get in despite the protections would make sense also because he also got into Hogwarts to talk to DD's portrait before the chase and Hogwarts was another heavily guarded place. Otherwise the sudden change of chronology, if intentional, should have been indicated somehow. (Is there anyone who figured it out without JKR's hint?)
Dryleaves - Jun 1, 2008 11:39 pm (#2246 of 2617)
The accident with George's ear suggests that Snape never really got on good terms with brooms and this may be a reason for him to learn to fly without one...
Julia H. - Jun 1, 2008 11:48 pm (#2247 of 2617)
Good idea, Dryleaves! I can visualize that happening.
Orion - Jun 2, 2008 9:39 am (#2248 of 2617)
It also means that Snape didn't save Lupin, he only tried to and wasn't successful. ***nitpick***
Julia H. - Jun 2, 2008 10:10 am (#2249 of 2617)
Orion, I think we have always known this. Snape wanted to save Lupin (intent is important in DH) but his spell went the wrong way and hit George instead of the DE. Although Lupin is saved somehow... (I wonder if Snape's spell may have had some effect on the DE's spell if not on the DE himself, like changing its direction. I'm not sure if something like that is possible in the world of HP or not but maybe the two spells collided or nearly collided and then each changed its direction.)
Dryleaves - Jun 2, 2008 10:19 am (#2250 of 2617)
...or maybe Lupin heard George scream and flinched, so that the DE's spell missed...
Orion - Jun 2, 2008 2:03 pm (#2251 of 2617)
To take this discussion even further away from the current topic...
Re: The spell that goes wrong and takes George's ear off. It's generally agreed upon that Snape is rubbish at flying on a broom. There's only one canon hint at it, that is: A little boy tries to mount a buckling broomstick. For me this sentence isn't a real hint that Snape can't fly well.
It hints at another thing, IMO. Snape comes to Hogwarts with a very low view of himself. It is true of horses and dogs that they sense the fear of humans who try to control them. This buckling broomstick seems to be the equivalent of an old riding school horse which has seen everything and is permanently underwhelmed by its riders. It will only go "up!" if the person has the required personal authority.
So I ask myself: How low must the self-esteem of a little boy be, when a broomstick, a piece of wood with bristles attached, decides to get fresh with him? A broomstick is not particularly sentient or sapient. You can order it to go "up!", you can steer it, you can Accio it, and that's it. Even a stupid piece of wood looks down its long nose on little Snape. IMO, this little sentence wants to show precisely that, and not skill at flying, or lack thereof.
We can't look at Quidditch skills for evidence for Snape's lack of flying abilities because it isn't compulsory - you are either interested or you're being left well alone. Snape probably doesn't turn up for try-outs at all, wanting to be brainy rather than brawny anyway. I don't claim Snape is great at flying a broom, I just say that we don't have canon evidence of yes or no.
So what's left of the misdirected spell that takes George's ear off is essentially a big fat red herring. Because I don't think Snape would miss. I'm miles away from SuperSnape, just to the contrary, I despise it if he is glorified, but he is certainly awesome when it comes to aiming spells, and he just wouldn't miss, whether on a broomstick, or in a tornado.
Julia H. - Jun 2, 2008 2:27 pm (#2252 of 2617)
Orion, it makes a lot of sense what you are saying both about that broomstick and the red herring. (You really are like that child in The Emperor's New Clothes.) However, even if the misdirected spell is just a red herring (JKR would do "anything" to deceive us about Snape until the end), we must put up with it, since it is in the book. So what if we just say (to help JKR a bit ) that this uncharacteristic mistake may be due to the fact that Snape is going through something worse than a tornado? He has recently AK-d DD, he has not yet got used to his new situation, has recently witnessed the death of Charity Burbage and told the Order's escape plan to LV and is now forced to chase Harry Potter together with DE's and LV himself, "openly fighting" against the Order for the first time and all this is becoming too much for him. He is human after all. (I think he will regain his strength later but first he has to go through this crisis.) It makes sense then that after this scene he finds himself at 12GP crying - another unusual thing for Snape to do.
rambkowalczyk - Jun 2, 2008 2:39 pm (#2253 of 2617)
There's also the statement that Tonks makes when she compliments Ron for Stunning a Death Eater while riding a broom. It's not as easy as it looks.
PeskyPixie - Jun 2, 2008 8:02 pm (#2254 of 2617)
I was thinking of that as well, ramb.
I need to respond to a few points made about my previous post, but I doubt I'll get around to it tonight. However, I was wondering, isn't it canon that Snape brings back one or two of Umbridge's decrees? or is this something I've invented on my own?
Julia H. - Jun 2, 2008 11:03 pm (#2255 of 2617)
Good catch, Ramb. It may be JKR's hint to counterbalance the red herring and to establish the plausibility of Snape missing the target (although readers are not supposed to notice that before they have read The Prince's Tale).
He lost his hood during the chase.
Not typical. Snape must be a real nervous wreck now (much more than on an average day).
Snape had reinstated Umbridge's old decree forbidding gatherings of three or more students or any unofficial student societies. (Chapter 16) Pesky, I think this is what you were referring to.
Dryleaves - Jun 3, 2008 12:45 am (#2256 of 2617)
Hmm... I wasn't that serious when writing that comment. It was just a stray thought partly based on the fact that I, myself am a person who would prefer just controlling my own arms and legs (I am not very good at that either)to also controlling a vehicle. I don't know about pieces of wood, but at least metal artefacts, often equipped with rubber wheels, usually sense my fear... Guess I just didn't want to feel alone in this... But of course, there is nothing that says that Snape was particularly bad at flying a broom. It is more likely he flew well enough.
But as Ramb says, it is probably not easy to hit someone with a spell when riding a broom, as both you and your target are moving. And this opens up to another scenario, that it is not Snape that is rubbish at flying and aiming, but the DE. He flies up between Snape and George and Lupin and aims for Lupin. Snape aims for the DE's wandhand, but when casting the spell the DE gets unsteady and wobbles out of Snape's aim and the Sectumsempra passes by him and hits George instead. And the DE's spell of course misses its target. But the way the memory looks I think Snape's intention was to save Lupin and that he played his part in the chase more convincingly than he had intended.
Then I like the thought that Snape actually is nervous and has difficulty coping with the pressure he is under after all.
wynnleaf - Jun 3, 2008 5:34 am (#2257 of 2617)
I've seen the assumption that Snape wasn't a good flyer many times, always, I assume, based on that memory of the bucking broom and the girl laughing. But as you guys are saying, that doesn't prove anything.
Probably Snape learned to fly at Hogwarts, rather than, like Draco or the Weasleys, learning to fly at home. That first flying lesson would be his first time on a broom.
One thing that is interesting is to speculate on just what JKR was trying to reveal with particular memory. Why were kids laughing at Snape's predicament with the bucking broom and why was the memory of any importance to him? I've often noticed that when a kid is kind of the "odd one out" other children will laugh at the child even over things that all or most of the children experience. Note I say "laugh at" rather than "laugh with". That is, they will laugh as though when a particular thing happens to that child, it makes him/her an object of ridicule, even though when the same thing happens to other children, it's no problem. And I think that's important in the memory, as my impression is the girl is laughing at Snape rather than with him.
As for Snape's flying ability, he doesn't seem to have any problem with the Quidditch game he referees during PS/SS.
By the way, I wonder who taught who to fly? Voldemort or Snape?
Julia H. - Jun 3, 2008 6:36 am (#2258 of 2617)
Edited Jun 3, 2008 7:53 am
Dryleaves, this is another plausible scenario, I think.
By the way, I wonder who taught who to fly? Voldemort or Snape? (Wynnleaf)
There was a rather lively discussion about that on the Read A Long. It would be good to know. We sort of agreed that Snape flying like Voldemort indicates how much (of all DE's) Snape's abilities approach those of Voldemort's and how close they get to each other as "master and servant" (regardless who teaches who, it is not the usual master and servant situation), which in effect underlines that the main difference between them lies in their choices (how and with what purpose they use the power they have) and highlights LV's cruelty when he kills Snape, a supposed "friend".
That is, they will laugh as though when a particular thing happens to that child, it makes him/her an object of ridicule, even though when the same thing happens to other children, it's no problem. And I think that's important in the memory, as my impression is the girl is laughing at Snape rather than with him.
I agree. And this experience (probably just one example of many similar experiences) left a lasting impression on Snape if he still remembers it when he is in his thirties, if it comes to the surface so easily (at least that is how I see it) and as it happens, this is the memory where Snape shouts "ENOUGH!".
Another reason why this memory may be important is that it perhaps indicates that Snape (despite his initial great expectations about Hogwarts) continues to face social disadvantages there, or more precisely in Slytherin. It seems pure-blood children often learn to fly at home (though not everybody). Snape is not likely to have done that for a number of reasons (besides what this memory suggests). Good broomsticks are expensive (the Snape family seems to be poorer than the Weasley family) and the Snapes live in a muggle neighbourhood where they cannot have much opportunity to fly without breaking the law, the father does not like magic, so he may not approve anyway and it is also possible that Quidditch is a kind of elite sport among wizards (does anyone else have this impression?), which may be associated with a certain social position (cf. the Malfoys, the Weasleys, the Potters) the Snapes are rather far away from. As far as I know, in Britain, sports (as most other things) vary from social class to social class, and this could be the same in the wizarding world as well. So there must be first-year students in Slytherin who already know how to fly a broomstick. There must be others who (for some reason) do not but it is probably clear to everyone that the reason why Snape does not know how to handle a broomstick is that he is "different" from the others in other respects as well. On top of that all, at that first lesson, he may be the most nervous and the least self-confident of all (that may be what the broomstick "feels", Orion!). After all he has chosen Slytherin because he feels brainy rather than brawny and flying on a broomstick is an essentially "brawny" thing to do.
Orion - Jun 4, 2008 10:07 am (#2259 of 2617)
That is a very good observation, wynnleaf. Naturally, the memory is important because of the laughing girl (Lily? Or another Gryffindor Pansy?), not because of the broom itself. So the memory shows us both how low little Snape's self esteem is and how unpopular he is already in his first year.
When we see Snape refereeing in PS/SS, one sentence says that he "landed nearby, white-faced and tight-lipped". On first glance, you could take this as air-sickness or fear, then it would mean "he landed nearby, pale and shaking and pressing his lips together because he was trying hard not to throw up". But I think he is only shocked and furious because of Slytherin's defeat.
He wouldn't be much use in the air to protect Harry if he was rubbish at flying - Harry might end up rescuing Snape instead of the other way round. And the books says Snape gives lots of penalties to Slytherin out of spite, and first of all you must be in a position to do that. Have you ever tried to be biased clinging desperately to a piece of wood sky-high above the ground? Snape has lots of time to be biased, on top of guarding Harry and everything. So I think that Snape is just as accomplished at flying as everybody else in the WW.
Edited to add: Who taught whom how to fly without a broom? I must be Voldie who knows the trick first because in the seven Potters chase Voldie already uses it whereas Snape still uses the good old broom. (One of the stroppy old school brooms? Or does he have a sleek and shiny firebolt at home at Spinner's end?)
wynnleaf - Jun 4, 2008 12:26 pm (#2260 of 2617)
I don't recall if the book shows that Snape was really giving penalties unfairly, or if that's just the Gryffindor spin on things. After all, Harry and others often act as though perfectly just point deductions that Snape might give in class are unfair (and no, I'm not saying all of Snape's point deductions are fair, but many are). But I don't recall if we are actually told what the supposedly biased calls were. I've been at plenty of sporting events, enough to know that the crowd blaming the ref for what they wish to perceive as unfair or biased calls is typical.
I don't know about Snape's white faced after the game. We must also have been very focused on possible life-threatening circumstances arising, so I imagine it would be a very tense game. Don't the players almost hit him on several occasions? And then there's the fact that apparently some of the faculty assumed Snape was referee just to help out Slytherin, since they didn't know the real reason Snape was doing it. One can only imagine the staff room atmosphere about that.
Orion - Jun 4, 2008 12:39 pm (#2261 of 2617)
There is one sentence (by memory) which says "Snape gave Slytherin another penalty for nothing at all." This is seen from Harry's point of view, of course, but the author seems to be perfectly behind Harry at that point.
Julia H. - Jun 4, 2008 4:26 pm (#2262 of 2617)
Who taught whom how to fly without a broom? It must be Voldie who knows the trick first because in the seven Potters chase Voldie already uses it whereas Snape still uses the good old broom. (Orion)
It makes it look like that, yes; but we should not forget that the chase is a military operation and the broomsticks may be just part of the uniform or the equipment that everybody must have. It is not likely that the soldiers can choose the way they would prefer to fly, except of course the commander in chief, LV, who probably thinks he needs both his hands free to catch Potter personally. Snape, however, has every reason to prefer the uniform (hood and broomstick and all), since he is only playing a part and does not want to really fight and kill Order members or to really help LV catch Harry. In this situation, not to be very conspicuous but rather to look exactly like everyone else is a good idea, no matter how well he could fly without a broomstick.
"landed nearby, white-faced and tight-lipped"
I really don't remember how I interpreted this clause when I first read PS. Clearly, that early on nothing indicates that Snape has problems with flying and it has just been described what he has been doing up there, so it does not seem to be a phobia or something like that. Recently (thanks to my children) I have quite a few times listened (sort of) to an audio book version of PS and re-interpreted what I heard with my DH knowledge. If I remember well, Snape also stares at Harry as he lands. Harry has just caught the snitch (it took him only a few minutes) by means of a very spectacular, quick and probably extremely dangerous manoeuvre. He is only a first-year student. Snape also looks at Harry in a significant way after the troll incident. I find a connection between these two scenes and my interpretation is that Snape is just realizing that even in the Dark Lord's absence, this kid will be extremely hard to protect. Without any real magical knowledge or skills yet, this 11-year-old kid can decide to attack a troll or to risk his life for the victory of his Quidditch team. Yes, Quirrell is trying to kill Harry but Harry himself seems to be looking for trouble as well. At the end of the Quidditch game, Snape may have just been scared for a moment that Harry might fall and die, after all he "landed nearby", so perhaps he was flying towards Harry ready to catch him if necessary. ( He may perhaps think "I vowed to protect him against the Dark Lord himself but what will his mother tell me in the afterlife if he just falls off a stupid broomstick and dies when I am not there?" ) This idea may play a part in his irritation when Harry becomes a Triwizard Champion just when there is enough trouble and danger without dragons and eggs and so on.
Solitaire - Jun 4, 2008 5:47 pm (#2263 of 2617)
since he is only playing a part and does not want to really fight and kill Order members
True ... he is satisfied to just take off George's ear and let him bleed to death (for all he knows)!
Julia H. - Jun 5, 2008 12:33 am (#2264 of 2617)
But Solitaire, it was not Snape's intention to take off George's ear at all.
A Death Eater moved ahead of Snape and raised his wand , pointing it directly at Lupin's back - "Sectumsempra!" shouted Snape. But the spell intended for the Death Eater's wand hand, missed and hit George instead - (The Prince's Tale)
I think it is totally unambiguous. Snape does not want to fight against Order members or kill them, in fact, he tries to save Lupin's life (risking his own). I don't know how this can be interpreted as malevolence towards the Order. An accident happens and George loses an ear. True, Snape does not help George after the accident but it is not mentioned either that he just cool-headedly turns his broomstick and leaves right after the accident.
Imagine the scene: they are all flying through the night, Lupin and George ahead. George is not alone: as far as I understand, Lupin does help him, that is why he does not take revenge on Snape. Snape and the other DE are flying after them. What could Snape do after the accident? (It is not the same situation as a muggle car accident, where the driver simply has to stop to reach the victim who has been hit by the car.) To help George, Snape should overtake him or catch up with him but he is not alone: there is the other DE (and more may be nearby), who clearly means to murder. Would it be really safe for George (and for Lupin) if Snape stopped them? Could Snape tell the other DE, "all right, I'll just heal this wound and then we'll let them fly on"? (In HBP it does take a few minutes at least to heal Sectumsempra wounds.) For all they know, George could be the real Harry, so it is not at all probable that the DE would let him be healed and released. Another problem is that Lupin and George probably fly at top speed: perhaps they can but perhaps they cannot be overtaken. Even if Snape can catch up with them: will Lupin and George simply let Snape help? Would they think for a moment that he wants to help? No, they would try to fight (even if Snape said he wanted to help, they would not believe) and in the meantime other DE's could get there, too. George could not do much, so Lupin would fight pretty much alone: Snape could try to help him but the DE's would probably realize that sooner than Lupin. There is no time to explain, so for Snape to do anything about George's injury would mean capturing him in the first place, which would entail defeating Lupin first, causing further harm, perhaps killing him (since Lupin would fight). But catching George (polyjuiced as Harry) in the presence of other DE's would amount to killing him too, even if Snape could stop the bleeding. Would that be any help? No. It would make things much worse. Unfortunately, after the accident (which was an accident and the total opposite of Snape's intention), Snape can do no more than hope that Lupin and the others will save George from bleeding to death.
How "satisfied" Snape must be is indicated in The Prince's Tale immediately by the next two sentences, already describing a different scene. (He is crying.)
haymoni - Jun 5, 2008 5:55 am (#2265 of 2617)
What would have happened if the spell had worked and the Death Eater was injured?
Snape couldn't stop what he was doing to sing him a cure. How would he have gotten out of that one?
"So sorry! I was aiming for the werewolf!"
Would Voldy have believed him or would he have questioned Snape's ability to cast a spell properly while giving chase on a broomstick?
Solitaire - Jun 5, 2008 9:07 am (#2266 of 2617)
I guess I am still bothered by the whole situation. Haymoni says it well enough for me. I'll reread The Prince's Tale, carefully, however, when I get there.
wynnleaf - Jun 5, 2008 9:23 am (#2267 of 2617)
What would have happened if the spell had worked and the Death Eater was injured? (haymoni)
Just as Snape really did hit George by accident, he could have easily claimed he hit the Death Eater by accident. These things do happen, after all. And he could even have stopped and helped the Death Eater, depending on LV's policies on stopping to help the wounded versus going on with the mission.
Not sure I understand about Solitaire's "satisfied" observation. How can Snape possibly be satisfied that he accidently hit one Order member, when he was trying to save the life of an Order member he so disliked? In other words, if saving Lupin's life was so important to Snape that he'd risk his cover to do it, why would he be in any way satisfied that another Order member was injured in the process?
Quinn Crockett - Jun 5, 2008 10:35 am (#2268 of 2617)
He could be satisfied that he was able to keep up appearances all the way round. No, maybe it didn't go the way he intended - and he might even be sorry that George took the brunt of the hit. But Snape certainly saved himself from possibly having to explain to Voldemort later on that it was only an accident, etc.
(shrug) Then again, what do I know...
Julia H. - Jun 5, 2008 2:42 pm (#2269 of 2617)
What would have happened if the spell had worked and the Death Eater was injured?
Snape couldn't stop what he was doing to sing him a cure. How would he have gotten out of that one? (Haymoni)
I guess I am still bothered by the whole situation. Haymoni says it well enough for me. (Solitaire)
It took me a while to figure out what this means but now it seems you don't like the idea that Snape, in a battle, attacks a DE, risking that the DE will die, in order to save an Order member (Lupin). Is that what you mean? Because - I don't know - if it is a battle, he either helps his side or not but when he helps, it must be by fighting and that typically includes having to hurt or kill the enemy. I don't know what LV's policy is about helping injured DE's or going on fighting but Snape could use AK or could Stun the DE (high up in the air, it equals killing, as Harry explains) if he wanted to kill in the first place. Using Sectumsempra indicates that he does not want to kill in the first place but to save Lupin and / or to remove the DE from the fight. Apparently, with proper help, it is possible to survive Sectumsempra, as George survives, and if the DE were injured, Snape could help him survive with much more likelihood than in the case of George.
He could be satisfied that he was able to keep up appearances all the way round. No, maybe it didn't go the way he intended - and he might even be sorry that George took the brunt of the hit. But Snape certainly saved himself from possibly having to explain to Voldemort later on that it was only an accident, etc. (Quinn)
I must tell you I am quite puzzled. This a fairly short post and I really don't understand how Snape "saved himself". By hitting George instead of the DE? It was an accident. Or do you mean that it was intentional? I don't think something can be both an accident and something intentional. "... satisfied that he was able to keep up appearances" : Well, he had to do that but by trying to save Lupin, that is precisely what he risked. (He might have explained it later and kept up appearances in spite of injuring a DE but saving Lupin was not with the purpose of keeping up appearances.) What I find most notable in this scene is that he does risk his cover even though he knows how important it is to keep it up.
... maybe it didn't go the way he intended ...
The words of the book make it absolutely clear to me that it did not go as he intended.
... he might even be sorry that George took the brunt of the hit...
I agree with Wynnleaf: If saving Lupin's life was important to him, it is more than probable that he was sorry for injuring another Order member. Besides, whatever JKR says in her interviews, the fact remains that in her book she put the crying scene right after this one (without indicating any change in the chronology). The two scenes are connected by association if only because of being right next to each other (though, personally, I think there is more to this connection):
But the spell intended for the Death Eater's wand hand, missed and hit George instead -
And next, Snape was kneeling in Sirius's old bedroom. Tears were dripping ... (etc.) (The Prince's Tale)
But Snape certainly saved himself from possibly having to explain to Voldemort later on that it was only an accident, etc. (Quinn)
The phrase "saved himself" sounds as if he intentionally injured George instead of the DE - but this is in contradiction with trying to save Lupin, which is canon. How could he have wanted to save Lupin by hitting George when Lupin was attacked by a DE not by George? I think "saving himself" would have been very easy by not doing anything at all but maybe hope that Lupin would be lucky enough to survive. The next safest thing would have been to AK the DE - if there were no close witnesses on the DE side, everybody would have thought that the DE was killed by someone in the Order. Snape just does not strike me here as someone particularly anxious to take care of himself.
Now a question to everyone: What should Snape have done in this situation? Surely, hitting George was not a good thing but we know that was not his intention at all. What else could /should he have done differently? The possibilities I can see are the following:
A) Not interfering at all on either side.
B) Trying to AK/Stun the DE instead of using Sectumsempra (that would have been killing with no or little possibility to help).
C) After inadvertently injuring George, trying to capture him with the purpose of singing a countercourse - but first he would have had to actively fight Lupin and George, then to heal George and later to free him somehow - difficult with a DE (or DE's) around. It seems he could have easily caused more harm than good.
D) Instead of capturing them, trying to explain himself to Lupin and George, who were flying ahead, while the DE was flying after them between Snape and Lupin-George. Snape could have tried to shout above the DE's head that he was really on the Order's side and 'George, please stop, I want to heal you' - I just cannot see that it would have worked at all.
What should he have done?
Edit: LOL, Pesky, I could quite understand this attitude in the present war situation - and when it is about saving Lupin, I would not be sorry for the DE's wand hand either at all! Is that a nasty streak in me?
PeskyPixie - Jun 5, 2008 2:53 pm (#2270 of 2617)
Even reformed, Snape has a bit of a nasty streak in him. He probably couldn't care less if a Death Eater lost a wand hand. He has been a witness to DE atrocities on a regular basis, and now that he tries to save innocent people whenever possible, he'll zap Dolohov with a Sectumsempra in a situation where he may probably get away with it. ("Whoops, sorry. I was going for Lupin's neck but this idiot tried to upstage me and as a result he's got to learn to Crucio with his other hand.")
Otherwise I would prefer Umbridge. As long as you don’t interfere with her policies or break into her office, she doesn’t hurt you.
If you lie low and put up with her lies and ways and don't mind not being taught.
Snape tries to hurt you, even if you haven’t done anything to deserve it.
For example?
I would learn less from Umbridge, but I would probably try counter that with self-study.
Great teacher.
wynnleaf, It’s absolutely possible that Snape could have kept his kept his cover with LV while protecting the students. In HBP when Snape is escaping, he interrupts a DE who is using crucio on Harry [“No! …Have you forgotten our orders? Potter belongs to the Dark Lord – we are to leave him! Go! Go!”]. Was he worried about his cover then?
He was not worried because LV really thought that he must kill Potter and really gave this order. Snape had just done a great "service" to LV, he would not be suspected right now.
Snape is intelligent, skilled at magic, and well practiced in deception. Certainly he was capable of protecting students from being tortured while still seeming like a loyal DE. All Snape had to do was more of what he had done in previous years.
I think that is what he did. But he had to be careful so it should not be noticed. He is skilled enough to protect the students while deceiving everybody (perhaps even some readers ).
Snape could have formed his own version of the Inquisitorial Squad (the Snape Squad), composed of DE children and other Voldemort supporters. The job of this group would be to identify rule-breaking students and bring them directly to Snape (thereby avoiding the Carrows).
I think the canon ideas that teachers patrolled the corridors and that they had to report wrong-doers were at least as good.
Nobody would be surprised if Snape didn’t get along well with the Carrows.
Voldemort maybe. Or the Carrows themselves.
Instead, we learn that the Carrows are in charge of all punishment and that Snape is conspicuously absent from most of what they do.
Perhaps the Carrows only punish students behind Snape's back. When Snape is not absent, there is no Crucio.
If Snape could deceive Voldemort while passing information on him to Dumbledore, Snape could fool the incompetent Carrow siblings while managing to keep most students from getting tortured.
The Carrows are sadistic. They will notice if they are not allowed to torture.
When Dumbledore asks Snape to protect the students, Snape gives “a stiff nod”. He doesn’t say, “Of course, Dumbeldore. I wouldn’t want to see any of them come to harm.” Snape agrees grudgingly, as if he thinks protecting students is a waste of time, as if he wouldn’t have bothered had Dumbledore not thought to ask him.
I don't think this is what it means. I think DD is repeatedly satisfied with Snape's nod because he knows that it is enough, Snape has given his word and will keep it. He does not want the Unbreakable Vow because he knows Snape. Snape always keeps his word. This is canon.
Indeed, it’s suspicious enough that Dumbledore has to make Snape promise to protect the students. It seems natural, given his attitude, that he doesn’t try very hard to protect the students.
I don't know what you mean. Snape has been protecting students for 7 books. I think the readers need to know that DD wanted Snape to be the headmaster and why - to make it clear that it was not his ambition. Also, "doing everything in his power" does not only include the protection itself but creating the possibility that starts with AK-ing DD.
Neville’s gouged face is a reflection of his apathy.
Apathy? I did not have this impression.
Rowling could have slipped in an example of him protecting students, but she didn’t. We never get a memory of that. Snape protecting students as headmaster is not canon. I think Rowling meant for us to see that Snape is not a good guardian.
It is canon and there are examples (though not a memory) but you have to be able to notice the clues. You seem to have read the surface only.
Julia H. - May 29, 2008 5:47 pm (#2232 of 2617)
Jason, I know about the interview in which JKR says that Snape enters 12GP right after AK-ing DD. This is also a good place for these feelings to surface but it does not make sense that Harry does not see the memories in order. All the other memories are in order. The interview is not enough, JKR should change the book or the interview will be forgotten. I don't think Moody's charm should prevent Snape from entering. He can fly after all, he does not have to use the door. Also, the enchantment (Dusty) is based on the conception that Snape is a murderer, which he is not. Harry's protection at the Dursley's is based on the conception that Petunia is Lily's sister. I don't think the protection would work if Petunia's being Lily's sister were a mistake only. So why should Moody's protection work when Snape did not really murder DD?
I agree that Lily is in the centre for Snape but through his love for her, he understands other things. Even if he does not learn to love James. Lily is in the centre of his remorse as well as in the centre of his sin. Whatever he has to atone for is related to Lily and can be symbolized by Lily alone. That is why his atonement and remorse can be full even though it is channelled through his love for Lily alone.
wynnleaf - May 29, 2008 6:55 pm (#2233 of 2617)
Soul Search,
When Snape uses his patronus in The Princes Tale, he is responding directly to DD's comment about his perhaps caring about Harry. JKR made it clear that Snape continued to dislike Harry, so it makes sense that his protecting Harry never became because of a care for Harry personally, but because of his love for Lily. But to go from that to the notion that therefore Snape didn't care about anyone or anything else, or feel any remorse except over Lily just doesn't really work as it doesn't follow directly from the fact that Snape doesn't like Harry.
mona amon - May 29, 2008 11:38 pm (#2234 of 2617)
I seem to have missed a long and interesting debate!
Julia, I think we have to conclude that Snape's memories are in chronological order, except for one. I don't see how he could have gotten around Moody's protections, which were set up against the one who 'killed' Dumbledore. Snape did not murder Dumbledore, since Dumbledore asked him to do it, but he certainly killed him. And we have the further evidence of the interview to show us what JKR's intent really was.
Julia H. - May 30, 2008 12:19 am (#2235 of 2617)
Mona, what about flying? "Dusty" seems to guard the entrance but what if Snape gets through an upstairs window?
JKR's interview will not necessarily be read by readers of DH. I first heard about this interview on this Forum. If I had not joined the Forum, perhaps I would never have found out what JKR's intent was and I bet there are lots and lots of HP readers who do not read the interviews. The change between this scene and the previous one (spell hitting George): is a simple And next. We don't see Harry flying backwards in time and there is no reason to change the chronology. Without the interview, it is not more logical or obvious that there is a sudden change in chronology than the idea that Snape did get in somehow in spite of Moody's charms. (It is magic against magic.)
Otherwise it is fine for me if Snape goes to 12GP after DD's death. The scene is just as meaningful and the information on DD in Lily's letter becomes much more intriguing: Snape has just killed DD, his mentor and surrogate father at his own orders, he is in despair, he is an outcast, the new situation must be terrible and almost unbearable - he has every reason to cry. Then in this situation, he finds Lily's letter with lots of things in it for him to react to, including the hint on young DD's mistake (prior to the publication of Rita's book), the revelation that perfect father figure DD may have made a mistake similar to Snape's.
When Snape uses his patronus in The Princes Tale, he is responding directly to DD's comment about his perhaps caring about Harry. (Wynneaf)
I think his reaction to the news that Harry must be killed by LV is somewhat in contradiction with complete denial. I guess Harry's life now means to Snape at least as much as the life of every other person he won't just watch die if he can help. Maybe there is a changing attitude to Harry that Snape desperately denies, I don't know. But he is not indifferent. I agree that whatever he feels towards Harry as a person, he may still feel remorse for having chosen the wrong way once.
Dryleaves - May 30, 2008 1:22 am (#2236 of 2617)
Dryleaves, your alternative explanation for Bill’s description doesn’t make sense. Why would Bill say, “My sister and her friends were punished cruelly, but they weren’t seriously injured,” just because he thought Snape’s intention was to be cruel? (Jason)
Well, maybe it doesn't. And I don't mean to say this is the way it was. What I meant was that we don't really know how Bill received the information in the first place or what he told Griphook, and that it is possible that they both, and their original source, even if it is Ginny herself, may all be influenced by what they expect to be true and therefore also express it in these terms. Harry and Hermione react differently when they hear about what the punishment actually was. They are relieved as they had expected something worse, and I assume that what you mean is that so must all the others have felt. But they never mention what the punishment consisted of and we can't be sure they even knew, even if it was Bill who told Griphook (as we don't know what he actually told him). What we learn in this chapter is that Snape have been fooled to believe that he is depositing the real sword at Gringotts when it is a fake and that he gave Ginny, Neville and Luna a punishment that Harry and Hermione (Ron is hungry and under the influence of the locket) consider a relatively mild one. In "The Prince's Tale" we learn that he knew the sword was a fake and that he helped Harry to get the real one. We also learn that he promised DD to protect the students.
Unfortunately, some people only look at the last bit of ‘Deathly Hallows’ when they look at Snape’s character. (Jason)
I think the chapter "The Prince's Tale" is meant to be a key to the interpretation of Snape's character. It is not the whole truth, but it gives us an indication to how the ambiguity in the descriptions of the earlier books could be read. Then I must say I never saw Snape as an "evil" character before DH, even if I tried to be open to the possibility after HBP. Unpleasant, yes, and I was often angry with him for the way he treated his students, but I never thought he truly wanted to harm them, I thought there were quite a lot of evidence or indications to the contrary. So I don't think the end of DH is that different from what we actually see earlier, only that this time we get the picture more directly from Snape, while we only saw Harry's perspective before.
Julia H. - May 30, 2008 1:56 am (#2237 of 2617)
If Snape was remorseful for anything else, which I don’t think he was, his remorse would be in the form of a quiet apology. (Jason)
By "being remorseful about anything else" I mean a general remorse for his bad choices (like having been a DE). I think this is what he should be remorseful besides being specifically remorseful for the prophecy and the part he played in the Potters' death. Actually, the fact that he also tried to save the Potters and did everything he could to save them (including continually risking his life) and that Pettigrew's betrayal was the final reason why his efforts were unsuccessful underlines the importance of this general remorse, which however can be centred around Lily, who is the original reason and permanent symbol of his change.
As for "a quiet apology", that was what he tried at 16 towards Lily. It was not enough. Now he does not apologize (quietly or loudly - that is Karkaroff's way) - and I don't know to whom specifically he could address such an apology, especially in the given situation, - but he lives a life of atonement, redeeming himself with actions, and that is (IMO) much more than any apology. Remorse does not equal an apology. Either one is possible without the other. Remorse is something that happens inside. Its outside manifestation has various possible ways, including an apology, atonement or even suicide or going mad with remorse. Snape's way is the active atonement (as well as a change of personality, I guess) to respond to his remorse, which, however, is not the remorse itself.
mona amon - May 30, 2008 4:51 am (#2238 of 2617)
"Dusty" seems to guard the entrance but what if Snape gets through an upstairs window?
JKR's interview will not necessarily be read by readers of DH. (Julia)
I'm sure all possible points of entry were protected, although we only see the one at the front door. Mad-eye did not know that Snape could fly like a bat, but he knew that he could fly in on a broomstick.
I used what JKR said in the interview to figure out her real intent. Of course a person who has not read it will probably conclude that he came to #12 GP after the Seven Potters Chase, just as I did the first time I read DH.
But it makes a lot more sense to me if he came there immediately after the death of DD, to be alone and mourn for the one he was forced to kill.
If she was to put it in chronological order this memory will have to come immediately after the 'after all this time? Always!' memory and before the one where portrait DD tells him he has to betray the Order's plans. I'm not sure if it would really fit in there. Perhaps Jo did not realise how much significance we would attach to such details, Lol!
Julia H. - May 30, 2008 5:04 am (#2239 of 2617)
I'm sure all possible points of entry were protected, although we only see the one at the front door. Mad-eye did not know that Snape could fly like a bat, but he knew that he could fly in on a broomstick. (Mona)
"... the other side can do magic too..."
If she was to put it in chronological order this memory will have to come immediately after the 'after all this time? Always!' memory and before the one where portrait DD tells him he has to betray the Order's plans. I'm not sure if it would really fit in there. (Mona)
Why not? As it is, the change from the scene where Snape last talks to living DD to the scene where he first talks to the portrait is quite abrupt. Seeing him mourning between the two scenes would be good, IMO. It would emphasize that the change is not merely ... hm... technical for him and of course the interpretation possibilities would be different. Nothing calls for a sudden change in chronology at this one point and it is very difficult to guess that this is what we are meant to think. Jo could have at least mentioned that Harry was flying backwards in time. (?)
Dryleaves - May 30, 2008 5:08 am (#2240 of 2617)
Perhaps Jo did not realise how much significance we would attach to such details, Lol! (mona amon)
But she ought to have guessed it, wouldn't she? Maybe it is as you say Mona, that she abandoned the chronology because she thought it would fit the narrative better, but as the rest of the memories are chronological it is a bit confusing. I am not all that happy with her interview amendments to the story, like this one or her statement that DD was in love with Grindelwald. I think it should have been clear (or at least hinted at) in the books.
Orion - May 31, 2008 1:27 pm (#2241 of 2617)
Everybody avoids the most obvious conclusion that Rowling was surprised when the question how Snape could get aroung the protections was sprung at her and tried to react at the spur of the moment. She meant Snape to enter after the seven Potters chase, but she forgot the enchantments, being only human and no supercomputer, and she made up a quick explanation. So she created a bigger contradiction as if she had admitted she forgot the protections or simply said "Snape was a very skilled wizard and overcame Moody's protections quite easily."
Dryleaves - Jun 1, 2008 2:14 am (#2242 of 2617)
Orion, you are like the child in the story of The Emperor's New Clothes...!
wynnleaf - Jun 1, 2008 4:55 am (#2243 of 2617)
Orion, I completely agree. In any case, I thought Moody's "trap" was kind of ridiculous and didn't take into account, for instance, nonverbal spells at which Snape excelled. And why should Snape fear a phantom of DD anyway? I never got that. In any case, I thought a number of things JKR has said to "explain" DH were pretty much made up on the spot because she can't very well say "I must have made a mistake."
mona amon - Jun 1, 2008 8:50 am (#2244 of 2617)
I still feel that what she said in the interview was what she really intended, Snape went to #12 immediately after Dumbledore's death. For whatever reason he goes there, to mourn for DD or to clean up before DEs try to get in, it makes sense to do it as soon as possible, before the Order has a chance to put up protective enchantments against him. Why would he go there almost two months later and risk getting caught by the Order?
Julia H. - Jun 1, 2008 12:12 pm (#2245 of 2617)
Edited Jun 1, 2008 1:28 pm
To me both scenarios make perfect sense. Snape had a very good reason to mourn right after DD's death, this is obvious I guess. After the chase, I think what made him go there in desperation was the "betrayal plan" he had been made to participate in and the fact that he had inadvertently caused a very serious injury and that Harry had very nearly been caught - I think he felt responsibility for all these things and it would explain why he went precisely to the Order's former headquarters. IMO, it would explain his somewhat changed attitude to DD's portrait in the next memory scene as well.
We don't know what happens in JKR's mind but the "mistake version with on-the-spot explanation" seems to be rather probable to me. (There are other contradictions in the books as well. In HBP, Snape says he had 16 years of information on DD to give Voldemort when he returned - according to my calculations, it was more like 14 years.) The reasoning that Snape was able to get in despite the protections would make sense also because he also got into Hogwarts to talk to DD's portrait before the chase and Hogwarts was another heavily guarded place. Otherwise the sudden change of chronology, if intentional, should have been indicated somehow. (Is there anyone who figured it out without JKR's hint?)
Dryleaves - Jun 1, 2008 11:39 pm (#2246 of 2617)
The accident with George's ear suggests that Snape never really got on good terms with brooms and this may be a reason for him to learn to fly without one...
Julia H. - Jun 1, 2008 11:48 pm (#2247 of 2617)
Good idea, Dryleaves! I can visualize that happening.
Orion - Jun 2, 2008 9:39 am (#2248 of 2617)
It also means that Snape didn't save Lupin, he only tried to and wasn't successful. ***nitpick***
Julia H. - Jun 2, 2008 10:10 am (#2249 of 2617)
Orion, I think we have always known this. Snape wanted to save Lupin (intent is important in DH) but his spell went the wrong way and hit George instead of the DE. Although Lupin is saved somehow... (I wonder if Snape's spell may have had some effect on the DE's spell if not on the DE himself, like changing its direction. I'm not sure if something like that is possible in the world of HP or not but maybe the two spells collided or nearly collided and then each changed its direction.)
Dryleaves - Jun 2, 2008 10:19 am (#2250 of 2617)
...or maybe Lupin heard George scream and flinched, so that the DE's spell missed...
Orion - Jun 2, 2008 2:03 pm (#2251 of 2617)
To take this discussion even further away from the current topic...
Re: The spell that goes wrong and takes George's ear off. It's generally agreed upon that Snape is rubbish at flying on a broom. There's only one canon hint at it, that is: A little boy tries to mount a buckling broomstick. For me this sentence isn't a real hint that Snape can't fly well.
It hints at another thing, IMO. Snape comes to Hogwarts with a very low view of himself. It is true of horses and dogs that they sense the fear of humans who try to control them. This buckling broomstick seems to be the equivalent of an old riding school horse which has seen everything and is permanently underwhelmed by its riders. It will only go "up!" if the person has the required personal authority.
So I ask myself: How low must the self-esteem of a little boy be, when a broomstick, a piece of wood with bristles attached, decides to get fresh with him? A broomstick is not particularly sentient or sapient. You can order it to go "up!", you can steer it, you can Accio it, and that's it. Even a stupid piece of wood looks down its long nose on little Snape. IMO, this little sentence wants to show precisely that, and not skill at flying, or lack thereof.
We can't look at Quidditch skills for evidence for Snape's lack of flying abilities because it isn't compulsory - you are either interested or you're being left well alone. Snape probably doesn't turn up for try-outs at all, wanting to be brainy rather than brawny anyway. I don't claim Snape is great at flying a broom, I just say that we don't have canon evidence of yes or no.
So what's left of the misdirected spell that takes George's ear off is essentially a big fat red herring. Because I don't think Snape would miss. I'm miles away from SuperSnape, just to the contrary, I despise it if he is glorified, but he is certainly awesome when it comes to aiming spells, and he just wouldn't miss, whether on a broomstick, or in a tornado.
Julia H. - Jun 2, 2008 2:27 pm (#2252 of 2617)
Orion, it makes a lot of sense what you are saying both about that broomstick and the red herring. (You really are like that child in The Emperor's New Clothes.) However, even if the misdirected spell is just a red herring (JKR would do "anything" to deceive us about Snape until the end), we must put up with it, since it is in the book. So what if we just say (to help JKR a bit ) that this uncharacteristic mistake may be due to the fact that Snape is going through something worse than a tornado? He has recently AK-d DD, he has not yet got used to his new situation, has recently witnessed the death of Charity Burbage and told the Order's escape plan to LV and is now forced to chase Harry Potter together with DE's and LV himself, "openly fighting" against the Order for the first time and all this is becoming too much for him. He is human after all. (I think he will regain his strength later but first he has to go through this crisis.) It makes sense then that after this scene he finds himself at 12GP crying - another unusual thing for Snape to do.
rambkowalczyk - Jun 2, 2008 2:39 pm (#2253 of 2617)
There's also the statement that Tonks makes when she compliments Ron for Stunning a Death Eater while riding a broom. It's not as easy as it looks.
PeskyPixie - Jun 2, 2008 8:02 pm (#2254 of 2617)
I was thinking of that as well, ramb.
I need to respond to a few points made about my previous post, but I doubt I'll get around to it tonight. However, I was wondering, isn't it canon that Snape brings back one or two of Umbridge's decrees? or is this something I've invented on my own?
Julia H. - Jun 2, 2008 11:03 pm (#2255 of 2617)
Good catch, Ramb. It may be JKR's hint to counterbalance the red herring and to establish the plausibility of Snape missing the target (although readers are not supposed to notice that before they have read The Prince's Tale).
He lost his hood during the chase.
Not typical. Snape must be a real nervous wreck now (much more than on an average day).
Snape had reinstated Umbridge's old decree forbidding gatherings of three or more students or any unofficial student societies. (Chapter 16) Pesky, I think this is what you were referring to.
Dryleaves - Jun 3, 2008 12:45 am (#2256 of 2617)
Hmm... I wasn't that serious when writing that comment. It was just a stray thought partly based on the fact that I, myself am a person who would prefer just controlling my own arms and legs (I am not very good at that either)to also controlling a vehicle. I don't know about pieces of wood, but at least metal artefacts, often equipped with rubber wheels, usually sense my fear... Guess I just didn't want to feel alone in this... But of course, there is nothing that says that Snape was particularly bad at flying a broom. It is more likely he flew well enough.
But as Ramb says, it is probably not easy to hit someone with a spell when riding a broom, as both you and your target are moving. And this opens up to another scenario, that it is not Snape that is rubbish at flying and aiming, but the DE. He flies up between Snape and George and Lupin and aims for Lupin. Snape aims for the DE's wandhand, but when casting the spell the DE gets unsteady and wobbles out of Snape's aim and the Sectumsempra passes by him and hits George instead. And the DE's spell of course misses its target. But the way the memory looks I think Snape's intention was to save Lupin and that he played his part in the chase more convincingly than he had intended.
Then I like the thought that Snape actually is nervous and has difficulty coping with the pressure he is under after all.
wynnleaf - Jun 3, 2008 5:34 am (#2257 of 2617)
I've seen the assumption that Snape wasn't a good flyer many times, always, I assume, based on that memory of the bucking broom and the girl laughing. But as you guys are saying, that doesn't prove anything.
Probably Snape learned to fly at Hogwarts, rather than, like Draco or the Weasleys, learning to fly at home. That first flying lesson would be his first time on a broom.
One thing that is interesting is to speculate on just what JKR was trying to reveal with particular memory. Why were kids laughing at Snape's predicament with the bucking broom and why was the memory of any importance to him? I've often noticed that when a kid is kind of the "odd one out" other children will laugh at the child even over things that all or most of the children experience. Note I say "laugh at" rather than "laugh with". That is, they will laugh as though when a particular thing happens to that child, it makes him/her an object of ridicule, even though when the same thing happens to other children, it's no problem. And I think that's important in the memory, as my impression is the girl is laughing at Snape rather than with him.
As for Snape's flying ability, he doesn't seem to have any problem with the Quidditch game he referees during PS/SS.
By the way, I wonder who taught who to fly? Voldemort or Snape?
Julia H. - Jun 3, 2008 6:36 am (#2258 of 2617)
Edited Jun 3, 2008 7:53 am
Dryleaves, this is another plausible scenario, I think.
By the way, I wonder who taught who to fly? Voldemort or Snape? (Wynnleaf)
There was a rather lively discussion about that on the Read A Long. It would be good to know. We sort of agreed that Snape flying like Voldemort indicates how much (of all DE's) Snape's abilities approach those of Voldemort's and how close they get to each other as "master and servant" (regardless who teaches who, it is not the usual master and servant situation), which in effect underlines that the main difference between them lies in their choices (how and with what purpose they use the power they have) and highlights LV's cruelty when he kills Snape, a supposed "friend".
That is, they will laugh as though when a particular thing happens to that child, it makes him/her an object of ridicule, even though when the same thing happens to other children, it's no problem. And I think that's important in the memory, as my impression is the girl is laughing at Snape rather than with him.
I agree. And this experience (probably just one example of many similar experiences) left a lasting impression on Snape if he still remembers it when he is in his thirties, if it comes to the surface so easily (at least that is how I see it) and as it happens, this is the memory where Snape shouts "ENOUGH!".
Another reason why this memory may be important is that it perhaps indicates that Snape (despite his initial great expectations about Hogwarts) continues to face social disadvantages there, or more precisely in Slytherin. It seems pure-blood children often learn to fly at home (though not everybody). Snape is not likely to have done that for a number of reasons (besides what this memory suggests). Good broomsticks are expensive (the Snape family seems to be poorer than the Weasley family) and the Snapes live in a muggle neighbourhood where they cannot have much opportunity to fly without breaking the law, the father does not like magic, so he may not approve anyway and it is also possible that Quidditch is a kind of elite sport among wizards (does anyone else have this impression?), which may be associated with a certain social position (cf. the Malfoys, the Weasleys, the Potters) the Snapes are rather far away from. As far as I know, in Britain, sports (as most other things) vary from social class to social class, and this could be the same in the wizarding world as well. So there must be first-year students in Slytherin who already know how to fly a broomstick. There must be others who (for some reason) do not but it is probably clear to everyone that the reason why Snape does not know how to handle a broomstick is that he is "different" from the others in other respects as well. On top of that all, at that first lesson, he may be the most nervous and the least self-confident of all (that may be what the broomstick "feels", Orion!). After all he has chosen Slytherin because he feels brainy rather than brawny and flying on a broomstick is an essentially "brawny" thing to do.
Orion - Jun 4, 2008 10:07 am (#2259 of 2617)
That is a very good observation, wynnleaf. Naturally, the memory is important because of the laughing girl (Lily? Or another Gryffindor Pansy?), not because of the broom itself. So the memory shows us both how low little Snape's self esteem is and how unpopular he is already in his first year.
When we see Snape refereeing in PS/SS, one sentence says that he "landed nearby, white-faced and tight-lipped". On first glance, you could take this as air-sickness or fear, then it would mean "he landed nearby, pale and shaking and pressing his lips together because he was trying hard not to throw up". But I think he is only shocked and furious because of Slytherin's defeat.
He wouldn't be much use in the air to protect Harry if he was rubbish at flying - Harry might end up rescuing Snape instead of the other way round. And the books says Snape gives lots of penalties to Slytherin out of spite, and first of all you must be in a position to do that. Have you ever tried to be biased clinging desperately to a piece of wood sky-high above the ground? Snape has lots of time to be biased, on top of guarding Harry and everything. So I think that Snape is just as accomplished at flying as everybody else in the WW.
Edited to add: Who taught whom how to fly without a broom? I must be Voldie who knows the trick first because in the seven Potters chase Voldie already uses it whereas Snape still uses the good old broom. (One of the stroppy old school brooms? Or does he have a sleek and shiny firebolt at home at Spinner's end?)
wynnleaf - Jun 4, 2008 12:26 pm (#2260 of 2617)
I don't recall if the book shows that Snape was really giving penalties unfairly, or if that's just the Gryffindor spin on things. After all, Harry and others often act as though perfectly just point deductions that Snape might give in class are unfair (and no, I'm not saying all of Snape's point deductions are fair, but many are). But I don't recall if we are actually told what the supposedly biased calls were. I've been at plenty of sporting events, enough to know that the crowd blaming the ref for what they wish to perceive as unfair or biased calls is typical.
I don't know about Snape's white faced after the game. We must also have been very focused on possible life-threatening circumstances arising, so I imagine it would be a very tense game. Don't the players almost hit him on several occasions? And then there's the fact that apparently some of the faculty assumed Snape was referee just to help out Slytherin, since they didn't know the real reason Snape was doing it. One can only imagine the staff room atmosphere about that.
Orion - Jun 4, 2008 12:39 pm (#2261 of 2617)
There is one sentence (by memory) which says "Snape gave Slytherin another penalty for nothing at all." This is seen from Harry's point of view, of course, but the author seems to be perfectly behind Harry at that point.
Julia H. - Jun 4, 2008 4:26 pm (#2262 of 2617)
Who taught whom how to fly without a broom? It must be Voldie who knows the trick first because in the seven Potters chase Voldie already uses it whereas Snape still uses the good old broom. (Orion)
It makes it look like that, yes; but we should not forget that the chase is a military operation and the broomsticks may be just part of the uniform or the equipment that everybody must have. It is not likely that the soldiers can choose the way they would prefer to fly, except of course the commander in chief, LV, who probably thinks he needs both his hands free to catch Potter personally. Snape, however, has every reason to prefer the uniform (hood and broomstick and all), since he is only playing a part and does not want to really fight and kill Order members or to really help LV catch Harry. In this situation, not to be very conspicuous but rather to look exactly like everyone else is a good idea, no matter how well he could fly without a broomstick.
"landed nearby, white-faced and tight-lipped"
I really don't remember how I interpreted this clause when I first read PS. Clearly, that early on nothing indicates that Snape has problems with flying and it has just been described what he has been doing up there, so it does not seem to be a phobia or something like that. Recently (thanks to my children) I have quite a few times listened (sort of) to an audio book version of PS and re-interpreted what I heard with my DH knowledge. If I remember well, Snape also stares at Harry as he lands. Harry has just caught the snitch (it took him only a few minutes) by means of a very spectacular, quick and probably extremely dangerous manoeuvre. He is only a first-year student. Snape also looks at Harry in a significant way after the troll incident. I find a connection between these two scenes and my interpretation is that Snape is just realizing that even in the Dark Lord's absence, this kid will be extremely hard to protect. Without any real magical knowledge or skills yet, this 11-year-old kid can decide to attack a troll or to risk his life for the victory of his Quidditch team. Yes, Quirrell is trying to kill Harry but Harry himself seems to be looking for trouble as well. At the end of the Quidditch game, Snape may have just been scared for a moment that Harry might fall and die, after all he "landed nearby", so perhaps he was flying towards Harry ready to catch him if necessary. ( He may perhaps think "I vowed to protect him against the Dark Lord himself but what will his mother tell me in the afterlife if he just falls off a stupid broomstick and dies when I am not there?" ) This idea may play a part in his irritation when Harry becomes a Triwizard Champion just when there is enough trouble and danger without dragons and eggs and so on.
Solitaire - Jun 4, 2008 5:47 pm (#2263 of 2617)
since he is only playing a part and does not want to really fight and kill Order members
True ... he is satisfied to just take off George's ear and let him bleed to death (for all he knows)!
Julia H. - Jun 5, 2008 12:33 am (#2264 of 2617)
But Solitaire, it was not Snape's intention to take off George's ear at all.
A Death Eater moved ahead of Snape and raised his wand , pointing it directly at Lupin's back - "Sectumsempra!" shouted Snape. But the spell intended for the Death Eater's wand hand, missed and hit George instead - (The Prince's Tale)
I think it is totally unambiguous. Snape does not want to fight against Order members or kill them, in fact, he tries to save Lupin's life (risking his own). I don't know how this can be interpreted as malevolence towards the Order. An accident happens and George loses an ear. True, Snape does not help George after the accident but it is not mentioned either that he just cool-headedly turns his broomstick and leaves right after the accident.
Imagine the scene: they are all flying through the night, Lupin and George ahead. George is not alone: as far as I understand, Lupin does help him, that is why he does not take revenge on Snape. Snape and the other DE are flying after them. What could Snape do after the accident? (It is not the same situation as a muggle car accident, where the driver simply has to stop to reach the victim who has been hit by the car.) To help George, Snape should overtake him or catch up with him but he is not alone: there is the other DE (and more may be nearby), who clearly means to murder. Would it be really safe for George (and for Lupin) if Snape stopped them? Could Snape tell the other DE, "all right, I'll just heal this wound and then we'll let them fly on"? (In HBP it does take a few minutes at least to heal Sectumsempra wounds.) For all they know, George could be the real Harry, so it is not at all probable that the DE would let him be healed and released. Another problem is that Lupin and George probably fly at top speed: perhaps they can but perhaps they cannot be overtaken. Even if Snape can catch up with them: will Lupin and George simply let Snape help? Would they think for a moment that he wants to help? No, they would try to fight (even if Snape said he wanted to help, they would not believe) and in the meantime other DE's could get there, too. George could not do much, so Lupin would fight pretty much alone: Snape could try to help him but the DE's would probably realize that sooner than Lupin. There is no time to explain, so for Snape to do anything about George's injury would mean capturing him in the first place, which would entail defeating Lupin first, causing further harm, perhaps killing him (since Lupin would fight). But catching George (polyjuiced as Harry) in the presence of other DE's would amount to killing him too, even if Snape could stop the bleeding. Would that be any help? No. It would make things much worse. Unfortunately, after the accident (which was an accident and the total opposite of Snape's intention), Snape can do no more than hope that Lupin and the others will save George from bleeding to death.
How "satisfied" Snape must be is indicated in The Prince's Tale immediately by the next two sentences, already describing a different scene. (He is crying.)
haymoni - Jun 5, 2008 5:55 am (#2265 of 2617)
What would have happened if the spell had worked and the Death Eater was injured?
Snape couldn't stop what he was doing to sing him a cure. How would he have gotten out of that one?
"So sorry! I was aiming for the werewolf!"
Would Voldy have believed him or would he have questioned Snape's ability to cast a spell properly while giving chase on a broomstick?
Solitaire - Jun 5, 2008 9:07 am (#2266 of 2617)
I guess I am still bothered by the whole situation. Haymoni says it well enough for me. I'll reread The Prince's Tale, carefully, however, when I get there.
wynnleaf - Jun 5, 2008 9:23 am (#2267 of 2617)
What would have happened if the spell had worked and the Death Eater was injured? (haymoni)
Just as Snape really did hit George by accident, he could have easily claimed he hit the Death Eater by accident. These things do happen, after all. And he could even have stopped and helped the Death Eater, depending on LV's policies on stopping to help the wounded versus going on with the mission.
Not sure I understand about Solitaire's "satisfied" observation. How can Snape possibly be satisfied that he accidently hit one Order member, when he was trying to save the life of an Order member he so disliked? In other words, if saving Lupin's life was so important to Snape that he'd risk his cover to do it, why would he be in any way satisfied that another Order member was injured in the process?
Quinn Crockett - Jun 5, 2008 10:35 am (#2268 of 2617)
He could be satisfied that he was able to keep up appearances all the way round. No, maybe it didn't go the way he intended - and he might even be sorry that George took the brunt of the hit. But Snape certainly saved himself from possibly having to explain to Voldemort later on that it was only an accident, etc.
(shrug) Then again, what do I know...
Julia H. - Jun 5, 2008 2:42 pm (#2269 of 2617)
What would have happened if the spell had worked and the Death Eater was injured?
Snape couldn't stop what he was doing to sing him a cure. How would he have gotten out of that one? (Haymoni)
I guess I am still bothered by the whole situation. Haymoni says it well enough for me. (Solitaire)
It took me a while to figure out what this means but now it seems you don't like the idea that Snape, in a battle, attacks a DE, risking that the DE will die, in order to save an Order member (Lupin). Is that what you mean? Because - I don't know - if it is a battle, he either helps his side or not but when he helps, it must be by fighting and that typically includes having to hurt or kill the enemy. I don't know what LV's policy is about helping injured DE's or going on fighting but Snape could use AK or could Stun the DE (high up in the air, it equals killing, as Harry explains) if he wanted to kill in the first place. Using Sectumsempra indicates that he does not want to kill in the first place but to save Lupin and / or to remove the DE from the fight. Apparently, with proper help, it is possible to survive Sectumsempra, as George survives, and if the DE were injured, Snape could help him survive with much more likelihood than in the case of George.
He could be satisfied that he was able to keep up appearances all the way round. No, maybe it didn't go the way he intended - and he might even be sorry that George took the brunt of the hit. But Snape certainly saved himself from possibly having to explain to Voldemort later on that it was only an accident, etc. (Quinn)
I must tell you I am quite puzzled. This a fairly short post and I really don't understand how Snape "saved himself". By hitting George instead of the DE? It was an accident. Or do you mean that it was intentional? I don't think something can be both an accident and something intentional. "... satisfied that he was able to keep up appearances" : Well, he had to do that but by trying to save Lupin, that is precisely what he risked. (He might have explained it later and kept up appearances in spite of injuring a DE but saving Lupin was not with the purpose of keeping up appearances.) What I find most notable in this scene is that he does risk his cover even though he knows how important it is to keep it up.
... maybe it didn't go the way he intended ...
The words of the book make it absolutely clear to me that it did not go as he intended.
... he might even be sorry that George took the brunt of the hit...
I agree with Wynnleaf: If saving Lupin's life was important to him, it is more than probable that he was sorry for injuring another Order member. Besides, whatever JKR says in her interviews, the fact remains that in her book she put the crying scene right after this one (without indicating any change in the chronology). The two scenes are connected by association if only because of being right next to each other (though, personally, I think there is more to this connection):
But the spell intended for the Death Eater's wand hand, missed and hit George instead -
And next, Snape was kneeling in Sirius's old bedroom. Tears were dripping ... (etc.) (The Prince's Tale)
But Snape certainly saved himself from possibly having to explain to Voldemort later on that it was only an accident, etc. (Quinn)
The phrase "saved himself" sounds as if he intentionally injured George instead of the DE - but this is in contradiction with trying to save Lupin, which is canon. How could he have wanted to save Lupin by hitting George when Lupin was attacked by a DE not by George? I think "saving himself" would have been very easy by not doing anything at all but maybe hope that Lupin would be lucky enough to survive. The next safest thing would have been to AK the DE - if there were no close witnesses on the DE side, everybody would have thought that the DE was killed by someone in the Order. Snape just does not strike me here as someone particularly anxious to take care of himself.
Now a question to everyone: What should Snape have done in this situation? Surely, hitting George was not a good thing but we know that was not his intention at all. What else could /should he have done differently? The possibilities I can see are the following:
A) Not interfering at all on either side.
B) Trying to AK/Stun the DE instead of using Sectumsempra (that would have been killing with no or little possibility to help).
C) After inadvertently injuring George, trying to capture him with the purpose of singing a countercourse - but first he would have had to actively fight Lupin and George, then to heal George and later to free him somehow - difficult with a DE (or DE's) around. It seems he could have easily caused more harm than good.
D) Instead of capturing them, trying to explain himself to Lupin and George, who were flying ahead, while the DE was flying after them between Snape and Lupin-George. Snape could have tried to shout above the DE's head that he was really on the Order's side and 'George, please stop, I want to heal you' - I just cannot see that it would have worked at all.
What should he have done?
Edit: LOL, Pesky, I could quite understand this attitude in the present war situation - and when it is about saving Lupin, I would not be sorry for the DE's wand hand either at all! Is that a nasty streak in me?
PeskyPixie - Jun 5, 2008 2:53 pm (#2270 of 2617)
Even reformed, Snape has a bit of a nasty streak in him. He probably couldn't care less if a Death Eater lost a wand hand. He has been a witness to DE atrocities on a regular basis, and now that he tries to save innocent people whenever possible, he'll zap Dolohov with a Sectumsempra in a situation where he may probably get away with it. ("Whoops, sorry. I was going for Lupin's neck but this idiot tried to upstage me and as a result he's got to learn to Crucio with his other hand.")
Last edited by Mona on Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:27 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2271 to 2300
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:26 pm
haymoni - Jun 5, 2008 2:57 pm (#2271 of 2617)
I think he could have gotten away with it.
I wonder how awful Snape felt watching that teacher rotating over the dining room table?
Quinn Crockett - Jun 5, 2008 4:39 pm (#2272 of 2617)
See, this is why I'm just going back to lurking. I de-lurk to contribute a tiny suggestion to the current discussion (a post that is barely even one sentence long) and you literally analyze every single syllable of it, ascribing meaning to it that was never intended. I don't think anything I said was particularly ambiguous or nasty.
"Saved himself" is not meant to be taken literally in that I don't think Snape specifically tried to hit George or anyone else just to "save himself" from Voldemort's wrath. I was merely suggesting that what seemed like a misfortunate occurance in that Snape did hit George would undoubtedly have allowed Snape to keep his cover (it did), would have protected him from any inquisition Voldemort might have decided to put him under if Snape had hit the Death Eater after all. So Snape could be satisfied that he had done the job he had told Dumbledore he would do.
PeskyPixie - Jun 5, 2008 5:09 pm (#2273 of 2617)
Edited Jun 5, 2008 5:47 pm
Quinn, it happens to all of us. I have contributed single sentences (with smilies next to them to indicate the light-hearted intent) which have then been endlessly scrutinized. Even recently, my use of the term 'non-verbal agreement' led to others (including yourself) focusing solely on this term and misinterpreting it in a way in which I never intended it. However, I don't take that personally as it is from these misinterpretations and the following clarifications that we come up with all sorts of ideas we had not previously considered. It's not meant as a personal attack towards you at all, and usually all that is required is a clarification (a heated one, if the criticisms have annoyed you!). However, if you are not comfortable with this syllable by syllable analysis (), I'm cool with not picking at your posts. No hard feelings at all, buddy.
ETA: Julia, I think it's kind of healthy to have a tiny hint of a 'nasty' streak , if it's directed towards even nastier Death Eaters. I've always thought that the HP bad guys don't deserve a rival as 'good' as Harry.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 5, 2008 7:14 pm (#2274 of 2617)
Okay, thanks, Pesky Pixie. Point taken on the misunderstanding. I'll try to keep up with you all and adjust to a more academic mindedness. Because I do love that you guys treat a "children's series" with the same credibility as any other literary work. I think the Snape character, at least, deserves it.
mona amon - Jun 5, 2008 7:42 pm (#2275 of 2617)
I guess I am still bothered by the whole situation. (Solitaire)
Me too. What really bothers me is Snape's use of Sectumsempra. To cold bloodedly take aim and try to chop off the DE's wand hand? Didn't this highly skilled wizard know any other spells? And what about the possibility (which actually happens) of missing and carving up either Lupin or George in friendly fire?
It would have gone down much better with me if he had tried stunning the DE or something similar. It would not bother me at all to see the DE toppling off his broom to his death, and for that matter, like Julia and Pesk I'm not overly concerned about some DE's wand hand. But I am concerned about what it says about Snape.
If the AK is Voldy's signature spell and Expelliarmus is Harry's, what does it say about Snape if his signature spell is Sectumsempra? And before DH came out I used to boast that Snape seemed to have kept the spell very secret and not taught it to any DEs.
ETA: Well said, Quinn!
wynnleaf - Jun 5, 2008 7:43 pm (#2276 of 2617)
On the "nasty streak" idea, I think that in this particular case, the willingness to save the life of one of the good guys by seriously injuring or possibly bringing about the death of a bad guy doesn't necessarily need a nasty streak. In a war and during a battle, any good combatant must be willing to do what it takes to protect his side, and it is, after all, the nature of battle that one would rather the other side experienced casualties rather than one's own side. All good soldiers/combatants would do this and it doesn't take having a particularly nasty side to one's character.
I'm not saying Snape can't be nasty, but I wouldn't think Snape's willingness to protect his own side in battle by harming one of the enemy a sign of his nastiness.
To cold bloodedly take aim and try to chop off the DE's wand hand? Didn't this highly skilled wizard know any other spells? (mona amon)
Snape had to use a spell that would look like something a real Death Eater would be using against the Order, not some wishy washy won't-do-permenant-damage kind of spell. But Snape also could not use an AK or even a stunning spell because if it did go awry, as it did, then he couldn't risk hitting an Order member with something that would certainly kill them either immediately or knock them off their broom to their death.
Solitaire - Jun 5, 2008 7:46 pm (#2277 of 2617)
I de-lurk to contribute a tiny suggestion to the current discussion (a post that is barely even one sentence long) and you literally analyze every single syllable of it
It's okay, Quinn. It has happened at least once to most people who post here, because Snape's thread, in particular, seems to arouse such strong feelings. The bottom line is that you feel the way you feel, and having your feelings picked apart and explained to you by others doesn't change that. I still don't like Snape. I know he loved Lily to pieces, and he helped Harry in the end ... but I do not believe this absolves him of all his rotten treatment of Harry and others over the years. I still think that, if he could have managed it, he would have had Lily live and let Harry and James die, and he would have left Sirius and Remus to the Dementors. Concerning George's ear ... well, I have my own feelings about that whole situation, too, and they are apparently different from what others feel. Even after the series has ended, I still view Snape through my "teacher's filter" ... and his treatment of kids in general appalls me. My feelings on this issue will never change, and neither will those who try to lecture me into changing how I feel. Your feelings are valid because they are what you feel.
Solitaire
mona amon - Jun 5, 2008 7:54 pm (#2278 of 2617)
not some wishy washy won't-do-permenant-damage kind of spell. (Wynnleaf)
But there was a very real danger of missing the DE and hitting one of his own side (which actually happens), and that's part of the reason why he should have chosen a milder spell. As to explaining it away later, I'm sure he could have easily managed that.
PeskyPixie - Jun 5, 2008 8:02 pm (#2279 of 2617)
I don't think I really want to 'lecture' others into adapting their own interpretations to suit my views. I do apologize if I have ever given that impression in my posts.
I just feel that it is interesting to learn how others interpret the same text and reasoning behind it. Similarly, I feel that those who are fascinated by Snape-the-character should be allowed to express why they enjoy reading this character who can be quite nasty. The reasons vary, and there is always room for healthy debate without the need to pressure others to change their beliefs. That said, the posters on this thread have written such persuasive arguments that, on a few occasions, I found that logic dictated me to change my original opinion!
wynnleaf - Jun 6, 2008 1:08 am (#2280 of 2617)
there is always room for healthy debate (Pesky)
In my opinion, it is the debate that drives this thread. When we get to the point where everyone is either in agreement, or where no one cares enough to discuss in depth, analyze each other's opinions, and yes, debate issues, the conversation dies out rather quickly, as -- as anyone may notice -- occurs on a great many of the other threads with the exception of threads that have continuously new material such as the chapter-by-chapter threads, those that focus on anecdotal postings, games, polls, etc.
That said, debate should always be respectful and civil. But because we are writing and unable to hear tone of voice or facial expressions, and because we come from perhaps different cultures and languages, or at the least different backgrounds, our choices of words or our ways of expressing opinions is not always clear to everyone. I have seen people get into miscommunication just over different interpretations of one word, but that one word may hold different connotations to different people. Analysis and clarification is often necessary if we're going to understand what we are each saying. If someone takes my words and analyzes them in depth with a completely different spin than what I intended, that doesn't generally mean they're trying to re-invent what I said, but that they truly didn't understand me. Do I want to know that I wasn't understood? Yes. Because then I can post again and, hopefully, clarify my thoughts to others.
Julia H. - Jun 6, 2008 3:45 am (#2281 of 2617)
Edited Jun 6, 2008 4:27 am
I de-lurk to contribute a tiny suggestion to the current discussion (a post that is barely even one sentence long) and you literally analyze every single syllable of it, ascribing meaning to it that was never intended. (Quinn)
I will try to be more careful next time. You see, precisely because your post was so short, it was very easy to analyze every word in it. I did not want to ascribe any meaning to it that you did not mean, I was simply saying how I understood or rather how I did not understand it. The phrases "satisfied" and "saving himself", in the context of the debate to me seemed to imply something intentionally done and I asked you whether you meant this because - well I did not understand what the intention could be. Now I understand (I hope at least ) that you meant what happened resulted in the fact that Snape did not have to explain anything, which I agree with. I am still not sure about the "satisfied" part, since by attacking the DE, Snape must have put up with the idea that he would have to explain what happened, so avoiding the explanation cannot have been his immediate purpose - and he may not have been particularly satisfied just because he avoided having to face a situation that he was prepared to face by causing an injury he did not mean to cause. If you don't want your post to be analyzed, I promise I will not. (There are people who perhaps tend to analyze too much - I for one like analyzing these books in details and sometimes the posts as well.) However, there is a bright side I think - people read your post, find it interesting enough to comment on it and if something is not clear enough to somebody and that person tells you, you can get the chance to explain it if you want. BTW, I would really like to read a longer post from you.
Concerning George's ear ... well, I have my own feelings about that whole situation, too, and they are apparently different from what others feel. ... My feelings on this issue will never change, and neither will those who try to lecture me into changing how I feel. (Solitaire)
It is quite clear you have your own feelings about George's ear and I wish you shared them with us but anyway... I tried to describe how I see that situation and what alternative choices I can think of for someone in Snape's place (and I try to base these things on canon, that is why I use quotations) and my question concerning these or any other alternative choices that I did not think of was genuine: I am really interested in knowing what various people think the best decision would be in the given difficult situation, whether Snape could have done anything more or better (apart from not missing the target). Such discussions I think go beyond the basic analysis of a book and it is good (IMO). I did not want to lecture anybody and I am well aware that opinions will not now turn into their opposites but if we do not debate or respond to what other people write or if we address only those posts and posters that we agree with, the discussion element will soon be lost I think. (But now look how lively this thread has become!)
It would have gone down much better with me if he had tried stunning the DE or something similar....But I am concerned about what it says about Snape.
If the AK is Voldy's signature spell and Expelliarmus is Harry's, what does it say about Snape if his signature spell is Sectumsempra? (Mona)
I think the question whether killing someone in a battle is worse or better than cutting off the hand of the same person is a valid question. I tend to think the answer can vary not only depending on the person who answers it but maybe with regard to the specific situation. Snape did not have much time to think but he may have wanted to avoid killing and so chose another spell. Whether he would have chosen the same spell if he had had time to think we cannot tell, though I guess it had to be a spell likely to be used in a battle. I am not surprised that not long after Snape was forced to AK Dumbledore, he is not ready for another AK. If he started now to AK people around "for the greater good", I would think some serious damage has been done to his soul. Now I think the fact that he does not think of using AK as a handy solution, tells something about how he feels about that particular AK he has recently been forced to do. (I think - and not everybody agrees I know - that the only AK in Snape's life is when he AK's DD and I think it puts the whole thing into a different, more dramatic light.) Sectumsempra is not a nice spell but it is war now. Sectumsempra may not be better than a spell that kills but this is Snape's choice in a desperate situation. Just as Lupin is much more concerned about the possibility of causing harm as a werewolf than by not telling DD that an alleged serial killer with alleged murderous intentions apparently getting access into the school is an animagus, the AK may similarly be a sensitive issue for Snape, so he tries to avoid that more than another "nasty spell". It may not be simply right vs. wrong.
Snape has now a "saving people thing" but suddenly he finds himself in a situation in which he has to attack and hurt someone (or let Lupin die), which he has not had to do so far because of his role as a spy. In this situation, he may just resort to the ways of his earlier ("less advanced") self, the one that invented Sectumsempra. I don't think there is any more to Sectumsempra being his "signature spell". There is only one instance we see him use it. Having to do something nasty, he recalls his nastier self. Having to take part in a fight does not necessarily improve one's personality and having to play the part of the DE he actually could have been may even cause damage. But then there is the crying scene next to that... It seems to be significant to me. Earlier, I think you asked (not exact quotation, sorry) what reason would Snape have to go to 12GP to cry at the point where the memory is placed. Well, I think this may be a good reason.
And before DH came out I used to boast that Snape seemed to have kept the spell very secret and not taught it to any DEs
I see no reason why you should change this opinion of yours. He is not teaching the spell, is he?
Dryleaves - Jun 6, 2008 4:26 am (#2282 of 2617)
If the AK is Voldy's signature spell and Expelliarmus is Harry's, what does it say about Snape if his signature spell is Sectumsempra? (mona amon)
Snape had to use a spell that would look like something a real Death Eater would be using against the Order... (Wynnleaf)
But there was a very real danger of missing the DE and hitting one of his own side (which actually happens), and that's part of the reason why he should have chosen a milder spell. (mona amon)
I think Wynnleaf has a point, because a stinging hex would certainly not seem credible if you tried to explain it away to Voldemort later. And we don't know what Snape actually intended with his Sectumsempra, because it seems as if the effect of this spell could be controlled, at least to some extent. I have no personal experience (luckily!) but it ought to take less power to cut off an ear than a whole hand, so maybe he just intended a nasty cut to the hand rather than sever it completely from the body?
Then you could of course ask if the use of Sectumsempra says something about Snape. It is his signature, or was. Maybe there was a nasty streak in him that wanted to use this teenage dark spell specifically on a DE? And what happens? He misses and hits George, maybe even Harry for all that he knows. Maybe Snape is just not meant to use his knowledge of dark magic as dark magic. It seems to be OK for other good guys to use Unforgivables in battle, but when Snape uses this dark spell, it just goes against his intentions and adds to his guilt.
Because I do love that you guys treat a "children's series" with the same credibility as any other literary work. I think the Snape character, at least, deserves it. (Quinn Crockett)
Yes, he certainly does! I absolutely agree (and not only to be "nice" )
I just feel that it is interesting to learn how others interpret the same text and reasoning behind it. (Pesky Pixie)
I know he loved Lily to pieces, and he helped Harry in the end ... but I do not believe this absolves him of all his rotten treatment of Harry and others over the years. (Solitaire)
I also think it is interesting how different readers interpret the same text. I especially find it interesting how different people view Snape's behaviour as a teacher and how this affects whether you see him as a good guy or a bad. I have never seen Snape as a bad guy, but I have never liked his treatment of the students either. I have wondered why DD lets him go on with it, because apparently he does, but he does not approve of Umbridge's corporal punishments. I think in every book except HBP, Snape is shown to ultimately follow DD's line, the same goal as the other teachers of Hogwarts, and at least care about the students' physical wellbeing. Of course words can hurt, but it seems as if the books make a difference between sarcasms and physical violence. And physical violence also leaves mental wounds. Still, I don't think Snape really is "absolved" from his treatment of the students, but I think that we are shown that there are worse things. I guess some of us think that he was flawed, not bad. Others think differently and I really think it is interesting to know what others think and why they do so, even if I want the right to say that I don't agree...
Solitaire - Jun 6, 2008 9:07 am (#2283 of 2617)
Still, I don't think Snape really is "absolved" from his treatment of the students, but I think that we are shown that there are worse things.
Dryleaves, if you ever question the real extent of emotional damage a teacher can inflict on a student without raising a hand to that student, come and spend some time on the chat thread. It is, perhaps, the very conversations we have been having lately among teachers and parents--over the unfeeling treatment of their children by certain teachers--that has revived my abhorrence of Snape's treatment of his students. Quite honestly, I consider the verbal abuse Snape has inflicted on some of his students (not just Harry) to be far more damaging in the long run than the swat or two some of my contemporaries received in school ... and I think they would agree with me.
Pesky, I was not really thinking of you when I used the term "lecturing." I've been posting on this forum since the summer of 2004 and have read thousands of Snape posts by hundreds of Snape posters. For a variety of reasons, people seem more emotionally affected (in one way or another) by this character than any of the others ... even Harry. If you go back into the Snape archives as far as OotP (and probably even to PS/SS), you can find some pretty emotionally-charged posts (and entire "threads within the thread") on both sides of the "Snape is abusive" issue. At one point, I became so upset from one discussion that I simply stopped looking at the Snape thread for a period of weeks or months.
Wynnleaf is right about the debate. Posters should be able to say what they feel, respectfully, on the Forum. Anyone who does not like the tone or perspective of a particular thread is free to skip that thread, as I have done before. Perhaps it's time to "ground" myself from this thread for a time, until the topic changes.
Solitaire
PeskyPixie - Jun 6, 2008 9:50 am (#2284 of 2617)
Actually, I think your perspective needs to be heard, Solitaire. So many of us seem to feel that Snape does no permanent damage to his students that it is quite interesting and important to understand the complete opposite point of view.
Julia H. - Jun 6, 2008 10:04 am (#2285 of 2617)
Maybe Snape is just not meant to use his knowledge of dark magic as dark magic. It seems to be OK for other good guys to use Unforgivables in battle, but when Snape uses this dark spell, it just goes against his intentions and adds to his guilt. (Dryleaves)
This is exactly how I see it, too. When good guys use dark magic, as Harry uses the Cruciatus Curse (not to save someone, only as a means of revenge or doing justice if you like), it somehow ceases to be quite as dark as it usually is (according to the logic of the books). However, Snape is not supposed to use dark magic or - I think - aggressive ways of fighting. His job is to serve the cause of the right side with his intelligence and various skills and most of all by protecting lives but not by fighting directly. He is guilty and he is atoning for having been a part of something dark and something against life and it seems his actions must be non-violent and must be directed at protecting but not at harming. When he does otherwise (even if with good intentions), he fails and things will be worse.
Like Dryleaves, I also agree with Quinn that the Snape character deserves deeper analysis or discussion. Obviously.
Pesky, I was not really thinking of you when I used the term "lecturing." (Solitaire)
Solitaire, since I answered your recent posts, I guess you must have meant me. I have read again my answers to you and I cannot find where I was "lecturing". At least what I meant was simply stating what I think and why - since you brought up the topic of George's ear, I did not think you would mind a discussion. (I would have been interested in reading why you are uncomfortable with the scene, since I agree that there are disturbing things in it.) Nor did I want to sound disrespectful and I don't think I was any more disrespectful than in my other posts. Of course, if this is the general impression of my tone, the best thing will be if I leave this thread so that others could stay.
Solitaire - Jun 6, 2008 10:42 am (#2286 of 2617)
No, Julia, I was not referring to you or to any single poster. As I said, I have been posting here for 4 years, and many passionate Snape supporters have had as much to say as those of us who lean more toward the way I feel about him. Anyway, perhaps lecturing was not the proper word. Perhaps I should have said that some posters have tried to argue me into changing my feelings, for I've often felt that way, as well. That passions run so high in both directions on the issue of Snape and the totality of his behavior throughout the series is a testament to Jo's artistry in constructing the character, IMO.
Solitaire
Orion - Jun 6, 2008 10:46 am (#2287 of 2617)
When I read the Prince's Tale and read that Sectumsempra was meant for the DE's wand hand I didn't think for a minute that Snape wanted to amputate the DE. We have seen the effect of the spell on Draco and he had cuts all over his body, but no part of his body fell off. How a spell that makes gashes can cut off a whole ear is a mystery to me because the ear is attached to the head on its whole length and you'd have difficulties aiming so precisely that it was parted from the head. Another red herring. They make me cross. So this is a cross-post.
Ouch, that was a lousy one.
Dryleaves - Jun 6, 2008 11:09 am (#2288 of 2617)
Solitaire, I also think your perspective is important. When I was a child/teenager I sometimes received Snape-like comments from adults, teachers and others, that hurt me, but then I also received quite a lot of love and had new experiences later in life that gave me other perspectives. So the only traces of damage left now is that I get extremely angry with Snape when he says: "I see no difference" about Hermione's teeth, for example. And that is not so much damage, frankly, and I guess I tend to judge the damage of Snape's behaviour from that point of view. I think it is worse to have it carved into your skin that you are a liar, because that would always remind you of the bad treatment and you would have to explain it to others all the time (or at least feel the need to). But it is bad enough if a child feels agony about a teacher and of course a child cannot be expected not to take the teacher's behaviour personally and see that it may all be about the teacher having personal problems, and so on. And I want to stress that I don't approve of Snape's behaviour at all. But I didn't mean to compare it to a swat or two either, but much worse things. When you read about things that people are forced to go through, then Snape may seem rather trivial.
Snape can keep a child safe, but seldom make them feel safe. I think maybe his behaviour could be dangerous in the long run when there is nothing good in the child's life to weigh it up. Snape himself is an example of that, I guess. The Hogwarts kids we see being exposed to Snape seem to have some positive antipole to him, and we don't really see any longlasting damage done, I think. In real life it may be more complicated.
Soul Search - Jun 6, 2008 11:15 am (#2289 of 2617)
In Deathly Hallows, "The Prince's Tale", just after Dumbledore tells Snape that Harry must die, Dumbledore says to Snape: "Don't be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?" Snape responds: "Lately, only those whom I could not save, ... ." Previously, we saw two examples that confirm Snape's statement.
In the first chapter Snape must, "quite impassively," watch as Voldemort AKs Charity Burbage, who even appeals to Snape with "Severus ... please ... ."
In the chase out of #4 Privet Drive Snape sees that a Death Eater is about to kill Lupin and uses Sectumsempra in an attempt to save him. Lupin is saved, although George loses an ear.
With Charity, Snape could do nothing. Even a doubtful comment could have gotten him killed. He had no choice. In the second example the confusion of the chase left him some leeway so he made the attempt. And got away with it.
Snape's response to Dumbledore and the action scenes are out of sequence in the text, but once put in order clearly show a Snape in great inner conflict. He does not want to see people die at Voldemort's hand, yet must, at times, restrain any desire to protect so he can fulfil his mission to Dumbledore.
So, Snape comes across without a clear image because, at times, we see the suppressed Snape who must allow evil and at other times the inner Snape, the protective side, comes through.
Potteraholic - Jun 6, 2008 12:08 pm (#2290 of 2617)
Another red herring. They make me cross. So this is a cross-post.
Ouch, that was a lousy one. Orion
I beg to differ! I really enjoyed that one, so much so that I actually got out of lurker mode to post! And now back to our regularly scheduled serious discussion about the inimitable Severus Snape.
wynnleaf - Jun 6, 2008 2:45 pm (#2291 of 2617)
That passions run so high in both directions on the issue of Snape and the totality of his behavior throughout the series is a testament to Jo's artistry in constructing the character, IMO. (Solitaire)
I think it might be helpful to find out why individual's passions run so high over Snape, both pro and con, while not so much about other characters. I'm not talking about why you like or dislike Snape. I'm talking about why it matters so much to you. Anybody willing to share -- why does Snape's character, the way the books treat him, and even the "take" other readers have on him, affect you so much?
Julia H. - Jun 6, 2008 3:22 pm (#2292 of 2617)
Solitaire, thank you for your answer. I agree that (while we do criticize Jo every now and then on different threads) the Snape character is a remarkable achievement on her part.
Orion, like PAH, I also liked your "cross-post". So the Sectumsempra may be like a dangerously sharp knife, which can make dangerous cuts and, like some knives, in the worst case, can even take off an ear if it hits the body in that place and direction. This would involve the supposition that the spell cut off George's ear because it hit him in a very unfortunate way - it might have just as well made a deep gash. Poor George.
It is a red herring, of course. JKR wants to keep the reader in the dark about Snape's loyalty very much until the end of DH and then to clear Snape of all (recent) charges in a few very short memories. Does anyone else think that Snape shouting Sectumsempra is a bit illogical after all the lessons he gave about non-verbal spells in HBP and because of our knowledge that he is very good at non-verbal spells? It is for the reader's benefit, of course, but for Snape to cast a non-verbal spell might be more useful, given the fact that he has to keep a few things in secret, so what is the point in shouting and attracting attention to what he is doing? Or is that something he uses to make the impression that he is not hiding anything at all? Hm...
So, Snape comes across without a clear image because, at times, we see the suppressed Snape who must allow evil and at other times the inner Snape, the protective side, comes through. (Soul Search)
I like the terms the suppressed Snape and the inner Snape. The former often functions as a red herring but is more than just that. Snape has to make a couple of very tough choices (like in the two examples Soul Search mentions), often without time to really consider the options. He must know his priorities instantly.
Exciting question, Wynnleaf... especially if we consider that readers come from every corner of the world. I don't think I could myself answer it right now but I will try to think about it and I am certainly looking forward to reading any responses to this question.
Soul Search - Jun 6, 2008 3:39 pm (#2293 of 2617)
wynnleaf, good question.
"I think it might be helpful to find out why individual's passions run so high over Snape, ..."
I don't I care about the Snape character more than any other, maybe even less than most, but I do marvel how we can all read the same text and get very different interpretations. I think it is the discussion itself that most interests me and invites me to post.
Solitaire - Jun 6, 2008 8:14 pm (#2294 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, I was simply stating what I perceive: Posters tend to get very "worked up" in discussions on the Snape thread--more so than on other threads, if you ask me. I may be wrong, but this is my perception.
Solitaire
wynnleaf - Jun 6, 2008 10:20 pm (#2295 of 2617)
Posters tend to get very "worked up" in discussions on the Snape thread--more so than on other threads, if you ask me. I may be wrong, but this is my perception. (Solitiare)
Oh, I doubt if it's just your perception. I would certainly agree with you and imagine that a great many other posters would agree as well. In fact, the challenge would probably being finding anyone that doesn't agree. That's why I think it would be interesting to ask why we get so "worked up" over Snape discussions, but not necessarily other discussions. Even on the Sirius Black or Lupin threads, when a really passionate discussion gets going, it's usually about how those characters relate to Snape. Snape's character stirs up strong feelings, but the reasons are probably different for different people.
mona amon - Jun 6, 2008 10:42 pm (#2296 of 2617)
Does anyone else think that Snape shouting Sectumsempra is a bit illogical after all the lessons he gave about non-verbal spells in HBP and because of our knowledge that he is very good at non-verbal spells? (Julia)
I think that there are certain spells that you cannot use non-verbally, like the AK. Sectumsempra is one of them. In the Half blood Prince textbook, Snape has scribbled 'Levicorpus (n-vbl)' while 'Sectumsempra' is written with an exclamation mark after it. Seems like you have to say it, and with some force.
I call Sectumsempra Snape's signature spell because it comes to him so readily in an emergency. IMO it is a particularly nasty killing spell, and Snape's readiness to use it shows an unwillingness to give up his beloved Dark Arts. It's not as if he has to use it. The rest of the wizarding world, both good and bad, get on perfectly well without it.
I think Wynnleaf has a point, because a stinging hex would certainly not seem credible if you tried to explain it away to Voldemort later. (Dryleaves)
But he did not really have a choice. George and Lupin were in the line of his fire, so he had to choose a spell that would not do much damage (in case he hits George or Lupin), or do nothing at all (like Harry stands and watches the Molly-Bella duel without helping because he's scared he might hit Molly). Yet he chooses Sectumsempra. I feel it was shaky morals and bad strategy.
He is not teaching the spell, is he? (Julia)
Before DH I thought he'd be keeping it secret. But here we see that he's not at all averse to shouting Sectumsempra! when he's among a crowd of other DEs. They can easily learn it from him.
But then there is the crying scene next to that... It seems to be significant to me. Earlier, I think you asked (not exact quotation, sorry) what reason would Snape have to go to 12GP to cry at the point where the memory is placed. Well, I think this may be a good reason.
Hmm...I too don't remember. I think I was arguing that he would not have entered #12 at that point when he knew that the Order would have put up protective spells against him, and might even be present in the building when he goes visiting. But even if he did, there's Lily's letter to show us what he was crying about, or at least what started him off. Somehow I just can't imagine Snape going to #12 because he felt so bad about injuring George. If Jo wanted us to think so, she should not have put Lily's letter into his hand.
Anybody willing to share -- why does Snape's character, the way the books treat him, and even the "take" other readers have on him, affect you so much? (Wynnleaf)
To say why I like Snape so much will be a long and complicated story, but I might try sometime. On the whole I don't think I get too worked up about the discussions, except when it touches on certain topics like Snape's Worst Memory, so I think it's some of the issues that 'rouse my passions' more than the character himself. Most of the time it doesn't bother me if people see Snape differently from the way I see him (though I'll definitely defend my opinions), but for some strange reason I get a lot more heated up when people try to defend all of Snape's actions than when they criticize him!
Dryleaves - Jun 7, 2008 2:31 am (#2297 of 2617)
...why does Snape's character, the way the books treat him, and even the "take" other readers have on him, affect you so much? (Wynnleaf)
I am new on the Forum, so I have missed the worst discussions, but over the books I came to care more and more about the Snape character, and if you care, I guess you care. (But of course he is fictional, so the caring is in proportion to that, I hope.. )
Snape is both treating other people in a bad way and is himself being badly treated, and this evokes strong feelings. Maybe the Snape character reminds different readers of different people from real life. If you, like Solitaire, is a teacher and see collegues treat their students in a really bad way, you may be really upset about this part of the character and it will colour the whole interpretation of him. But if you know people that are seen as unpleasant by most people, but that you yourself know have quite a few good sides and even may be loving and caring, then you perhaps tend to give the character another chance and even defend him from other readers with different views than your own.
As the books are written from Harry's perspective and Harry really dislikes Snape, for very good reasons, the descriptions of Snape are often extremely negative and full of emotion from Harry's side. The positive things about Snape are often described more neutrally, I think, and are not always acknowledged as good things by Harry. So if you take Harry's side you will maybe have the same strongly negative emotions about Snape. If you instead take Snape's side you may think that this character is somewhat "misunderstood" and feel you want to defend him (sometimes a little too much, perhaps).
Then there is the constant question of Snape's true loyalty. The Snape character stands between good and evil in the story, doesn't clearly belong anywhere, and therefore the reader must defend his/her opinion of him. The truly fascinating thing is that he is still there, in between, though the story is ended and his true loyalty is revealed.
I think I have to think a little more about why the character affects me, though...
Julia H. - Jun 7, 2008 2:52 am (#2298 of 2617)
But he did not really have a choice. (Mona)
Apparently, he did have a choice or we could not discuss what he should have done. Yes, he could have used another spell but I don't think he could have just watched what was happening as Harry did in the case of Molly and Bella. The difference is that Molly and Bella were equally fighting, face to face. Lupin, however, was flying ahead, the DE was attacking him from behind his back. Seeing that and not doing anything would pretty much mean leaving the outcome to pure chance. I don't think this particular use of Sectumsempra indicates shaky morals but it is resorting to an earlier stage in his development, which he is not supposed to do. (Again, the comparison with Harry's use of Unforgivables is very interesting.) If it is bad strategy, well, he is not experienced in battles. Duels are different, you stand face to face with your enemy (or enemies) but this is a more complicated situation.
As for shouting the spell in the presence of DE's: On the one hand it is a situation of emergency, where saving Lupin becomes more important than keeping the spell a secret. It is a bit similar to the situation in The Silver Doe chapter. He must not reveal his presence to Harry but when Harry does not come out of the pond, he moves - probably to save Harry - that is why Ron can see him. If Ron did not come, Snape would have to give up hiding and save Harry from the pond. (I sometimes wish it had happened so.) It is a question of priorities. Using Sectumsempra in an emergency does not mean that otherwise he does not keep it a secret. On the other hand, I'm not sure how serious the danger that the DE's learn Sectumsempra from him in the middle of a battle may be. I'd think everyone would be too busy doing what he is doing to learn spells from each other. Or if the DE's watch him so closely as both to hear and understand what he is shouting and then they can even memorize it, then he is running an even greater risk than I thought, since the chances that someone notices who he is aiming at are bigger.
I hope I am not getting you too worked up - understanding why Snape uses Sectumsempra is at least as important for me as defending his action. Ultimately then I think, even if he does make a mistake using that particular spell, he does so with good intentions and at the moment he is not only "nasty Snape, who still uses Dark Magic" but also "good Snape, who wants to save lives instead of just watching as someone dies". BTW, he has recently been forced to watch Charity's death - it may be possible that this memory and how he feels about it is part of his "nastier than necessary" reaction to seeing Lupin attacked. (Whatever he thinks of him, Lupin is also a former colleague, as Charity was and I don't know if it is important but Snape knows that Lupin is now married and that Voldemort has specifically set Bellatrix on Tonks and possibly on their future children.)
Somehow I just can't imagine Snape going to #12 because he felt so bad about injuring George. If Jo wanted us to think so, she should not have put Lily's letter into his hand.
There must be a reason why he goes there and it is not likely to be to find Lily's letter, because he cannot expect that. It is not only George's ear, the whole battle almost goes totally wrong, besides he is confronted with the degree of his isolation. He probably feels responsibility and he may even regret using Sectumsempra. 12GP is deserted and part of the reason why he goes there may be that he can see his being formerly an Order member in a different light now. In the present situation, it may seem to be one of the valuable chances he lost and one he could not appreciate / use really well while he still had it.
I think he finds Lily's letter by accident and among all his troubles and sorrows, the letter is something that can represent it all, an object that can be grasped and held in his hands and at the same time an object that becomes the only - sort of - comfort to him when he is very much in need of comfort and there are no living beings to give it to him.
Anybody willing to share -- why does Snape's character, the way the books treat him, and even the "take" other readers have on him, affect you so much? (Wynnleaf)
Lots of answers and complex and personal ones could be given. This time I'll try something moderately personal and something general:
HP, as any fairy tale and a large part of world literature is about the fight between good and evil represented in the first place by Harry and Voldemort. The books are about what happens between them against the background of a panorama of the wizarding world. I think Snape is important because the war taking place outside also takes place inside one person's soul and that is Snape. (Sure the fight affects other souls as well but it is only Snape whose soul is the scene of a complete war between good and evil.) I tend to imagine that as in the world outside there are battles and challenges and dragons and snakes and little victories and little defeats and difficult choices and basic principles and mistakes and great discoveries (etc.), similarly intensive and "spectacular" things are happening during this long fight inside his soul before the final victory is achieved - and I think the good wins inside just like outside. For some reason I find this inner fight far more interesting than the one outside.
A more general answer I can think of is that while we get all kinds of intriguing hints about the Snape character, he remains a mystery even after the Prince's Tale. While the complexity of the character is given by the author, to really see a full character in front of us we, readers, are forced to contribute to the building process. Unless we are very casual readers of HP, we must add a part of ourselves (our views, beliefs, imagination, interest, interpretation) to the character. This takes some effort and some dedication. Whether we interpret the character as essentially bad or essentially good, the complete character is more than usually our own creation. So perhaps we get heated over something that is our own.
Dryleaves - Jun 7, 2008 3:30 am (#2299 of 2617)
I think Snape is important because the war taking place outside also takes place inside one person's soul and that is Snape. (Julia)
Unless we are very casual readers of HP, we must add a part of ourselves (our views, beliefs, imagination, interest, interpretation) to the character. This takes some effort and some dedication. Whether we interpret the character as essentially bad or essentially good, the complete character is more than usually our own creation. So perhaps we get heated over something that is our own. (Julia)
These are very good answers to the question, I think!
Orion - Jun 7, 2008 4:28 am (#2300 of 2617)
Why does Snape shout out Sectumsempra so that everybody can hear it? Well, so that Lupin can tell the others. It's a literary device to inform the readers. I can't think of any other reason. We must stop finding internal reasons for every single fart a character produces and stop worrying about them because sometimes the author has no other choice if she wants to lead her readers in a certain direction.
I think he could have gotten away with it.
I wonder how awful Snape felt watching that teacher rotating over the dining room table?
Quinn Crockett - Jun 5, 2008 4:39 pm (#2272 of 2617)
See, this is why I'm just going back to lurking. I de-lurk to contribute a tiny suggestion to the current discussion (a post that is barely even one sentence long) and you literally analyze every single syllable of it, ascribing meaning to it that was never intended. I don't think anything I said was particularly ambiguous or nasty.
"Saved himself" is not meant to be taken literally in that I don't think Snape specifically tried to hit George or anyone else just to "save himself" from Voldemort's wrath. I was merely suggesting that what seemed like a misfortunate occurance in that Snape did hit George would undoubtedly have allowed Snape to keep his cover (it did), would have protected him from any inquisition Voldemort might have decided to put him under if Snape had hit the Death Eater after all. So Snape could be satisfied that he had done the job he had told Dumbledore he would do.
PeskyPixie - Jun 5, 2008 5:09 pm (#2273 of 2617)
Edited Jun 5, 2008 5:47 pm
Quinn, it happens to all of us. I have contributed single sentences (with smilies next to them to indicate the light-hearted intent) which have then been endlessly scrutinized. Even recently, my use of the term 'non-verbal agreement' led to others (including yourself) focusing solely on this term and misinterpreting it in a way in which I never intended it. However, I don't take that personally as it is from these misinterpretations and the following clarifications that we come up with all sorts of ideas we had not previously considered. It's not meant as a personal attack towards you at all, and usually all that is required is a clarification (a heated one, if the criticisms have annoyed you!). However, if you are not comfortable with this syllable by syllable analysis (), I'm cool with not picking at your posts. No hard feelings at all, buddy.
ETA: Julia, I think it's kind of healthy to have a tiny hint of a 'nasty' streak , if it's directed towards even nastier Death Eaters. I've always thought that the HP bad guys don't deserve a rival as 'good' as Harry.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 5, 2008 7:14 pm (#2274 of 2617)
Okay, thanks, Pesky Pixie. Point taken on the misunderstanding. I'll try to keep up with you all and adjust to a more academic mindedness. Because I do love that you guys treat a "children's series" with the same credibility as any other literary work. I think the Snape character, at least, deserves it.
mona amon - Jun 5, 2008 7:42 pm (#2275 of 2617)
I guess I am still bothered by the whole situation. (Solitaire)
Me too. What really bothers me is Snape's use of Sectumsempra. To cold bloodedly take aim and try to chop off the DE's wand hand? Didn't this highly skilled wizard know any other spells? And what about the possibility (which actually happens) of missing and carving up either Lupin or George in friendly fire?
It would have gone down much better with me if he had tried stunning the DE or something similar. It would not bother me at all to see the DE toppling off his broom to his death, and for that matter, like Julia and Pesk I'm not overly concerned about some DE's wand hand. But I am concerned about what it says about Snape.
If the AK is Voldy's signature spell and Expelliarmus is Harry's, what does it say about Snape if his signature spell is Sectumsempra? And before DH came out I used to boast that Snape seemed to have kept the spell very secret and not taught it to any DEs.
ETA: Well said, Quinn!
wynnleaf - Jun 5, 2008 7:43 pm (#2276 of 2617)
On the "nasty streak" idea, I think that in this particular case, the willingness to save the life of one of the good guys by seriously injuring or possibly bringing about the death of a bad guy doesn't necessarily need a nasty streak. In a war and during a battle, any good combatant must be willing to do what it takes to protect his side, and it is, after all, the nature of battle that one would rather the other side experienced casualties rather than one's own side. All good soldiers/combatants would do this and it doesn't take having a particularly nasty side to one's character.
I'm not saying Snape can't be nasty, but I wouldn't think Snape's willingness to protect his own side in battle by harming one of the enemy a sign of his nastiness.
To cold bloodedly take aim and try to chop off the DE's wand hand? Didn't this highly skilled wizard know any other spells? (mona amon)
Snape had to use a spell that would look like something a real Death Eater would be using against the Order, not some wishy washy won't-do-permenant-damage kind of spell. But Snape also could not use an AK or even a stunning spell because if it did go awry, as it did, then he couldn't risk hitting an Order member with something that would certainly kill them either immediately or knock them off their broom to their death.
Solitaire - Jun 5, 2008 7:46 pm (#2277 of 2617)
I de-lurk to contribute a tiny suggestion to the current discussion (a post that is barely even one sentence long) and you literally analyze every single syllable of it
It's okay, Quinn. It has happened at least once to most people who post here, because Snape's thread, in particular, seems to arouse such strong feelings. The bottom line is that you feel the way you feel, and having your feelings picked apart and explained to you by others doesn't change that. I still don't like Snape. I know he loved Lily to pieces, and he helped Harry in the end ... but I do not believe this absolves him of all his rotten treatment of Harry and others over the years. I still think that, if he could have managed it, he would have had Lily live and let Harry and James die, and he would have left Sirius and Remus to the Dementors. Concerning George's ear ... well, I have my own feelings about that whole situation, too, and they are apparently different from what others feel. Even after the series has ended, I still view Snape through my "teacher's filter" ... and his treatment of kids in general appalls me. My feelings on this issue will never change, and neither will those who try to lecture me into changing how I feel. Your feelings are valid because they are what you feel.
Solitaire
mona amon - Jun 5, 2008 7:54 pm (#2278 of 2617)
not some wishy washy won't-do-permenant-damage kind of spell. (Wynnleaf)
But there was a very real danger of missing the DE and hitting one of his own side (which actually happens), and that's part of the reason why he should have chosen a milder spell. As to explaining it away later, I'm sure he could have easily managed that.
PeskyPixie - Jun 5, 2008 8:02 pm (#2279 of 2617)
I don't think I really want to 'lecture' others into adapting their own interpretations to suit my views. I do apologize if I have ever given that impression in my posts.
I just feel that it is interesting to learn how others interpret the same text and reasoning behind it. Similarly, I feel that those who are fascinated by Snape-the-character should be allowed to express why they enjoy reading this character who can be quite nasty. The reasons vary, and there is always room for healthy debate without the need to pressure others to change their beliefs. That said, the posters on this thread have written such persuasive arguments that, on a few occasions, I found that logic dictated me to change my original opinion!
wynnleaf - Jun 6, 2008 1:08 am (#2280 of 2617)
there is always room for healthy debate (Pesky)
In my opinion, it is the debate that drives this thread. When we get to the point where everyone is either in agreement, or where no one cares enough to discuss in depth, analyze each other's opinions, and yes, debate issues, the conversation dies out rather quickly, as -- as anyone may notice -- occurs on a great many of the other threads with the exception of threads that have continuously new material such as the chapter-by-chapter threads, those that focus on anecdotal postings, games, polls, etc.
That said, debate should always be respectful and civil. But because we are writing and unable to hear tone of voice or facial expressions, and because we come from perhaps different cultures and languages, or at the least different backgrounds, our choices of words or our ways of expressing opinions is not always clear to everyone. I have seen people get into miscommunication just over different interpretations of one word, but that one word may hold different connotations to different people. Analysis and clarification is often necessary if we're going to understand what we are each saying. If someone takes my words and analyzes them in depth with a completely different spin than what I intended, that doesn't generally mean they're trying to re-invent what I said, but that they truly didn't understand me. Do I want to know that I wasn't understood? Yes. Because then I can post again and, hopefully, clarify my thoughts to others.
Julia H. - Jun 6, 2008 3:45 am (#2281 of 2617)
Edited Jun 6, 2008 4:27 am
I de-lurk to contribute a tiny suggestion to the current discussion (a post that is barely even one sentence long) and you literally analyze every single syllable of it, ascribing meaning to it that was never intended. (Quinn)
I will try to be more careful next time. You see, precisely because your post was so short, it was very easy to analyze every word in it. I did not want to ascribe any meaning to it that you did not mean, I was simply saying how I understood or rather how I did not understand it. The phrases "satisfied" and "saving himself", in the context of the debate to me seemed to imply something intentionally done and I asked you whether you meant this because - well I did not understand what the intention could be. Now I understand (I hope at least ) that you meant what happened resulted in the fact that Snape did not have to explain anything, which I agree with. I am still not sure about the "satisfied" part, since by attacking the DE, Snape must have put up with the idea that he would have to explain what happened, so avoiding the explanation cannot have been his immediate purpose - and he may not have been particularly satisfied just because he avoided having to face a situation that he was prepared to face by causing an injury he did not mean to cause. If you don't want your post to be analyzed, I promise I will not. (There are people who perhaps tend to analyze too much - I for one like analyzing these books in details and sometimes the posts as well.) However, there is a bright side I think - people read your post, find it interesting enough to comment on it and if something is not clear enough to somebody and that person tells you, you can get the chance to explain it if you want. BTW, I would really like to read a longer post from you.
Concerning George's ear ... well, I have my own feelings about that whole situation, too, and they are apparently different from what others feel. ... My feelings on this issue will never change, and neither will those who try to lecture me into changing how I feel. (Solitaire)
It is quite clear you have your own feelings about George's ear and I wish you shared them with us but anyway... I tried to describe how I see that situation and what alternative choices I can think of for someone in Snape's place (and I try to base these things on canon, that is why I use quotations) and my question concerning these or any other alternative choices that I did not think of was genuine: I am really interested in knowing what various people think the best decision would be in the given difficult situation, whether Snape could have done anything more or better (apart from not missing the target). Such discussions I think go beyond the basic analysis of a book and it is good (IMO). I did not want to lecture anybody and I am well aware that opinions will not now turn into their opposites but if we do not debate or respond to what other people write or if we address only those posts and posters that we agree with, the discussion element will soon be lost I think. (But now look how lively this thread has become!)
It would have gone down much better with me if he had tried stunning the DE or something similar....But I am concerned about what it says about Snape.
If the AK is Voldy's signature spell and Expelliarmus is Harry's, what does it say about Snape if his signature spell is Sectumsempra? (Mona)
I think the question whether killing someone in a battle is worse or better than cutting off the hand of the same person is a valid question. I tend to think the answer can vary not only depending on the person who answers it but maybe with regard to the specific situation. Snape did not have much time to think but he may have wanted to avoid killing and so chose another spell. Whether he would have chosen the same spell if he had had time to think we cannot tell, though I guess it had to be a spell likely to be used in a battle. I am not surprised that not long after Snape was forced to AK Dumbledore, he is not ready for another AK. If he started now to AK people around "for the greater good", I would think some serious damage has been done to his soul. Now I think the fact that he does not think of using AK as a handy solution, tells something about how he feels about that particular AK he has recently been forced to do. (I think - and not everybody agrees I know - that the only AK in Snape's life is when he AK's DD and I think it puts the whole thing into a different, more dramatic light.) Sectumsempra is not a nice spell but it is war now. Sectumsempra may not be better than a spell that kills but this is Snape's choice in a desperate situation. Just as Lupin is much more concerned about the possibility of causing harm as a werewolf than by not telling DD that an alleged serial killer with alleged murderous intentions apparently getting access into the school is an animagus, the AK may similarly be a sensitive issue for Snape, so he tries to avoid that more than another "nasty spell". It may not be simply right vs. wrong.
Snape has now a "saving people thing" but suddenly he finds himself in a situation in which he has to attack and hurt someone (or let Lupin die), which he has not had to do so far because of his role as a spy. In this situation, he may just resort to the ways of his earlier ("less advanced") self, the one that invented Sectumsempra. I don't think there is any more to Sectumsempra being his "signature spell". There is only one instance we see him use it. Having to do something nasty, he recalls his nastier self. Having to take part in a fight does not necessarily improve one's personality and having to play the part of the DE he actually could have been may even cause damage. But then there is the crying scene next to that... It seems to be significant to me. Earlier, I think you asked (not exact quotation, sorry) what reason would Snape have to go to 12GP to cry at the point where the memory is placed. Well, I think this may be a good reason.
And before DH came out I used to boast that Snape seemed to have kept the spell very secret and not taught it to any DEs
I see no reason why you should change this opinion of yours. He is not teaching the spell, is he?
Dryleaves - Jun 6, 2008 4:26 am (#2282 of 2617)
If the AK is Voldy's signature spell and Expelliarmus is Harry's, what does it say about Snape if his signature spell is Sectumsempra? (mona amon)
Snape had to use a spell that would look like something a real Death Eater would be using against the Order... (Wynnleaf)
But there was a very real danger of missing the DE and hitting one of his own side (which actually happens), and that's part of the reason why he should have chosen a milder spell. (mona amon)
I think Wynnleaf has a point, because a stinging hex would certainly not seem credible if you tried to explain it away to Voldemort later. And we don't know what Snape actually intended with his Sectumsempra, because it seems as if the effect of this spell could be controlled, at least to some extent. I have no personal experience (luckily!) but it ought to take less power to cut off an ear than a whole hand, so maybe he just intended a nasty cut to the hand rather than sever it completely from the body?
Then you could of course ask if the use of Sectumsempra says something about Snape. It is his signature, or was. Maybe there was a nasty streak in him that wanted to use this teenage dark spell specifically on a DE? And what happens? He misses and hits George, maybe even Harry for all that he knows. Maybe Snape is just not meant to use his knowledge of dark magic as dark magic. It seems to be OK for other good guys to use Unforgivables in battle, but when Snape uses this dark spell, it just goes against his intentions and adds to his guilt.
Because I do love that you guys treat a "children's series" with the same credibility as any other literary work. I think the Snape character, at least, deserves it. (Quinn Crockett)
Yes, he certainly does! I absolutely agree (and not only to be "nice" )
I just feel that it is interesting to learn how others interpret the same text and reasoning behind it. (Pesky Pixie)
I know he loved Lily to pieces, and he helped Harry in the end ... but I do not believe this absolves him of all his rotten treatment of Harry and others over the years. (Solitaire)
I also think it is interesting how different readers interpret the same text. I especially find it interesting how different people view Snape's behaviour as a teacher and how this affects whether you see him as a good guy or a bad. I have never seen Snape as a bad guy, but I have never liked his treatment of the students either. I have wondered why DD lets him go on with it, because apparently he does, but he does not approve of Umbridge's corporal punishments. I think in every book except HBP, Snape is shown to ultimately follow DD's line, the same goal as the other teachers of Hogwarts, and at least care about the students' physical wellbeing. Of course words can hurt, but it seems as if the books make a difference between sarcasms and physical violence. And physical violence also leaves mental wounds. Still, I don't think Snape really is "absolved" from his treatment of the students, but I think that we are shown that there are worse things. I guess some of us think that he was flawed, not bad. Others think differently and I really think it is interesting to know what others think and why they do so, even if I want the right to say that I don't agree...
Solitaire - Jun 6, 2008 9:07 am (#2283 of 2617)
Still, I don't think Snape really is "absolved" from his treatment of the students, but I think that we are shown that there are worse things.
Dryleaves, if you ever question the real extent of emotional damage a teacher can inflict on a student without raising a hand to that student, come and spend some time on the chat thread. It is, perhaps, the very conversations we have been having lately among teachers and parents--over the unfeeling treatment of their children by certain teachers--that has revived my abhorrence of Snape's treatment of his students. Quite honestly, I consider the verbal abuse Snape has inflicted on some of his students (not just Harry) to be far more damaging in the long run than the swat or two some of my contemporaries received in school ... and I think they would agree with me.
Pesky, I was not really thinking of you when I used the term "lecturing." I've been posting on this forum since the summer of 2004 and have read thousands of Snape posts by hundreds of Snape posters. For a variety of reasons, people seem more emotionally affected (in one way or another) by this character than any of the others ... even Harry. If you go back into the Snape archives as far as OotP (and probably even to PS/SS), you can find some pretty emotionally-charged posts (and entire "threads within the thread") on both sides of the "Snape is abusive" issue. At one point, I became so upset from one discussion that I simply stopped looking at the Snape thread for a period of weeks or months.
Wynnleaf is right about the debate. Posters should be able to say what they feel, respectfully, on the Forum. Anyone who does not like the tone or perspective of a particular thread is free to skip that thread, as I have done before. Perhaps it's time to "ground" myself from this thread for a time, until the topic changes.
Solitaire
PeskyPixie - Jun 6, 2008 9:50 am (#2284 of 2617)
Actually, I think your perspective needs to be heard, Solitaire. So many of us seem to feel that Snape does no permanent damage to his students that it is quite interesting and important to understand the complete opposite point of view.
Julia H. - Jun 6, 2008 10:04 am (#2285 of 2617)
Maybe Snape is just not meant to use his knowledge of dark magic as dark magic. It seems to be OK for other good guys to use Unforgivables in battle, but when Snape uses this dark spell, it just goes against his intentions and adds to his guilt. (Dryleaves)
This is exactly how I see it, too. When good guys use dark magic, as Harry uses the Cruciatus Curse (not to save someone, only as a means of revenge or doing justice if you like), it somehow ceases to be quite as dark as it usually is (according to the logic of the books). However, Snape is not supposed to use dark magic or - I think - aggressive ways of fighting. His job is to serve the cause of the right side with his intelligence and various skills and most of all by protecting lives but not by fighting directly. He is guilty and he is atoning for having been a part of something dark and something against life and it seems his actions must be non-violent and must be directed at protecting but not at harming. When he does otherwise (even if with good intentions), he fails and things will be worse.
Like Dryleaves, I also agree with Quinn that the Snape character deserves deeper analysis or discussion. Obviously.
Pesky, I was not really thinking of you when I used the term "lecturing." (Solitaire)
Solitaire, since I answered your recent posts, I guess you must have meant me. I have read again my answers to you and I cannot find where I was "lecturing". At least what I meant was simply stating what I think and why - since you brought up the topic of George's ear, I did not think you would mind a discussion. (I would have been interested in reading why you are uncomfortable with the scene, since I agree that there are disturbing things in it.) Nor did I want to sound disrespectful and I don't think I was any more disrespectful than in my other posts. Of course, if this is the general impression of my tone, the best thing will be if I leave this thread so that others could stay.
Solitaire - Jun 6, 2008 10:42 am (#2286 of 2617)
No, Julia, I was not referring to you or to any single poster. As I said, I have been posting here for 4 years, and many passionate Snape supporters have had as much to say as those of us who lean more toward the way I feel about him. Anyway, perhaps lecturing was not the proper word. Perhaps I should have said that some posters have tried to argue me into changing my feelings, for I've often felt that way, as well. That passions run so high in both directions on the issue of Snape and the totality of his behavior throughout the series is a testament to Jo's artistry in constructing the character, IMO.
Solitaire
Orion - Jun 6, 2008 10:46 am (#2287 of 2617)
When I read the Prince's Tale and read that Sectumsempra was meant for the DE's wand hand I didn't think for a minute that Snape wanted to amputate the DE. We have seen the effect of the spell on Draco and he had cuts all over his body, but no part of his body fell off. How a spell that makes gashes can cut off a whole ear is a mystery to me because the ear is attached to the head on its whole length and you'd have difficulties aiming so precisely that it was parted from the head. Another red herring. They make me cross. So this is a cross-post.
Ouch, that was a lousy one.
Dryleaves - Jun 6, 2008 11:09 am (#2288 of 2617)
Solitaire, I also think your perspective is important. When I was a child/teenager I sometimes received Snape-like comments from adults, teachers and others, that hurt me, but then I also received quite a lot of love and had new experiences later in life that gave me other perspectives. So the only traces of damage left now is that I get extremely angry with Snape when he says: "I see no difference" about Hermione's teeth, for example. And that is not so much damage, frankly, and I guess I tend to judge the damage of Snape's behaviour from that point of view. I think it is worse to have it carved into your skin that you are a liar, because that would always remind you of the bad treatment and you would have to explain it to others all the time (or at least feel the need to). But it is bad enough if a child feels agony about a teacher and of course a child cannot be expected not to take the teacher's behaviour personally and see that it may all be about the teacher having personal problems, and so on. And I want to stress that I don't approve of Snape's behaviour at all. But I didn't mean to compare it to a swat or two either, but much worse things. When you read about things that people are forced to go through, then Snape may seem rather trivial.
Snape can keep a child safe, but seldom make them feel safe. I think maybe his behaviour could be dangerous in the long run when there is nothing good in the child's life to weigh it up. Snape himself is an example of that, I guess. The Hogwarts kids we see being exposed to Snape seem to have some positive antipole to him, and we don't really see any longlasting damage done, I think. In real life it may be more complicated.
Soul Search - Jun 6, 2008 11:15 am (#2289 of 2617)
In Deathly Hallows, "The Prince's Tale", just after Dumbledore tells Snape that Harry must die, Dumbledore says to Snape: "Don't be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?" Snape responds: "Lately, only those whom I could not save, ... ." Previously, we saw two examples that confirm Snape's statement.
In the first chapter Snape must, "quite impassively," watch as Voldemort AKs Charity Burbage, who even appeals to Snape with "Severus ... please ... ."
In the chase out of #4 Privet Drive Snape sees that a Death Eater is about to kill Lupin and uses Sectumsempra in an attempt to save him. Lupin is saved, although George loses an ear.
With Charity, Snape could do nothing. Even a doubtful comment could have gotten him killed. He had no choice. In the second example the confusion of the chase left him some leeway so he made the attempt. And got away with it.
Snape's response to Dumbledore and the action scenes are out of sequence in the text, but once put in order clearly show a Snape in great inner conflict. He does not want to see people die at Voldemort's hand, yet must, at times, restrain any desire to protect so he can fulfil his mission to Dumbledore.
So, Snape comes across without a clear image because, at times, we see the suppressed Snape who must allow evil and at other times the inner Snape, the protective side, comes through.
Potteraholic - Jun 6, 2008 12:08 pm (#2290 of 2617)
Another red herring. They make me cross. So this is a cross-post.
Ouch, that was a lousy one. Orion
I beg to differ! I really enjoyed that one, so much so that I actually got out of lurker mode to post! And now back to our regularly scheduled serious discussion about the inimitable Severus Snape.
wynnleaf - Jun 6, 2008 2:45 pm (#2291 of 2617)
That passions run so high in both directions on the issue of Snape and the totality of his behavior throughout the series is a testament to Jo's artistry in constructing the character, IMO. (Solitaire)
I think it might be helpful to find out why individual's passions run so high over Snape, both pro and con, while not so much about other characters. I'm not talking about why you like or dislike Snape. I'm talking about why it matters so much to you. Anybody willing to share -- why does Snape's character, the way the books treat him, and even the "take" other readers have on him, affect you so much?
Julia H. - Jun 6, 2008 3:22 pm (#2292 of 2617)
Solitaire, thank you for your answer. I agree that (while we do criticize Jo every now and then on different threads) the Snape character is a remarkable achievement on her part.
Orion, like PAH, I also liked your "cross-post". So the Sectumsempra may be like a dangerously sharp knife, which can make dangerous cuts and, like some knives, in the worst case, can even take off an ear if it hits the body in that place and direction. This would involve the supposition that the spell cut off George's ear because it hit him in a very unfortunate way - it might have just as well made a deep gash. Poor George.
It is a red herring, of course. JKR wants to keep the reader in the dark about Snape's loyalty very much until the end of DH and then to clear Snape of all (recent) charges in a few very short memories. Does anyone else think that Snape shouting Sectumsempra is a bit illogical after all the lessons he gave about non-verbal spells in HBP and because of our knowledge that he is very good at non-verbal spells? It is for the reader's benefit, of course, but for Snape to cast a non-verbal spell might be more useful, given the fact that he has to keep a few things in secret, so what is the point in shouting and attracting attention to what he is doing? Or is that something he uses to make the impression that he is not hiding anything at all? Hm...
So, Snape comes across without a clear image because, at times, we see the suppressed Snape who must allow evil and at other times the inner Snape, the protective side, comes through. (Soul Search)
I like the terms the suppressed Snape and the inner Snape. The former often functions as a red herring but is more than just that. Snape has to make a couple of very tough choices (like in the two examples Soul Search mentions), often without time to really consider the options. He must know his priorities instantly.
Exciting question, Wynnleaf... especially if we consider that readers come from every corner of the world. I don't think I could myself answer it right now but I will try to think about it and I am certainly looking forward to reading any responses to this question.
Soul Search - Jun 6, 2008 3:39 pm (#2293 of 2617)
wynnleaf, good question.
"I think it might be helpful to find out why individual's passions run so high over Snape, ..."
I don't I care about the Snape character more than any other, maybe even less than most, but I do marvel how we can all read the same text and get very different interpretations. I think it is the discussion itself that most interests me and invites me to post.
Solitaire - Jun 6, 2008 8:14 pm (#2294 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, I was simply stating what I perceive: Posters tend to get very "worked up" in discussions on the Snape thread--more so than on other threads, if you ask me. I may be wrong, but this is my perception.
Solitaire
wynnleaf - Jun 6, 2008 10:20 pm (#2295 of 2617)
Posters tend to get very "worked up" in discussions on the Snape thread--more so than on other threads, if you ask me. I may be wrong, but this is my perception. (Solitiare)
Oh, I doubt if it's just your perception. I would certainly agree with you and imagine that a great many other posters would agree as well. In fact, the challenge would probably being finding anyone that doesn't agree. That's why I think it would be interesting to ask why we get so "worked up" over Snape discussions, but not necessarily other discussions. Even on the Sirius Black or Lupin threads, when a really passionate discussion gets going, it's usually about how those characters relate to Snape. Snape's character stirs up strong feelings, but the reasons are probably different for different people.
mona amon - Jun 6, 2008 10:42 pm (#2296 of 2617)
Does anyone else think that Snape shouting Sectumsempra is a bit illogical after all the lessons he gave about non-verbal spells in HBP and because of our knowledge that he is very good at non-verbal spells? (Julia)
I think that there are certain spells that you cannot use non-verbally, like the AK. Sectumsempra is one of them. In the Half blood Prince textbook, Snape has scribbled 'Levicorpus (n-vbl)' while 'Sectumsempra' is written with an exclamation mark after it. Seems like you have to say it, and with some force.
I call Sectumsempra Snape's signature spell because it comes to him so readily in an emergency. IMO it is a particularly nasty killing spell, and Snape's readiness to use it shows an unwillingness to give up his beloved Dark Arts. It's not as if he has to use it. The rest of the wizarding world, both good and bad, get on perfectly well without it.
I think Wynnleaf has a point, because a stinging hex would certainly not seem credible if you tried to explain it away to Voldemort later. (Dryleaves)
But he did not really have a choice. George and Lupin were in the line of his fire, so he had to choose a spell that would not do much damage (in case he hits George or Lupin), or do nothing at all (like Harry stands and watches the Molly-Bella duel without helping because he's scared he might hit Molly). Yet he chooses Sectumsempra. I feel it was shaky morals and bad strategy.
He is not teaching the spell, is he? (Julia)
Before DH I thought he'd be keeping it secret. But here we see that he's not at all averse to shouting Sectumsempra! when he's among a crowd of other DEs. They can easily learn it from him.
But then there is the crying scene next to that... It seems to be significant to me. Earlier, I think you asked (not exact quotation, sorry) what reason would Snape have to go to 12GP to cry at the point where the memory is placed. Well, I think this may be a good reason.
Hmm...I too don't remember. I think I was arguing that he would not have entered #12 at that point when he knew that the Order would have put up protective spells against him, and might even be present in the building when he goes visiting. But even if he did, there's Lily's letter to show us what he was crying about, or at least what started him off. Somehow I just can't imagine Snape going to #12 because he felt so bad about injuring George. If Jo wanted us to think so, she should not have put Lily's letter into his hand.
Anybody willing to share -- why does Snape's character, the way the books treat him, and even the "take" other readers have on him, affect you so much? (Wynnleaf)
To say why I like Snape so much will be a long and complicated story, but I might try sometime. On the whole I don't think I get too worked up about the discussions, except when it touches on certain topics like Snape's Worst Memory, so I think it's some of the issues that 'rouse my passions' more than the character himself. Most of the time it doesn't bother me if people see Snape differently from the way I see him (though I'll definitely defend my opinions), but for some strange reason I get a lot more heated up when people try to defend all of Snape's actions than when they criticize him!
Dryleaves - Jun 7, 2008 2:31 am (#2297 of 2617)
...why does Snape's character, the way the books treat him, and even the "take" other readers have on him, affect you so much? (Wynnleaf)
I am new on the Forum, so I have missed the worst discussions, but over the books I came to care more and more about the Snape character, and if you care, I guess you care. (But of course he is fictional, so the caring is in proportion to that, I hope.. )
Snape is both treating other people in a bad way and is himself being badly treated, and this evokes strong feelings. Maybe the Snape character reminds different readers of different people from real life. If you, like Solitaire, is a teacher and see collegues treat their students in a really bad way, you may be really upset about this part of the character and it will colour the whole interpretation of him. But if you know people that are seen as unpleasant by most people, but that you yourself know have quite a few good sides and even may be loving and caring, then you perhaps tend to give the character another chance and even defend him from other readers with different views than your own.
As the books are written from Harry's perspective and Harry really dislikes Snape, for very good reasons, the descriptions of Snape are often extremely negative and full of emotion from Harry's side. The positive things about Snape are often described more neutrally, I think, and are not always acknowledged as good things by Harry. So if you take Harry's side you will maybe have the same strongly negative emotions about Snape. If you instead take Snape's side you may think that this character is somewhat "misunderstood" and feel you want to defend him (sometimes a little too much, perhaps).
Then there is the constant question of Snape's true loyalty. The Snape character stands between good and evil in the story, doesn't clearly belong anywhere, and therefore the reader must defend his/her opinion of him. The truly fascinating thing is that he is still there, in between, though the story is ended and his true loyalty is revealed.
I think I have to think a little more about why the character affects me, though...
Julia H. - Jun 7, 2008 2:52 am (#2298 of 2617)
But he did not really have a choice. (Mona)
Apparently, he did have a choice or we could not discuss what he should have done. Yes, he could have used another spell but I don't think he could have just watched what was happening as Harry did in the case of Molly and Bella. The difference is that Molly and Bella were equally fighting, face to face. Lupin, however, was flying ahead, the DE was attacking him from behind his back. Seeing that and not doing anything would pretty much mean leaving the outcome to pure chance. I don't think this particular use of Sectumsempra indicates shaky morals but it is resorting to an earlier stage in his development, which he is not supposed to do. (Again, the comparison with Harry's use of Unforgivables is very interesting.) If it is bad strategy, well, he is not experienced in battles. Duels are different, you stand face to face with your enemy (or enemies) but this is a more complicated situation.
As for shouting the spell in the presence of DE's: On the one hand it is a situation of emergency, where saving Lupin becomes more important than keeping the spell a secret. It is a bit similar to the situation in The Silver Doe chapter. He must not reveal his presence to Harry but when Harry does not come out of the pond, he moves - probably to save Harry - that is why Ron can see him. If Ron did not come, Snape would have to give up hiding and save Harry from the pond. (I sometimes wish it had happened so.) It is a question of priorities. Using Sectumsempra in an emergency does not mean that otherwise he does not keep it a secret. On the other hand, I'm not sure how serious the danger that the DE's learn Sectumsempra from him in the middle of a battle may be. I'd think everyone would be too busy doing what he is doing to learn spells from each other. Or if the DE's watch him so closely as both to hear and understand what he is shouting and then they can even memorize it, then he is running an even greater risk than I thought, since the chances that someone notices who he is aiming at are bigger.
I hope I am not getting you too worked up - understanding why Snape uses Sectumsempra is at least as important for me as defending his action. Ultimately then I think, even if he does make a mistake using that particular spell, he does so with good intentions and at the moment he is not only "nasty Snape, who still uses Dark Magic" but also "good Snape, who wants to save lives instead of just watching as someone dies". BTW, he has recently been forced to watch Charity's death - it may be possible that this memory and how he feels about it is part of his "nastier than necessary" reaction to seeing Lupin attacked. (Whatever he thinks of him, Lupin is also a former colleague, as Charity was and I don't know if it is important but Snape knows that Lupin is now married and that Voldemort has specifically set Bellatrix on Tonks and possibly on their future children.)
Somehow I just can't imagine Snape going to #12 because he felt so bad about injuring George. If Jo wanted us to think so, she should not have put Lily's letter into his hand.
There must be a reason why he goes there and it is not likely to be to find Lily's letter, because he cannot expect that. It is not only George's ear, the whole battle almost goes totally wrong, besides he is confronted with the degree of his isolation. He probably feels responsibility and he may even regret using Sectumsempra. 12GP is deserted and part of the reason why he goes there may be that he can see his being formerly an Order member in a different light now. In the present situation, it may seem to be one of the valuable chances he lost and one he could not appreciate / use really well while he still had it.
I think he finds Lily's letter by accident and among all his troubles and sorrows, the letter is something that can represent it all, an object that can be grasped and held in his hands and at the same time an object that becomes the only - sort of - comfort to him when he is very much in need of comfort and there are no living beings to give it to him.
Anybody willing to share -- why does Snape's character, the way the books treat him, and even the "take" other readers have on him, affect you so much? (Wynnleaf)
Lots of answers and complex and personal ones could be given. This time I'll try something moderately personal and something general:
HP, as any fairy tale and a large part of world literature is about the fight between good and evil represented in the first place by Harry and Voldemort. The books are about what happens between them against the background of a panorama of the wizarding world. I think Snape is important because the war taking place outside also takes place inside one person's soul and that is Snape. (Sure the fight affects other souls as well but it is only Snape whose soul is the scene of a complete war between good and evil.) I tend to imagine that as in the world outside there are battles and challenges and dragons and snakes and little victories and little defeats and difficult choices and basic principles and mistakes and great discoveries (etc.), similarly intensive and "spectacular" things are happening during this long fight inside his soul before the final victory is achieved - and I think the good wins inside just like outside. For some reason I find this inner fight far more interesting than the one outside.
A more general answer I can think of is that while we get all kinds of intriguing hints about the Snape character, he remains a mystery even after the Prince's Tale. While the complexity of the character is given by the author, to really see a full character in front of us we, readers, are forced to contribute to the building process. Unless we are very casual readers of HP, we must add a part of ourselves (our views, beliefs, imagination, interest, interpretation) to the character. This takes some effort and some dedication. Whether we interpret the character as essentially bad or essentially good, the complete character is more than usually our own creation. So perhaps we get heated over something that is our own.
Dryleaves - Jun 7, 2008 3:30 am (#2299 of 2617)
I think Snape is important because the war taking place outside also takes place inside one person's soul and that is Snape. (Julia)
Unless we are very casual readers of HP, we must add a part of ourselves (our views, beliefs, imagination, interest, interpretation) to the character. This takes some effort and some dedication. Whether we interpret the character as essentially bad or essentially good, the complete character is more than usually our own creation. So perhaps we get heated over something that is our own. (Julia)
These are very good answers to the question, I think!
Orion - Jun 7, 2008 4:28 am (#2300 of 2617)
Why does Snape shout out Sectumsempra so that everybody can hear it? Well, so that Lupin can tell the others. It's a literary device to inform the readers. I can't think of any other reason. We must stop finding internal reasons for every single fart a character produces and stop worrying about them because sometimes the author has no other choice if she wants to lead her readers in a certain direction.
Last edited by Mona on Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:12 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2301 to 2330
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:36 pm
wynnleaf - Jun 7, 2008 5:11 am (#2301 of 2617)
If Snape shouldn't have used sectumsempra, what spell should he have used that would still be a spell that would look quite normal for a Death Eater to be using in battle, yet still not knock a good guy of his/her broom if they got hit by accident, and still stop the Death Eater from killing Lupin if the spell hit its mark?
As for why Snape discussions often hit me on a more emotional level, I think it's because the issues surrounding why people view the character as they do, and many of the more specific judgment calls made, hit so close to home, which comes from having several Snapish or at least Slytherin-like friends and family members. And it's not just the views on Snape, but the countering views that could fall under the umbrella of "other characters who are better than Snape and why they're better" which often, in my opinion, seem to ultimately come down to "being nice trumps everything no matter what a person actually does or doesn't do" or "good intentions absolve terrible decisions." And I suppose I'm particularly affected by those kinds of arguments because, even on the more mundane levels, I've seen too many people deeply hurt by "nice" people (including "nice" teachers), or deeply hurt by others who had good intentions, but ultimately made their decisions from arrogant perspectives, too convinced of their own rightness.
Another aspect that can get me "worked up" is when an issue falls within the unanswered question Snape asks Lily, of why the actions of the Marauders are somehow not as bad as the Dark joke a Slytherin friend plays on another student. As far as I know, this is the only time in the entire series that JKR has a character actually ask the question "why is it not so bad when one person hurts someone, but worse when another person hurts someone?" And yet I feel that the entire series has many, many examples that should bring that question forward and yet it never gets answered.
Because double standards really do hurt people, and because people I love have been hurt by the use of double standards, discussions centering on these questions can be emotional to me. Most especially when they seem to fall under labels like "it's not so bad when this person does a wrong thing, because they are one of the good guys, but it's horrible when another person does it because they're one of the bad guys." What a huge ethical problem that gets played out in our world on both micro and macro levels!
Because Snape's character has so many good and bad aspects, the character brings out these questions far more clearly than other characters. For instance, Harry's character could bring out many of these questions, because Harry does many, many questionable or wrong things. But because most everyone likes Harry, we're not as likely to discuss the wrong things Harry does. And even if we do occasionally discuss them, we are generally unanimous in forgiving Harry because we all like him.
Orion - Jun 7, 2008 5:55 am (#2302 of 2617)
I agree with Wynnleaf wholeheartedly. I love Tom, Sylvester and Wile E. Coyote, and I think Jerry, Tweety and Roadrunner should end up in a salami. Harry is such a superhuman hero that it's refreshing when he gets a bit of criticism slapped around his ears once in a while. The HP books focus on heroism and bravery very much, and bravery is a secondary virtue, much like punctuality or tenacity, but not a primary virtue such as personal integrity. Bella, for instance, is a formidable thing, probably the bravest person in the whole series, but she's a sadistic, twisted torturer and mad as a hatter. So bravery is constantly shown, in the books, as central point around which a person focuses their personalities, but it's totally mad because at the same time we learn that it doesn't say anything about the person at all.
And Snape runs after Harry all the time with his robes flapping and tries to save him and Harry has nothing better to do than slip out from under his nose as often as he can because Harry can't bring himself to trust him. Harry even deceives DD, the only person who'd be able to control him, so Snape has no chance because Harry is so brave. I hate bravery.
This doesn't belong on this thread, but if DD had zapped Voldie when he applied for a job at Hogwarts the whole story wouldn't have culminated in a all-out battle with umpteen dead bodies. Ethics are often a bit blurry round the edges in the HP universe. And Snape is decidedly not the blurriest of all.
Dryleaves - Jun 7, 2008 6:16 am (#2303 of 2617)
Ethics are often a bit blurry round the edges in the HP universe. And Snape is decidedly not the blurriest of all. (Orion)
Isn't he one of the least blurry as his choices actually have great consequences?
Julia H. - Jun 7, 2008 7:47 am (#2304 of 2617)
And it's not just the views on Snape, but the countering views that could fall under the umbrella of "other characters who are better than Snape and why they're better" which often, in my opinion, seem to ultimately come down to "being nice trumps everything no matter what a person actually does or doesn't do" or "good intentions absolve terrible decisions." And I suppose I'm particularly affected by those kinds of arguments because, even on the more mundane levels, I've seen too many people deeply hurt by "nice" people (including "nice" teachers), or deeply hurt by others who had good intentions, but ultimately made their decisions from arrogant perspectives, too convinced of their own rightness. (Wynnleaf)
I too absolutely agree with this and with the other things in Wynnleaf's post. I could say a lot about such things... anyway. Snape is not nice, he is just himself. He has a huge problem (this whole guilt and redemption issue), which he has to solve somehow and in the process he does truly admirable things (among other things) and he contributes to the victory much more than most of the "nice" characters (who are often not even so genuinely nice). However, in the end he still seems to come across most of all as a nasty person and nobody bothers to note that there was much more to him than just nastiness and that they do owe him a few things after all.
Anna L. Black - Jun 7, 2008 8:18 am (#2305 of 2617)
About the Sectumsempra - I think that people tend to read too much into it IMO, Snape didn't think it through, and reacted on instinct (Harry's not the only one with a "saving people" thing). He didn't consider what would happen when he hits a "fellow" DE. Even if he did (I won't be surprised if he thought something like this might happen before they went out on the mission) - during a broomstick chase you can't really aim so well, as we've seen, so he has an excuse already.
Regarding why Snape seems to make readers care so much - I think Snape is probably the most fleshed-out character in HP. Even more than Harry, on some level, because Harry doesn't have this internal fight about which way to follow - he never strayed off the "Good guys" path, even if he used unforgivables. Snape, on the other way, is such a complex character, with so many nuances to his actions and feelings, that I guess a lot of people find something in him with wich they can identify. The debate whether he is on the good side or the bad one was probably also one of the things that always sparkled a lively debate. What amazed me the most after HBP came out is this: Even though JKR supposedly showed us that Snape is on LV's side, the debate about Snape's true loyalties just became fiercer. After Snape killed DD, I became certain that he is in fact loyal to DD - which is not the normal reaction at all, and the fact that JKR managed to make me react that way just proves to me that Snape is the one character in HP that has something unique in him.
Having said that, I was never a Snape-fan per se, but gradually learned to appreciate his character, with all the flaws that he has, and to admire his ability to cope with everything he's been through.
P.S. I'm glad to be finally able to post on this thread - the last 3 months I was just catching up on all the posts (of this thread) that I missed in the months before that. I started in February, with about 1200 unread posts, and at the rate of this thread, it wasn't an easy task!
Solitaire - Jun 7, 2008 11:14 am (#2306 of 2617)
Harry has nothing better to do than slip out from under his nose as often as he can because Harry can't bring himself to trust him
I have a difficult time faulting Harry for this. Reread the account of Harry's first potions class with Snape. I did this past week, and I was struck anew by Snape's complete unfairness and nastiness. Surely he knew already that Harry had grown up in a Muggle family. His close friendship with Lily certainly must have acquainted him with Petunia's (and possibly Vernon's) feelings about magic. Add to that his own Muggle father's reactions, and he should have guessed that Harry might have been kept totally ignorant of the magical world, until he was informed about it a few weeks prior to school. I suspect, too, that Dumbledore, as Headmaster, would have informed the teachers ahead of time about how Harry had been living. If he did, indeed, know this information, it makes his behavior to Harry on that very first day even more despicable. It shows a very cruel nature. Harry's relationship to Snape began with Snape not only humiliating and punishing him unfairly before his peers but also making his fellow Gryffindors suffer as a result of it.
We all know that there are adults in the world who hide their true natures from family, friends, employers, and colleagues. Consider how shocked we all are to find someone we know has abused a child or spouse. I think it is quite possible that Harry felt he was in a situation where no one knew Snape's true hatred of him. In this respect, he felt alone. Certainly, Snape has not done too much to help Harry trust him. Even when Snape has done things to help, they have been performed in such a way as "shades" Snape's true reasons and allegiances. Of course, we now know the reasons for this; however, Harry was kept in the dark, so all he had to go on was instinct and experience, none of which were positive where Snape was concerned. JM2K about it ...
Solitaire
Orion - Jun 7, 2008 11:55 am (#2307 of 2617)
I agree with you, Soli, until the ending of book one where DD explains Snape's protection to Harry. Harry doesn't believe anything of it for a minute. IMO, DD is to blame, because he is the only one who can bring the two of them together without them bashing each other's heads in. DD is also the only one who can have a serious word with Snape to leave Harry alone, yet he lets everything run as long as he can without interfering.
As much as I find Snape's behaviour towards Harry abusive and unfair, I can't blame him for behaving in a bitter and twisted way because he has had very bitter experiences and he can't relate to people in a proper way. It's nothing he can change by an act of sheer willpower because he is too damaged by his personal history.
Harry gives as good as he gets, too, doesn't he? He talks back in class and breaks rules all the time. He doesn't exactly make it easy for Snape to like him better because he really behaves like James in his recklessness.
One of the innumerable posts of mad Snape defenders who won't hear a word against him although he behaves like a jerk...
Julia H. - Jun 7, 2008 12:13 pm (#2308 of 2617)
Having said that, I was never a Snape-fan per se, but gradually learned to appreciate his character, with all the flaws that he has, and to admire his ability to cope with everything he's been through. (Anna)
Hello, Anna, welcome to the Snape-thread!
This is exactly how I learned to appreciate (etc. ) the character as well. HBP definitely was a decisive book in this respect!
I have a difficult time faulting Harry for this. (Solitaire)
I don't blame Harry either, at least not in the beginning. The first lesson spoiled a lot of things and it was Snape's fault. However, I don't think it was because of a generally cruel nature. I think it had a specific, Harry-related reason. Without trying to absolve Snape, I am trying to imagine his point of view (we know Harry's well enough): When he agrees to protect Harry, he also asks DD to keep his secret because he does not want Potter's son to know. IMO, it indicates that already then he fears this child because he feels guilty towards him and this also indicates (I think) that he has a conscience (how could he feel remorse otherwise?). I think he does not want Harry to know because then Harry had a reason to hate him and despise him and he himself feels what he did is unforgivable. But it must be very difficult to teach and protect for years someone hating and despising you with a reason. He has ten years to wait before he can see Lily's eyes in Harry's face. He probably fears the moment. Then one day Harry is there reminding him of everything. He cannot be decent to Harry. Why? If he were a decent, average teacher to him, Harry might respect him. This may be something that Snape would like but he may also feel that it would not be right. It would be deception to act someone even moderately nice in front of Harry and win his trust because Harry should hate and despise him - he just does not know. Snape does not want him to know but still (probably with subconscious motivations) behaves towards Harry in a way to make sure Harry will hate him and despise and distrust him. (A complicated soul... but then most souls are.)
So Harry does not trust Snape but trusts Quirrell instead. At the end of PS, however, he learns that Quirrell supported Voldemort and Snape protected the Stone with the same determination as Harry himself. He learns that Snape saved his life. When Quirrell wanted to kill him, there were several teachers present. Nice Hagrid was there and he even realized that the broom must be bewitched. Just and great McGonagall, a powerful and clever witch was also there. Madam Hooch must have been there as well and she probably knows a few things about brooms. (Was she the referee? Was a referee flying around the players, as later Snape did?) Yet, it was nasty, cruel Snape alone who did not only notice what was going on but also did something for Harry and eventually he successfully saved Harry's life. Later he took care to be around when he thought Harry might be in danger again. Harry finds out all this, yet he does not realize (then or later) that behind nasty Snape there is another Snape, one who actively tries to protect him and who actually does more for him than many of the teachers who are otherwise nice or decent do.
EDIT: Cross-posted with Orion!
Dryleaves - Jun 7, 2008 12:16 pm (#2309 of 2617)
Solitaire, I agree that Snape is horrible to Harry during the first potions class and I don't mean to defend his behaviour, but Snape's situation is also a cruel one. Harry is so much more than just another student to Snape, he represents almost everything that has gone wrong (for one reason or other) in Snape's life, and anyone would have a problem coping with it, I think, even if not everyone would be as nasty as Snape. I don't get the impression that Snape's behaviour is that unknown to his collegues and I definetly think that DD knows pretty exactly what he is like, and yet seems to do very little about it. If he really wanted to avoid what happens during the potions classes, then DD either should not let Snape teach Harry at all, or at least control the situation continually.
Edit: I also cross-posted...
Solitaire - Jun 7, 2008 2:37 pm (#2310 of 2617)
Snape is still the adult and the teacher, and he abuses his power over Harry, a child who had no knowledge of why he was so hated. Upon entering Hogwarts, Harry becomes one part of a difficult triangle. Snape is bound by Dumbledore to help Harry, whom he hates unreasonably. Dumbledore is apparently bound NOT to give Harry any information about why Snape hates him. As Snape is the only potions teacher for the first 5 years, Harry is fairly trapped into close daily proximity with him. Snape, of course, exacerbates the problem at every opportunity, because he has never really grown up emotionally. In that area, he seems to have stalled at about the same age as Harry. He responds like a child quite frequently, except that he has the adult status to exact punishment.
It is easy to blame Dumbledore for a lot of the trouble. Even if he couldn't give Harry the details about Lily and Snape, he could have told Snape to back off a bit--not so much as to cause suspicion, but maybe to treat Harry no worse than everyone else. Then again, perhaps he did ... and that is why Snape treated Harry as well as his three closest friends (Ron, Hermione, and Neville) so abusively.
Harry certainly does seem to tick off Snape rather often. If I'd been Harry, I'd have tried to stay out of his way if I didn't have to be there. Dumbledore's unwillingness to give Harry critical information is what seems to propel him to go seeking answers for things he doesn't understand ... and that keeps landing him in Snape's path, because Snape is so closely bound in this triangle.
Then again, if Snape wasn't mean, rotten and hateful, we wouldn't have much of a story, would we? It is Harry's fear, distrust, and dislike of Snape that fuels several subplots in the series.
Solitaire
Julia H. - Jun 7, 2008 4:13 pm (#2311 of 2617)
Then again, if Snape wasn't mean, rotten and hateful, we wouldn't have much of a story, would we? It is Harry's fear, distrust, and dislike of Snape that fuels several subplots in the series. (Solitaire)
Well, the story needs him, definitely, and I agree with most of your post, except perhaps DD's behaviour. There is no indication that DD tries to discipline Snape early on with regard to Harry and even less that DD's interference could be the reason why Snape is so nasty. We pretty much see that Snape does as DD tells him to do. (He stops in the middle of a tantrum at the end of PoA when DD says "enough", he shakes hands with Sirius at the end of GoF and so on.) Of course changing his behaviour to Harry may be much more difficult or even impossible, as Orion says, but he would probably try. The scene in which Snape is ranting about Harry while DD is reading the paper shows that DD does not take the problem seriously: he does not even look up from his paper as he tells Snape that he, personally, likes Harry. This is not at all the same as putting down the paper and telling Snape to stop and sit down and listen to something very important. True, there is only one teacher for every subject at Hogwarts but DD as Headmaster could arrange for two potions teachers for a while - both of them could teach two subjects with Snape avoiding Harry's year. (Of course we, readers, would lose a lot. ) Then DD - while well aware of the enmity between Snape and Harry - organizes Occlumency trainings for them, where they have to duel, wands held at the ready, on a regular basis (which they already do in a way, symbolically). Even if DD finds it absolutely necessary, he might think of a way to mitigate the tension that the situation causes. (I mean DD is not a good psychologist, is he? Hoping that Snape will just get over his wounds now?)
But then I think what several of us are saying is not that Snape is not nasty towards Harry but that it is absolutely unfair that only his nastiness seems to count when he also works hard to protect and to save Harry regularly and Harry knows but does not notice or does not care. At the same time, nice characters, just because they are nice, are easily forgiven even if they actually endanger others directly and indirectly. (E.g., Hagrid carelessly betraying the secret of his dog to a complete stranger, Lupin not mentioning that Sirius is an animagus for fear that DD will have a bad opinion of him and even Fake-Moody's questionable teaching methods seem to be overlooked as long as he appears to like Harry.) Whatever else Snape does as well, he is seen only as the nasty one, the black sheep.
Snape is bound by Dumbledore to help Harry...
It appears he is bound by his own word. DD does not force or Imperius him to agree but tells him that this is what he can do for Lily and Snape agrees by his own choice.
Solitaire - Jun 7, 2008 5:20 pm (#2312 of 2617)
Don't we find that Snape agrees--when he asked Dumbledore to help Lily--to also help keep Harry safe? (It has been almost a year, and I have not reread, so I could be wrong here.) As nasty as Snape is, he does seem bound by his own promise, so I will concede some sense of honor. But my point is that he seems to be doing this only because he said he would ... not because his heart is really in it. He does not seem to think Harry is "worthy" of the fate to which he has been destined, and he seems to go about proving Harry's unworthiness through most of the series. (I do think this changes in DH.) Yes, he fulfills the word of his agreement ... but not the spirit. I'm not sure if this is clear, but it's how I see Snape, given my personal "filter."
I have a pretty good idea how Snape would have affected me when I was an adolescent. When I had Snape-like teachers and professors in school--and I did have a couple who liked to humiliate students--I was nervous all of the time and did poorly. When I had teachers like Remus (compassionate and understanding) or even McGonagall (strict, a bit gruff, but fair and caring), I learned. I currently have a couple of Snapes in my Real Life. They are callous and rude without seeming to care whom they hurt. I'm sure all of these things affect my perspective when I read Snape. They are also why my perspective probably will not change.
Solitaire
BTW, I also have an Umbridge who has been quite actively manipulative and deceitful in my personal world ... causing me to hate the Umbridge character even more than I did before, if that's possible!
Julia H. - Jun 7, 2008 6:02 pm (#2313 of 2617)
But my point is that he seems to be doing this only because he said he would ... not because his heart is really in it. (Solitaire)
I think his heart is in it but his heart is not for Harry but for Lily. He agrees in the first place to protect Lily's son because of Lily. He does not only protect him by watching over him and saving his life if necessary but he agrees to spy on Voldemort to protect Harry in a more general sense. He is protecting Lily's son; however, when they are face to face and there is no immediate danger, Harry becomes James Potter's son. How these two aspects are present at the same time is shown in The Flight of the Prince. While Harry is attacking him, Snape is shouting at him his fury about James. In the middle of this, Harry is attacked and Snape knows at once "by heart" what he must do...
... he seems to go about proving Harry's unworthiness through most of the series. (I do think this changes in DH.)
I agree there is a change about that in DH. However, I think Snape's original idea of Harry's "unworthiness" deserves some analysis. What does he want to prove and to whom? Are we sure that deep down, he really does think Harry is unworthy? I don't mean he is consciously lying, only that perhaps he is trying to see what he wants to see. Before the Occlumency lessons, he removes his terrible memories into the Pensieve: Does he really think that 15-year-old Harry, while learning how to close down his own mind will be able to break into his mind and see what Snape does not want him to see? He does break in once but Snape stops him rather quickly and not much harm is done. But if Snape finds a more serious intrusion possible, is it not a subconscious compliment to Harry's abilities? (He also mentions he has heard that Harry was able to resist the Imperious Curse.) I wonder if there are other such instances...
wynnleaf - Jun 7, 2008 6:58 pm (#2314 of 2617)
The way I understood DH, Snape protects Harry not because DD asked him to, but because of Lily. DD knew Snape would do anything to not only protect Lily, but after her death he'd do anything to protect her son. So DD didn't so much ask Snape to protect Harry, as he did remind him that Harry would need to be protected, knowing that was all the inducement Snape would need to stay on at Hogwarts and prepare to protect Harry. In other words, DD wasn't asking "do this for me," he was saying, "this is what you'll need to do for Lily."
As regards Snape thinking Harry unworthy, I always felt that Snape did not believe Harry had the ability to have any sort of victory against Voldemort. After DH, I felt that he was primarily trying to protect Harry and get him through the Voldemort wars alive, not so that Harry could fulfill a destiny, but just so that Lily's son would live. When DD reveals that Harry will have to die, Snape is appalled, not because he thought he'd been protecting the Chosen One so he could defeat LV and live, but because he had been intending to keep Harry alive no matter what.
This is just a gut feeling, but I doubt if Snape ever put much weight on the prophecy, and the idea that Harry would defeat LV was probably pretty ludicrous to him as well. But I don't think that so much mattered as regards his focus on protecting Harry.
mona amon - Jun 7, 2008 8:46 pm (#2315 of 2617)
This is in reply to yesterday's posts which already seem to be from a long time ago. This thread is once again moving too fast for me!
If Snape shouldn't have used sectumsempra, what spell should he have used that would still be a spell that would look quite normal for a Death Eater to be using in battle, yet still not knock a good guy of his/her broom if they got hit by accident, and still stop the Death Eater from killing Lupin if the spell hit its mark? (Wynnleaf)
But Wynnleaf, what's the difference between using a spell that might knock a good guy off his broom and one that might cause a good guy to bleed to death within a couple of minutes?
Apparently, he did have a choice or we could not discuss what he should have done. (Julia)
That's not what I meant. Here's the situation.
1) He could have tried hitting the DE with a spell that causes much damage, and risked hitting the good guys with the same spell.
2) He could have tried hitting the DE with a milder spell (that would not cause much damage to Lupin or George if it hits them by mistake), and then had the problem of explaining why he was using such a spell.
When I said 'did not have a choice' I meant that 1) is not really a viable alternative if he wanted to save the lives of the good guys. Yet he goes for it, showing bad strategy, with which I think you agree. Anyhow, his 'saving Lupin thing' is definitely to his credit.
I agree that the Molly-Bella fight is not the same situation, but Harry's choices (or lack of them) are the same. He does not try to help Molly not because he thinks she has a fair chance but because he does not want to risk hitting her.
I don't think this particular use of Sectumsempra indicates shaky morals but it is resorting to an earlier stage in his development, which he is not supposed to do. (Again, the comparison with Harry's use of Unforgivables is very interesting.)
I'm saying almost the same thing. He is resorting to an earlier stage, when his morals were shaky. I'm not really talking about this particular use of Sectumsempra, but the fact that he's still using the spell even after he is supposed to have reformed. I have no problem with the good guys using unforgivables in a war situation, but sectumsempra is such a horrible spell, slashing, hurting, mutilating and causing the victim to bleed to death within minutes. Harry's use of unforgivables is different. He uses Crucio against Amycus and attempts to use Sectumsempra on Snape when he is in a blind fury. It's something he needs to learn how to control. Snape is already supposed to have learnt that lesson.
I hope I am not getting you too worked up ...
Well, since you asked, I am a bit hot under the collar right now
Like I said I get a lot more heated up when people try to defend all of Snape's actions than when they criticize him, but Julia, please don't allow that to cramp your style Getting all worked up is part of the fun of taking part in these discussions, I think.
ETA: What does Lupin mean when he says 'Sectumsempra was always a speciality of Snape's?'
Solitaire - Jun 7, 2008 9:29 pm (#2316 of 2617)
What does Lupin mean when he says 'Sectumsempra was always a speciality of Snape's'
It sounds to me like this is not the first time Remus has seen Snape cast this spell.
Julia H. - Jun 8, 2008 1:00 am (#2317 of 2617)
I agree that the Molly-Bella fight is not the same situation, but Harry's choices (or lack of them) are the same. He does not try to help Molly not because he thinks she has a fair chance but because he does not want to risk hitting her. (Mona)
I don't know what Harry thinks of Molly's chances but Molly does not only know she is being attacked but she herself is attacking Bella. Lupin, however, may not even notice that he is being targeted by the DE's spell before he is dead. I just can't see that Snape choosing not to try to save Lupin would have been the same kind of decision as Harry's. I am not sure that he even has the time to consider what happens if he hits one of the good guys accidentally. He is probably reacting instantly, as soon as he sees the DE aiming at Lupin. It does not take that much time to cast a spell once a wizard is aiming, so Snape cannot have time to consider"what if"s either.
wynnleaf - Jun 8, 2008 8:28 am (#2318 of 2617)
If Snape shouldn't have used sectumsempra, what spell should he have used that would still be a spell that would look quite normal for a Death Eater to be using in battle, yet still not knock a good guy of his/her broom if they got hit by accident, and still stop the Death Eater from killing Lupin if the spell hit its mark? (Wynnleaf)
But Wynnleaf, what's the difference between using a spell that might knock a good guy off his broom and one that might cause a good guy to bleed to death within a couple of minutes? (mona amon)
I don't think you answered my question. What should Snape have done? If you can't provide a better alternative, then Snape's action, which worked by the way, can't be faulted.
In your following comments you said that:
1) He could have tried hitting the DE with a spell that causes much damage, and risked hitting the good guys with the same spell. (Mona amon)
If (and we don't know this) the spell used to cut James in the Worst Memory was sectumsempra, then it can clearly cause varying degrees of damage depending on what the caster wants. In that case, it would be the perfect spell to use, because Snape could call out "Sectumsempra" which sounds like he's using a seriously bad spell, but keep it reined in so that it's not so damaging, hit the Death Eater to distract him, and cause non-deadly damage to an Order member if one got hit accidently.
You also said:
When I said 'did not have a choice' I meant that 1) is not really a viable alternative if he wanted to save the lives of the good guys. Yet he goes for it, showing bad strategy, with which I think you agree. (mona amon)
Not sure who you meant by "you," but I don't agree. You said that the first choices wasn't a "viable alternative if he wanted to save the lives of the good guys," and yet he used it and when a good guy got hit, George didn't die, but only lost an ear, and another Order member was saved. Granted, the loss of an ear is a bad thing and a permanent injury, but it's a lot better than an Order member ending up dead.
It seems to me that you're saying that Snape's strategy was bad because you don't think it should have worked, and the fact that it did work (Lupin saved and George only hurt) was not to Snape's credit.
The problem is that we have no evidence that the force of the Sectumsempra used would have whacked through bone, muscle, tendons, etc. and taken off the Death Eater's hand, just because it cut off George's ear. We've seen the spell used by Harry when he was waving his wand wildly and with force, and even then it cut Draco up a lot, but it wasn't like it tore him wide open (getting gross here). And if Snape used it on James, it only made a smallish cut to which none of the boys even paid much attention.
Julia H. - Jun 8, 2008 9:04 am (#2319 of 2617)
It may be annoying that I keep defending Snape whatever he does. I tried to think about this, also as part of the question about the strong feelings concerning Snape. Yes, perhaps the more I think of the character, the more I tend to see the good in him (the bad is pointed out by other posters anyway, so I’m not saying that I really ignore that part). All the time I know he is not one of the really good guys. The way I see it is this:
Originally he has the potential for good or for bad, as most people probably (perhaps even Tom Riddle but I’m not sure). He becomes a DE and the circumstances that lead there are quite well described (as in the case of Tom Riddle as well). For various reasons, as a teenager, he is at a relatively high risk to go the wrong way, even though it is probably not something absolutely inevitable. Also, he is pretty much alone when he would probably need help or guidance. He won’t become a sympathetic teacher himself but then where are his teachers when he is a teenager and (in spite of his talents) is drifting to the wrong direction, or for that matter, when he is bullied by the good guys? Nobody ever seems to notice anything in Hogwarts. He does not seem to play the successful and nice guy to deceive people as Tom Riddle did, so why does not anybody realize that a teenage boy who seems to be left alone by his parents needs the help of an adult?
Whether it is an unfortunate accident or conscious moral suicide, he falls morally and could yet fall deeper and deeper if one single straw did not stop his downfall – his love for Lily, something coming from inside. (Tom Riddle, in contrast, has nothing in him to stop his moral downfall, even though he is better appreciated by various people.) Then he starts to rise. It may not be his original purpose to become any better than he is, he may just want to save Lily, yet this in itself is a chance. It is only the beginning of a long way and I think he realizes (not very much later) how horrible his downfall as such was. He is ashamed and remorseful and wants to atone – but this does not mean he can become at once a great and good guy, no. How could he? It is even more difficult, since his experiences and his guilt deeply affect his personality in a negative way.
We debate whether his love for Lily is selfish or not. We debate whether using Sectumsempra to save Lupin’s life is ethical or not. We debate how horrible a teacher he exactly is and many other things. These are all great debates. My point of view (just one of the many viewpoints) in most of these is something like “look where he is coming from and where he is going”. There are mistakes, even relapses maybe. There are things which change slowly or not at all. But he is working hard and is definitely improving. I see him as someone who in an accident – which may well have been his own fault – has suffered great injuries and is now trying to learn to walk again. It hurts. He tries with clenched teeth again and again, maybe swearing under his breath. He sometimes falls on the ground but he gets up again. He staggers through a ballroom where healthy good guys and nice ladies dance gracefully. He cannot do that and I cannot blame him for it. His achievement is being able to walk. There is positive discrimination, giving some advantage to someone with a disadvantage. So he staggers among the dancers who look at him with surprise or disgust, not understanding what he is doing among them, causing disturbance where he goes. As it happens, he has jobs to do there, so he shakes off the looks of disapproval and staggers on: Protecting Harry, spying on Voldemort, teaching potions.
He gets tasks the dancers could not do, tasks only someone like him can do. The one man who guides and protects him gives him not only dangerous but possibly damaging jobs (sure, with great trust in his abilities and his loyalty). If he makes mistakes, it seems they are not ordinary human mistakes but the surfacing of bad morals. Some things must be especially difficult, like having to go back to the DE’s - and I am not talking about the mortal danger. With a changed or changing personality, seeing what they do and knowing he once belonged to them must be, on the one hand, a real lesson. But it must be depressing and psychologically dangerous as well and no, not because he could be tempted by their ways. (What may he have to go through just to be accepted back to start with?) Then in the spying job mistakes are not allowed but it is suspicious if he plays the part of a DE too well. Having to AK his mentor and only friend(?) must also be absolutely damaging. What negative energies he must call forth and with what willpower he must control them to be able to successfully perform the Killing Curse against his own will and then to concentrate on saving all those who now hate him and then – possibly – to report to Voldemort and endure the despicable honors LV may now lavish on him in his moment of triumph. Who else could do all that? Who of the good guys would have either low enough self-esteem or a high enough sense of indebtedness to agree to do such a job? There are those who never fall and there are those who fall but do not rise and there is Snape who once fell and is slowly rising now from the abyss by means of very, very hard work. To me that is what counts most. Despite his flaws, in the end, his guilt and his remorse, his promises, his strong will and his love make him do much greater things than most of the guys with a clear conscience and agreeable personalities ever do.
Orion - Jun 8, 2008 10:13 am (#2320 of 2617)
Sniff! Rummage rummage there must be a sniff-smiley somewhere... Nag nag nag: "Having to AK his mentor and only friend(?) must also be absolutely damaging." With friends like that, who needs an enemy?
Dryleaves - Jun 8, 2008 11:54 am (#2321 of 2617)
I'm not really talking about this particular use of Sectumsempra, but the fact that he's still using the spell even after he is supposed to have reformed. I have no problem with the good guys using unforgivables in a war situation, but sectumsempra is such a horrible spell, slashing, hurting, mutilating and causing the victim to bleed to death within minutes. Harry's use of unforgivables is different. He uses Crucio against Amycus and attempts to use Sectumsempra on Snape when he is in a blind fury. (Mona amon)
With the risk of making you self-ignite , I must ask what you mean more exactly when you say that Harry's use of the Cruciatus Curse is OK, but not Snape's use of Sectumsempra? I can see if you don't like Sectumsempra, it is a horrible spell, but if Harry is in blind fury and Cruciatus is OK, couldn't you say that Snape is also in an agitated state with all the pressure he is under? And then it would be more likely for Snape to use Sectumsempra, a spell that he himself invented and have used, than it is for Harry to use Crucio, that he from the beginning has learned is despicable and forbidden and belongs to the other side, the one he is fighting. Harry is actively learning to master an evil spell, while Snape is relapsing (and immediately reminded by Fate, or something, that it was not a good thing to use it, but that is of course no extenuating circumstance for Snape himself ). Are you just more disappointed in Snape than in Harry?
What does Lupin mean when he says 'Sectumsempra was always a speciality of Snape's?' (Mona amon)
It sounds to me like this is not the first time Remus has seen Snape cast this spell. (Solitaire)
I think this is confusing, because if Snape was known to have used Sectumsempra in school, wouldn't he have been expelled? And if Lupin had seen him use it later, why wasn't DD alerted that he had hired an active DE for a potions master?
...he staggers among the dancers... (Julia)
When I made the hangman yesterday I stumbled over the episode when Snape threatens to give Trevor the toad the potion Neville has made, which may be poisonous. I don't think Snape ever intended to even risk killing the toad, he probably was quite sure he fed it with an accurate potion, the cruel thing is that Neville doesn't know this and is convinced that his possible mistake might kill his pet. In a way you could understand Snape's motive here: in a real life situation a wrongly made potion is dangerous. But what he does is of course completely wrong, a better way would for example be to make some sort of role play where the students knew it was a game, but still could imagine it to be a real life situation. I remember when I reread PoA I was somehow frustrated on Snape's behalf, because often the meaning of what he says makes complete sense, often he says the same thing as for example Lupin, but the way in which he says it is so completely wrong. Of course Harry won't listen to him. But maybe he just doesn't know how to say it in the right way. Snape is (almost?) never nice. Very few people seem to ever have been nice to him. It probably takes an effort of him to be nice, because he has not really ever learned how you do it, and then by experience he knows that it probably won't be worth that effort anyway.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 8, 2008 12:03 pm (#2322 of 2617)
he contributes to the victory much more than most of the "nice" characters (who are often not even so genuinely nice). - Julia H
Hm. I'm not sure I agree with this. I would say in a side-by-side comparision, Snape's specific contribution is no more significant than any one else's. Voldemort's downfall was definitely a team effort that required every player to "play their position".
After Snape killed DD, I became certain that he is in fact loyal to DD - Anna L Black
Me too. This was actually what convinced me that he was "Dumbledore's man" after all.
Reread the account of Harry's first potions class with Snape. I did this past week, and I was struck anew by Snape's complete unfairness and nastiness. - Solitaire
This is a very good point. I recall that when I first read Prof Trelawney's outburst (in HBP) that Prof Snape had been standing over her when she came out of her trance (during her interview with Dumbledore), Snape's "our new celebrity" remark was the first thing I thought of. What I mean is Snape taunts Harry for being kind of a diva (which, of course Harry isn't) knowing all the while that he, Snape, actually had something of a role in why Harry is so revered. That's messed up!
As much as I find Snape's behaviour towards Harry abusive and unfair, I can't blame him for behaving in a bitter and twisted way because he has had very bitter experiences and he can't relate to people in a proper way. It's nothing he can change by an act of sheer willpower because he is too damaged by his personal history. - Orion
This is an interesting comment as well. I actually disagree with the idea that Snape is simply unable to change. I believe that the only way anyone really can change is, first and foremost, because they choose to; then they take the steps to make that happen for themselves. Many many people have had miserable, even abusive, childhoods to overcome - even some people on this forum, I would imagine. Yet not every one who grows up in that kind of environment becomes a vicious serial killer - or a Death Eater. Snape chooses not to change, in my view. In addition, unlike Dumbledore, Snape is still a young man. It's not as if he is so set in his ways that he just can't embrace a new kind of living.
My question to Orion though is: if Snape is so "damaged" that he cannot change of his own accord, do you consider the character to have achieved the redemption the author claims for him?
I definitely agree, though, that Dumbledore should have had more of a handle on the whole Snape-Harry relationship, because I agree with Solitaire that Snape does seem to be stuck emotionally at about Harry's age. With this in mind, Dumbledore really let that whole thing go on far too long and with no real reason to do so.
When DD reveals that Harry will have to die, Snape is appalled, not because he thought he'd been protecting the Chosen One so he could defeat LV and live, but because he had been intending to keep Harry alive no matter what. - Wynnleaf
Another interesting point, one that I agree with.
What does Lupin mean when he says 'Sectumsempra was always a speciality of Snape's? - mona amon
I think Snape probably used this spell (or tried to) on the Marauders. The slashing spell he uses in the Worst Memory seems to be at least a rudimentary version of the Sectumsempra. In any case, it seems to have been immediately familiar to Lupin.
PeskyPixie - Jun 8, 2008 12:09 pm (#2323 of 2617)
Snape is in a state of arrested development when it comes to Harry (and his friends). He should not be teaching him to begin with, not until he has therapy with his problems, at least. I find myself agreeing with Zelmia's idea that Snape really begins to mature after Dumbledore's death, when he has to take responsibility for his own actions and answer to himself. In essence, he 'grows up' after his father figure dies.
Dryleaves - Jun 8, 2008 12:46 pm (#2324 of 2617)
Many many people have had miserable, even abusive, childhoods to overcome - even some people on this forum, I would imagine. Yet not every one who grows up in that kind of environment becomes a vicious serial killer - or a Death Eater. Snape chooses not to change, in my view. In addition, unlike Dumbledore, Snape is still a young man. It's not as if he is so set in his ways that he just can't embrace a new kind of living. (Quinn Crockett)
I both agree and not, I think. Being an unfair, abusive teacher and an unpleasant person is not the same as being a Death Eater. Snape leaves the DEs for DD and I also think he leaves the DE ideals, which means he does embrace a new kind of living. Then he still is unpleasant. As I wrote earlier I think Snape has a problem with being pleasant, that he doesn't really know how to and doesn't expect anyone to be nice back. But I also think that he doesn't really want anyone to be nice back either, as a punishment maybe, and therefore I think you are right when you say that he doesn't want to change.
I find myself agreeing with Zelmia's idea that Snape really begins to mature after Dumbledore's death, when he has to take responsibility for his own actions and answer to himself. (Pesky Pixie)
I think he changes earlier, but yes, I think something happens to him after DD's death and that he matures. One example is that he really tries to and manages to reach out to Harry and make Harry trust him (even if Harry doesn't know that the Silver Doe is Snape's patronus). He also dares to open up completely to Harry in his memories in order for Harry to trust the information they convey. This is a kind of maturity he hasn't got before, I think.
Orion - Jun 8, 2008 1:56 pm (#2325 of 2617)
Quinn, you asked whether I believe that Snape dies in a state of redemption. I'm not completely sure what redemption is (the translation doesn't help, either), but I guess that it means "does Snape die as a good guy, as an emotionally matured and integer person"? No, I think that Snape never really changes, that he dies glued to Lily's memory and to the memory of all the unfair tricks life has played on him, and he is still bitter and twisted in the moment of his last breath. I'd hate it if he was a reformed character or a (spit) hero.
And the epilogue stinks, IMO. What use is it for Snape that everybody knows that he was one of the good guys? He's dead.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 8, 2008 2:24 pm (#2326 of 2617)
I also think that he doesn't really want anyone to be nice back either, as a punishment maybe, and therefore I think you are right when you say that he doesn't want to change. - Dryleaves[I]
Oh very interesting! Do you think this is a sort of subconscious reaction or an actual conscious choice on his part?
Interesting too is the idea of Snape sort of "growing up" after Dumbledore's death. I can definitely see that. Actually, I think that process kind of started for him with the conversation about Dumbledore dying. Even though Snape had to get those few last digs into Harry, I think having the knowledge of Dumbledore's inevitable death hanging over his head (sword of Damocles, anyone?) must have had a very sobering effect.
Thanks for your response, Orion! I agree with you about the epilogue. It was pretty saccharin. Personally I am still on the fence about whether or not the author achieved her purpose for the character as far as redemption.
Julia H. - Jun 8, 2008 2:50 pm (#2327 of 2617)
Edited Jun 8, 2008 3:23 pm
Snape definitely changes, I think, and it implies that he wants to change. However, his change is not from "unpleasant" to "nice". I don't think he cares about being nice. The way he changes is much more important than that: from a DE he changes into a person who accepts responsibility for protecting other people's lives and who is willing to sacrifice everything that he has for the purpose of doing his duty. This is a great change in itself and this is why he deserves redemption in the end. (I am pro redemption and I think he becomes a hero or antihero or something - whatever - far above the ordinary. But I agree that the redemption issue is left ambiguous and open to individual interpretation and I don't like it.)
Not everybody with a miserable childhood becomes a serial killer. Well, nor does Snape. Yes, he becomes a DE but he is able to change. However, coming from a miserable, abusive childhood background does not make people especially nice either. And in Snape's case it is not only his family. Where would he have learned how to be nice? At home? Hardly. In Slytherin? It does not strike me as a warm and nice place. From the good guys in school? They attack him because he exists. From his teachers? There seems to be not one of them who really cares for him. From Lily? Yes, maybe, but she turns her back on him precisely when he is trying to be "nice" and is trying to apologise for being nasty. Among the DE's? Clearly not. When he returns to Hogwarts, he has a damaged personality and he is a profoundly unhappy person. He is also a marked person, who has a past that separates him from others. It may even be possible that his nastiness helps him "survive" a bit. A nicer, softer person might not be able to bear the knowledge of being "marked" and known as such in a community of respectable people. The self-punishment element that Dryleaves mentions is there too, IMO: Snape makes Harry hate him almost as if Harry knew the real reason why he should hate him; he avoids Azkaban but he isolates himself from people; he keeps his main guilt a secret from others but agrees to "roleplay" a crime that is bound to make him hated and despised probably more than the disclosure of his real guilt would have.
I agree that change is only possible for someone who wants it but wanting to change does not mean immediate change. Nor do I think that change will first be manifested on the surface. IMO it is more likely to happen deep down first and maybe in time appear on the surface as well.
Besides, Snape's life in Hogwarts is not a leisurely walk towards a new personality. He has to struggle with the shadows of his past all the time. Harry, Lupin, Sirius, DD himself, who likes to take the opportunity to remind him... Then Voldemort returns and the past returns as well. By this time he has changed considerably: his values and morals are different. However, he has to go back to LV and live through his past again. I don't think this helps him to be any nicer. The jobs he accepts are rather degrading on an everyday level, I think: Playing the faithful servant of someone like LV, adopting the language and the gestures of DE life, watching Charity Burbage die. These are all parts of the job. Yes, once he did these things voluntarily, I know. But now he has changed, his values and his mentality are different, yet he has to "bring back" his earlier self, the one he wants to leave behind, for the sake of successful acting. This is not merely acting on his part, there must be a sense of déjá vu attached to it and that is what makes it really degrading. Yet, whatever he experiences and whatever he goes through, he has to guard his present, better self and has to grow and mature still and in fact he does.
wynnleaf - Jun 8, 2008 3:33 pm (#2328 of 2617)
[I]Many many people have had miserable, even abusive, childhoods to overcome - even some people on this forum, I would imagine. Yet not every one who grows up in that kind of environment becomes a vicious serial killer - or a Death Eater. (Dryleaves)
Snape definitely changes, I think, and it implies that he wants to change. However, his change is not from "unpleasant" to "nice". (Julia)
Many people from miserable abusive childhoods don't grow up to be Death Eaters -- or terrorists in real life. On the other hand, Snape didn't stay a DE, so I don't think that can be used as evidence of not changing, but instead evidence of change. He grows to be a person unwilling to stand by and watch anyone die if he can save them. And this is during the time period of HBP, not after DD's death. He grows to be a person willing to put his life on the line for other people, even those he doesn't like. He grows to be willing to give up practically everything that ever mattered to him in order to do what was right -- even giving Harry info that he had to die, when Snape had worked years to keep him safe.
But he doesn't become nice.
Is becoming nice or outwardly kind the only sign of positive change, without which one must be deemed "unredeemed"? In my opinion, of course not! JKR, in her post-DH comments made it clear that she wanted Snape to be seen as having been redeemed. She said that she wanted there to be redemption. So regardless what our personal views of what makes redemption, JKR did want Snape to be redeemed.
Harry changes very little throughout the series. He is willing to die to save others, can't stand to see anyone die if he can save them, fights to defeat Voldemort, etc. How is he very different from Snape? Harry is mostly nice. But is Harry always kind, forgiving, etc? No, not always. Is he arrogant? Yes, often, and JKR has commented on that. Does he sometimes injure, torture, or hurt other people? Yes. Through bad judgment (Sirius, Tonks, Hermione at the Ministry in OOTP), vindictivness (examples might be Draco and his companions at the end of GOF and OOTP; Carrow in DH, Bella in OOTP, not to mention his petty desire to use sectumsempra on McClaggen even before he knew what it did), inconsiderate recklessness (the kids injured in the potions class in COS), and numerous other examples. But Harry is generally agreeable and nice, besides being the protagonist and we, the readers, generally feel comfortable with him regardless of how many people get injured, tortured, or even killed due to his actions.
wynnleaf - Jun 8, 2008 3:53 pm (#2329 of 2617)
I want to comment on my own post.
I'm not trying to get into a discussion about the relative merits of Harry's actions versus Snape's actions. But I think that at least we can look at the overall picture. In the entire series Harry does many, many highly questionable things and numerous things that are reckless, vindictive, etc. He does use Crucio or attempt it on several occasions. He and his friend hex Draco and friends into unconsciousness and leave them for many hours, walking over their bodies when they leave the train, at the end of GOF, when all Draco did was say mean and hateful things.
Yet I've never seen anyone, even people like me who will criticize Harry's actions, accuse Harry of being dark or unredeemed. Many people will accept practically anything Harry does under the banners of "his intentions were good" or "he did it to the bad guys." Whether or not those count as excusing his actions is debatable. But noteworthy to me is that we can get into deep discussions on this thread about whether or not Snape is a redeemed character, even after all that he did, and yet have no such questions about Harry regardless of what he did.
We don't actually know what bad stuff Snape did other than join the DEs and take the prophecy to LV. These were of course very wrong things, but it's not like he didn't have a huge amount of remorse about it and JKR has said that if he had it to do over, he wouldn't do it. We look for signs of remorse and question tears, attempts to change, risking his life to correct his actions, yet when Harry almost kills Draco and rather quickly moves from first remorse to how to hide evidence and how unfair the punishment is, we don't worry too much about it.
I really think the difference is that Harry is simply liked. Because we see things from his perspective and because we generally sympathize with him ("we" being almost all readers I think), it's very easy to keep considering him a good kid, regardless what bad choices he often makes.
And that gets me back to "nice." How important is it after all?
Solitaire - Jun 8, 2008 6:10 pm (#2330 of 2617)
if Snape was known to have used Sectumsempra in school, wouldn't he have been expelled
Not if no one squealed on him. I've always had the idea that Remus had not seen Snape since before the Potters died, so school seems the most logical place to have seen it. I could be wrong, but I'll find out soon enough. I'm rereading the entire series this summer and am in the middle of PoA.
It's nothing he can change by an act of sheer willpower because he is too damaged by his personal history.
This seems to directly contradict the idea that we all have the ability to make choices, a very prominent theme in the series. At some point in our lives, we all must become responsible for the choices we make. Snape chooses to be hateful to Harry.
that gets me back to "nice." How important is it after all?
I guess it depends on what you want out of life. Personally, I like people and want friends and family in my life.
As to Harry's bad choices, well, I still have to look at the fact that he was a kid and the worst of his mistakes are committed because information has been withheld from him. Then again, if he'd always acted with full knowledge of each situation, he probably wouldn't have done many of the things he did, and we wouldn't have a story. Harry's ignorance, misinformation, misunderstandings, and mistakes are almost required for the stories as we know them to exist.
Solitaire
If Snape shouldn't have used sectumsempra, what spell should he have used that would still be a spell that would look quite normal for a Death Eater to be using in battle, yet still not knock a good guy of his/her broom if they got hit by accident, and still stop the Death Eater from killing Lupin if the spell hit its mark?
As for why Snape discussions often hit me on a more emotional level, I think it's because the issues surrounding why people view the character as they do, and many of the more specific judgment calls made, hit so close to home, which comes from having several Snapish or at least Slytherin-like friends and family members. And it's not just the views on Snape, but the countering views that could fall under the umbrella of "other characters who are better than Snape and why they're better" which often, in my opinion, seem to ultimately come down to "being nice trumps everything no matter what a person actually does or doesn't do" or "good intentions absolve terrible decisions." And I suppose I'm particularly affected by those kinds of arguments because, even on the more mundane levels, I've seen too many people deeply hurt by "nice" people (including "nice" teachers), or deeply hurt by others who had good intentions, but ultimately made their decisions from arrogant perspectives, too convinced of their own rightness.
Another aspect that can get me "worked up" is when an issue falls within the unanswered question Snape asks Lily, of why the actions of the Marauders are somehow not as bad as the Dark joke a Slytherin friend plays on another student. As far as I know, this is the only time in the entire series that JKR has a character actually ask the question "why is it not so bad when one person hurts someone, but worse when another person hurts someone?" And yet I feel that the entire series has many, many examples that should bring that question forward and yet it never gets answered.
Because double standards really do hurt people, and because people I love have been hurt by the use of double standards, discussions centering on these questions can be emotional to me. Most especially when they seem to fall under labels like "it's not so bad when this person does a wrong thing, because they are one of the good guys, but it's horrible when another person does it because they're one of the bad guys." What a huge ethical problem that gets played out in our world on both micro and macro levels!
Because Snape's character has so many good and bad aspects, the character brings out these questions far more clearly than other characters. For instance, Harry's character could bring out many of these questions, because Harry does many, many questionable or wrong things. But because most everyone likes Harry, we're not as likely to discuss the wrong things Harry does. And even if we do occasionally discuss them, we are generally unanimous in forgiving Harry because we all like him.
Orion - Jun 7, 2008 5:55 am (#2302 of 2617)
I agree with Wynnleaf wholeheartedly. I love Tom, Sylvester and Wile E. Coyote, and I think Jerry, Tweety and Roadrunner should end up in a salami. Harry is such a superhuman hero that it's refreshing when he gets a bit of criticism slapped around his ears once in a while. The HP books focus on heroism and bravery very much, and bravery is a secondary virtue, much like punctuality or tenacity, but not a primary virtue such as personal integrity. Bella, for instance, is a formidable thing, probably the bravest person in the whole series, but she's a sadistic, twisted torturer and mad as a hatter. So bravery is constantly shown, in the books, as central point around which a person focuses their personalities, but it's totally mad because at the same time we learn that it doesn't say anything about the person at all.
And Snape runs after Harry all the time with his robes flapping and tries to save him and Harry has nothing better to do than slip out from under his nose as often as he can because Harry can't bring himself to trust him. Harry even deceives DD, the only person who'd be able to control him, so Snape has no chance because Harry is so brave. I hate bravery.
This doesn't belong on this thread, but if DD had zapped Voldie when he applied for a job at Hogwarts the whole story wouldn't have culminated in a all-out battle with umpteen dead bodies. Ethics are often a bit blurry round the edges in the HP universe. And Snape is decidedly not the blurriest of all.
Dryleaves - Jun 7, 2008 6:16 am (#2303 of 2617)
Ethics are often a bit blurry round the edges in the HP universe. And Snape is decidedly not the blurriest of all. (Orion)
Isn't he one of the least blurry as his choices actually have great consequences?
Julia H. - Jun 7, 2008 7:47 am (#2304 of 2617)
And it's not just the views on Snape, but the countering views that could fall under the umbrella of "other characters who are better than Snape and why they're better" which often, in my opinion, seem to ultimately come down to "being nice trumps everything no matter what a person actually does or doesn't do" or "good intentions absolve terrible decisions." And I suppose I'm particularly affected by those kinds of arguments because, even on the more mundane levels, I've seen too many people deeply hurt by "nice" people (including "nice" teachers), or deeply hurt by others who had good intentions, but ultimately made their decisions from arrogant perspectives, too convinced of their own rightness. (Wynnleaf)
I too absolutely agree with this and with the other things in Wynnleaf's post. I could say a lot about such things... anyway. Snape is not nice, he is just himself. He has a huge problem (this whole guilt and redemption issue), which he has to solve somehow and in the process he does truly admirable things (among other things) and he contributes to the victory much more than most of the "nice" characters (who are often not even so genuinely nice). However, in the end he still seems to come across most of all as a nasty person and nobody bothers to note that there was much more to him than just nastiness and that they do owe him a few things after all.
Anna L. Black - Jun 7, 2008 8:18 am (#2305 of 2617)
About the Sectumsempra - I think that people tend to read too much into it IMO, Snape didn't think it through, and reacted on instinct (Harry's not the only one with a "saving people" thing). He didn't consider what would happen when he hits a "fellow" DE. Even if he did (I won't be surprised if he thought something like this might happen before they went out on the mission) - during a broomstick chase you can't really aim so well, as we've seen, so he has an excuse already.
Regarding why Snape seems to make readers care so much - I think Snape is probably the most fleshed-out character in HP. Even more than Harry, on some level, because Harry doesn't have this internal fight about which way to follow - he never strayed off the "Good guys" path, even if he used unforgivables. Snape, on the other way, is such a complex character, with so many nuances to his actions and feelings, that I guess a lot of people find something in him with wich they can identify. The debate whether he is on the good side or the bad one was probably also one of the things that always sparkled a lively debate. What amazed me the most after HBP came out is this: Even though JKR supposedly showed us that Snape is on LV's side, the debate about Snape's true loyalties just became fiercer. After Snape killed DD, I became certain that he is in fact loyal to DD - which is not the normal reaction at all, and the fact that JKR managed to make me react that way just proves to me that Snape is the one character in HP that has something unique in him.
Having said that, I was never a Snape-fan per se, but gradually learned to appreciate his character, with all the flaws that he has, and to admire his ability to cope with everything he's been through.
P.S. I'm glad to be finally able to post on this thread - the last 3 months I was just catching up on all the posts (of this thread) that I missed in the months before that. I started in February, with about 1200 unread posts, and at the rate of this thread, it wasn't an easy task!
Solitaire - Jun 7, 2008 11:14 am (#2306 of 2617)
Harry has nothing better to do than slip out from under his nose as often as he can because Harry can't bring himself to trust him
I have a difficult time faulting Harry for this. Reread the account of Harry's first potions class with Snape. I did this past week, and I was struck anew by Snape's complete unfairness and nastiness. Surely he knew already that Harry had grown up in a Muggle family. His close friendship with Lily certainly must have acquainted him with Petunia's (and possibly Vernon's) feelings about magic. Add to that his own Muggle father's reactions, and he should have guessed that Harry might have been kept totally ignorant of the magical world, until he was informed about it a few weeks prior to school. I suspect, too, that Dumbledore, as Headmaster, would have informed the teachers ahead of time about how Harry had been living. If he did, indeed, know this information, it makes his behavior to Harry on that very first day even more despicable. It shows a very cruel nature. Harry's relationship to Snape began with Snape not only humiliating and punishing him unfairly before his peers but also making his fellow Gryffindors suffer as a result of it.
We all know that there are adults in the world who hide their true natures from family, friends, employers, and colleagues. Consider how shocked we all are to find someone we know has abused a child or spouse. I think it is quite possible that Harry felt he was in a situation where no one knew Snape's true hatred of him. In this respect, he felt alone. Certainly, Snape has not done too much to help Harry trust him. Even when Snape has done things to help, they have been performed in such a way as "shades" Snape's true reasons and allegiances. Of course, we now know the reasons for this; however, Harry was kept in the dark, so all he had to go on was instinct and experience, none of which were positive where Snape was concerned. JM2K about it ...
Solitaire
Orion - Jun 7, 2008 11:55 am (#2307 of 2617)
I agree with you, Soli, until the ending of book one where DD explains Snape's protection to Harry. Harry doesn't believe anything of it for a minute. IMO, DD is to blame, because he is the only one who can bring the two of them together without them bashing each other's heads in. DD is also the only one who can have a serious word with Snape to leave Harry alone, yet he lets everything run as long as he can without interfering.
As much as I find Snape's behaviour towards Harry abusive and unfair, I can't blame him for behaving in a bitter and twisted way because he has had very bitter experiences and he can't relate to people in a proper way. It's nothing he can change by an act of sheer willpower because he is too damaged by his personal history.
Harry gives as good as he gets, too, doesn't he? He talks back in class and breaks rules all the time. He doesn't exactly make it easy for Snape to like him better because he really behaves like James in his recklessness.
One of the innumerable posts of mad Snape defenders who won't hear a word against him although he behaves like a jerk...
Julia H. - Jun 7, 2008 12:13 pm (#2308 of 2617)
Having said that, I was never a Snape-fan per se, but gradually learned to appreciate his character, with all the flaws that he has, and to admire his ability to cope with everything he's been through. (Anna)
Hello, Anna, welcome to the Snape-thread!
This is exactly how I learned to appreciate (etc. ) the character as well. HBP definitely was a decisive book in this respect!
I have a difficult time faulting Harry for this. (Solitaire)
I don't blame Harry either, at least not in the beginning. The first lesson spoiled a lot of things and it was Snape's fault. However, I don't think it was because of a generally cruel nature. I think it had a specific, Harry-related reason. Without trying to absolve Snape, I am trying to imagine his point of view (we know Harry's well enough): When he agrees to protect Harry, he also asks DD to keep his secret because he does not want Potter's son to know. IMO, it indicates that already then he fears this child because he feels guilty towards him and this also indicates (I think) that he has a conscience (how could he feel remorse otherwise?). I think he does not want Harry to know because then Harry had a reason to hate him and despise him and he himself feels what he did is unforgivable. But it must be very difficult to teach and protect for years someone hating and despising you with a reason. He has ten years to wait before he can see Lily's eyes in Harry's face. He probably fears the moment. Then one day Harry is there reminding him of everything. He cannot be decent to Harry. Why? If he were a decent, average teacher to him, Harry might respect him. This may be something that Snape would like but he may also feel that it would not be right. It would be deception to act someone even moderately nice in front of Harry and win his trust because Harry should hate and despise him - he just does not know. Snape does not want him to know but still (probably with subconscious motivations) behaves towards Harry in a way to make sure Harry will hate him and despise and distrust him. (A complicated soul... but then most souls are.)
So Harry does not trust Snape but trusts Quirrell instead. At the end of PS, however, he learns that Quirrell supported Voldemort and Snape protected the Stone with the same determination as Harry himself. He learns that Snape saved his life. When Quirrell wanted to kill him, there were several teachers present. Nice Hagrid was there and he even realized that the broom must be bewitched. Just and great McGonagall, a powerful and clever witch was also there. Madam Hooch must have been there as well and she probably knows a few things about brooms. (Was she the referee? Was a referee flying around the players, as later Snape did?) Yet, it was nasty, cruel Snape alone who did not only notice what was going on but also did something for Harry and eventually he successfully saved Harry's life. Later he took care to be around when he thought Harry might be in danger again. Harry finds out all this, yet he does not realize (then or later) that behind nasty Snape there is another Snape, one who actively tries to protect him and who actually does more for him than many of the teachers who are otherwise nice or decent do.
EDIT: Cross-posted with Orion!
Dryleaves - Jun 7, 2008 12:16 pm (#2309 of 2617)
Solitaire, I agree that Snape is horrible to Harry during the first potions class and I don't mean to defend his behaviour, but Snape's situation is also a cruel one. Harry is so much more than just another student to Snape, he represents almost everything that has gone wrong (for one reason or other) in Snape's life, and anyone would have a problem coping with it, I think, even if not everyone would be as nasty as Snape. I don't get the impression that Snape's behaviour is that unknown to his collegues and I definetly think that DD knows pretty exactly what he is like, and yet seems to do very little about it. If he really wanted to avoid what happens during the potions classes, then DD either should not let Snape teach Harry at all, or at least control the situation continually.
Edit: I also cross-posted...
Solitaire - Jun 7, 2008 2:37 pm (#2310 of 2617)
Snape is still the adult and the teacher, and he abuses his power over Harry, a child who had no knowledge of why he was so hated. Upon entering Hogwarts, Harry becomes one part of a difficult triangle. Snape is bound by Dumbledore to help Harry, whom he hates unreasonably. Dumbledore is apparently bound NOT to give Harry any information about why Snape hates him. As Snape is the only potions teacher for the first 5 years, Harry is fairly trapped into close daily proximity with him. Snape, of course, exacerbates the problem at every opportunity, because he has never really grown up emotionally. In that area, he seems to have stalled at about the same age as Harry. He responds like a child quite frequently, except that he has the adult status to exact punishment.
It is easy to blame Dumbledore for a lot of the trouble. Even if he couldn't give Harry the details about Lily and Snape, he could have told Snape to back off a bit--not so much as to cause suspicion, but maybe to treat Harry no worse than everyone else. Then again, perhaps he did ... and that is why Snape treated Harry as well as his three closest friends (Ron, Hermione, and Neville) so abusively.
Harry certainly does seem to tick off Snape rather often. If I'd been Harry, I'd have tried to stay out of his way if I didn't have to be there. Dumbledore's unwillingness to give Harry critical information is what seems to propel him to go seeking answers for things he doesn't understand ... and that keeps landing him in Snape's path, because Snape is so closely bound in this triangle.
Then again, if Snape wasn't mean, rotten and hateful, we wouldn't have much of a story, would we? It is Harry's fear, distrust, and dislike of Snape that fuels several subplots in the series.
Solitaire
Julia H. - Jun 7, 2008 4:13 pm (#2311 of 2617)
Then again, if Snape wasn't mean, rotten and hateful, we wouldn't have much of a story, would we? It is Harry's fear, distrust, and dislike of Snape that fuels several subplots in the series. (Solitaire)
Well, the story needs him, definitely, and I agree with most of your post, except perhaps DD's behaviour. There is no indication that DD tries to discipline Snape early on with regard to Harry and even less that DD's interference could be the reason why Snape is so nasty. We pretty much see that Snape does as DD tells him to do. (He stops in the middle of a tantrum at the end of PoA when DD says "enough", he shakes hands with Sirius at the end of GoF and so on.) Of course changing his behaviour to Harry may be much more difficult or even impossible, as Orion says, but he would probably try. The scene in which Snape is ranting about Harry while DD is reading the paper shows that DD does not take the problem seriously: he does not even look up from his paper as he tells Snape that he, personally, likes Harry. This is not at all the same as putting down the paper and telling Snape to stop and sit down and listen to something very important. True, there is only one teacher for every subject at Hogwarts but DD as Headmaster could arrange for two potions teachers for a while - both of them could teach two subjects with Snape avoiding Harry's year. (Of course we, readers, would lose a lot. ) Then DD - while well aware of the enmity between Snape and Harry - organizes Occlumency trainings for them, where they have to duel, wands held at the ready, on a regular basis (which they already do in a way, symbolically). Even if DD finds it absolutely necessary, he might think of a way to mitigate the tension that the situation causes. (I mean DD is not a good psychologist, is he? Hoping that Snape will just get over his wounds now?)
But then I think what several of us are saying is not that Snape is not nasty towards Harry but that it is absolutely unfair that only his nastiness seems to count when he also works hard to protect and to save Harry regularly and Harry knows but does not notice or does not care. At the same time, nice characters, just because they are nice, are easily forgiven even if they actually endanger others directly and indirectly. (E.g., Hagrid carelessly betraying the secret of his dog to a complete stranger, Lupin not mentioning that Sirius is an animagus for fear that DD will have a bad opinion of him and even Fake-Moody's questionable teaching methods seem to be overlooked as long as he appears to like Harry.) Whatever else Snape does as well, he is seen only as the nasty one, the black sheep.
Snape is bound by Dumbledore to help Harry...
It appears he is bound by his own word. DD does not force or Imperius him to agree but tells him that this is what he can do for Lily and Snape agrees by his own choice.
Solitaire - Jun 7, 2008 5:20 pm (#2312 of 2617)
Don't we find that Snape agrees--when he asked Dumbledore to help Lily--to also help keep Harry safe? (It has been almost a year, and I have not reread, so I could be wrong here.) As nasty as Snape is, he does seem bound by his own promise, so I will concede some sense of honor. But my point is that he seems to be doing this only because he said he would ... not because his heart is really in it. He does not seem to think Harry is "worthy" of the fate to which he has been destined, and he seems to go about proving Harry's unworthiness through most of the series. (I do think this changes in DH.) Yes, he fulfills the word of his agreement ... but not the spirit. I'm not sure if this is clear, but it's how I see Snape, given my personal "filter."
I have a pretty good idea how Snape would have affected me when I was an adolescent. When I had Snape-like teachers and professors in school--and I did have a couple who liked to humiliate students--I was nervous all of the time and did poorly. When I had teachers like Remus (compassionate and understanding) or even McGonagall (strict, a bit gruff, but fair and caring), I learned. I currently have a couple of Snapes in my Real Life. They are callous and rude without seeming to care whom they hurt. I'm sure all of these things affect my perspective when I read Snape. They are also why my perspective probably will not change.
Solitaire
BTW, I also have an Umbridge who has been quite actively manipulative and deceitful in my personal world ... causing me to hate the Umbridge character even more than I did before, if that's possible!
Julia H. - Jun 7, 2008 6:02 pm (#2313 of 2617)
But my point is that he seems to be doing this only because he said he would ... not because his heart is really in it. (Solitaire)
I think his heart is in it but his heart is not for Harry but for Lily. He agrees in the first place to protect Lily's son because of Lily. He does not only protect him by watching over him and saving his life if necessary but he agrees to spy on Voldemort to protect Harry in a more general sense. He is protecting Lily's son; however, when they are face to face and there is no immediate danger, Harry becomes James Potter's son. How these two aspects are present at the same time is shown in The Flight of the Prince. While Harry is attacking him, Snape is shouting at him his fury about James. In the middle of this, Harry is attacked and Snape knows at once "by heart" what he must do...
... he seems to go about proving Harry's unworthiness through most of the series. (I do think this changes in DH.)
I agree there is a change about that in DH. However, I think Snape's original idea of Harry's "unworthiness" deserves some analysis. What does he want to prove and to whom? Are we sure that deep down, he really does think Harry is unworthy? I don't mean he is consciously lying, only that perhaps he is trying to see what he wants to see. Before the Occlumency lessons, he removes his terrible memories into the Pensieve: Does he really think that 15-year-old Harry, while learning how to close down his own mind will be able to break into his mind and see what Snape does not want him to see? He does break in once but Snape stops him rather quickly and not much harm is done. But if Snape finds a more serious intrusion possible, is it not a subconscious compliment to Harry's abilities? (He also mentions he has heard that Harry was able to resist the Imperious Curse.) I wonder if there are other such instances...
wynnleaf - Jun 7, 2008 6:58 pm (#2314 of 2617)
The way I understood DH, Snape protects Harry not because DD asked him to, but because of Lily. DD knew Snape would do anything to not only protect Lily, but after her death he'd do anything to protect her son. So DD didn't so much ask Snape to protect Harry, as he did remind him that Harry would need to be protected, knowing that was all the inducement Snape would need to stay on at Hogwarts and prepare to protect Harry. In other words, DD wasn't asking "do this for me," he was saying, "this is what you'll need to do for Lily."
As regards Snape thinking Harry unworthy, I always felt that Snape did not believe Harry had the ability to have any sort of victory against Voldemort. After DH, I felt that he was primarily trying to protect Harry and get him through the Voldemort wars alive, not so that Harry could fulfill a destiny, but just so that Lily's son would live. When DD reveals that Harry will have to die, Snape is appalled, not because he thought he'd been protecting the Chosen One so he could defeat LV and live, but because he had been intending to keep Harry alive no matter what.
This is just a gut feeling, but I doubt if Snape ever put much weight on the prophecy, and the idea that Harry would defeat LV was probably pretty ludicrous to him as well. But I don't think that so much mattered as regards his focus on protecting Harry.
mona amon - Jun 7, 2008 8:46 pm (#2315 of 2617)
This is in reply to yesterday's posts which already seem to be from a long time ago. This thread is once again moving too fast for me!
If Snape shouldn't have used sectumsempra, what spell should he have used that would still be a spell that would look quite normal for a Death Eater to be using in battle, yet still not knock a good guy of his/her broom if they got hit by accident, and still stop the Death Eater from killing Lupin if the spell hit its mark? (Wynnleaf)
But Wynnleaf, what's the difference between using a spell that might knock a good guy off his broom and one that might cause a good guy to bleed to death within a couple of minutes?
Apparently, he did have a choice or we could not discuss what he should have done. (Julia)
That's not what I meant. Here's the situation.
1) He could have tried hitting the DE with a spell that causes much damage, and risked hitting the good guys with the same spell.
2) He could have tried hitting the DE with a milder spell (that would not cause much damage to Lupin or George if it hits them by mistake), and then had the problem of explaining why he was using such a spell.
When I said 'did not have a choice' I meant that 1) is not really a viable alternative if he wanted to save the lives of the good guys. Yet he goes for it, showing bad strategy, with which I think you agree. Anyhow, his 'saving Lupin thing' is definitely to his credit.
I agree that the Molly-Bella fight is not the same situation, but Harry's choices (or lack of them) are the same. He does not try to help Molly not because he thinks she has a fair chance but because he does not want to risk hitting her.
I don't think this particular use of Sectumsempra indicates shaky morals but it is resorting to an earlier stage in his development, which he is not supposed to do. (Again, the comparison with Harry's use of Unforgivables is very interesting.)
I'm saying almost the same thing. He is resorting to an earlier stage, when his morals were shaky. I'm not really talking about this particular use of Sectumsempra, but the fact that he's still using the spell even after he is supposed to have reformed. I have no problem with the good guys using unforgivables in a war situation, but sectumsempra is such a horrible spell, slashing, hurting, mutilating and causing the victim to bleed to death within minutes. Harry's use of unforgivables is different. He uses Crucio against Amycus and attempts to use Sectumsempra on Snape when he is in a blind fury. It's something he needs to learn how to control. Snape is already supposed to have learnt that lesson.
I hope I am not getting you too worked up ...
Well, since you asked, I am a bit hot under the collar right now
Like I said I get a lot more heated up when people try to defend all of Snape's actions than when they criticize him, but Julia, please don't allow that to cramp your style Getting all worked up is part of the fun of taking part in these discussions, I think. ETA: What does Lupin mean when he says 'Sectumsempra was always a speciality of Snape's?'
Solitaire - Jun 7, 2008 9:29 pm (#2316 of 2617)
What does Lupin mean when he says 'Sectumsempra was always a speciality of Snape's'
It sounds to me like this is not the first time Remus has seen Snape cast this spell.
Julia H. - Jun 8, 2008 1:00 am (#2317 of 2617)
I agree that the Molly-Bella fight is not the same situation, but Harry's choices (or lack of them) are the same. He does not try to help Molly not because he thinks she has a fair chance but because he does not want to risk hitting her. (Mona)
I don't know what Harry thinks of Molly's chances but Molly does not only know she is being attacked but she herself is attacking Bella. Lupin, however, may not even notice that he is being targeted by the DE's spell before he is dead. I just can't see that Snape choosing not to try to save Lupin would have been the same kind of decision as Harry's. I am not sure that he even has the time to consider what happens if he hits one of the good guys accidentally. He is probably reacting instantly, as soon as he sees the DE aiming at Lupin. It does not take that much time to cast a spell once a wizard is aiming, so Snape cannot have time to consider"what if"s either.
wynnleaf - Jun 8, 2008 8:28 am (#2318 of 2617)
If Snape shouldn't have used sectumsempra, what spell should he have used that would still be a spell that would look quite normal for a Death Eater to be using in battle, yet still not knock a good guy of his/her broom if they got hit by accident, and still stop the Death Eater from killing Lupin if the spell hit its mark? (Wynnleaf)
But Wynnleaf, what's the difference between using a spell that might knock a good guy off his broom and one that might cause a good guy to bleed to death within a couple of minutes? (mona amon)
I don't think you answered my question. What should Snape have done? If you can't provide a better alternative, then Snape's action, which worked by the way, can't be faulted.
In your following comments you said that:
1) He could have tried hitting the DE with a spell that causes much damage, and risked hitting the good guys with the same spell. (Mona amon)
If (and we don't know this) the spell used to cut James in the Worst Memory was sectumsempra, then it can clearly cause varying degrees of damage depending on what the caster wants. In that case, it would be the perfect spell to use, because Snape could call out "Sectumsempra" which sounds like he's using a seriously bad spell, but keep it reined in so that it's not so damaging, hit the Death Eater to distract him, and cause non-deadly damage to an Order member if one got hit accidently.
You also said:
When I said 'did not have a choice' I meant that 1) is not really a viable alternative if he wanted to save the lives of the good guys. Yet he goes for it, showing bad strategy, with which I think you agree. (mona amon)
Not sure who you meant by "you," but I don't agree. You said that the first choices wasn't a "viable alternative if he wanted to save the lives of the good guys," and yet he used it and when a good guy got hit, George didn't die, but only lost an ear, and another Order member was saved. Granted, the loss of an ear is a bad thing and a permanent injury, but it's a lot better than an Order member ending up dead.
It seems to me that you're saying that Snape's strategy was bad because you don't think it should have worked, and the fact that it did work (Lupin saved and George only hurt) was not to Snape's credit.
The problem is that we have no evidence that the force of the Sectumsempra used would have whacked through bone, muscle, tendons, etc. and taken off the Death Eater's hand, just because it cut off George's ear. We've seen the spell used by Harry when he was waving his wand wildly and with force, and even then it cut Draco up a lot, but it wasn't like it tore him wide open (getting gross here). And if Snape used it on James, it only made a smallish cut to which none of the boys even paid much attention.
Julia H. - Jun 8, 2008 9:04 am (#2319 of 2617)
It may be annoying that I keep defending Snape whatever he does. I tried to think about this, also as part of the question about the strong feelings concerning Snape. Yes, perhaps the more I think of the character, the more I tend to see the good in him (the bad is pointed out by other posters anyway, so I’m not saying that I really ignore that part). All the time I know he is not one of the really good guys. The way I see it is this:
Originally he has the potential for good or for bad, as most people probably (perhaps even Tom Riddle but I’m not sure). He becomes a DE and the circumstances that lead there are quite well described (as in the case of Tom Riddle as well). For various reasons, as a teenager, he is at a relatively high risk to go the wrong way, even though it is probably not something absolutely inevitable. Also, he is pretty much alone when he would probably need help or guidance. He won’t become a sympathetic teacher himself but then where are his teachers when he is a teenager and (in spite of his talents) is drifting to the wrong direction, or for that matter, when he is bullied by the good guys? Nobody ever seems to notice anything in Hogwarts. He does not seem to play the successful and nice guy to deceive people as Tom Riddle did, so why does not anybody realize that a teenage boy who seems to be left alone by his parents needs the help of an adult?
Whether it is an unfortunate accident or conscious moral suicide, he falls morally and could yet fall deeper and deeper if one single straw did not stop his downfall – his love for Lily, something coming from inside. (Tom Riddle, in contrast, has nothing in him to stop his moral downfall, even though he is better appreciated by various people.) Then he starts to rise. It may not be his original purpose to become any better than he is, he may just want to save Lily, yet this in itself is a chance. It is only the beginning of a long way and I think he realizes (not very much later) how horrible his downfall as such was. He is ashamed and remorseful and wants to atone – but this does not mean he can become at once a great and good guy, no. How could he? It is even more difficult, since his experiences and his guilt deeply affect his personality in a negative way.
We debate whether his love for Lily is selfish or not. We debate whether using Sectumsempra to save Lupin’s life is ethical or not. We debate how horrible a teacher he exactly is and many other things. These are all great debates. My point of view (just one of the many viewpoints) in most of these is something like “look where he is coming from and where he is going”. There are mistakes, even relapses maybe. There are things which change slowly or not at all. But he is working hard and is definitely improving. I see him as someone who in an accident – which may well have been his own fault – has suffered great injuries and is now trying to learn to walk again. It hurts. He tries with clenched teeth again and again, maybe swearing under his breath. He sometimes falls on the ground but he gets up again. He staggers through a ballroom where healthy good guys and nice ladies dance gracefully. He cannot do that and I cannot blame him for it. His achievement is being able to walk. There is positive discrimination, giving some advantage to someone with a disadvantage. So he staggers among the dancers who look at him with surprise or disgust, not understanding what he is doing among them, causing disturbance where he goes. As it happens, he has jobs to do there, so he shakes off the looks of disapproval and staggers on: Protecting Harry, spying on Voldemort, teaching potions.
He gets tasks the dancers could not do, tasks only someone like him can do. The one man who guides and protects him gives him not only dangerous but possibly damaging jobs (sure, with great trust in his abilities and his loyalty). If he makes mistakes, it seems they are not ordinary human mistakes but the surfacing of bad morals. Some things must be especially difficult, like having to go back to the DE’s - and I am not talking about the mortal danger. With a changed or changing personality, seeing what they do and knowing he once belonged to them must be, on the one hand, a real lesson. But it must be depressing and psychologically dangerous as well and no, not because he could be tempted by their ways. (What may he have to go through just to be accepted back to start with?) Then in the spying job mistakes are not allowed but it is suspicious if he plays the part of a DE too well. Having to AK his mentor and only friend(?) must also be absolutely damaging. What negative energies he must call forth and with what willpower he must control them to be able to successfully perform the Killing Curse against his own will and then to concentrate on saving all those who now hate him and then – possibly – to report to Voldemort and endure the despicable honors LV may now lavish on him in his moment of triumph. Who else could do all that? Who of the good guys would have either low enough self-esteem or a high enough sense of indebtedness to agree to do such a job? There are those who never fall and there are those who fall but do not rise and there is Snape who once fell and is slowly rising now from the abyss by means of very, very hard work. To me that is what counts most. Despite his flaws, in the end, his guilt and his remorse, his promises, his strong will and his love make him do much greater things than most of the guys with a clear conscience and agreeable personalities ever do.
Orion - Jun 8, 2008 10:13 am (#2320 of 2617)
Sniff! Rummage rummage there must be a sniff-smiley somewhere... Nag nag nag: "Having to AK his mentor and only friend(?) must also be absolutely damaging." With friends like that, who needs an enemy?
Dryleaves - Jun 8, 2008 11:54 am (#2321 of 2617)
I'm not really talking about this particular use of Sectumsempra, but the fact that he's still using the spell even after he is supposed to have reformed. I have no problem with the good guys using unforgivables in a war situation, but sectumsempra is such a horrible spell, slashing, hurting, mutilating and causing the victim to bleed to death within minutes. Harry's use of unforgivables is different. He uses Crucio against Amycus and attempts to use Sectumsempra on Snape when he is in a blind fury. (Mona amon)
With the risk of making you self-ignite , I must ask what you mean more exactly when you say that Harry's use of the Cruciatus Curse is OK, but not Snape's use of Sectumsempra? I can see if you don't like Sectumsempra, it is a horrible spell, but if Harry is in blind fury and Cruciatus is OK, couldn't you say that Snape is also in an agitated state with all the pressure he is under? And then it would be more likely for Snape to use Sectumsempra, a spell that he himself invented and have used, than it is for Harry to use Crucio, that he from the beginning has learned is despicable and forbidden and belongs to the other side, the one he is fighting. Harry is actively learning to master an evil spell, while Snape is relapsing (and immediately reminded by Fate, or something, that it was not a good thing to use it, but that is of course no extenuating circumstance for Snape himself ). Are you just more disappointed in Snape than in Harry?
What does Lupin mean when he says 'Sectumsempra was always a speciality of Snape's?' (Mona amon)
It sounds to me like this is not the first time Remus has seen Snape cast this spell. (Solitaire)
I think this is confusing, because if Snape was known to have used Sectumsempra in school, wouldn't he have been expelled? And if Lupin had seen him use it later, why wasn't DD alerted that he had hired an active DE for a potions master?
...he staggers among the dancers... (Julia)
When I made the hangman yesterday I stumbled over the episode when Snape threatens to give Trevor the toad the potion Neville has made, which may be poisonous. I don't think Snape ever intended to even risk killing the toad, he probably was quite sure he fed it with an accurate potion, the cruel thing is that Neville doesn't know this and is convinced that his possible mistake might kill his pet. In a way you could understand Snape's motive here: in a real life situation a wrongly made potion is dangerous. But what he does is of course completely wrong, a better way would for example be to make some sort of role play where the students knew it was a game, but still could imagine it to be a real life situation. I remember when I reread PoA I was somehow frustrated on Snape's behalf, because often the meaning of what he says makes complete sense, often he says the same thing as for example Lupin, but the way in which he says it is so completely wrong. Of course Harry won't listen to him. But maybe he just doesn't know how to say it in the right way. Snape is (almost?) never nice. Very few people seem to ever have been nice to him. It probably takes an effort of him to be nice, because he has not really ever learned how you do it, and then by experience he knows that it probably won't be worth that effort anyway.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 8, 2008 12:03 pm (#2322 of 2617)
he contributes to the victory much more than most of the "nice" characters (who are often not even so genuinely nice). - Julia H
Hm. I'm not sure I agree with this. I would say in a side-by-side comparision, Snape's specific contribution is no more significant than any one else's. Voldemort's downfall was definitely a team effort that required every player to "play their position".
After Snape killed DD, I became certain that he is in fact loyal to DD - Anna L Black
Me too. This was actually what convinced me that he was "Dumbledore's man" after all.
Reread the account of Harry's first potions class with Snape. I did this past week, and I was struck anew by Snape's complete unfairness and nastiness. - Solitaire
This is a very good point. I recall that when I first read Prof Trelawney's outburst (in HBP) that Prof Snape had been standing over her when she came out of her trance (during her interview with Dumbledore), Snape's "our new celebrity" remark was the first thing I thought of. What I mean is Snape taunts Harry for being kind of a diva (which, of course Harry isn't) knowing all the while that he, Snape, actually had something of a role in why Harry is so revered. That's messed up!
As much as I find Snape's behaviour towards Harry abusive and unfair, I can't blame him for behaving in a bitter and twisted way because he has had very bitter experiences and he can't relate to people in a proper way. It's nothing he can change by an act of sheer willpower because he is too damaged by his personal history. - Orion
This is an interesting comment as well. I actually disagree with the idea that Snape is simply unable to change. I believe that the only way anyone really can change is, first and foremost, because they choose to; then they take the steps to make that happen for themselves. Many many people have had miserable, even abusive, childhoods to overcome - even some people on this forum, I would imagine. Yet not every one who grows up in that kind of environment becomes a vicious serial killer - or a Death Eater. Snape chooses not to change, in my view. In addition, unlike Dumbledore, Snape is still a young man. It's not as if he is so set in his ways that he just can't embrace a new kind of living.
My question to Orion though is: if Snape is so "damaged" that he cannot change of his own accord, do you consider the character to have achieved the redemption the author claims for him?
I definitely agree, though, that Dumbledore should have had more of a handle on the whole Snape-Harry relationship, because I agree with Solitaire that Snape does seem to be stuck emotionally at about Harry's age. With this in mind, Dumbledore really let that whole thing go on far too long and with no real reason to do so.
When DD reveals that Harry will have to die, Snape is appalled, not because he thought he'd been protecting the Chosen One so he could defeat LV and live, but because he had been intending to keep Harry alive no matter what. - Wynnleaf
Another interesting point, one that I agree with.
What does Lupin mean when he says 'Sectumsempra was always a speciality of Snape's? - mona amon
I think Snape probably used this spell (or tried to) on the Marauders. The slashing spell he uses in the Worst Memory seems to be at least a rudimentary version of the Sectumsempra. In any case, it seems to have been immediately familiar to Lupin.
PeskyPixie - Jun 8, 2008 12:09 pm (#2323 of 2617)
Snape is in a state of arrested development when it comes to Harry (and his friends). He should not be teaching him to begin with, not until he has therapy with his problems, at least. I find myself agreeing with Zelmia's idea that Snape really begins to mature after Dumbledore's death, when he has to take responsibility for his own actions and answer to himself. In essence, he 'grows up' after his father figure dies.
Dryleaves - Jun 8, 2008 12:46 pm (#2324 of 2617)
Many many people have had miserable, even abusive, childhoods to overcome - even some people on this forum, I would imagine. Yet not every one who grows up in that kind of environment becomes a vicious serial killer - or a Death Eater. Snape chooses not to change, in my view. In addition, unlike Dumbledore, Snape is still a young man. It's not as if he is so set in his ways that he just can't embrace a new kind of living. (Quinn Crockett)
I both agree and not, I think. Being an unfair, abusive teacher and an unpleasant person is not the same as being a Death Eater. Snape leaves the DEs for DD and I also think he leaves the DE ideals, which means he does embrace a new kind of living. Then he still is unpleasant. As I wrote earlier I think Snape has a problem with being pleasant, that he doesn't really know how to and doesn't expect anyone to be nice back. But I also think that he doesn't really want anyone to be nice back either, as a punishment maybe, and therefore I think you are right when you say that he doesn't want to change.
I find myself agreeing with Zelmia's idea that Snape really begins to mature after Dumbledore's death, when he has to take responsibility for his own actions and answer to himself. (Pesky Pixie)
I think he changes earlier, but yes, I think something happens to him after DD's death and that he matures. One example is that he really tries to and manages to reach out to Harry and make Harry trust him (even if Harry doesn't know that the Silver Doe is Snape's patronus). He also dares to open up completely to Harry in his memories in order for Harry to trust the information they convey. This is a kind of maturity he hasn't got before, I think.
Orion - Jun 8, 2008 1:56 pm (#2325 of 2617)
Quinn, you asked whether I believe that Snape dies in a state of redemption. I'm not completely sure what redemption is (the translation doesn't help, either), but I guess that it means "does Snape die as a good guy, as an emotionally matured and integer person"? No, I think that Snape never really changes, that he dies glued to Lily's memory and to the memory of all the unfair tricks life has played on him, and he is still bitter and twisted in the moment of his last breath. I'd hate it if he was a reformed character or a (spit) hero.
And the epilogue stinks, IMO. What use is it for Snape that everybody knows that he was one of the good guys? He's dead.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 8, 2008 2:24 pm (#2326 of 2617)
I also think that he doesn't really want anyone to be nice back either, as a punishment maybe, and therefore I think you are right when you say that he doesn't want to change. - Dryleaves[I]
Oh very interesting! Do you think this is a sort of subconscious reaction or an actual conscious choice on his part?
Interesting too is the idea of Snape sort of "growing up" after Dumbledore's death. I can definitely see that. Actually, I think that process kind of started for him with the conversation about Dumbledore dying. Even though Snape had to get those few last digs into Harry, I think having the knowledge of Dumbledore's inevitable death hanging over his head (sword of Damocles, anyone?) must have had a very sobering effect.
Thanks for your response, Orion! I agree with you about the epilogue. It was pretty saccharin. Personally I am still on the fence about whether or not the author achieved her purpose for the character as far as redemption.
Julia H. - Jun 8, 2008 2:50 pm (#2327 of 2617)
Edited Jun 8, 2008 3:23 pm
Snape definitely changes, I think, and it implies that he wants to change. However, his change is not from "unpleasant" to "nice". I don't think he cares about being nice. The way he changes is much more important than that: from a DE he changes into a person who accepts responsibility for protecting other people's lives and who is willing to sacrifice everything that he has for the purpose of doing his duty. This is a great change in itself and this is why he deserves redemption in the end. (I am pro redemption and I think he becomes a hero or antihero or something - whatever - far above the ordinary. But I agree that the redemption issue is left ambiguous and open to individual interpretation and I don't like it.)
Not everybody with a miserable childhood becomes a serial killer. Well, nor does Snape. Yes, he becomes a DE but he is able to change. However, coming from a miserable, abusive childhood background does not make people especially nice either. And in Snape's case it is not only his family. Where would he have learned how to be nice? At home? Hardly. In Slytherin? It does not strike me as a warm and nice place. From the good guys in school? They attack him because he exists. From his teachers? There seems to be not one of them who really cares for him. From Lily? Yes, maybe, but she turns her back on him precisely when he is trying to be "nice" and is trying to apologise for being nasty. Among the DE's? Clearly not. When he returns to Hogwarts, he has a damaged personality and he is a profoundly unhappy person. He is also a marked person, who has a past that separates him from others. It may even be possible that his nastiness helps him "survive" a bit. A nicer, softer person might not be able to bear the knowledge of being "marked" and known as such in a community of respectable people. The self-punishment element that Dryleaves mentions is there too, IMO: Snape makes Harry hate him almost as if Harry knew the real reason why he should hate him; he avoids Azkaban but he isolates himself from people; he keeps his main guilt a secret from others but agrees to "roleplay" a crime that is bound to make him hated and despised probably more than the disclosure of his real guilt would have.
I agree that change is only possible for someone who wants it but wanting to change does not mean immediate change. Nor do I think that change will first be manifested on the surface. IMO it is more likely to happen deep down first and maybe in time appear on the surface as well.
Besides, Snape's life in Hogwarts is not a leisurely walk towards a new personality. He has to struggle with the shadows of his past all the time. Harry, Lupin, Sirius, DD himself, who likes to take the opportunity to remind him... Then Voldemort returns and the past returns as well. By this time he has changed considerably: his values and morals are different. However, he has to go back to LV and live through his past again. I don't think this helps him to be any nicer. The jobs he accepts are rather degrading on an everyday level, I think: Playing the faithful servant of someone like LV, adopting the language and the gestures of DE life, watching Charity Burbage die. These are all parts of the job. Yes, once he did these things voluntarily, I know. But now he has changed, his values and his mentality are different, yet he has to "bring back" his earlier self, the one he wants to leave behind, for the sake of successful acting. This is not merely acting on his part, there must be a sense of déjá vu attached to it and that is what makes it really degrading. Yet, whatever he experiences and whatever he goes through, he has to guard his present, better self and has to grow and mature still and in fact he does.
wynnleaf - Jun 8, 2008 3:33 pm (#2328 of 2617)
[I]Many many people have had miserable, even abusive, childhoods to overcome - even some people on this forum, I would imagine. Yet not every one who grows up in that kind of environment becomes a vicious serial killer - or a Death Eater. (Dryleaves)
Snape definitely changes, I think, and it implies that he wants to change. However, his change is not from "unpleasant" to "nice". (Julia)
Many people from miserable abusive childhoods don't grow up to be Death Eaters -- or terrorists in real life. On the other hand, Snape didn't stay a DE, so I don't think that can be used as evidence of not changing, but instead evidence of change. He grows to be a person unwilling to stand by and watch anyone die if he can save them. And this is during the time period of HBP, not after DD's death. He grows to be a person willing to put his life on the line for other people, even those he doesn't like. He grows to be willing to give up practically everything that ever mattered to him in order to do what was right -- even giving Harry info that he had to die, when Snape had worked years to keep him safe.
But he doesn't become nice.
Is becoming nice or outwardly kind the only sign of positive change, without which one must be deemed "unredeemed"? In my opinion, of course not! JKR, in her post-DH comments made it clear that she wanted Snape to be seen as having been redeemed. She said that she wanted there to be redemption. So regardless what our personal views of what makes redemption, JKR did want Snape to be redeemed.
Harry changes very little throughout the series. He is willing to die to save others, can't stand to see anyone die if he can save them, fights to defeat Voldemort, etc. How is he very different from Snape? Harry is mostly nice. But is Harry always kind, forgiving, etc? No, not always. Is he arrogant? Yes, often, and JKR has commented on that. Does he sometimes injure, torture, or hurt other people? Yes. Through bad judgment (Sirius, Tonks, Hermione at the Ministry in OOTP), vindictivness (examples might be Draco and his companions at the end of GOF and OOTP; Carrow in DH, Bella in OOTP, not to mention his petty desire to use sectumsempra on McClaggen even before he knew what it did), inconsiderate recklessness (the kids injured in the potions class in COS), and numerous other examples. But Harry is generally agreeable and nice, besides being the protagonist and we, the readers, generally feel comfortable with him regardless of how many people get injured, tortured, or even killed due to his actions.
wynnleaf - Jun 8, 2008 3:53 pm (#2329 of 2617)
I want to comment on my own post.
I'm not trying to get into a discussion about the relative merits of Harry's actions versus Snape's actions. But I think that at least we can look at the overall picture. In the entire series Harry does many, many highly questionable things and numerous things that are reckless, vindictive, etc. He does use Crucio or attempt it on several occasions. He and his friend hex Draco and friends into unconsciousness and leave them for many hours, walking over their bodies when they leave the train, at the end of GOF, when all Draco did was say mean and hateful things.
Yet I've never seen anyone, even people like me who will criticize Harry's actions, accuse Harry of being dark or unredeemed. Many people will accept practically anything Harry does under the banners of "his intentions were good" or "he did it to the bad guys." Whether or not those count as excusing his actions is debatable. But noteworthy to me is that we can get into deep discussions on this thread about whether or not Snape is a redeemed character, even after all that he did, and yet have no such questions about Harry regardless of what he did.
We don't actually know what bad stuff Snape did other than join the DEs and take the prophecy to LV. These were of course very wrong things, but it's not like he didn't have a huge amount of remorse about it and JKR has said that if he had it to do over, he wouldn't do it. We look for signs of remorse and question tears, attempts to change, risking his life to correct his actions, yet when Harry almost kills Draco and rather quickly moves from first remorse to how to hide evidence and how unfair the punishment is, we don't worry too much about it.
I really think the difference is that Harry is simply liked. Because we see things from his perspective and because we generally sympathize with him ("we" being almost all readers I think), it's very easy to keep considering him a good kid, regardless what bad choices he often makes.
And that gets me back to "nice." How important is it after all?
Solitaire - Jun 8, 2008 6:10 pm (#2330 of 2617)
if Snape was known to have used Sectumsempra in school, wouldn't he have been expelled
Not if no one squealed on him. I've always had the idea that Remus had not seen Snape since before the Potters died, so school seems the most logical place to have seen it. I could be wrong, but I'll find out soon enough. I'm rereading the entire series this summer and am in the middle of PoA.
It's nothing he can change by an act of sheer willpower because he is too damaged by his personal history.
This seems to directly contradict the idea that we all have the ability to make choices, a very prominent theme in the series. At some point in our lives, we all must become responsible for the choices we make. Snape chooses to be hateful to Harry.
that gets me back to "nice." How important is it after all?
I guess it depends on what you want out of life. Personally, I like people and want friends and family in my life.
As to Harry's bad choices, well, I still have to look at the fact that he was a kid and the worst of his mistakes are committed because information has been withheld from him. Then again, if he'd always acted with full knowledge of each situation, he probably wouldn't have done many of the things he did, and we wouldn't have a story. Harry's ignorance, misinformation, misunderstandings, and mistakes are almost required for the stories as we know them to exist.
Solitaire
Last edited by Mona on Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:27 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2331 to 2360
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:39 pm
tandaradei - Jun 8, 2008 7:41 pm (#2331 of 2617)
Perhaps I should have posted this in the DH Readalong, but it is essentially about Snape and my inability through 7 books to correctly judge him, so I’ll place it here for now. Jo said much in her commencement speech to Harvard which struck me as profound, and she writes with a speechmaker’s acumen; but I wanted to focus on one particular thing she said.
...[cut]...Imagination is not only the uniquely human capacity to envision that which is not, and therefore the fount of all invention and innovation. In its arguably most transformative and revelatory capacity, it is the power that enables us to empathize with humans whose experiences we have never shared....[cut]...
click here on: The Fringe Benefits of Failure, and the Importance of Imagination
I’m now wondering if Snape weren’t Jo’s “published thesis” for this philosophy. For me at least the “Prince’s Tale” in many ways proved HP’s most affecting chapter – the greatest surprise in the series, if you will. I quickly realized as I saw through Snape’s eyes that I had misjudged him badly – I had not “empathized” correctly with him, even as Jo lectured scant days ago. Part of this is Jo’s fault, of course. By employing a Third Person Limited persona in the series, I was prey to Harry’s judgments about Snape, and we all know how Harry felt, though excusably so. I did not agree with all those crazy “Snape lovers,” and now I will have to eat crow for the rest of my days; I see no other alternative. Harry’s prejudice became mine, even when such facts as the foe-mirror said otherwise; and I really do not think I could have adjusted my opinion of this teacher unless I were provided with a Pensieve and some actual Snape-thoughts.
This was an underwhelming moment for my ego, and now I fear I may have misjudged some teachers I had considered evil in my past.
Jo’s speech was worth hearing.
wynnleaf - Jun 8, 2008 8:55 pm (#2332 of 2617)
that gets me back to "nice." How important is it after all? (me)
My question didn't mean "how important is it to be nice in the process of making and keeping friends." I meant, how important is niceness in evaluating the character of another person, their redemptive aspects, their moral fiber, etc.? In my opinion, "nice" helps one make friends, but it does not determine character, nor the degree to which one may intentionally or inadvertently do harm.
As tandaradei's post implies, if we judge based on niceness, we may only catch the surface and miss the true character of others. That's what happens with Snape, in my opinion, as well as other characters in the series. Nice characters are given much more leeway to make mistakes and bad choices and still be loved by most readers. An unpleasant character is found to even be suspicious in his best actions.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 8, 2008 9:30 pm (#2333 of 2617)
However, coming from a miserable, abusive childhood background does not make people especially nice either. - Julia H
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I'm sure many of us can think of several people we have known (or know) who are "nice" people (i.e. loving, caring, thoughtful, kind, etc) but who had some pretty scary childhood abuse to overcome.
I personally don't think Snape's childhood was too much of a factor in his becoming a Death Eater. Nor do I think it has much to do with how he treats other people. I think Snape treats people the way he does, quite simply, because he doesn't have time for idiots. He doesn't have time, and he doesn't want to make the time, for anyone he deems unworthy of his respect/attention/consideration, etc. And this is almost everyone.
There is a very short list of people whom Snape genuinely respects, Dumbledore being at the very top.
I agree with Solitaire that it's a bit unfair to compare the choices of a teenager with those of a grown man. But I also understand what Wynnleaf is trying to say (I think ).
Personally, I think we can't discount "niceness" (in fiction, or in real life) precisely because (going back to Tandraei's post) being nice is the clearest and most immediate demonstration of the ability to empathize with others. In that respect, I think that whether or not a person is "nice" is indeed something to be considered when evaluating a person's character (either real or fictitious).
However, I don't think Hagrid or Harry (or others) being "nice" was the only reason they were so easily forgiven their transgressions. It was also because they genuinely felt terrible about the damage they caused. But, again, that kind of remorse can only come from the ability to empathize with others.
The interesting twist is that Voldemort recognizes that "being nice" is definitely important, particularly for establishing trust, and is able to capitalize on it for his nefarious purposes. Snape, on the other hand, never really gets the whole "being nice" thing the way someone like Lucius Malfoy does.
mona amon - Jun 8, 2008 9:42 pm (#2334 of 2617)
I don't think you answered my question. What should Snape have done? If you can't provide a better alternative, then Snape's action, which worked by the way, can't be faulted. (Wynnleaf)
I think he should not have interfered. That spell is shown to be potentially lethal, and he should not have risked hitting the good guys with it. He should have left Lupin to his fate. Or he should have accelerated a bit and bumped into the DE. That could be passed off as an accident.
Why do you say that Snape's action 'worked'? We can imagine if we want that Snape hitting George was what caused the DE to miss Lupin, but there is no evidence of it in the book. What is shown in the book is that Snape bungled his attempt at hitting the DE's wand hand with Sectumsempra and took off George's ear instead, and that Lupin was unharmed, but whether that was due to Snape's action or the DE's wobbly aim, we do not know.
If (and we don't know this) the spell used to cut James in the Worst Memory was sectumsempra, then it can clearly cause varying degrees of damage depending on what the caster wants. In that case, it would be the perfect spell to use, because Snape could call out "Sectumsempra" which sounds like he's using a seriously bad spell, but keep it reined in so that it's not so damaging, hit the Death Eater to distract him, and cause non-deadly damage to an Order member if one got hit accidently.
Since we have absolutely no evidence that the spell used to cut James was Sectumsempra (as you yourself have acknowledged) I don't think you can use it to prove your argument. From what we have seen of it, Sectumsempra is like a very long invisible sword. Even if Snape had learned to control it to a certain extent, he couldn't have much control of it when he was flying through the air on a broom, aiming at a moving target. Even one slash in a vital spot is enough to cause death due to bleeding.
Not sure who you meant by "you," but I don't agree.
The 'you' was of course Julia, whose post I quoted from and to whom I was replying. I went back and checked, and I've mentioned her name in brackets and everything.
It seems to me that you're saying that Snape's strategy was bad because you don't think it should have worked, and the fact that it did work (Lupin saved and George only hurt) was not to Snape's credit.
No I'm not. I'm saying it was bad strategy because it did not work, and wasn't very likely to have worked, since Snape was on a broom shooting at a moving target, and Lupin and George were in the line of his fire. Due to Snape's action George was hurt, and Lupin is shown to escaped but it is not demonstrated that it was a result of Snape's action.
Now to read the other posts.
ETA: With the risk of making you self-ignite , I must ask what you mean more exactly when you say that Harry's use of the Cruciatus Curse is OK, but not Snape's use of Sectumsempra? I can see if you don't like Sectumsempra, it is a horrible spell, but if Harry is in blind fury and Cruciatus is OK, couldn't you say that Snape is also in an agitated state with all the pressure he is under? (Dryleaves)
LOL about self igniting! Anyway I didn't say that Harry's use of Crucio and Sectumsempra were OK. I said he has to learn how to control himself and not use those spells. Snape on the other hand is already supposed to have learnt these lessons. Basically I was excusing Harry a little because of his youth.
wynnleaf - Jun 8, 2008 10:37 pm (#2335 of 2617)
However, I don't think Hagrid or Harry (or others) being "nice" was the only reason they were so easily forgiven their transgressions. It was also because they genuinely felt terrible about the damage they caused. But, again, that kind of remorse can only come from the ability to empathize with others. (Quinn)
I agree that Harry is remorseful about some things. He's sad that Sirius was killed in OOTP, but prefers to think only of the blame to others (Bella for killing Sirius or Snape for -- something), but he doesn't seem remorseful at all that he led other students into a trap (Hermione, as I recall, advised against the whole thing), or that they and Tonks nearly got killed. He's certainly not remorseful about any uses of Unforgivables. He is remorseful about using Sectumsempra on Draco, or at least he's shocked and upset at the damage, but within minutes he seems a lot more interested in hiding the potions book and later with bemoaning the unfairness of his punishment. I can't recall him ever being remorseful about the hexing of Draco and friends into unconsciousness in GOF or OOTP, much less leaving them injured for hours. I can't recall the slightest worry he had over the kids injured when the explosion he set off in Potions Class during COS injured others. He's unconcerned about Snape after he and his friends render him unconscious for a long time. Harry does feel badly about various and sundry things, but I don't think he actually feels much remorse for the things he specifically does, especially if they harm people he doesn't like.
However, it's a long series, I'm probably forgetting some things. I don't mean to say that Harry is never remorseful, but there's plenty of times when he does wrong things and we're shown no remorse or even regret on his part. And in general, this doesn't cause many people to wonder whether or not Harry was "unredeemed" or had some major flaw in his character.
By the way, this is similar to the Snape attempt to help out Lupin. Whether or not Snape made a mistake in attempting to save Lupin, why would it be considered wrong to try to help Lupin? Snape was supposed to make a split second decision, the moment he saw a Death Eater aiming for Lupin, that it was more dangerous to try to stop the DE from killing Lupin than to let the DE go ahead and try to kill him and hope that the DE would miss? So that shows Snape's poor moral fiber? But Harry can make a considered decision (not split second), complete with advice to the contrary, to go into danger, trailed by his friends, resulting in the death of one person and serious injury of several others, but it's not seen as a problem with his character, but great because he's trying to save someone (Sirius).
I don't mean that you, mona amon, think it was okay for Harry to do that, but I'm pointing out the difference in the way the two characters are viewed.
That spell is shown to be potentially lethal. (mona amon)
Well, actually, we're not necessarily shown that Draco was dying. Lots of blood, yes, but of course there was load of water on the floor as well, so it's hard to say just how much blood he lost. Like I pointed out before, it's not like the spell cut him completely open. And we're specifically told Harry was waving rather wildly. And only George's ear was cut off, so it's not at all possible to garner from that whether the DE would have been killed or even maimed, or whether any other person might have been killed by the spell. For that matter, it seems likely that Snape would not have wanted to kill the DE, and therefore probably wasn't using the spell in such a way as to kill anyone, whoever it hit.
Most of all though, battle is unpredictable and most combatants aren't out there picking and choosing and making considered and careful decisions, not once the battle is engaged. It's instinct and training. Snape saw Lupin under attack and immediately attempted to thwart the attack. The idea that Snape shouldn't be firing in such a way as to risk hitting an Order member is odd, since of course Snape would be expected to be firing toward the Order members, even if he might in general be attempting to miss.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 8, 2008 11:45 pm (#2336 of 2617)
Hm. I think you make some fair points, Wynnleaf. However, I simply don't agree with comparing the actions and decisions of a character who is only a child for at least a third of the series, and then just a teenager for the rest of it, with those of a character who is an adult throughout. While Harry is very mature in some areas of his life, he is absolutely at age level (I would even say below regarding girls) in many others.
Julia H. - Jun 9, 2008 1:30 am (#2337 of 2617)
Edited Jun 9, 2008 2:05 am
Interesting discussion.
I really do not think I could have adjusted my opinion of this teacher unless I were provided with a Pensieve and some actual Snape-thoughts. (tandaradei)
I do think a Pensieve and a journey into other people's thoughts and experiences would sometimes be useful in real life - to see the human side of our enemy or the secret sorrows of our friend and to understand them better.
Yes, Harry is a kid and a teenager. Snape was also once a kid and a teenager (he is one even when he joins LV) and it seems a bad choice - choosing Slytherin - at the age of 11 and apparently without really knowing what he is choosing turns him into someone needing redemption for the rest of his life.
About being nice: Quinn, I did not say that it is impossible to be nice after a miserable childhood, I only said that it does not make a person nice, at least I don't think so. What I see as a major problem in Snape's childhood is too little love. He seems to be neglected and alone. We don't know whether his agressive-looking father actually beats him or not but if a child does not feel to be loved by anyone (and his mother does not seem to be giving him too much love either), it is enough to hurt the child for life. Besides, Petunia's reaction to his odd clothes and poor address is probably not unique. Yes, there is Lily, whose acceptance is very important to him. I have read posts saying practically that Snape after all has a loving and kind friend who accepts him with all his faults, so he should not complain. I don't think it is that simple. The very fact that Lily remains so important to him for the rest of his life shows IMO how little acceptance and love he generally gets. He is about nine years old when he meets Lily. What was before that? Besides, a child cannot get from another child what he should get from an adult. It is simply not the same thing. Snape does not love or respect a lot of people, it is true, but he does not get a lot of love or respect himself either. (LOL, that was an understatement.) Sure, there might be people who become nice in spite of that but I am not surprised at those who do not.
Does Snape's family background influence his decision to become a DE?
I don't know what Jo's answer would be. However, I know what psychologists say when they advise parents how to protect their children from hanging out with the wrong sort of "friends" when they, the parents, cannot be close by any more. The answer is basically this: If a child gets enough love and respect and can experience quality relationships and the feeling of being valued at home, he or she later, as a teenager or young adult, will expect the same quality of relationships regarding his/her friends, partners etc. If the child does not experience love and respect (etc.) at home, (s)he will be much more likely to accept degrading relationships, to join gangs, to start using drugs or to do anything to be accepted or tolerated by others at all. To a large extent, it is a question of emotional security and self-esteem. IMO young Snape is a perfect example of this.
Regarding other nice people: I think the HP books teach a fairly good lesson about the veneer of niceness. Snape is not nice but is ultimately good. However, there are quite a few "nice" characters who are not good at all. Quirrell is nice and shy and respectful, yet he intends to kill and to steal. Lockhart is simply "charming" () but he turns out to have been robbing people from their memories and knowledge and achievements. Even Umbridge can put on seeming niceness, though she is sadistic. Fudge is usually nice but his character is far from being admirable. Bagman is nice but he is capable of stealing form kids when he needs money very much. Rita Skeeter can appear to be very nice and so can Lucius. Yes, niceness can be a way of expressing how you value other people but it is just as good a way to gain advantages for yourself. Besides, if someone is willing to risk his life and soul to save others, that amply makes up for the lack of outward niceness in my eyes and I might even risk saying that it may be a way of showing that you do value other people.
Solitaire, I think choices are very important but can you say that everything is a matter of personal choice? Can you really choose to like someone you do not like? Can you really choose to change the bitterness in you if it is there and with good reason? Can you choose to do things that need to be learned first if you have never been taught them? I think one of the purposes of families and education is to broaden the possibilities of personal choice by giving chances, knowledge, values, examples and so on.
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 7:15 am (#2338 of 2617)
Snape, as a teenager, is so similar to the many Muggle teens who choose a wrong path in life due to a lack of a stable and loving family and the resulting desire to gain acceptance among friends who may not be the best influences. Personally, I was the 'straight as an arrow' kid who never made choices I now repent. However, I understand that my ability to know myself so well is greatly a result of the love, support, stability and acceptance my family provided for me. I feel that my ability to be empathetic and compassionate are also influenced by the examples I've had throughout life. Being so blessed I am even more aware of how the lack of all of these elements in a young person's life can really confuse them about their own identity and set them up for trouble. Of course, not everyone is a Snape. Some people are naturally strong enough to overcome any obstacle on their own. Still, I find it highly unfair to ignore a young man's emotionally impoverished background when judging him for the bad choices he has made in life, especially when he is trying to overcome his mistakes to the best of his ability.
Yes, Harry also feels unwanted for ten years of his life, but he knows that these two morons are his aunt and uncle and they only have him because his own parents are dead. He can make any fantasy up about his parents, and by age eleven he once again has positive influences in his life who reassure him of how dear he is to his deceased parents.
In comparison we have young Severus whose feelings of unwantedness (I think I just invented a word ) are from his own parents. With the exception of Lily (who is in a different House) we don't see anyone take a positive interest in him. Thus, while Harry may naturally be a more 'good' individual than Snape, I do feel for Snape whose life-altering choices as a teen are probably nothing more than the result of confusion about self-identity.
Oh, and I am not all that sold on 'niceness' as a means of understanding another person. Those of you who visit the Chat and Greeting thread may know of my childhood 'friend' Gigi. Well, if you were to meet both of us in person, she may come across as the 'nicer' one while I may be judged as more standoffish as I am a young woman with my own thoughts and opinions and I'm just not the gushing type (unless there's something in it for me ). However, the moment you need help with something, Gigi will be the first one to kiss you on both cheeks and take off while I'm the one who'll stand beside you as long as you need support. By the way, Gigi's 'niceness' has earned her many, many 'friends'. I have only a few, but I stand by them ferociously.
Steve Newton - Jun 9, 2008 8:33 am (#2339 of 2617)
I was listening to HBP this morning on the way to work and wondered (Yes, I know how dangerous that can be.) Did Snape really want to teach DADA and not potions or was that just a cover story?
If this is already a well beaten subject please feel free to ignore.
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 8:44 am (#2340 of 2617)
I've wondered that as well, Steve. Do Dumbledore and Snape ever discuss this matter? or does Snape fill out an application each year and Dumbledore just slips it to the bottom of his pile and pretends that he lost it? The two certainly seem close enough that in private Snape would be bold enough to confront Dumbledore about it if it had not already been discussed.
Julia H. - Jun 9, 2008 8:45 am (#2341 of 2617)
Great post, Pesky (2338), you have said it all so well!
I'll go back to the question if Snape should interfere or just watch what happens when Lupin is attacked:
Our debates about reformed Snape’s specific actions sometimes remind me of the tale in which the miller, his son and their donkey are going to the marketplace. They are all walking happily when they meet a man who mentions how stupid it is to walk when one has a donkey. Good advice. Next, the miller is riding the donkey, his son is walking. The next man they meet says how cold-hearted a father the miller must be, sitting comfortably while that poor child is walking. All right, the miller and the son change places. But then the next passer-by says it is wrong that the young one is riding while the old one is walking. So next both the miller and the son are riding but only as far as the next person they meet, since that one turns out to be sorry for the poor donkey having to carry two people. The miller and the son end up arriving at the marketplace carrying the donkey. Of course, everyone laughs at them.
It seems whatever Snape does, there will be something we can point out that he should have done differently.
Snape tries to save Lupin by attacking a DE in the middle of the battle. Lupin survives – we don’t know how – but Snape’s decision is wrong because he injures someone else. The other option mentioned is that Snape does not interfere, just hopes that Lupin will survive somehow. The fact is that we don’t know what would happen then, since we don’t know it either whether Snape’s action does not affect the DE somehow to start with. (For example, the DE may hear Snape shouting and he may turn or lean aside, so as not to be hit “accidentally” and that may be the reason why he does not hit Lupin.) So as far as we can tell or as far as Snape can tell in that split second when he brings his decision, watching what happens without interfering would be at least as much taking chances as actually trying to save Lupin.
Imagine Snape does not try to save Lupin. Suppose Lupin dies but even if he – accidentally – survives, what will we be doing next? I bet we would be debating now whether Snape is careful, like Harry, or whether he is a coward or whether he still hates Lupin so much that he does not lift a finger to save him when he could. (Of course, unlike in Harry’s case, we would not be told by JKR why he does not try.) Something similar applies to using a different spell. Which is worse, having someone bleed to death or stunning him off the broomstick high up in the air? Both are bad like most of the stuff that happens in battle and the difference seems to be a bit too fine to me. When I come to think of it: if someone bleeds very much high up in the air, he will probably fall off the broomstick long before he bleeds to death unless he gets help, as George does. But Snape might give the DE this help as well as the spell that stops the bleeding. Luckily, nobody bleeds to death and again we don’t really know whether Snape has had any intention to kill at all. So there is the benefit of doubt at least and otherwise, well, this is a battle and Snape and the DE are on two different sides.
I don’t know what JKR intended to show us but I very much suspect at least that the message of the scene is likely to be the following: Snape tries to save Lupin’s life, supporting his statement that he will not watch people die when he can save them (which may indicate that he would not have let the DE die either, I don’t know). Snape is willing to take risks to save a fellow Order member or a fellow human being even if they are not friends at all. (That can be a reference to how much he has changed since the time when he only wanted to save his friend. Lupin, like James, is a Marauder.) Snape is doing his best to support the good side even in his isolation. The scene is also there to counterbalance the scene of Charity’s death: to show us that in that scene, Snape’s reason for not doing anything is indeed that there is nothing he could do to save her. None of these would be implied if Snape were careful and – like Harry – did not do anything to save Lupin. However, he has to make a mistake and injure someone simply because at the beginning of the book, JKR needs more red herrings about Snape’s true loyalties.
EDIT: Good question, Steve, difficult to answer.
EDIT: Regarding how Lupin knows about Sectumsempra: What I can imagine is that student Snape, being the Marauders' favourite target, gave a little demonstration to them of what he could do. (Some time after the Worst Memory Scene would be a convenient or likely time for him to do that.) I am sure no ears were lost in the demonstration and no other lasting harm was done (or we would know) but Snape may have wanted to warn them to leave him alone. And I guess they did not leave him alone...
mona amon - Jun 9, 2008 9:23 am (#2342 of 2617)
Edited Jun 9, 2008 10:07 am
Did Snape really want to teach DADA and not potions or was that just a cover story? (Steve)
I think we did discuss it once, but I don't remember the discussion or what conclusions we came to. My own opinion is that he did want to teach DADA very much. LV was only interested in having a spy at Hogwarts. What subject he was teaching wouldn't have bothered him. But Snape repeatedly asks DD for the DADA post.
Whether or not Snape made a mistake in attempting to save Lupin, why would it be considered wrong to try to help Lupin? (Wynnleaf)
I don't think anyone here said that it was wrong to try and save Lupin. Only that he made a mistake.
Well, actually, we're not necessarily shown that Draco was dying. Lots of blood, yes, but of course there was load of water on the floor as well, so it's hard to say just how much blood he lost. Like I pointed out before, it's not like the spell cut him completely open.
It says 'blood spurted from Draco's face and chest...', which definitely sounds as if arteries were severed. If Snape hadn't burst in to the rescue, Draco would very likely have died of rapid blood loss before the shocked Harry could collect his wits. Deep surface cuts are enough to cause severe bleeding. Snape's spell was strong enough to slice off George's ear, so it could have caused deep cuts if it had hit some other part of him. I stand by what I said. It was a potentially lethal spell.
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 9:34 am (#2343 of 2617)
Sectumsempra is a nasty spell, a potential killing spell unless Snape happens to hang around to sing you back to health.
I'd love to learn it though!
Solitaire - Jun 9, 2008 9:43 am (#2344 of 2617)
Even if Snape had learned to control it to a certain extent, he couldn't have much control of it when he was flying through the air on a broom, aiming at a moving target. That would seem to be the strongest argument against using it in such a situation, IMO.
I agree, Quinn, that being nice can mask devious motives. In fact, most adults I know have been taken in by at least one such person by the time they hit their 20s or 30s. Often, though, the person who is putting on the "nice act" is unable to sustain it and winds up blowing an emotional fuse when his patience is stretched too far without achieving his ends.
he led other students into a trap I thought Harry attempted to discourage the others from coming--since he believed that Voldemort had Sirius--but they insisted on accompanying him.
And only George's ear was cut off Ouch! If it were my ear that had been "disconnected" from my head, I probably wouldn't see it as an "only" kind of injury, especially since it apparently can't be grown back like Harry's bones were. And since Snape wasn't there to "sing" the wounds closed, how did he know that George wouldn't bleed to death? (edit: I see Pesky mentioned this, too.)
Snape was also once a kid and a teenager (he is one even when he joins LV) and it seems a bad choice It's interesting, though, that Lily seemed to understand the implications of his choice, even though she was no older than he was. She had also proven herself to be his friend over the years, so he knew her concerns and comments were genuine.
Solitaire, I think choices are very important but can you say that everything is a matter of personal choice? Can you really choose to like someone you do not like? Can you really choose to change the bitterness in you if it is there and with good reason? Julia, I can address this point with you in email, if you like. I do not think I really can do it here, since my beliefs about these things have their roots in my faith. And while it is not easy, yes ... I do think one can do all of the things you have mentioned, based on my own personal experience.
Can you choose to do things that need to be learned first if you have never been taught them? I think one of the purposes of families and education is to broaden the possibilities of personal choice by giving chances, knowledge, values, examples and so on. Harry certainly had experienced no real examples of generosity, caring, or making good choices when he arrived at Hogwarts (with the exception of Hagrid). At the hands of the Dursleys he'd experienced only selfishness, cruelty, deprivation, favoritism, and other negative values. Yet he seems--more often than not and in spite of his blundering, mistakes, and wrong choices--to ultimately want to make good choices.
I think Harry and Snape show us two of the many things that can happen to people who grow up in terribly adverse family situations. Some kids will allow the injuries and evils of their childhoods to turn them into miserable, evil people. Others, like Snape, will rise above their misfortunes and move ahead, after some bumps in the road ... but they seem to close themselves off to any real joy, perhaps from fear of rejection. Then there are those like Harry, who seem to long for the opposite of what they left behind. We do know that Harry longed for that happiness and embraced it, despite the fact that he'd had a childhood that was probably as miserable as Snape's AND he'd been kept away from any knowledge of who he truly was. I agree that we cannot know what Snape thought when he saw happy and loving families like the Weasleys. Perhaps it was regret that the path he had chosen had cost him the love, or at least the friendship, of the only woman he'd ever loved. Just thoughts ...
Edit: One thing I find so sad ... we learn that Snape seemed to really know Lily and have a genuine friendship with her. He could have helped Harry to know his mother in a way no one else was able to do.
Solitaire
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 9:48 am (#2345 of 2617)
"I think Harry and Snape show us two of the many things that can happen to people who grow up in terribly adverse family situations." -Solitaire
I think we need Tom Riddle Jr. (AKA Mouldy Voldy) to complete this example. The three of them demonstrate three different outcomes of a neglected childhood. Harry and Tom are extremes at opposite ends of the spectrum while Snape struggles in the middle, trying his best to overcome his shortcomings.
Still, are there differences in the neglect the three boys respectively experience which subtly influences the choices they make? Or is it all genetic?
Solitaire - Jun 9, 2008 9:50 am (#2346 of 2617)
I don't know, Pesky ... sometimes it seems evil really does live in the bones, doesn't it?
Julia H. - Jun 9, 2008 11:00 am (#2347 of 2617)
I think Harry and Snape show us two of the many things that can happen to people who grow up in terribly adverse family situations. Some kids will allow the injuries and evils of their childhoods to turn them into miserable, evil people. Others, like Snape, will rise above their misfortunes and move ahead, after some bumps in the road ... but they seem to close themselves off to any real joy, perhaps from fear of rejection. Then there are those like Harry, who seem to long for the opposite of what they left behind. (Solitaire)
I agree, Solitaire. I also agree with Pesky when she says:
I think we need Tom Riddle Jr. (AKA Mouldy Voldy) to complete this example. The three of them demonstrate three different outcomes of a neglected childhood. Harry and Tom are extremes at opposite ends of the spectrum while Snape struggles in the middle, trying his best to overcome his shortcomings.
The three "abandoned boys". This is precisely why I find the Snape character very, very important. We have the two extremes, the good (Harry) and the bad (Riddle) but Snape proves that there is a way to change even after the initial bad choices. Without him the picture would be neither full nor true. Some of the results may be genetically determined: choices are important but so are parents in HP. James and Lily come from families where children are liked and well-cared for. They love each other and their child. Riddle's parents are married without real love and are soon separated. (The significance of love potion.) Furthermore, Merope's father is abusive, who certainly cannot teach his children what real love and families are like. We don't know much about Snape's parents only that they argue but apparently do not divorce and they do not exactly abandon, "only" neglect their child. But besides genetics, I can mention still one thing that makes Harry's situation better: we know that he was loved and cared for at the beginning of his life. Even if he did not remember it later, as a baby, he did experience the feeling of being loved and valued and important, probably adored. This experience is what is needed for a child to be friends with himself (herself) later, without which there is no self-esteem and is difficult to find real friends. Snape seems to have lacked that. He cannot reach out towards people (except for Lily once and when in great distress, he turns to DD) but we see that when he does get love and appreciation, as from Lily, it means the whole world to him even after they are separated and the friendship is long over. DD is good to him and with this he wins Snape's unconditional, unchanging loyalty. True, Snape is bound to DD by his promise but my feeling is that his loyalty and obedience to him goes way beyond the force of his promise and shows how much he must have longed for acceptance (without knowing how to be "nice enough" to win it) and how grateful he can be when he finally gets it from someone and how much he will do to keep/deserve it.
E-mails are welcome, Solitaire.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 9, 2008 11:33 am (#2348 of 2617)
I think the HP books teach a fairly good lesson about the veneer of niceness. Snape is not nice but is ultimately good. However, there are quite a few "nice" characters who are not good at all. - Julia
Oh, and I am not all that sold on 'niceness' as a means of understanding another person. - Pesky Pixie
I'm afraid I'm not sure I understand what point either of you are making.
I find it highly unfair to ignore a young man's emotionally impoverished background when judging him for the bad choices he has made in life, especially when he is trying to overcome his mistakes to the best of his ability. - Pesky Pixie
Personally, I'm not ignoring Snape's childhood. I'm simply disagreeing with the amount of importance others are placing on it.
I believe it is established in OP, during his interview with Umbridge, that Snape did indeed wish to teach DADA but was given Potions.
Dryleaves - Jun 9, 2008 12:10 pm (#2349 of 2617)
...but Snape proves that there is a way to change even after the initial bad choices. Without him the picture would be neither full nor true. (Julia)
I would also say that Snape is the one of the three who actually gets a full and true picture. Harry's and Voldemort's childhoods are more allegorical. The Dursleys are caricatures and even if neglect and abuse exists even in places like Privet Drive, I think it ought to be hard to keep up appearances like the Dursleys do when you so obviously treat your children differently. We never really see how Harry keeps his hope up or how Voldemort becomes a sociopat. Even if we don't get to know that much about Snape's home background I still feel that his story is realistic and the best explained. (That is why I feel puzzled when JKR speaks about Snape in post DH interviews, because in the books she took care to give him this credible background and a plausible psychological explanation of why he is like he is, and made him a very real, human character, but in the interviews she just dismisses him as merely a brave bully, or something like that.)
Then just a note on being nice. People can be nice as a mask, but genuinely nice people can also do serious damage. A person very close to me is a really nice person, with a big, warm heart that truly beats for his family and friends and he is always ready to help and be of service when someone needs it. So ready that he often promises more than he can actually keep, and apart from the fact that this behaviour can make people really disappointed, it has also put people in real trouble because they trusted and relied on him, and these situations have been solved only through sheer luck or through the intervention by others. But he has also helped a lot of people when he really was able to, so his "niceness" is not a mask, just combined with too great a wish to please and to be liked by others and too optimistic an opinion of what he actually can handle. So I would consider it a virtue of Snape's that he actually does what he promises to do. Snape has many good sides, that never seem to be acknowledged by others, they only see his faults. And I don't think it is fair to only blame Snape himself for this. Snape is not the only one who sees only what he wants to see.
Soul Search - Jun 9, 2008 12:12 pm (#2350 of 2617)
On the question of Snape and the DADA job.
We have kicked this around, but there does not seem to be any defining canon. We do know that the DADA job had been cursed ever since Voldemort's visit to Dumbledore. The curse had been in place long enough for Dumbledore to figure out the job was cursed before he hired Snape.
The idea that Dumbledore thought Snape may resort to his DE days if he taught DADA is ridiculous, Dumbledore trusted Snape completely, so that must have been a ruse to justify why Dumbledore did not give Snape the job. The real reason would have told Voldemort Dumbledore knew the job was cursed.
Snape, no doubt, would have been pleased to teach DADA, and likely rather capable doing it, but Dumbledore couldn't risk losing him. Snape had to have known about the curse on the job, but supported the ruse.
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 12:18 pm (#2351 of 2617)
I think Harry and Snape show us two of the many things that can happen to people who grow up in terribly adverse family situations. Some kids will allow the injuries and evils of their childhoods to turn them into miserable, evil people. Others, like Snape, will rise above their misfortunes and move ahead, after some bumps in the road ... but they seem to close themselves off to any real joy, perhaps from fear of rejection. Then there are those like Harry, who seem to long for the opposite of what they left behind. We do know that Harry longed for that happiness and embraced it, despite the fact that he'd had a childhood that was probably as miserable as Snape's AND he'd been kept away from any knowledge of who he truly was. (Solitaire)
Yes, I very much agree. But I'd add that Harry longing for that happiness is something that's there from early childhood. We don't see him make a conscious decision at age 10 or 11 or later to embrace the desire for something he can't recall, but did once have. It appears to me to be somewhere in his imagination or early buried memories where he is sure that his parents weren't the awful people the Dursleys claimed, and loved him and wanted him. So what he'd like to get back is what he feels he lost -- a family that loves him. So we can see the psychological roots of Harry's desire.
Snape, on the other hand, has no such past, as far as we're shown, however far back in his childhood that he'd like to reclaim. He can't imagine the parents or family that loved him, but was torn from him. He knows that his parents neglect him and probably worse (especially his father). So he has no particular hopes or dreams of reclaiming something he lost. My guess is that a person in that position is more likely to grow up believing that such things, love, the concern and care of others, is simply not something they "deserve" or can obtain. So until Lily, who is only a child and not attempting to nurture Snape after all, Snape has no one to care about him. But by age 9, one's personality and a great deal of inner psychological roots that drive us are already set.
Quinn, the point about niceness is to question whether we should use the fact that Snape is definitely not nice, often unpleasant, sarcastic, insulting and sometimes downright verbally cruel, as THE telling point to decide whether he's a "redeemed" character. In other words, if you stack up all the good he does, his remorse, his changing in various areas, does that still not make him a morally redeemed character, because, regardless what else he's done, he's still not nice?
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 12:35 pm (#2352 of 2617)
"Personally, I'm not ignoring Snape's childhood. I'm simply disagreeing with the amount of importance others are placing on it." -Quinn Crockett
Interesting. I felt that through the use of the Pensieve, Harry's reverse Legilimency and The Prince's Tale, JKR attempts to show the reader why Snape is the way he is and also why he makes certain choices in life. He is deeply flawed, but there's some reason behind it.
As for the 'niceness' argument, the original point (made by wynnleaf, I believe, but I may be incorrect) was that we often easily forgive the mistakes of characters/people who are 'nice' while those who are not as appealing on the surface are often doubted even when their actions are attempts at being noble. For example, we excuse Hagrid for the many times he leads Harry into danger, but Snape tries to save Lupin and we jump all over him. Hagrid's good intentions overcome even his most disastrous blunders, while even 'the best' of Snape is questioned because he is not nice.
Orion - Jun 9, 2008 1:14 pm (#2353 of 2617)
"It appears to me to be somewhere in his imagination or early buried memories where he is sure that his (Harry's) parents weren't the awful people the Dursleys claimed, and loved him and wanted him. So what he'd like to get back is what he feels he lost -- a family that loves him." (wynnleaf)
The first year is the decisive one. A child who is loved well and knows that help will always come and is cuddled and sung to and never left alone, feels secure for life, is able to feel empathy, can relate to other people in a positive way, and so on. So Harry has a corner in his soul where the memory of love is stored and the ablility of love grows from.
You cannot over-estimate the influence of a person's youth. There are very resilient children who grow up to be admirable people although they had terrible childhoods, so there seems to be a genetic disposition as well. IMO a bad childhood is a very good excuse for being a nasty adult, and for making bad choices in life. You can't choose your family, and you can't choose your genes (which is the same thing, but family and genes influence you in different ways.) You can't expect someone to be one of the rare resilient personalities, because you have to be born like that.
Edited because I messed up a sentence.
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 1:27 pm (#2354 of 2617)
"You can't expect someone to be one of the rare resilient personalities ..." -Orion
Yes, that's what I meant, Orion. There are people who are remarkable examples of 'goodness' and are resilient enough to overcome any obstacle which crosses their path. However, it's unfair to expect all children to be equal and (if Severus and Harry were the same age) to yank Sev into a corner and reprimand him for not being as resilient and sweet as Harry.
Julia H. - Jun 9, 2008 1:33 pm (#2355 of 2617)
Edited Jun 9, 2008 2:57 pm
Especially, as it seems, because Harry does have something to grasp and to cling to (the experience of his first year and the "memory" of his good parents). I think the whole of the series could be analyzed on the basis of family relationships, most of all parent and child relationships and their consequences.
EDIT: The DADA job: Snape does a few things that most people would not do but I still find it a bit hard to believe that he wanted a cursed job so much, although I can believe that he otherwise would have liked to teach DADA (and he may have been appalled by the kind of people who occasionally ended up teaching this important subject). DD did not give Snape the job because he did not want to lose him and I guess (hope) Snape realized that. It seems to be canon that he applied for the job regularly (Umbridge knew about it) but it may have been a ruse, as Soul Search said, something intended to deceive Voldemort. It is not really logical, knowing the relationship between DD and Snape, that he would have applied repeatedly when DD clearly told him no. It may be worth noting that in The Prince's Tale it does not seem to be an issue between DD and Snape (which may or may not be significant). Another piece of information we have is that it is mentioned by Hagrid and in connection with Lockhart that he (Lockhart) was the only applicant for the DADA job that year. It seems Hagrid does not know about Snape applying. It is repeatedly implied in the books (through Harry's opinion) that Snape is jealous of other DADA teachers but, as my 10-year-old daughter noticed, he always has other reasons to dislike the DADA teachers. Quirrell is being suspected and rightly so, Lockhart is generally disliked by his colleagues (no wonder), Lupin is a Marauder, Fake Moody is nasty to Snape and Umbridge is Umbridge. Snape mentions his "DADA problem" to Bellatrix but that may only indicate that it was indeed just acting to strengthen LV's trust in Snape.
EDIT2: Maybe we should focus on whether or not Snape learned empathy, even for someone whom he did not necessarily respect or like. (Quinn)
Well, perhaps we need a working definition for the word first so that we should not confuse empathy with being nice, so that we should make it clear that this time we are talking about something else than before. While I don't want to give this definition, I'd like to note that IMO one important difference between empathy and being nice is that niceness is a surface phenomenon which may cover various things deep down (as various posters noted); while empathy is essentially inside, a psychological skill or something similar, which can probably have various surface manifestations. What follows is that this may be more difficult to decide than the question whether Snape is nice (he is clearly not) because we never see his feelings and thoughts directly. We can only interpret his actions. To start with, I would say Snape's general "saving-people-thing" in the last years of his life may indicate the presence of empathy, since wanting to save others (and not only friends) from death or torture implies that he can feel for these people if they are killed or tortured. He also seems to understand the Malfoys' predicament even though they are on different sides with different goals.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 9, 2008 1:52 pm (#2356 of 2617)
Edited Jun 9, 2008 2:39 pm
Quinn, the point about niceness is to question whether we should use the fact that Snape is definitely not nice, often unpleasant, sarcastic, insulting and sometimes downright verbally cruel, as THE telling point to decide whether he's a "redeemed" character. In other words, if you stack up all the good he does, his remorse, his changing in various areas, does that still not make him a morally redeemed character, because, regardless what else he's done, he's still not nice? - Wynnleaf
Thank you. With that in mind, I think that maybe we're just getting too caught up in the word "nice". Maybe we should focus on whether or not Snape learned empathy, even for someone whom he did not necessarily respect or like. To me, any remorse he might feel rests entirely on that.
I agree that the Snape character is the most three-dimensional of just about all the HP characters. I would say that Ron is equally so.
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 3:20 pm (#2357 of 2617)
Maybe we should focus on whether or not Snape learned empathy, even for someone whom he did not necessarily respect or like. To me, any remorse he might feel rests entirely on that. (Quinn)
Empathy is a tricky word and before we discuss it, we'd better be more or less on the same page.
Empathy is not, for instance, the same thing as sympathy nor is it the same as compassion.
Here's a definition: "Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives." You may find other definitions that fit how you view the word a little better.
Having recently had to deal with a real-life extreme narcissist including characteristics of psychopathy (not a criminal, though), I recently looked up quite a bit on the subject. As I see it, Tom Riddle is a criminal psychopath. Psychopaths, as a characteristic of the disorder, do not feel remorse or compassion. They do however, experience a kind of empathy. They are able to read other people very, very well and learn from them how others will react to this or that action. This is how many psychopaths learn how to appeal to others, even though they have no true care or concern for others.
They do not feel sympathy, which is: The act or power of sharing the feelings of another. And/or, a feeling or an expression of pity or sorrow for the distress of another; compassion or commiseration.
Does Snape have empathy for others? Probably a normal amount. He can read other people fairly well, but his biases often get in the way. That's typical. Does Snape have sympathy for others? That's more questionable, in my opinion. I think his empathy seems to reflect a deeper caring, perhaps sympathy (not in the "pity" aspect), in situations such as his concern for Ginny in COS, or for Dumbledore over the ring curse.
The huge difference between a psychopath (and Riddle is one) and others is the ability to feel true remorse. Psychopaths may regret getting into a particular situation, but they don't feel remorse. Snape does feel remorse, and there's the point of change. Note that in DH, at the end, Harry gives Voldemort the opportunity for remorse and LV doesn't take it. Probably he can't, because he's a psychopath and it's more or less hard-wired into him to be as he is.
To give an opposite example, a person in the autistic spectrum has a very, very difficult time "reading" other people, which causes them to be very weak on empathy. Yet these same people have the same emotions as anyone else and they feel compassion, can care for others, sympathy (in terms of pity or sadness for others) etc. and they can certainly feel remorse. Yet they may have very little empathy.
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 5:07 pm (#2358 of 2617)
Wow, wynnleaf, and all this time I assumed that empathy included the ability to be compassionate and sympathetic. I've learned something new today.
Solitaire - Jun 9, 2008 5:33 pm (#2359 of 2617)
"Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives" and
Does Snape have empathy for others? Probably a normal amount. He can read other people fairly well, but his biases often get in the way.
I found the following definition of empathy online: the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner.
Do you think Snape identifies with or is sensitive to Harry's thoughts and feelings? I don't see that at all--until the end of DH, that is--but perhaps I'm forgetting something. His legilimency certainly allows him to know some of the things Harry is thinking, but that would seem to be a different thing.
Solitaire
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 6:48 pm (#2360 of 2617)
Do you think Snape identifies with or is sensitive to Harry's thoughts and feelings? I don't see that at all--until the end of DH, that is--but perhaps I'm forgetting something. His legilimency certainly allows him to know some of the things Harry is thinking, but that would seem to be a different thing. (Solitiare)
Oh, by no means! I quite agree that Snape isn't particularly identifying or sensitive toward Harry at all. Well.... he is sensitive to Harry in a negative way. That is, he recognizes when Harry is trying to be rebellious toward him. For instance, an person with aspergers might, lacking in empathy, might not recognize Harry's "there's no need to call me 'sir'" as a rebellious remark, or many other of Harry's equally disrespectful remarks. That's because someone lacking in empathy doesn't get the body language, the tone of voice, etc. that cues people to that sort of thing. Snape does get things that Harry is actively trying to communicate through voice tone, etc. People totally lacking in empathy don't get that.
On a different level, does a normally empathetic person lack their normal amount of empathy for people they despise? Yeah, sure. So when Snape loathes Harry, it's normal for him not to be particularly empathetic.
Perhaps I should have posted this in the DH Readalong, but it is essentially about Snape and my inability through 7 books to correctly judge him, so I’ll place it here for now. Jo said much in her commencement speech to Harvard which struck me as profound, and she writes with a speechmaker’s acumen; but I wanted to focus on one particular thing she said.
...[cut]...Imagination is not only the uniquely human capacity to envision that which is not, and therefore the fount of all invention and innovation. In its arguably most transformative and revelatory capacity, it is the power that enables us to empathize with humans whose experiences we have never shared....[cut]...
click here on: The Fringe Benefits of Failure, and the Importance of Imagination
I’m now wondering if Snape weren’t Jo’s “published thesis” for this philosophy. For me at least the “Prince’s Tale” in many ways proved HP’s most affecting chapter – the greatest surprise in the series, if you will. I quickly realized as I saw through Snape’s eyes that I had misjudged him badly – I had not “empathized” correctly with him, even as Jo lectured scant days ago. Part of this is Jo’s fault, of course. By employing a Third Person Limited persona in the series, I was prey to Harry’s judgments about Snape, and we all know how Harry felt, though excusably so. I did not agree with all those crazy “Snape lovers,” and now I will have to eat crow for the rest of my days; I see no other alternative. Harry’s prejudice became mine, even when such facts as the foe-mirror said otherwise; and I really do not think I could have adjusted my opinion of this teacher unless I were provided with a Pensieve and some actual Snape-thoughts.
This was an underwhelming moment for my ego, and now I fear I may have misjudged some teachers I had considered evil in my past.
Jo’s speech was worth hearing.
wynnleaf - Jun 8, 2008 8:55 pm (#2332 of 2617)
that gets me back to "nice." How important is it after all? (me)
My question didn't mean "how important is it to be nice in the process of making and keeping friends." I meant, how important is niceness in evaluating the character of another person, their redemptive aspects, their moral fiber, etc.? In my opinion, "nice" helps one make friends, but it does not determine character, nor the degree to which one may intentionally or inadvertently do harm.
As tandaradei's post implies, if we judge based on niceness, we may only catch the surface and miss the true character of others. That's what happens with Snape, in my opinion, as well as other characters in the series. Nice characters are given much more leeway to make mistakes and bad choices and still be loved by most readers. An unpleasant character is found to even be suspicious in his best actions.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 8, 2008 9:30 pm (#2333 of 2617)
However, coming from a miserable, abusive childhood background does not make people especially nice either. - Julia H
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I'm sure many of us can think of several people we have known (or know) who are "nice" people (i.e. loving, caring, thoughtful, kind, etc) but who had some pretty scary childhood abuse to overcome.
I personally don't think Snape's childhood was too much of a factor in his becoming a Death Eater. Nor do I think it has much to do with how he treats other people. I think Snape treats people the way he does, quite simply, because he doesn't have time for idiots. He doesn't have time, and he doesn't want to make the time, for anyone he deems unworthy of his respect/attention/consideration, etc. And this is almost everyone.
There is a very short list of people whom Snape genuinely respects, Dumbledore being at the very top.
I agree with Solitaire that it's a bit unfair to compare the choices of a teenager with those of a grown man. But I also understand what Wynnleaf is trying to say (I think ).
Personally, I think we can't discount "niceness" (in fiction, or in real life) precisely because (going back to Tandraei's post) being nice is the clearest and most immediate demonstration of the ability to empathize with others. In that respect, I think that whether or not a person is "nice" is indeed something to be considered when evaluating a person's character (either real or fictitious).
However, I don't think Hagrid or Harry (or others) being "nice" was the only reason they were so easily forgiven their transgressions. It was also because they genuinely felt terrible about the damage they caused. But, again, that kind of remorse can only come from the ability to empathize with others.
The interesting twist is that Voldemort recognizes that "being nice" is definitely important, particularly for establishing trust, and is able to capitalize on it for his nefarious purposes. Snape, on the other hand, never really gets the whole "being nice" thing the way someone like Lucius Malfoy does.
mona amon - Jun 8, 2008 9:42 pm (#2334 of 2617)
I don't think you answered my question. What should Snape have done? If you can't provide a better alternative, then Snape's action, which worked by the way, can't be faulted. (Wynnleaf)
I think he should not have interfered. That spell is shown to be potentially lethal, and he should not have risked hitting the good guys with it. He should have left Lupin to his fate. Or he should have accelerated a bit and bumped into the DE. That could be passed off as an accident.
Why do you say that Snape's action 'worked'? We can imagine if we want that Snape hitting George was what caused the DE to miss Lupin, but there is no evidence of it in the book. What is shown in the book is that Snape bungled his attempt at hitting the DE's wand hand with Sectumsempra and took off George's ear instead, and that Lupin was unharmed, but whether that was due to Snape's action or the DE's wobbly aim, we do not know.
If (and we don't know this) the spell used to cut James in the Worst Memory was sectumsempra, then it can clearly cause varying degrees of damage depending on what the caster wants. In that case, it would be the perfect spell to use, because Snape could call out "Sectumsempra" which sounds like he's using a seriously bad spell, but keep it reined in so that it's not so damaging, hit the Death Eater to distract him, and cause non-deadly damage to an Order member if one got hit accidently.
Since we have absolutely no evidence that the spell used to cut James was Sectumsempra (as you yourself have acknowledged) I don't think you can use it to prove your argument. From what we have seen of it, Sectumsempra is like a very long invisible sword. Even if Snape had learned to control it to a certain extent, he couldn't have much control of it when he was flying through the air on a broom, aiming at a moving target. Even one slash in a vital spot is enough to cause death due to bleeding.
Not sure who you meant by "you," but I don't agree.
The 'you' was of course Julia, whose post I quoted from and to whom I was replying. I went back and checked, and I've mentioned her name in brackets and everything.
It seems to me that you're saying that Snape's strategy was bad because you don't think it should have worked, and the fact that it did work (Lupin saved and George only hurt) was not to Snape's credit.
No I'm not. I'm saying it was bad strategy because it did not work, and wasn't very likely to have worked, since Snape was on a broom shooting at a moving target, and Lupin and George were in the line of his fire. Due to Snape's action George was hurt, and Lupin is shown to escaped but it is not demonstrated that it was a result of Snape's action.
Now to read the other posts.
ETA: With the risk of making you self-ignite , I must ask what you mean more exactly when you say that Harry's use of the Cruciatus Curse is OK, but not Snape's use of Sectumsempra? I can see if you don't like Sectumsempra, it is a horrible spell, but if Harry is in blind fury and Cruciatus is OK, couldn't you say that Snape is also in an agitated state with all the pressure he is under? (Dryleaves)
LOL about self igniting! Anyway I didn't say that Harry's use of Crucio and Sectumsempra were OK. I said he has to learn how to control himself and not use those spells. Snape on the other hand is already supposed to have learnt these lessons. Basically I was excusing Harry a little because of his youth.
wynnleaf - Jun 8, 2008 10:37 pm (#2335 of 2617)
However, I don't think Hagrid or Harry (or others) being "nice" was the only reason they were so easily forgiven their transgressions. It was also because they genuinely felt terrible about the damage they caused. But, again, that kind of remorse can only come from the ability to empathize with others. (Quinn)
I agree that Harry is remorseful about some things. He's sad that Sirius was killed in OOTP, but prefers to think only of the blame to others (Bella for killing Sirius or Snape for -- something), but he doesn't seem remorseful at all that he led other students into a trap (Hermione, as I recall, advised against the whole thing), or that they and Tonks nearly got killed. He's certainly not remorseful about any uses of Unforgivables. He is remorseful about using Sectumsempra on Draco, or at least he's shocked and upset at the damage, but within minutes he seems a lot more interested in hiding the potions book and later with bemoaning the unfairness of his punishment. I can't recall him ever being remorseful about the hexing of Draco and friends into unconsciousness in GOF or OOTP, much less leaving them injured for hours. I can't recall the slightest worry he had over the kids injured when the explosion he set off in Potions Class during COS injured others. He's unconcerned about Snape after he and his friends render him unconscious for a long time. Harry does feel badly about various and sundry things, but I don't think he actually feels much remorse for the things he specifically does, especially if they harm people he doesn't like.
However, it's a long series, I'm probably forgetting some things. I don't mean to say that Harry is never remorseful, but there's plenty of times when he does wrong things and we're shown no remorse or even regret on his part. And in general, this doesn't cause many people to wonder whether or not Harry was "unredeemed" or had some major flaw in his character.
By the way, this is similar to the Snape attempt to help out Lupin. Whether or not Snape made a mistake in attempting to save Lupin, why would it be considered wrong to try to help Lupin? Snape was supposed to make a split second decision, the moment he saw a Death Eater aiming for Lupin, that it was more dangerous to try to stop the DE from killing Lupin than to let the DE go ahead and try to kill him and hope that the DE would miss? So that shows Snape's poor moral fiber? But Harry can make a considered decision (not split second), complete with advice to the contrary, to go into danger, trailed by his friends, resulting in the death of one person and serious injury of several others, but it's not seen as a problem with his character, but great because he's trying to save someone (Sirius).
I don't mean that you, mona amon, think it was okay for Harry to do that, but I'm pointing out the difference in the way the two characters are viewed.
That spell is shown to be potentially lethal. (mona amon)
Well, actually, we're not necessarily shown that Draco was dying. Lots of blood, yes, but of course there was load of water on the floor as well, so it's hard to say just how much blood he lost. Like I pointed out before, it's not like the spell cut him completely open. And we're specifically told Harry was waving rather wildly. And only George's ear was cut off, so it's not at all possible to garner from that whether the DE would have been killed or even maimed, or whether any other person might have been killed by the spell. For that matter, it seems likely that Snape would not have wanted to kill the DE, and therefore probably wasn't using the spell in such a way as to kill anyone, whoever it hit.
Most of all though, battle is unpredictable and most combatants aren't out there picking and choosing and making considered and careful decisions, not once the battle is engaged. It's instinct and training. Snape saw Lupin under attack and immediately attempted to thwart the attack. The idea that Snape shouldn't be firing in such a way as to risk hitting an Order member is odd, since of course Snape would be expected to be firing toward the Order members, even if he might in general be attempting to miss.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 8, 2008 11:45 pm (#2336 of 2617)
Hm. I think you make some fair points, Wynnleaf. However, I simply don't agree with comparing the actions and decisions of a character who is only a child for at least a third of the series, and then just a teenager for the rest of it, with those of a character who is an adult throughout. While Harry is very mature in some areas of his life, he is absolutely at age level (I would even say below regarding girls) in many others.
Julia H. - Jun 9, 2008 1:30 am (#2337 of 2617)
Edited Jun 9, 2008 2:05 am
Interesting discussion.
I really do not think I could have adjusted my opinion of this teacher unless I were provided with a Pensieve and some actual Snape-thoughts. (tandaradei)
I do think a Pensieve and a journey into other people's thoughts and experiences would sometimes be useful in real life - to see the human side of our enemy or the secret sorrows of our friend and to understand them better.
Yes, Harry is a kid and a teenager. Snape was also once a kid and a teenager (he is one even when he joins LV) and it seems a bad choice - choosing Slytherin - at the age of 11 and apparently without really knowing what he is choosing turns him into someone needing redemption for the rest of his life.
About being nice: Quinn, I did not say that it is impossible to be nice after a miserable childhood, I only said that it does not make a person nice, at least I don't think so. What I see as a major problem in Snape's childhood is too little love. He seems to be neglected and alone. We don't know whether his agressive-looking father actually beats him or not but if a child does not feel to be loved by anyone (and his mother does not seem to be giving him too much love either), it is enough to hurt the child for life. Besides, Petunia's reaction to his odd clothes and poor address is probably not unique. Yes, there is Lily, whose acceptance is very important to him. I have read posts saying practically that Snape after all has a loving and kind friend who accepts him with all his faults, so he should not complain. I don't think it is that simple. The very fact that Lily remains so important to him for the rest of his life shows IMO how little acceptance and love he generally gets. He is about nine years old when he meets Lily. What was before that? Besides, a child cannot get from another child what he should get from an adult. It is simply not the same thing. Snape does not love or respect a lot of people, it is true, but he does not get a lot of love or respect himself either. (LOL, that was an understatement.) Sure, there might be people who become nice in spite of that but I am not surprised at those who do not.
Does Snape's family background influence his decision to become a DE?
I don't know what Jo's answer would be. However, I know what psychologists say when they advise parents how to protect their children from hanging out with the wrong sort of "friends" when they, the parents, cannot be close by any more. The answer is basically this: If a child gets enough love and respect and can experience quality relationships and the feeling of being valued at home, he or she later, as a teenager or young adult, will expect the same quality of relationships regarding his/her friends, partners etc. If the child does not experience love and respect (etc.) at home, (s)he will be much more likely to accept degrading relationships, to join gangs, to start using drugs or to do anything to be accepted or tolerated by others at all. To a large extent, it is a question of emotional security and self-esteem. IMO young Snape is a perfect example of this.
Regarding other nice people: I think the HP books teach a fairly good lesson about the veneer of niceness. Snape is not nice but is ultimately good. However, there are quite a few "nice" characters who are not good at all. Quirrell is nice and shy and respectful, yet he intends to kill and to steal. Lockhart is simply "charming" () but he turns out to have been robbing people from their memories and knowledge and achievements. Even Umbridge can put on seeming niceness, though she is sadistic. Fudge is usually nice but his character is far from being admirable. Bagman is nice but he is capable of stealing form kids when he needs money very much. Rita Skeeter can appear to be very nice and so can Lucius. Yes, niceness can be a way of expressing how you value other people but it is just as good a way to gain advantages for yourself. Besides, if someone is willing to risk his life and soul to save others, that amply makes up for the lack of outward niceness in my eyes and I might even risk saying that it may be a way of showing that you do value other people.
Solitaire, I think choices are very important but can you say that everything is a matter of personal choice? Can you really choose to like someone you do not like? Can you really choose to change the bitterness in you if it is there and with good reason? Can you choose to do things that need to be learned first if you have never been taught them? I think one of the purposes of families and education is to broaden the possibilities of personal choice by giving chances, knowledge, values, examples and so on.
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 7:15 am (#2338 of 2617)
Snape, as a teenager, is so similar to the many Muggle teens who choose a wrong path in life due to a lack of a stable and loving family and the resulting desire to gain acceptance among friends who may not be the best influences. Personally, I was the 'straight as an arrow' kid who never made choices I now repent. However, I understand that my ability to know myself so well is greatly a result of the love, support, stability and acceptance my family provided for me. I feel that my ability to be empathetic and compassionate are also influenced by the examples I've had throughout life. Being so blessed I am even more aware of how the lack of all of these elements in a young person's life can really confuse them about their own identity and set them up for trouble. Of course, not everyone is a Snape. Some people are naturally strong enough to overcome any obstacle on their own. Still, I find it highly unfair to ignore a young man's emotionally impoverished background when judging him for the bad choices he has made in life, especially when he is trying to overcome his mistakes to the best of his ability.
Yes, Harry also feels unwanted for ten years of his life, but he knows that these two morons are his aunt and uncle and they only have him because his own parents are dead. He can make any fantasy up about his parents, and by age eleven he once again has positive influences in his life who reassure him of how dear he is to his deceased parents.
In comparison we have young Severus whose feelings of unwantedness (I think I just invented a word ) are from his own parents. With the exception of Lily (who is in a different House) we don't see anyone take a positive interest in him. Thus, while Harry may naturally be a more 'good' individual than Snape, I do feel for Snape whose life-altering choices as a teen are probably nothing more than the result of confusion about self-identity.
Oh, and I am not all that sold on 'niceness' as a means of understanding another person. Those of you who visit the Chat and Greeting thread may know of my childhood 'friend' Gigi. Well, if you were to meet both of us in person, she may come across as the 'nicer' one while I may be judged as more standoffish as I am a young woman with my own thoughts and opinions and I'm just not the gushing type (unless there's something in it for me ). However, the moment you need help with something, Gigi will be the first one to kiss you on both cheeks and take off while I'm the one who'll stand beside you as long as you need support. By the way, Gigi's 'niceness' has earned her many, many 'friends'. I have only a few, but I stand by them ferociously.
Steve Newton - Jun 9, 2008 8:33 am (#2339 of 2617)
I was listening to HBP this morning on the way to work and wondered (Yes, I know how dangerous that can be.) Did Snape really want to teach DADA and not potions or was that just a cover story?
If this is already a well beaten subject please feel free to ignore.
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 8:44 am (#2340 of 2617)
I've wondered that as well, Steve. Do Dumbledore and Snape ever discuss this matter? or does Snape fill out an application each year and Dumbledore just slips it to the bottom of his pile and pretends that he lost it? The two certainly seem close enough that in private Snape would be bold enough to confront Dumbledore about it if it had not already been discussed.
Julia H. - Jun 9, 2008 8:45 am (#2341 of 2617)
Great post, Pesky (2338), you have said it all so well!
I'll go back to the question if Snape should interfere or just watch what happens when Lupin is attacked:
Our debates about reformed Snape’s specific actions sometimes remind me of the tale in which the miller, his son and their donkey are going to the marketplace. They are all walking happily when they meet a man who mentions how stupid it is to walk when one has a donkey. Good advice. Next, the miller is riding the donkey, his son is walking. The next man they meet says how cold-hearted a father the miller must be, sitting comfortably while that poor child is walking. All right, the miller and the son change places. But then the next passer-by says it is wrong that the young one is riding while the old one is walking. So next both the miller and the son are riding but only as far as the next person they meet, since that one turns out to be sorry for the poor donkey having to carry two people. The miller and the son end up arriving at the marketplace carrying the donkey. Of course, everyone laughs at them.
It seems whatever Snape does, there will be something we can point out that he should have done differently.
Snape tries to save Lupin by attacking a DE in the middle of the battle. Lupin survives – we don’t know how – but Snape’s decision is wrong because he injures someone else. The other option mentioned is that Snape does not interfere, just hopes that Lupin will survive somehow. The fact is that we don’t know what would happen then, since we don’t know it either whether Snape’s action does not affect the DE somehow to start with. (For example, the DE may hear Snape shouting and he may turn or lean aside, so as not to be hit “accidentally” and that may be the reason why he does not hit Lupin.) So as far as we can tell or as far as Snape can tell in that split second when he brings his decision, watching what happens without interfering would be at least as much taking chances as actually trying to save Lupin.
Imagine Snape does not try to save Lupin. Suppose Lupin dies but even if he – accidentally – survives, what will we be doing next? I bet we would be debating now whether Snape is careful, like Harry, or whether he is a coward or whether he still hates Lupin so much that he does not lift a finger to save him when he could. (Of course, unlike in Harry’s case, we would not be told by JKR why he does not try.) Something similar applies to using a different spell. Which is worse, having someone bleed to death or stunning him off the broomstick high up in the air? Both are bad like most of the stuff that happens in battle and the difference seems to be a bit too fine to me. When I come to think of it: if someone bleeds very much high up in the air, he will probably fall off the broomstick long before he bleeds to death unless he gets help, as George does. But Snape might give the DE this help as well as the spell that stops the bleeding. Luckily, nobody bleeds to death and again we don’t really know whether Snape has had any intention to kill at all. So there is the benefit of doubt at least and otherwise, well, this is a battle and Snape and the DE are on two different sides.
I don’t know what JKR intended to show us but I very much suspect at least that the message of the scene is likely to be the following: Snape tries to save Lupin’s life, supporting his statement that he will not watch people die when he can save them (which may indicate that he would not have let the DE die either, I don’t know). Snape is willing to take risks to save a fellow Order member or a fellow human being even if they are not friends at all. (That can be a reference to how much he has changed since the time when he only wanted to save his friend. Lupin, like James, is a Marauder.) Snape is doing his best to support the good side even in his isolation. The scene is also there to counterbalance the scene of Charity’s death: to show us that in that scene, Snape’s reason for not doing anything is indeed that there is nothing he could do to save her. None of these would be implied if Snape were careful and – like Harry – did not do anything to save Lupin. However, he has to make a mistake and injure someone simply because at the beginning of the book, JKR needs more red herrings about Snape’s true loyalties.
EDIT: Good question, Steve, difficult to answer.
EDIT: Regarding how Lupin knows about Sectumsempra: What I can imagine is that student Snape, being the Marauders' favourite target, gave a little demonstration to them of what he could do. (Some time after the Worst Memory Scene would be a convenient or likely time for him to do that.) I am sure no ears were lost in the demonstration and no other lasting harm was done (or we would know) but Snape may have wanted to warn them to leave him alone. And I guess they did not leave him alone...
mona amon - Jun 9, 2008 9:23 am (#2342 of 2617)
Edited Jun 9, 2008 10:07 am
Did Snape really want to teach DADA and not potions or was that just a cover story? (Steve)
I think we did discuss it once, but I don't remember the discussion or what conclusions we came to. My own opinion is that he did want to teach DADA very much. LV was only interested in having a spy at Hogwarts. What subject he was teaching wouldn't have bothered him. But Snape repeatedly asks DD for the DADA post.
Whether or not Snape made a mistake in attempting to save Lupin, why would it be considered wrong to try to help Lupin? (Wynnleaf)
I don't think anyone here said that it was wrong to try and save Lupin. Only that he made a mistake.
Well, actually, we're not necessarily shown that Draco was dying. Lots of blood, yes, but of course there was load of water on the floor as well, so it's hard to say just how much blood he lost. Like I pointed out before, it's not like the spell cut him completely open.
It says 'blood spurted from Draco's face and chest...', which definitely sounds as if arteries were severed. If Snape hadn't burst in to the rescue, Draco would very likely have died of rapid blood loss before the shocked Harry could collect his wits. Deep surface cuts are enough to cause severe bleeding. Snape's spell was strong enough to slice off George's ear, so it could have caused deep cuts if it had hit some other part of him. I stand by what I said. It was a potentially lethal spell.
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 9:34 am (#2343 of 2617)
Sectumsempra is a nasty spell, a potential killing spell unless Snape happens to hang around to sing you back to health.
I'd love to learn it though!
Solitaire - Jun 9, 2008 9:43 am (#2344 of 2617)
Even if Snape had learned to control it to a certain extent, he couldn't have much control of it when he was flying through the air on a broom, aiming at a moving target. That would seem to be the strongest argument against using it in such a situation, IMO.
I agree, Quinn, that being nice can mask devious motives. In fact, most adults I know have been taken in by at least one such person by the time they hit their 20s or 30s. Often, though, the person who is putting on the "nice act" is unable to sustain it and winds up blowing an emotional fuse when his patience is stretched too far without achieving his ends.
he led other students into a trap I thought Harry attempted to discourage the others from coming--since he believed that Voldemort had Sirius--but they insisted on accompanying him.
And only George's ear was cut off Ouch! If it were my ear that had been "disconnected" from my head, I probably wouldn't see it as an "only" kind of injury, especially since it apparently can't be grown back like Harry's bones were. And since Snape wasn't there to "sing" the wounds closed, how did he know that George wouldn't bleed to death? (edit: I see Pesky mentioned this, too.)
Snape was also once a kid and a teenager (he is one even when he joins LV) and it seems a bad choice It's interesting, though, that Lily seemed to understand the implications of his choice, even though she was no older than he was. She had also proven herself to be his friend over the years, so he knew her concerns and comments were genuine.
Solitaire, I think choices are very important but can you say that everything is a matter of personal choice? Can you really choose to like someone you do not like? Can you really choose to change the bitterness in you if it is there and with good reason? Julia, I can address this point with you in email, if you like. I do not think I really can do it here, since my beliefs about these things have their roots in my faith. And while it is not easy, yes ... I do think one can do all of the things you have mentioned, based on my own personal experience.
Can you choose to do things that need to be learned first if you have never been taught them? I think one of the purposes of families and education is to broaden the possibilities of personal choice by giving chances, knowledge, values, examples and so on. Harry certainly had experienced no real examples of generosity, caring, or making good choices when he arrived at Hogwarts (with the exception of Hagrid). At the hands of the Dursleys he'd experienced only selfishness, cruelty, deprivation, favoritism, and other negative values. Yet he seems--more often than not and in spite of his blundering, mistakes, and wrong choices--to ultimately want to make good choices.
I think Harry and Snape show us two of the many things that can happen to people who grow up in terribly adverse family situations. Some kids will allow the injuries and evils of their childhoods to turn them into miserable, evil people. Others, like Snape, will rise above their misfortunes and move ahead, after some bumps in the road ... but they seem to close themselves off to any real joy, perhaps from fear of rejection. Then there are those like Harry, who seem to long for the opposite of what they left behind. We do know that Harry longed for that happiness and embraced it, despite the fact that he'd had a childhood that was probably as miserable as Snape's AND he'd been kept away from any knowledge of who he truly was. I agree that we cannot know what Snape thought when he saw happy and loving families like the Weasleys. Perhaps it was regret that the path he had chosen had cost him the love, or at least the friendship, of the only woman he'd ever loved. Just thoughts ...
Edit: One thing I find so sad ... we learn that Snape seemed to really know Lily and have a genuine friendship with her. He could have helped Harry to know his mother in a way no one else was able to do.
Solitaire
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 9:48 am (#2345 of 2617)
"I think Harry and Snape show us two of the many things that can happen to people who grow up in terribly adverse family situations." -Solitaire
I think we need Tom Riddle Jr. (AKA Mouldy Voldy) to complete this example. The three of them demonstrate three different outcomes of a neglected childhood. Harry and Tom are extremes at opposite ends of the spectrum while Snape struggles in the middle, trying his best to overcome his shortcomings.
Still, are there differences in the neglect the three boys respectively experience which subtly influences the choices they make? Or is it all genetic?
Solitaire - Jun 9, 2008 9:50 am (#2346 of 2617)
I don't know, Pesky ... sometimes it seems evil really does live in the bones, doesn't it?
Julia H. - Jun 9, 2008 11:00 am (#2347 of 2617)
I think Harry and Snape show us two of the many things that can happen to people who grow up in terribly adverse family situations. Some kids will allow the injuries and evils of their childhoods to turn them into miserable, evil people. Others, like Snape, will rise above their misfortunes and move ahead, after some bumps in the road ... but they seem to close themselves off to any real joy, perhaps from fear of rejection. Then there are those like Harry, who seem to long for the opposite of what they left behind. (Solitaire)
I agree, Solitaire. I also agree with Pesky when she says:
I think we need Tom Riddle Jr. (AKA Mouldy Voldy) to complete this example. The three of them demonstrate three different outcomes of a neglected childhood. Harry and Tom are extremes at opposite ends of the spectrum while Snape struggles in the middle, trying his best to overcome his shortcomings.
The three "abandoned boys". This is precisely why I find the Snape character very, very important. We have the two extremes, the good (Harry) and the bad (Riddle) but Snape proves that there is a way to change even after the initial bad choices. Without him the picture would be neither full nor true. Some of the results may be genetically determined: choices are important but so are parents in HP. James and Lily come from families where children are liked and well-cared for. They love each other and their child. Riddle's parents are married without real love and are soon separated. (The significance of love potion.) Furthermore, Merope's father is abusive, who certainly cannot teach his children what real love and families are like. We don't know much about Snape's parents only that they argue but apparently do not divorce and they do not exactly abandon, "only" neglect their child. But besides genetics, I can mention still one thing that makes Harry's situation better: we know that he was loved and cared for at the beginning of his life. Even if he did not remember it later, as a baby, he did experience the feeling of being loved and valued and important, probably adored. This experience is what is needed for a child to be friends with himself (herself) later, without which there is no self-esteem and is difficult to find real friends. Snape seems to have lacked that. He cannot reach out towards people (except for Lily once and when in great distress, he turns to DD) but we see that when he does get love and appreciation, as from Lily, it means the whole world to him even after they are separated and the friendship is long over. DD is good to him and with this he wins Snape's unconditional, unchanging loyalty. True, Snape is bound to DD by his promise but my feeling is that his loyalty and obedience to him goes way beyond the force of his promise and shows how much he must have longed for acceptance (without knowing how to be "nice enough" to win it) and how grateful he can be when he finally gets it from someone and how much he will do to keep/deserve it.
E-mails are welcome, Solitaire.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 9, 2008 11:33 am (#2348 of 2617)
I think the HP books teach a fairly good lesson about the veneer of niceness. Snape is not nice but is ultimately good. However, there are quite a few "nice" characters who are not good at all. - Julia
Oh, and I am not all that sold on 'niceness' as a means of understanding another person. - Pesky Pixie
I'm afraid I'm not sure I understand what point either of you are making.
I find it highly unfair to ignore a young man's emotionally impoverished background when judging him for the bad choices he has made in life, especially when he is trying to overcome his mistakes to the best of his ability. - Pesky Pixie
Personally, I'm not ignoring Snape's childhood. I'm simply disagreeing with the amount of importance others are placing on it.
I believe it is established in OP, during his interview with Umbridge, that Snape did indeed wish to teach DADA but was given Potions.
Dryleaves - Jun 9, 2008 12:10 pm (#2349 of 2617)
...but Snape proves that there is a way to change even after the initial bad choices. Without him the picture would be neither full nor true. (Julia)
I would also say that Snape is the one of the three who actually gets a full and true picture. Harry's and Voldemort's childhoods are more allegorical. The Dursleys are caricatures and even if neglect and abuse exists even in places like Privet Drive, I think it ought to be hard to keep up appearances like the Dursleys do when you so obviously treat your children differently. We never really see how Harry keeps his hope up or how Voldemort becomes a sociopat. Even if we don't get to know that much about Snape's home background I still feel that his story is realistic and the best explained. (That is why I feel puzzled when JKR speaks about Snape in post DH interviews, because in the books she took care to give him this credible background and a plausible psychological explanation of why he is like he is, and made him a very real, human character, but in the interviews she just dismisses him as merely a brave bully, or something like that.)
Then just a note on being nice. People can be nice as a mask, but genuinely nice people can also do serious damage. A person very close to me is a really nice person, with a big, warm heart that truly beats for his family and friends and he is always ready to help and be of service when someone needs it. So ready that he often promises more than he can actually keep, and apart from the fact that this behaviour can make people really disappointed, it has also put people in real trouble because they trusted and relied on him, and these situations have been solved only through sheer luck or through the intervention by others. But he has also helped a lot of people when he really was able to, so his "niceness" is not a mask, just combined with too great a wish to please and to be liked by others and too optimistic an opinion of what he actually can handle. So I would consider it a virtue of Snape's that he actually does what he promises to do. Snape has many good sides, that never seem to be acknowledged by others, they only see his faults. And I don't think it is fair to only blame Snape himself for this. Snape is not the only one who sees only what he wants to see.
Soul Search - Jun 9, 2008 12:12 pm (#2350 of 2617)
On the question of Snape and the DADA job.
We have kicked this around, but there does not seem to be any defining canon. We do know that the DADA job had been cursed ever since Voldemort's visit to Dumbledore. The curse had been in place long enough for Dumbledore to figure out the job was cursed before he hired Snape.
The idea that Dumbledore thought Snape may resort to his DE days if he taught DADA is ridiculous, Dumbledore trusted Snape completely, so that must have been a ruse to justify why Dumbledore did not give Snape the job. The real reason would have told Voldemort Dumbledore knew the job was cursed.
Snape, no doubt, would have been pleased to teach DADA, and likely rather capable doing it, but Dumbledore couldn't risk losing him. Snape had to have known about the curse on the job, but supported the ruse.
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 12:18 pm (#2351 of 2617)
I think Harry and Snape show us two of the many things that can happen to people who grow up in terribly adverse family situations. Some kids will allow the injuries and evils of their childhoods to turn them into miserable, evil people. Others, like Snape, will rise above their misfortunes and move ahead, after some bumps in the road ... but they seem to close themselves off to any real joy, perhaps from fear of rejection. Then there are those like Harry, who seem to long for the opposite of what they left behind. We do know that Harry longed for that happiness and embraced it, despite the fact that he'd had a childhood that was probably as miserable as Snape's AND he'd been kept away from any knowledge of who he truly was. (Solitaire)
Yes, I very much agree. But I'd add that Harry longing for that happiness is something that's there from early childhood. We don't see him make a conscious decision at age 10 or 11 or later to embrace the desire for something he can't recall, but did once have. It appears to me to be somewhere in his imagination or early buried memories where he is sure that his parents weren't the awful people the Dursleys claimed, and loved him and wanted him. So what he'd like to get back is what he feels he lost -- a family that loves him. So we can see the psychological roots of Harry's desire.
Snape, on the other hand, has no such past, as far as we're shown, however far back in his childhood that he'd like to reclaim. He can't imagine the parents or family that loved him, but was torn from him. He knows that his parents neglect him and probably worse (especially his father). So he has no particular hopes or dreams of reclaiming something he lost. My guess is that a person in that position is more likely to grow up believing that such things, love, the concern and care of others, is simply not something they "deserve" or can obtain. So until Lily, who is only a child and not attempting to nurture Snape after all, Snape has no one to care about him. But by age 9, one's personality and a great deal of inner psychological roots that drive us are already set.
Quinn, the point about niceness is to question whether we should use the fact that Snape is definitely not nice, often unpleasant, sarcastic, insulting and sometimes downright verbally cruel, as THE telling point to decide whether he's a "redeemed" character. In other words, if you stack up all the good he does, his remorse, his changing in various areas, does that still not make him a morally redeemed character, because, regardless what else he's done, he's still not nice?
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 12:35 pm (#2352 of 2617)
"Personally, I'm not ignoring Snape's childhood. I'm simply disagreeing with the amount of importance others are placing on it." -Quinn Crockett
Interesting. I felt that through the use of the Pensieve, Harry's reverse Legilimency and The Prince's Tale, JKR attempts to show the reader why Snape is the way he is and also why he makes certain choices in life. He is deeply flawed, but there's some reason behind it.
As for the 'niceness' argument, the original point (made by wynnleaf, I believe, but I may be incorrect) was that we often easily forgive the mistakes of characters/people who are 'nice' while those who are not as appealing on the surface are often doubted even when their actions are attempts at being noble. For example, we excuse Hagrid for the many times he leads Harry into danger, but Snape tries to save Lupin and we jump all over him. Hagrid's good intentions overcome even his most disastrous blunders, while even 'the best' of Snape is questioned because he is not nice.
Orion - Jun 9, 2008 1:14 pm (#2353 of 2617)
"It appears to me to be somewhere in his imagination or early buried memories where he is sure that his (Harry's) parents weren't the awful people the Dursleys claimed, and loved him and wanted him. So what he'd like to get back is what he feels he lost -- a family that loves him." (wynnleaf)
The first year is the decisive one. A child who is loved well and knows that help will always come and is cuddled and sung to and never left alone, feels secure for life, is able to feel empathy, can relate to other people in a positive way, and so on. So Harry has a corner in his soul where the memory of love is stored and the ablility of love grows from.
You cannot over-estimate the influence of a person's youth. There are very resilient children who grow up to be admirable people although they had terrible childhoods, so there seems to be a genetic disposition as well. IMO a bad childhood is a very good excuse for being a nasty adult, and for making bad choices in life. You can't choose your family, and you can't choose your genes (which is the same thing, but family and genes influence you in different ways.) You can't expect someone to be one of the rare resilient personalities, because you have to be born like that.
Edited because I messed up a sentence.
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 1:27 pm (#2354 of 2617)
"You can't expect someone to be one of the rare resilient personalities ..." -Orion
Yes, that's what I meant, Orion. There are people who are remarkable examples of 'goodness' and are resilient enough to overcome any obstacle which crosses their path. However, it's unfair to expect all children to be equal and (if Severus and Harry were the same age) to yank Sev into a corner and reprimand him for not being as resilient and sweet as Harry.
Julia H. - Jun 9, 2008 1:33 pm (#2355 of 2617)
Edited Jun 9, 2008 2:57 pm
Especially, as it seems, because Harry does have something to grasp and to cling to (the experience of his first year and the "memory" of his good parents). I think the whole of the series could be analyzed on the basis of family relationships, most of all parent and child relationships and their consequences.
EDIT: The DADA job: Snape does a few things that most people would not do but I still find it a bit hard to believe that he wanted a cursed job so much, although I can believe that he otherwise would have liked to teach DADA (and he may have been appalled by the kind of people who occasionally ended up teaching this important subject). DD did not give Snape the job because he did not want to lose him and I guess (hope) Snape realized that. It seems to be canon that he applied for the job regularly (Umbridge knew about it) but it may have been a ruse, as Soul Search said, something intended to deceive Voldemort. It is not really logical, knowing the relationship between DD and Snape, that he would have applied repeatedly when DD clearly told him no. It may be worth noting that in The Prince's Tale it does not seem to be an issue between DD and Snape (which may or may not be significant). Another piece of information we have is that it is mentioned by Hagrid and in connection with Lockhart that he (Lockhart) was the only applicant for the DADA job that year. It seems Hagrid does not know about Snape applying. It is repeatedly implied in the books (through Harry's opinion) that Snape is jealous of other DADA teachers but, as my 10-year-old daughter noticed, he always has other reasons to dislike the DADA teachers. Quirrell is being suspected and rightly so, Lockhart is generally disliked by his colleagues (no wonder), Lupin is a Marauder, Fake Moody is nasty to Snape and Umbridge is Umbridge. Snape mentions his "DADA problem" to Bellatrix but that may only indicate that it was indeed just acting to strengthen LV's trust in Snape.
EDIT2: Maybe we should focus on whether or not Snape learned empathy, even for someone whom he did not necessarily respect or like. (Quinn)
Well, perhaps we need a working definition for the word first so that we should not confuse empathy with being nice, so that we should make it clear that this time we are talking about something else than before. While I don't want to give this definition, I'd like to note that IMO one important difference between empathy and being nice is that niceness is a surface phenomenon which may cover various things deep down (as various posters noted); while empathy is essentially inside, a psychological skill or something similar, which can probably have various surface manifestations. What follows is that this may be more difficult to decide than the question whether Snape is nice (he is clearly not) because we never see his feelings and thoughts directly. We can only interpret his actions. To start with, I would say Snape's general "saving-people-thing" in the last years of his life may indicate the presence of empathy, since wanting to save others (and not only friends) from death or torture implies that he can feel for these people if they are killed or tortured. He also seems to understand the Malfoys' predicament even though they are on different sides with different goals.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 9, 2008 1:52 pm (#2356 of 2617)
Edited Jun 9, 2008 2:39 pm
Quinn, the point about niceness is to question whether we should use the fact that Snape is definitely not nice, often unpleasant, sarcastic, insulting and sometimes downright verbally cruel, as THE telling point to decide whether he's a "redeemed" character. In other words, if you stack up all the good he does, his remorse, his changing in various areas, does that still not make him a morally redeemed character, because, regardless what else he's done, he's still not nice? - Wynnleaf
Thank you. With that in mind, I think that maybe we're just getting too caught up in the word "nice". Maybe we should focus on whether or not Snape learned empathy, even for someone whom he did not necessarily respect or like. To me, any remorse he might feel rests entirely on that.
I agree that the Snape character is the most three-dimensional of just about all the HP characters. I would say that Ron is equally so.
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 3:20 pm (#2357 of 2617)
Maybe we should focus on whether or not Snape learned empathy, even for someone whom he did not necessarily respect or like. To me, any remorse he might feel rests entirely on that. (Quinn)
Empathy is a tricky word and before we discuss it, we'd better be more or less on the same page.
Empathy is not, for instance, the same thing as sympathy nor is it the same as compassion.
Here's a definition: "Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives." You may find other definitions that fit how you view the word a little better.
Having recently had to deal with a real-life extreme narcissist including characteristics of psychopathy (not a criminal, though), I recently looked up quite a bit on the subject. As I see it, Tom Riddle is a criminal psychopath. Psychopaths, as a characteristic of the disorder, do not feel remorse or compassion. They do however, experience a kind of empathy. They are able to read other people very, very well and learn from them how others will react to this or that action. This is how many psychopaths learn how to appeal to others, even though they have no true care or concern for others.
They do not feel sympathy, which is: The act or power of sharing the feelings of another. And/or, a feeling or an expression of pity or sorrow for the distress of another; compassion or commiseration.
Does Snape have empathy for others? Probably a normal amount. He can read other people fairly well, but his biases often get in the way. That's typical. Does Snape have sympathy for others? That's more questionable, in my opinion. I think his empathy seems to reflect a deeper caring, perhaps sympathy (not in the "pity" aspect), in situations such as his concern for Ginny in COS, or for Dumbledore over the ring curse.
The huge difference between a psychopath (and Riddle is one) and others is the ability to feel true remorse. Psychopaths may regret getting into a particular situation, but they don't feel remorse. Snape does feel remorse, and there's the point of change. Note that in DH, at the end, Harry gives Voldemort the opportunity for remorse and LV doesn't take it. Probably he can't, because he's a psychopath and it's more or less hard-wired into him to be as he is.
To give an opposite example, a person in the autistic spectrum has a very, very difficult time "reading" other people, which causes them to be very weak on empathy. Yet these same people have the same emotions as anyone else and they feel compassion, can care for others, sympathy (in terms of pity or sadness for others) etc. and they can certainly feel remorse. Yet they may have very little empathy.
PeskyPixie - Jun 9, 2008 5:07 pm (#2358 of 2617)
Wow, wynnleaf, and all this time I assumed that empathy included the ability to be compassionate and sympathetic. I've learned something new today.
Solitaire - Jun 9, 2008 5:33 pm (#2359 of 2617)
"Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives" and
Does Snape have empathy for others? Probably a normal amount. He can read other people fairly well, but his biases often get in the way.
I found the following definition of empathy online: the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner.
Do you think Snape identifies with or is sensitive to Harry's thoughts and feelings? I don't see that at all--until the end of DH, that is--but perhaps I'm forgetting something. His legilimency certainly allows him to know some of the things Harry is thinking, but that would seem to be a different thing.
Solitaire
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 6:48 pm (#2360 of 2617)
Do you think Snape identifies with or is sensitive to Harry's thoughts and feelings? I don't see that at all--until the end of DH, that is--but perhaps I'm forgetting something. His legilimency certainly allows him to know some of the things Harry is thinking, but that would seem to be a different thing. (Solitiare)
Oh, by no means! I quite agree that Snape isn't particularly identifying or sensitive toward Harry at all. Well.... he is sensitive to Harry in a negative way. That is, he recognizes when Harry is trying to be rebellious toward him. For instance, an person with aspergers might, lacking in empathy, might not recognize Harry's "there's no need to call me 'sir'" as a rebellious remark, or many other of Harry's equally disrespectful remarks. That's because someone lacking in empathy doesn't get the body language, the tone of voice, etc. that cues people to that sort of thing. Snape does get things that Harry is actively trying to communicate through voice tone, etc. People totally lacking in empathy don't get that.
On a different level, does a normally empathetic person lack their normal amount of empathy for people they despise? Yeah, sure. So when Snape loathes Harry, it's normal for him not to be particularly empathetic.
Last edited by Mona on Thu Nov 20, 2014 11:03 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 2361 to 2390
Mona Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:43 pm
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 8:34 pm (#2361 of 2617)
I had to leave the computer unexpectedly before I'd proofed the previous post, but since no one else has posted I can add a bit more.
What I'm saying is that Snape is acting in a normal way when he doesn't extend more than negative empathy toward Harry. Normal people don't spend a lot of time attempting to empathize deeply with people they loathe. However, Snape does have the ability to empathize, and I think he does do it with some people. He seems to empathize with Draco's situation, both in his discussions with Dumbledore about Draco (in DH) and in his conversations with Draco in HBP. He appears to empathize with Narcissa and her fears for Draco at the hands of LV. And I think he empathizes some with DD.
Not all empathy includes sympathy and we shouldn't mix them up. Snape does empathize to a degree with Harry, he just doesn't empathize in a positive way. He does see and correctly interpret those things about Harry which are indeed negative, but he doesn't attempt to empathize with those things about Harry that might create sympathy or any sort of good will. While it is not good that he acts that way, it is perfectly normal for people to not go far into positive empathy for people that they dislike.
mona amon - Jun 9, 2008 8:36 pm (#2362 of 2617)
Edited Jun 9, 2008 9:23 pm
I think empathy (as we usually use the word) means understanding a person so well that you can almost feel what that person is feeling, and it's usually a result of having common experiences. For instance, when Harry views Snape's worst memory, he feels a lot of empathy for him because he knew exactly what it felt like (because of Dudley's bullying) to be humiliated in front of a circle of onlookers. If Hermione had seen the same thing, she'd probably have felt sorry for Snape (sympathy) but the complete identification with him would not have been there (this is an assumption of course).
When Snape practices legilemency on Harry he witnesses scenes where Harry is being bullied or ill treated. Does he feel empathy for Harry? I think he might have felt a little, because he is less harsh to Harry in the first occlumency lesson than he usually is, but on the whole he does a very good job of supressing it. He does not want to see Harry as anything other than James the second.
On the whole we are not shown Snape being particularly empathetic, though I remember one instance of sympathy, "The dark lord does not expect Draco to succeed. This is merely punishment for Lucius's recent failures. Slow torture for Draco's parents while they watch him fail and pay the price."
Does he feel empathy for Narcissa at Spinners End? He was after all in a similar position once when he went to Dumbledore to beg him to save Lily, but it's difficult to say whether he is being empathetic or just sympathetic in this scene.
EDIT: I'm not sure he was feeling empathy with Draco in the conversation he has with him in HBP. In that scene he is like a parent with a child, trying to give advice that will help keep him out of trouble, while the child refuses to listen. When I'm in a similar situation with my son I know I feel frustration and annoyance rather than empathy with him, and I think Snape's feelings towards Draco are similar.
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 9:06 pm (#2363 of 2617)
In Snape's conversations with Draco, I was particularly thinking of his comments where it's clear he realizes Draco's distress over his father being in prison, or later, after sectumsempra, when he tries to alleviate anxiety Draco might have over how seriously he'd been injured.
I think empathy (as we usually use the word) means understanding a person so well that you can almost feel what that person is feeling, and its usually a result of having common experiences. (mona amon)
This is the stronger form of empathy, a sort of putting oneself in the other person's shoes, through relating their experience to similar experiences or feelings of your own. Snape does appear to be able to do this, but he does not do it much with Harry. I do agree that he perhaps began to do it in the first Occlumency lesson, where Snape was, for him, a lot less nasty. But very few people attempt much empathy for people they don't like.
The fact that Harry does allow himself to empathize with Snape is a mark of Harry's own character, but probably many kids his age wouldn't find themselves able to empathize with someone they hated. Later, in HBP, Harry empathizes with Draco. Harry is actually unusual in this regard and I don't consider it a mark against most people that they'd find it difficult to impossible to empathize with someone they loathed. The loathing itself may be completely misplaced, but once it's there, it's pretty difficult to empathize with someone.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 9, 2008 9:41 pm (#2364 of 2617)
This is the stronger form of empathy, a sort of putting oneself in the other person's shoes, through relating their experience to similar experiences or feelings of your own. Snape does appear to be able to do this, but he does not do it much with Harry.
Wynnleaf, would you mind citing a reference or two to where Snape shows his empathetic side? The only instance that occurs to me is when he says, "Who did the dog belong to?" in the Occlumency lesson (OP). I remember being deeply disappointed by that entire interaction, incidentally.
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 9:44 pm (#2365 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, would you mind citing a reference or two to where Snape shows his empathetic side? (Quinn)
It's more of a gut feeling, not based on many specifics. I guess the fact that Snape isn't as sarcastic or insulting is part of it, plus his face getting pale after seeing a memory of Harry's, the question about the dog, and the lack of sarcastic remarks about the way the Dursleys treat Harry.
Dryleaves - Jun 10, 2008 12:57 am (#2366 of 2617)
...the lack of sarcastic remarks about the way the Dursleys treat Harry (Wynnleaf)
The lack of sarcasm is conspicuous, as the Dursleys' treatment of Harry is a cornucopia of opportunities for Snape to make snide, nasty remarks. After having seen it for the first time Snape instead does something as rare as to compliment Harry. He also compliments him a second time, later, though in a less reassuring tone, I think, after Harry has broken into his own memories. The fact that those memories are childhood memories, could maybe also be some sign of empathy in the identification sense. These were the memories that were at the ready, in the "front" of the mind. Even if Snape is a person who dwells in the past, he could just as well have had other, more recent thoughts on his mind: he does work for the Order, Umbridge is at Hogwarts, and there are the usual, annoying students, etc. Instead there is this exposed child.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 2:10 am (#2367 of 2617)
Edited Jun 10, 2008 3:22 am
I tried to collect a few quotes that IMO may indicate empathy. Of course, since we never get to see into Snape's mind, we cannot be sure, but I think these are possible indications of empathy.
I have been told that you have already shown aptitude at resisting the Imperius Curse. You will find that similar powers are needed for this...
I think this is a form of encouragment that Snape tries to give Harry at the beginning of the practice. (If we compare Snape to Snape, this is quite remarkable.) We know that Harry is nervous. (He is eyeing Snape's wand apprehensively). If Snape realizes that Harry is nervous (empathy), encouragement is an appropriate response to that, meaning perhaps "it will not be absolutely new, you will know how to do it".
After the first legilimency attack, Harry asks: Did you see everything I saw? I think when he says "everything", he is mostly concerned whether Snape saw the kiss with Cho or not. Snape answers Flashes of it and then asks the question about the dog (which may indicate some form of sympathy) but he does not mention Cho, so perhaps he understands that this is what Harry least wanted him to see and is considerate enough not to mention it. (Again, these are only assumptions, possibilities, but we will never know for sure unless JKR rewrites the book from Snape's point of view and that is not likely.) After that Snape praises Harry:
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been.
This can be interpreted both as praise and as encouragement indicating that Snape realizes how Harry hates the situation and tries to help a bit. Then of course he reacts to some of Harry's memories by turning paler than usual. Once we speculated that Snape may have learned Occlumency in the hard way, as a DE, trying to guard his private thoughts and memories against LV's regular legilimency tests and this is how he is trying to teach Harry. This would make it more likely that Snape can empathize with Harry in this situation more than usually. (Harry does not seem to notice it.) But Snape also gets annoyed because Harry does not react to the situation the way he did. Harry does not make efforts to learn Occlumency and Snape probably interprets him quite correctly (empathy) when he suggests that Harry "enjoys" his visions, even though it is not so much "enjoyment" but strong curiosity to find out what his dreams mean.
I think Snape definitely empathizes and sympathizes with Narcissa, since he can closely relate Narcissa's plight to his own experience and his reactions also suggest both empathy and sympathy. Apart from that, he perhaps understands her regarding something where their experiences are very different: DD's approaching death to Narcissa means her son's survival, while to Snape it means loss and sorrow and the beginning of a darker future.
The fact that those memories are childhood memories, could maybe also be some sign of empathy in the identification sense. These were the memories that were at the ready, in the "front" of the mind. (Dryleaves)
Very interesting observation, Dryleaves. I don't know if this is what you mean but do you think Snape has his childhood memories in the front of his mind because he has been watching Harry's sad childhood memories and that brings out his own sad memories of his own sad childhood? I think these Occlumency lessons, disastrous as they are, could result in a deeper understanding between Snape and Harry if the Worst Memory did not surface. Or maybe it could be a one-way understanding only. Perhaps the problem is that while Snape can empathize and sympathize with Harry more because of seeing his memories, Harry (who does not notice the change) totally rejects the idea of Snape entering his mind. However, when Harry gets the opportunity to see Snape's sad memories, he can look at Snape with more empathy, even sympathy but then Snape, like Harry before, strongly rejects the idea of this intrusion and does not for a moment think that Harry may actually understand him. (How much would it mean to Snape if he knew that seeing his worst memory, Lily's son takes his side and not James Potter's?) If this is so, Snape's decision to give Harry his memories with his last efforts in life implies truly remarkable changes in him with regard to Harry and otherwise.
Orion - Jun 10, 2008 8:49 am (#2368 of 2617)
"I think empathy (as we usually use the word) means understanding a person so well that you can almost feel what that person is feeling, and its usually a result of having common experiences. For instance, when Harry views Snape's worst memory, he feels a lot of empathy for him because he knew exactly what it felt like (because of Dudley's bullying) to be humiliated in front of a circle of onlookers. If Hermione had seen the same thing, she'd probably have felt sorry for Snape (sympathy) but the complete identification with him would not have been there (this is an assumption of course). (mona amon)"
Hermione has been the victim of bullying too, at the beginning of PS/SS, and apart from Ron and Harry she doesn't seem to have real friends. (Briefly, with Victor Krum.) We only see her in normal teenage conversation about dates and stuff in HBP when she has almost graduated. At the beginning of PS/SS she behaves so strangely that you get the impression of a socially very isolated child whom her classmates hated. So I think Hermione would have totally understood. On the other hand her inability to understand the house-elves' feelings is astonishing. Everybody is telling her repeatedly that she's insulting, but she doesn't get it. Strange. But I think she would have understood Snape.
"When Snape practices legilimency on Harry he witnesses scenes where Harry is being bullied or ill treated. Does he feel empathy for Harry? I think he might have felt a little, because he is less harsh to Harry in the first occlumency lesson than he usually is, but on the whole he does a very good job of supressing it. He does not want to see Harry as anything other than James the second." (mona amon)
If Snape saw Harry as somebody other than James the second he would go to pieces. Hating Harry is a (stupid) working strategy to keep his monstrous guilt at bay so that he doesn't lose his mind. If he ever faced what he has done he would be a case for St Mungo's. The perfunctory personality he keeps running is not very lovable but at least his brains are still intact.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 10:08 am (#2369 of 2617)
...not very lovable???
PeskyPixie - Jun 10, 2008 10:10 am (#2370 of 2617)
Well, on the surface Sev is not the nicest guy. Oh, dear me, we are back to 'nice' again.
wynnleaf - Jun 10, 2008 10:22 am (#2371 of 2617)
If he ever faced what he has done he would be a case for St Mungo's. (Orion)
Do you mean "faced what he has done" to Harry since the Potter's deaths? Or what he did that helped bring about their deaths? I think you're partly right about how he'd feel about how he'd treated Harry. Once he started down the path of treating Harry like a mini-James, and once he'd got a year or two down the road of treating him so badly, I think he almost had to keep himself from seeing Lily in Harry. If he ever let himself truly see that Harry was Lily's child, he'd have to face up to that. So while he at first saw only James as, perhaps, some sort of defense mechanism against memories of James, or that James "won" Lily, or whatever, once he'd done that for a length of time, he couldn't stop. In OOTP, he sees much about Harry in the memories that contradicts his assumptions, but he can't let himself get too caught up in that or he'll have to see his own guilt in how he'd treated Harry. Of course, as the occlumency lessons progress, Harry helps to reaffirm Snape's original view of Harry, when Harry clearly doesn't practice anything, dwells consciously on the visions from LV, etc.
Orion - Jun 10, 2008 10:32 am (#2372 of 2617)
"Do you mean "faced what he has done" to Harry since the Potter's deaths? Or what he did that helped bring about their deaths?" (wynnleaf)
I mean delivering the prophecy, wynnleaf. It makes me think of a daddy who insists on driving drunkenly, insists on taking his little child with him, against the protests of his wife, drives too fast and has an accident in which the child gets killed. I know it is a bad comparison because the situations are different, the motivations are different, the backstories are different, everything is different, but the feeling of guilt must be the same.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 10:40 am (#2373 of 2617)
After my previous post I thought how sad it was that Snape was so sure that Harry - mini-James - had been "having fun" watching his Worst Memory, when Harry in fact sympathized with Snape (even after Snape had thrown him out of his office) and was appalled by his father's behaviour. If Snape had just known that... I think he could not very well imagine people in general (and of course Harry specifically) feeling any sympathy for him and probably would have rejected the whole idea. But then again you may be right that this was a survival strategy for Snape and seeing Harry for what he was would have destroyed him.
EDIT: Hm... Orion, I thought he did face what he had done (delivering the prophecy) and did feel very guilty about it. I can believe that facing how unfair he was to Harry and that Harry was not mini-James could be an unbearable addition to his already huge guilt but at some level he must have faced his basic guilt. During DH, lots of things must have happened inside him - he remained sane but he was able to separate Harry from James or else how could he have found Lily in him in the end?
Quinn Crockett - Jun 10, 2008 10:52 am (#2374 of 2617)
Edited Jun 10, 2008 11:43 am
So it looks like apart from the Occlumency lesson and the "dog" remark, we don't really have any examples of Snape's empathetic side. Julia, I'm not sure I entirely agree with your "encouragement" interpretation. I think it was probably all Prof. Snape could do to choke out a backhanded compliment to Harry. I don't think he really cares too much about whether or not Harry wants him to see Harry kissing Cho, for example.
I think the scene with Narcissa is tricky because we know that at this time Snape has made the deal with Dumbledore to kill him when the time comes. We also know that, now more than ever, he must keep up his Death Eater appearance, particularly in front of Bellatrix (and possibly Wormtail). Personally, I think he shows great tenderness with Narcissa and I believe there is genuine affection between them. They seem to have been friends a long time. To me, this is important when considering his empathetic side.
ETA: Solitaire, I think this scene is what greatly defines the character for me. He tells Sirius, "Vengeance is sweet." He is thinking only of his own history with Sirius and Lupin. He doesn't want to hear the truth, he doesn't want to even consider that there may be another explanation, etc.
Solitaire - Jun 10, 2008 10:56 am (#2375 of 2617)
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been.
LOL I do not think this could be construed as a compliment from anyone other than Snape. I'd consider it an insult, if someone said such a thing to me.
Last night I finished reading PoA (I'm rereading the series right now) and noticed an interesting discrepancy with regard to Snape. He says the following to Harry: "... your saintly father and his friends played a highly amusing joke on me that would have resulted in my death if your father hadn't got cold feet at the last moment. There was nothing brave about what he did. He was saving his own skin as much as mine. Had their joke succeeded, he would have been expelled from Hogwarts."
Later, in the Shrieking Shack, Remus has this to say: Sirius thought it would be--er--amusing, to tell Snape all he had to do was prod the knot on the tree trunk with a long stick, and he'd be able to get in after me. Well, of course, Snape tried it--if he'd got as far as this house, he'd have met a fully grown werewolf--but your father, who'd heard what Sirius had done, went after Snape and pulled him back, at great risk to his life ..." This sounds like neither Lupin nor James were in on the planning of this particular prank. It doesn't seem that James thought it was a great thing to do. So ... is Snape really convinced that James and Lupin had a part in the prank, or is he just lying about it to hurt Harry? And doesn't he continue to persist in this assertion in the future, even though he's obviously heard the truth about it while he was lingering outside the Shrieking Shack door, concealed under the Invisibility Cloak?
It was interesting to reread PoA again. I saw lots of things I'd either forgotten or didn't notice before. One thing that really caught my attention was the dream Harry had following the Gryffindor-Ravenclaw quidditch match. In his dream he was following something silvery-white through a forest. It reminded me of the Silver Doe in DH. Great foreshadowing ...
Solitaire
PeskyPixie - Jun 10, 2008 11:01 am (#2376 of 2617)
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been.
LOL! Yes, only from Snape can this be considered a compliment and I accept it as such.
I love the Silver Doe foreshadowing as well. Actually, Harry does quite a bit of foreshadowing about Severus, starting with his nightmarish dream during his first night at Hogwarts.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 11:08 am (#2377 of 2617)
Edited Jun 10, 2008 12:26 pm
Julia, I'm not sure I entirely agree with your "encouragement" interpretation. (Quinn)
As I said, we don't see into him. The compliment may be backhanded but is more than what Snape usually gives.
I think the scene with Narcissa is tricky because we know that at this time Snape has made the deal with Dumbledore to kill him when the time comes. We also know that, now more than ever, he must keep up his Death Eater appearance, particularly in front of Bellatrix (and possibly Wormtail).
Of course. Still I don't think he had to make that vow. Of course he knew he would do it anyway, he would save Draco (as part of the plan between him and DD) but he needn't have let the conversation get as far as this point, the whole thing could have been safely stopped where he and Bella told Narcissa that she ought not to speak if she was forbidden. The only reason that I can think of for Snape to continue the conversation (and it was Snape who continued it) is to give some hope or comfort to Narcissa and he could not tell her that Draco would be saved anyway. That is how he ended up making the vow.
They seem to have been friends a long time.
That is a question... Narcissa is desperate and ready to do anything. Asking someone to make that vow (instead of a promise) is not something typical between real friends. On the other hand, she knows where Snape lives and Snape is kind to her from the first moment. But then Narcissa is so similar to Snape-on-the-hilltop...
The Prank again: I think Snape is convinced that James was involved in the Prank. Maybe past experience taught him to think that Sirius and James were doing these things together and, of course, his opinion of James. But I don't think he is angry with Sirius really only because of the Prank. He does not want to tell them there that the (probably) main reason why he hates Sirius is that he "betrayed" (as he, as almost everyone else, thinks) Lily. He thinks that he has caught the man who betrayed Lily and that is why he is so out of his mind.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 12:49 pm (#2378 of 2617)
I agree that this is not one of Snape's best moments (though perhaps we would be more sympathetic towards him if he were right and Sirius were a DE). However, I don't think either that this is the moment that best defines the character. On the one hand, he is still going to change and improve, so why should this be the "real" Snape when he has been worse and will be better? On the other hand, this is an extreme, agitated moment for him and I do think it is about much more than just the Prank. His whole life went irreversibly wrong when he could not save Lily from the danger he had brought on her and this is probably why he is half mad now.
This question may not belong to this thread but let me ask anyway: Does anyone know why Snape's role at the end of the movie version was changed so much? I have read it was JKR's idea but is it known why? Was the movie version something she had considered for the book before deciding on the final book version? (I like the movie version because it brings out certain similarities between Sirius and Snape: how both of them are protecting Harry. Snape is also in a way more book-Snape-like in this scene than in many other movie scenes that are closer to the books. It is very characteristic that in one moment he is furious with Harry but in the next moment he immediately shields him from the sudden danger.)
Orion - Jun 10, 2008 12:58 pm (#2379 of 2617)
MovieSnape is a mess. He is never nasty enough to explain Harry's problems with him, and they changed scenes when it doesn't result in saving screen time. At the beginning of COS, for example, when MovieSnape berates Ron and Harry over a newspaper clipping, it's a static and uninteresting scene when it would have been so much better if he had spotted them outside the Great Hall insulting him. It's just insensitive film-making, I suppose.
POA is my favourite film, but there are three important shortcomings: Lack of Marauders backstory, lack of temper tantrum, Snape as living shield between werewolf and trio instead of being dragged along with his head lolling and bumping against the ceiling.
wynnleaf - Jun 10, 2008 1:07 pm (#2380 of 2617)
So it looks like apart from the Occlumency lesson and the "dog" remark, we don't really have any examples of Snape's empathetic side. (Quinn)
Perhaps not regarding Harry, but we did have other examples of probable empathy for other characters. We can't prove empathy with practically any of the characters other than Harry, because unless we get to see their thoughts, we don't know if it's really empathy.
So ... is Snape really convinced that James and Lupin had a part in the prank, or is he just lying about it to hurt Harry? (Solitiare)
I cannot recall any instance in the series where Snape directly lies, or even indirectly, other than to the bad guys like Bella or Umbridge or LV. In general, his character is insulting and sarcastic, but he doesn't tell lies. Lupin, on the other hand, is shown to lie on numerous occasions, sometimes to make the past look a bit better, sometimes he lies to Snape, he lied to Dumbledore, etc. It would not be uncharacteristic for Lupin to lie about James' part in a prank if that would make James look better to Harry. On the other hand, without any proof one way or the other from JKR, we can't know whether James was in on the prank or not. I do think, given that we don't see Snape lie except to bad guys, that Snape did truly believe that James was in on it.
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been. (Snape in OOTP)
LOL! Yes, only from Snape can this be considered a compliment and I accept it as such. (Pesky)
I agree, from Snape it's a compliment. But if Snape is supposed to be from northern England, it could just stem from a local tendency to give backhanded compliments. Harry, having been in Snape's class for 5 years, might have recognized it as such if he didn't see everything about Snape through the "I hate Snape" lense. Personally, I do it myself much of the time and my kids are used to it and understand my "that's half-way decent" as "that's pretty good". Of course, my kids also know I actually love them, whereas Harry thinks, correctly, that Snape loathes him.
At the beginning of COS, for example, when MovieSnape berates Ron and Harry over a newspaper clipping, it's a static and uninteresting scene when it would have been so much better if he had spotted them outside the Great Hall insulting him. (Orion)
Yes, but if they'd shown that scene it would not have made Snape seem worse, it would have made Harry and Ron seem worse. After all, that's the first we see Snape in COS, and other than the previous book, where we discovered at the end that he was protecting Harry rather than trying to kill him, we have not much reason to dislike Snape. I'm speaking more of the film, because the film didn't give as much in PS/SS to make the viewer dislike Snape. So if in COS, Ron and Harry were shown right off as hoping Snape got fired and laughing about it, Snape's anger would come across as quite justified (which it was, by the way). And then Ron and Harry don't seem as sympathetic.
I've commented occasionally that the films often leave out bits from scenes that make the trio seem slightly less sympathetic or somewhat questionable -- no blowing up the potions class and injuring students in the films for instance, or laughing while ferret/Draco is being bounced onto the pavement. I think some things that we can pass off in print would look a lot worse acted out in film. The same might possibly be said for Snape in the classroom. If we saw Snape saying some of the things he does in the books, it might not be as easy to convince viewers later that Snape is on the good side.
tandaradei - Jun 10, 2008 1:18 pm (#2381 of 2617)
...[cut]...Empathy, of all the terms here discussed {Sympathy, pity, compassion, commiseration, condolence, ruth}, has the least emotional content; it describes a gift, often a cultivated gift, for vicarious feeling, but the feeling need not be one of sorrow; thus empathy is often used as a synonym for some senses of sympathy as well as in distinction from sympathy [what he lacks is not sympathy but empathy, the ability to put himself in the other fellow's place -- G. W. Johnson] Empathy is frequently employed with reference to nonhuman object (as a literary character or an idea, culture, or work of art) [a fundamental component of the aesthetic attitude is sympathy, or -- more accurately -- empathy. In the presence of any work of art ... the recipient ... must surrender his independent and outstanding personality, to identify himself with the form or action presented by the artist -- Read]....[cut]...
Webster's New Dictionary of Synonyms, p.809
I suppose, in storytelling, when an audience reacts to a character's situation, that happens more through empathy than sympathy. However, if one of the characters (for example) cares of animals and the audience does also, or at least believes it does, an amount of sympathy can evolve.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 10, 2008 1:45 pm (#2382 of 2617)
Lupin, on the other hand, is shown to lie on numerous occasions - Wynnleaf
Hm. I don't recall Lupin ever lying. Unless you are referring to his sort of "lying by omission" about knowing Sirius was an Animagus and not saying anything about it. In which case, I would say that that's really only one time. Still, I agree that Snape doesn't ever seem to lie, though he does withhold information (to Voldemort, especially).
I can understand Snape believing that Sirius was the one who betrayed the Potters' hiding place. Everyone thought this, after all, even Lupin initially. Nevertheless, Snape's immediate, "gut" reaction is to exact vengeance. "Vengeance is sweet. How I wished I would be the one to find you..." and also "Give me a reason..."
Later, though Snape doesn't directly exact the kind of vengeance he had earlier threatened ("Perhaps they'll even give you a little kiss...") he is still quite happy to actively try to discredit Harry, Ron and Hermione if it means Sirius will be sent back to Azkaban, or worse.
On empathy, I have always understood it to mean the ability to understand/comprehend the emotional experiences of others but without necessarily actively feeling the same thing. Sympathy is more the ability to actually feel what someone else is experiencing, but perhaps to a lesser degree. Is that not right?
Dryleaves - Jun 10, 2008 2:13 pm (#2383 of 2617)
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been. (Snape in OOTP)
LOL! Yes, only from Snape can this be considered a compliment and I accept it as such. (Pesky)
I know quite a few people who give this kind of compliments. Maybe it is a cultural thing. I think it is more common in the countryside and smaller towns than in bigger towns. And in the southern half of Sweden we have a prejudice that says that this is the only kind of compliment people give in the northern half. It may also be a class thing. In Sweden there is a conception called "Jantelagen" (the Jante-law, from a book by Norweigan author Aksel Sandemose, I think) and this "law" states among other things that you shall not think that you are "someone" or that you are better than anyone else. Similar notions probably exists in other parts of the world as well.
Regarding the prank and the reunion in the Shrieking Shack: I think Snape is convinced James is in on the joke. I think he sees the Marauders as an entity and believes they do everything together(probably from experience). He hates the Marauders and he can and wants to think nothing but ill of them (and I don't think this is a particularly Snapish tendency, I had similar feelings about bullies at school). I think he also feels that he is the one who is in the right but never is listened to, the one who never gets justice. When Sirius is accused of being the one that betrayed James and Lily this confirms what Snape "knew" of him all the time, and finally it is proved to the world that he was right. But most of all this is a bitter feeling, because it happened too late, as Sirius got Lily killed (in Snape's mind and at this time it is also the common opinion). In the Shack he still truly thinks the Marauders are villains, so of course he is not so willing to listen to Lupin and Sirius, who in his opinion (and to his experience) are accomplices and liars. When I read the Shrieking Shack scene for the first time I thought Snape was being totally unreasonable. When I reread it and knew about the Marauders and above all about Lily, I didn't think his reaction was that strange at all. It is not a good thing that it could have resulted in an innocent man being kissed by a Dementor, and concerning the Marauders I think he seems to never get enough justice and forgets that twenty years have passed since the last time, but it is not, I think, a situation that defines a character. Had he been listening, reasonable and understanding, though, it might have been.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 3:40 pm (#2384 of 2617)
Edited Jun 10, 2008 4:57 pm
If we saw Snape saying some of the things he does in the books, it might not be as easy to convince viewers later that Snape is on the good side. (wynnleaf)
We are yet to see how easy it will be after all that they did and that they did not do in the movies. Movie-Snape sometimes seems to be a bit too rough even for book-Snape in a physical sense but he talks less, so he is less sarcastic.
I don't recall Lupin ever lying. (Quinn)
He lies to Snape when Snape asks him about the map (he denies that he knows anything about it) and then takes Harry away from Snape's office saying that he wants to discuss his vampire essay. Moments later he reveals it to Harry that he does not want to talk about the essay and that he knows about the origin of the map, which indicates he finds it OK to have told lies to a colleague (to Snape at any rate) and does not mind that Harry knows it.
Snape tells lies only when it is a part of his job as a spy or his order work (to Voldemort, the DE's, to Umbridge). It is significant that when he reminds DD what he has been through to keep Harry alive, he mentions lying alongside mortal danger: I have spied for you and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you. To me this suggests he regards having to tell lies as one of the worst things he has been forced to put up with.
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been. (Snape in OOTP)
LOL! Yes, only from Snape can this be considered a compliment and I accept it as such. (Pesky)
Interesting observations about dialects. (I will try to look it up.) I know differences of this kind exist between dialects.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 10, 2008 5:02 pm (#2385 of 2617)
Yes, I forgot that Lupin does lie about the Map. But to be fair, Snape lied about the map as well when he claimed it was "full of Dark magic" and pretended not to know who Moony, Wormtail Padfoot and Prongs were.
I think Lupin was protecting his shared past with Snape which both men seem to have wanted though obviously for different reasons. Both men could have used the opportunity to lambast the other, or at least reveal each other's secret, but neither does. They are each willing to keep the secret. For now.
And I may have caused some confusion when I said that the Shrieking Shack scene was what defined Snape's character for me. I meant it in a sort of cinematic way in that it's the first time that we got a sense of who this character is, where he comes from. Up to that point he is just sort of inexplicably nasty to Harry and his friends. But after this, we understand that he is carrying around this tremendous grudge (there is even an chapter called "Snape's Grudge") and that he's taking it out on Harry.
We have a starting place for his character arc, though of course we'll get the whole picture later on. Hope that clears things up.
ETA: Yes, Sirius's gut reaction was to kill Peter. But this seems only fair since Peter had, for all intents and purposes, "killed" Sirius. Besides, Peter was supposedly already dead. I don't think comparing Snape and Sirius is a very balanced comparison. They are both pretty stunted, emotionally. Sirius because he was in prison and Snape because... well he seems to want to cling to that hate, in my opinion.
wynnleaf - Jun 10, 2008 5:03 pm (#2386 of 2617)
I don't recall Lupin ever lying. (Quinn)
Julia mentioned important ones, but there seem to be more. Lying by omission to DD is very significant because of two things: 1. the severity of the danger, as far as he knew, that he put people in through his deceit and 2. he did it solely to keep the favor of the headmaster, his employer. Picture when the Fat Lady's portrait was shred and everyone knew Sirius Black, assumed mass murderer and Death Eater, was stalking the castle. Dumbledore sends the staff to search the school, Lupin along with them. Lupin allows everyone including DD to go on the search without telling them that they need to be searching for a dog. Or when the staff is trying to keep the castle safe and Lupin chooses to not tell about the secret entrances that Black knows of. We know that no one was guarding at least one, since Harry was able to continue to use it.
But there's more. In POA, Lupin tells Harry that Snape hated James because he was jealous of his Quidditch skills. Perhaps we could stretch that to a truth - barely. Surely Lupin knew their animosity went far and away deeper than the sort of animosity between Harry and McClaggen. Lupin chooses to not reveal his past friendship with James to Harry, in spite of Harry's questioning. That's not a lie, but it is concealment. My point isn't that we should never, ever trust Lupin, but that if we're going to choose to believe Lupin or Snape over the issue of what James knew and when he knew it, we already know that Lupin has a past of concealing things in efforts to keep the goodwill of others. It would be in character for him to conceal a negative about James from Harry so that Harry wouldn't feel badly about his father. Snape, on the other hand, has only been shown to lie in the line of duty, so to speak.
Another piece of evidence is the HBP detention files, in which we are only shown James and Sirius getting into misadventures together making it more likely that at least certain aspects of the Prank were known to James from the outset, than that Sirius acted completely alone.
All that said, I really don't think we can possibly make a definite call on it, because JKR never showed us whose story was correct, or even if either story was really correct. I do think she showed us enough to determine that Snape at least believed that James was in on it.
Snape's immediate, "gut" reaction is to exact vengeance. (Quinn)
Yes, indeed, but then again, that was also Lupin and Sirius' first reaction to Peter, right? And Lupin and Sirius wanted to exact vengence by killing Peter outright, without him ever having been taken before the authorities. Snape, on the other hand, threatened to take Sirius to the dementors who, whatever we personally feel about it, were indeed the ones charged with taking in Sirius Black. Further, Lupin and Sirius, when they had Peter in their immediate control, were actually going to follow through and kill him, if Harry hadn't stepped in. But Snape, when he actually had Sirius unconscious before him, did not take him to the dementors and instead put him on a stretcher and took him, with the children, into Hogwarts. The stretcher is particularly noteworthy, since we had just seen Sirius take the unconscious Snape floating along through the tunnel allowing his head to bump repeatedly on the ceiling.
Outside of his Death Eater role, Snape is mostly bark with little bite.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 5:22 pm (#2387 of 2617)
... and pretended not to know who Moony, Wormtail Padfoot and Prongs were (Quinn)
Did he really know these nicknames? Is this ever mentioned? Because I don't know. Or could he just think that Harry had an object offending him (Snape) and the most likely source, since Lupin was in the castle, was a former Marauder? Or did he just realize that the four nicknames might mean the four Marauders? ("Moony" must have been easy to guess but I'm not sure about the other nicknames: It was the Marauders' secret that they were animagi, so they may have kept their nicknames a secret as well.)
PeskyPixie - Jun 10, 2008 5:29 pm (#2388 of 2617)
"Snape ... seems to want to cling to that hate, in my opinion." -Quinn
Not everyone is equal in their ability to let go of old hurts, especially without closure. Some people aren't bothered by anything, but others need closure before they have any hope of moving on. Of course, 'moving on' would be the healthiest thing for Snape, but who's going to suggest this to him and help him through his muddled up emotions? Especially when there's a Dark Lord he's betrayed waiting around the corner to rise again?
I wonder why readers tend to give Sirius such breaks? He's a 'good guy', but there is a very unappealing arrogant streak in him. I've noticed that (in the past) many excuse his verbal assault on Snape aboard the Hogwarts Express then blame Snape for sticking up for his own beliefs. If only oddball Neville had done the same to Draco, we would be applauding him ... just thinking, that perhaps it does pay to be rich, good-looking, popular and a Gryffindor.
ETA: Julia, I'm not sure when Snape learns of the Marauders' nicknames (i.e. once the OotP has reformed or since his schooldays). I'm thinking the former, because how else would he know know to connect Lupin to the Map? I have a hunch that he feels Lupin is using his opportunity as professor to make a mockery of Snape ... just as he did not exercise his power as prefect to protect Snape all those years ago. Some people have a horrifically difficult time disassociating themselves from their high school image.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 5:45 pm (#2389 of 2617)
I'm thinking the former, because how else would he know know to connect Lupin to the Map? (Pesky)
I tried to make some suggestions above... but I don't know. I just wondered whether the Marauders did not keep these nicknames secret. Illegal animagi break the law - it is more serious than ordinary rule breaking at school.
I have a hunch that he feels Lupin is using his opportunity as professor to make a mockery of Snape ...
You see that is likely (after the boggart incident, especially) and it may be a reason why Snape might connect Lupin to the Map, even without knowing the nicknames. But once he thinks of Lupin, "Moony" would be as obvious as an already solved riddle. (If you know what I mean. )
PeskyPixie - Jun 10, 2008 5:59 pm (#2390 of 2617)
Ah, I see, the tone of the insult coupled with the name 'Moony' makes him 'put two and two together as only Snape could.' That's an interesting way to look at it. I hadn't considered it before.
I had to leave the computer unexpectedly before I'd proofed the previous post, but since no one else has posted I can add a bit more.
What I'm saying is that Snape is acting in a normal way when he doesn't extend more than negative empathy toward Harry. Normal people don't spend a lot of time attempting to empathize deeply with people they loathe. However, Snape does have the ability to empathize, and I think he does do it with some people. He seems to empathize with Draco's situation, both in his discussions with Dumbledore about Draco (in DH) and in his conversations with Draco in HBP. He appears to empathize with Narcissa and her fears for Draco at the hands of LV. And I think he empathizes some with DD.
Not all empathy includes sympathy and we shouldn't mix them up. Snape does empathize to a degree with Harry, he just doesn't empathize in a positive way. He does see and correctly interpret those things about Harry which are indeed negative, but he doesn't attempt to empathize with those things about Harry that might create sympathy or any sort of good will. While it is not good that he acts that way, it is perfectly normal for people to not go far into positive empathy for people that they dislike.
mona amon - Jun 9, 2008 8:36 pm (#2362 of 2617)
Edited Jun 9, 2008 9:23 pm
I think empathy (as we usually use the word) means understanding a person so well that you can almost feel what that person is feeling, and it's usually a result of having common experiences. For instance, when Harry views Snape's worst memory, he feels a lot of empathy for him because he knew exactly what it felt like (because of Dudley's bullying) to be humiliated in front of a circle of onlookers. If Hermione had seen the same thing, she'd probably have felt sorry for Snape (sympathy) but the complete identification with him would not have been there (this is an assumption of course).
When Snape practices legilemency on Harry he witnesses scenes where Harry is being bullied or ill treated. Does he feel empathy for Harry? I think he might have felt a little, because he is less harsh to Harry in the first occlumency lesson than he usually is, but on the whole he does a very good job of supressing it. He does not want to see Harry as anything other than James the second.
On the whole we are not shown Snape being particularly empathetic, though I remember one instance of sympathy, "The dark lord does not expect Draco to succeed. This is merely punishment for Lucius's recent failures. Slow torture for Draco's parents while they watch him fail and pay the price."
Does he feel empathy for Narcissa at Spinners End? He was after all in a similar position once when he went to Dumbledore to beg him to save Lily, but it's difficult to say whether he is being empathetic or just sympathetic in this scene.
EDIT: I'm not sure he was feeling empathy with Draco in the conversation he has with him in HBP. In that scene he is like a parent with a child, trying to give advice that will help keep him out of trouble, while the child refuses to listen. When I'm in a similar situation with my son I know I feel frustration and annoyance rather than empathy with him, and I think Snape's feelings towards Draco are similar.
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 9:06 pm (#2363 of 2617)
In Snape's conversations with Draco, I was particularly thinking of his comments where it's clear he realizes Draco's distress over his father being in prison, or later, after sectumsempra, when he tries to alleviate anxiety Draco might have over how seriously he'd been injured.
I think empathy (as we usually use the word) means understanding a person so well that you can almost feel what that person is feeling, and its usually a result of having common experiences. (mona amon)
This is the stronger form of empathy, a sort of putting oneself in the other person's shoes, through relating their experience to similar experiences or feelings of your own. Snape does appear to be able to do this, but he does not do it much with Harry. I do agree that he perhaps began to do it in the first Occlumency lesson, where Snape was, for him, a lot less nasty. But very few people attempt much empathy for people they don't like.
The fact that Harry does allow himself to empathize with Snape is a mark of Harry's own character, but probably many kids his age wouldn't find themselves able to empathize with someone they hated. Later, in HBP, Harry empathizes with Draco. Harry is actually unusual in this regard and I don't consider it a mark against most people that they'd find it difficult to impossible to empathize with someone they loathed. The loathing itself may be completely misplaced, but once it's there, it's pretty difficult to empathize with someone.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 9, 2008 9:41 pm (#2364 of 2617)
This is the stronger form of empathy, a sort of putting oneself in the other person's shoes, through relating their experience to similar experiences or feelings of your own. Snape does appear to be able to do this, but he does not do it much with Harry.
Wynnleaf, would you mind citing a reference or two to where Snape shows his empathetic side? The only instance that occurs to me is when he says, "Who did the dog belong to?" in the Occlumency lesson (OP). I remember being deeply disappointed by that entire interaction, incidentally.
wynnleaf - Jun 9, 2008 9:44 pm (#2365 of 2617)
Wynnleaf, would you mind citing a reference or two to where Snape shows his empathetic side? (Quinn)
It's more of a gut feeling, not based on many specifics. I guess the fact that Snape isn't as sarcastic or insulting is part of it, plus his face getting pale after seeing a memory of Harry's, the question about the dog, and the lack of sarcastic remarks about the way the Dursleys treat Harry.
Dryleaves - Jun 10, 2008 12:57 am (#2366 of 2617)
...the lack of sarcastic remarks about the way the Dursleys treat Harry (Wynnleaf)
The lack of sarcasm is conspicuous, as the Dursleys' treatment of Harry is a cornucopia of opportunities for Snape to make snide, nasty remarks. After having seen it for the first time Snape instead does something as rare as to compliment Harry. He also compliments him a second time, later, though in a less reassuring tone, I think, after Harry has broken into his own memories. The fact that those memories are childhood memories, could maybe also be some sign of empathy in the identification sense. These were the memories that were at the ready, in the "front" of the mind. Even if Snape is a person who dwells in the past, he could just as well have had other, more recent thoughts on his mind: he does work for the Order, Umbridge is at Hogwarts, and there are the usual, annoying students, etc. Instead there is this exposed child.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 2:10 am (#2367 of 2617)
Edited Jun 10, 2008 3:22 am
I tried to collect a few quotes that IMO may indicate empathy. Of course, since we never get to see into Snape's mind, we cannot be sure, but I think these are possible indications of empathy.
I have been told that you have already shown aptitude at resisting the Imperius Curse. You will find that similar powers are needed for this...
I think this is a form of encouragment that Snape tries to give Harry at the beginning of the practice. (If we compare Snape to Snape, this is quite remarkable.) We know that Harry is nervous. (He is eyeing Snape's wand apprehensively). If Snape realizes that Harry is nervous (empathy), encouragement is an appropriate response to that, meaning perhaps "it will not be absolutely new, you will know how to do it".
After the first legilimency attack, Harry asks: Did you see everything I saw? I think when he says "everything", he is mostly concerned whether Snape saw the kiss with Cho or not. Snape answers Flashes of it and then asks the question about the dog (which may indicate some form of sympathy) but he does not mention Cho, so perhaps he understands that this is what Harry least wanted him to see and is considerate enough not to mention it. (Again, these are only assumptions, possibilities, but we will never know for sure unless JKR rewrites the book from Snape's point of view and that is not likely.) After that Snape praises Harry:
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been.
This can be interpreted both as praise and as encouragement indicating that Snape realizes how Harry hates the situation and tries to help a bit. Then of course he reacts to some of Harry's memories by turning paler than usual. Once we speculated that Snape may have learned Occlumency in the hard way, as a DE, trying to guard his private thoughts and memories against LV's regular legilimency tests and this is how he is trying to teach Harry. This would make it more likely that Snape can empathize with Harry in this situation more than usually. (Harry does not seem to notice it.) But Snape also gets annoyed because Harry does not react to the situation the way he did. Harry does not make efforts to learn Occlumency and Snape probably interprets him quite correctly (empathy) when he suggests that Harry "enjoys" his visions, even though it is not so much "enjoyment" but strong curiosity to find out what his dreams mean.
I think Snape definitely empathizes and sympathizes with Narcissa, since he can closely relate Narcissa's plight to his own experience and his reactions also suggest both empathy and sympathy. Apart from that, he perhaps understands her regarding something where their experiences are very different: DD's approaching death to Narcissa means her son's survival, while to Snape it means loss and sorrow and the beginning of a darker future.
The fact that those memories are childhood memories, could maybe also be some sign of empathy in the identification sense. These were the memories that were at the ready, in the "front" of the mind. (Dryleaves)
Very interesting observation, Dryleaves. I don't know if this is what you mean but do you think Snape has his childhood memories in the front of his mind because he has been watching Harry's sad childhood memories and that brings out his own sad memories of his own sad childhood? I think these Occlumency lessons, disastrous as they are, could result in a deeper understanding between Snape and Harry if the Worst Memory did not surface. Or maybe it could be a one-way understanding only. Perhaps the problem is that while Snape can empathize and sympathize with Harry more because of seeing his memories, Harry (who does not notice the change) totally rejects the idea of Snape entering his mind. However, when Harry gets the opportunity to see Snape's sad memories, he can look at Snape with more empathy, even sympathy but then Snape, like Harry before, strongly rejects the idea of this intrusion and does not for a moment think that Harry may actually understand him. (How much would it mean to Snape if he knew that seeing his worst memory, Lily's son takes his side and not James Potter's?) If this is so, Snape's decision to give Harry his memories with his last efforts in life implies truly remarkable changes in him with regard to Harry and otherwise.
Orion - Jun 10, 2008 8:49 am (#2368 of 2617)
"I think empathy (as we usually use the word) means understanding a person so well that you can almost feel what that person is feeling, and its usually a result of having common experiences. For instance, when Harry views Snape's worst memory, he feels a lot of empathy for him because he knew exactly what it felt like (because of Dudley's bullying) to be humiliated in front of a circle of onlookers. If Hermione had seen the same thing, she'd probably have felt sorry for Snape (sympathy) but the complete identification with him would not have been there (this is an assumption of course). (mona amon)"
Hermione has been the victim of bullying too, at the beginning of PS/SS, and apart from Ron and Harry she doesn't seem to have real friends. (Briefly, with Victor Krum.) We only see her in normal teenage conversation about dates and stuff in HBP when she has almost graduated. At the beginning of PS/SS she behaves so strangely that you get the impression of a socially very isolated child whom her classmates hated. So I think Hermione would have totally understood. On the other hand her inability to understand the house-elves' feelings is astonishing. Everybody is telling her repeatedly that she's insulting, but she doesn't get it. Strange. But I think she would have understood Snape.
"When Snape practices legilimency on Harry he witnesses scenes where Harry is being bullied or ill treated. Does he feel empathy for Harry? I think he might have felt a little, because he is less harsh to Harry in the first occlumency lesson than he usually is, but on the whole he does a very good job of supressing it. He does not want to see Harry as anything other than James the second." (mona amon)
If Snape saw Harry as somebody other than James the second he would go to pieces. Hating Harry is a (stupid) working strategy to keep his monstrous guilt at bay so that he doesn't lose his mind. If he ever faced what he has done he would be a case for St Mungo's. The perfunctory personality he keeps running is not very lovable but at least his brains are still intact.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 10:08 am (#2369 of 2617)
...not very lovable???
PeskyPixie - Jun 10, 2008 10:10 am (#2370 of 2617)
Well, on the surface Sev is not the nicest guy. Oh, dear me, we are back to 'nice' again.
wynnleaf - Jun 10, 2008 10:22 am (#2371 of 2617)
If he ever faced what he has done he would be a case for St Mungo's. (Orion)
Do you mean "faced what he has done" to Harry since the Potter's deaths? Or what he did that helped bring about their deaths? I think you're partly right about how he'd feel about how he'd treated Harry. Once he started down the path of treating Harry like a mini-James, and once he'd got a year or two down the road of treating him so badly, I think he almost had to keep himself from seeing Lily in Harry. If he ever let himself truly see that Harry was Lily's child, he'd have to face up to that. So while he at first saw only James as, perhaps, some sort of defense mechanism against memories of James, or that James "won" Lily, or whatever, once he'd done that for a length of time, he couldn't stop. In OOTP, he sees much about Harry in the memories that contradicts his assumptions, but he can't let himself get too caught up in that or he'll have to see his own guilt in how he'd treated Harry. Of course, as the occlumency lessons progress, Harry helps to reaffirm Snape's original view of Harry, when Harry clearly doesn't practice anything, dwells consciously on the visions from LV, etc.
Orion - Jun 10, 2008 10:32 am (#2372 of 2617)
"Do you mean "faced what he has done" to Harry since the Potter's deaths? Or what he did that helped bring about their deaths?" (wynnleaf)
I mean delivering the prophecy, wynnleaf. It makes me think of a daddy who insists on driving drunkenly, insists on taking his little child with him, against the protests of his wife, drives too fast and has an accident in which the child gets killed. I know it is a bad comparison because the situations are different, the motivations are different, the backstories are different, everything is different, but the feeling of guilt must be the same.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 10:40 am (#2373 of 2617)
After my previous post I thought how sad it was that Snape was so sure that Harry - mini-James - had been "having fun" watching his Worst Memory, when Harry in fact sympathized with Snape (even after Snape had thrown him out of his office) and was appalled by his father's behaviour. If Snape had just known that... I think he could not very well imagine people in general (and of course Harry specifically) feeling any sympathy for him and probably would have rejected the whole idea. But then again you may be right that this was a survival strategy for Snape and seeing Harry for what he was would have destroyed him.
EDIT: Hm... Orion, I thought he did face what he had done (delivering the prophecy) and did feel very guilty about it. I can believe that facing how unfair he was to Harry and that Harry was not mini-James could be an unbearable addition to his already huge guilt but at some level he must have faced his basic guilt. During DH, lots of things must have happened inside him - he remained sane but he was able to separate Harry from James or else how could he have found Lily in him in the end?
Quinn Crockett - Jun 10, 2008 10:52 am (#2374 of 2617)
Edited Jun 10, 2008 11:43 am
So it looks like apart from the Occlumency lesson and the "dog" remark, we don't really have any examples of Snape's empathetic side. Julia, I'm not sure I entirely agree with your "encouragement" interpretation. I think it was probably all Prof. Snape could do to choke out a backhanded compliment to Harry. I don't think he really cares too much about whether or not Harry wants him to see Harry kissing Cho, for example.
I think the scene with Narcissa is tricky because we know that at this time Snape has made the deal with Dumbledore to kill him when the time comes. We also know that, now more than ever, he must keep up his Death Eater appearance, particularly in front of Bellatrix (and possibly Wormtail). Personally, I think he shows great tenderness with Narcissa and I believe there is genuine affection between them. They seem to have been friends a long time. To me, this is important when considering his empathetic side.
ETA: Solitaire, I think this scene is what greatly defines the character for me. He tells Sirius, "Vengeance is sweet." He is thinking only of his own history with Sirius and Lupin. He doesn't want to hear the truth, he doesn't want to even consider that there may be another explanation, etc.
Solitaire - Jun 10, 2008 10:56 am (#2375 of 2617)
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been.
LOL I do not think this could be construed as a compliment from anyone other than Snape. I'd consider it an insult, if someone said such a thing to me.
Last night I finished reading PoA (I'm rereading the series right now) and noticed an interesting discrepancy with regard to Snape. He says the following to Harry: "... your saintly father and his friends played a highly amusing joke on me that would have resulted in my death if your father hadn't got cold feet at the last moment. There was nothing brave about what he did. He was saving his own skin as much as mine. Had their joke succeeded, he would have been expelled from Hogwarts."
Later, in the Shrieking Shack, Remus has this to say: Sirius thought it would be--er--amusing, to tell Snape all he had to do was prod the knot on the tree trunk with a long stick, and he'd be able to get in after me. Well, of course, Snape tried it--if he'd got as far as this house, he'd have met a fully grown werewolf--but your father, who'd heard what Sirius had done, went after Snape and pulled him back, at great risk to his life ..." This sounds like neither Lupin nor James were in on the planning of this particular prank. It doesn't seem that James thought it was a great thing to do. So ... is Snape really convinced that James and Lupin had a part in the prank, or is he just lying about it to hurt Harry? And doesn't he continue to persist in this assertion in the future, even though he's obviously heard the truth about it while he was lingering outside the Shrieking Shack door, concealed under the Invisibility Cloak?
It was interesting to reread PoA again. I saw lots of things I'd either forgotten or didn't notice before. One thing that really caught my attention was the dream Harry had following the Gryffindor-Ravenclaw quidditch match. In his dream he was following something silvery-white through a forest. It reminded me of the Silver Doe in DH. Great foreshadowing ...
Solitaire
PeskyPixie - Jun 10, 2008 11:01 am (#2376 of 2617)
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been.
LOL! Yes, only from Snape can this be considered a compliment and I accept it as such.
I love the Silver Doe foreshadowing as well. Actually, Harry does quite a bit of foreshadowing about Severus, starting with his nightmarish dream during his first night at Hogwarts.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 11:08 am (#2377 of 2617)
Edited Jun 10, 2008 12:26 pm
Julia, I'm not sure I entirely agree with your "encouragement" interpretation. (Quinn)
As I said, we don't see into him. The compliment may be backhanded but is more than what Snape usually gives.
I think the scene with Narcissa is tricky because we know that at this time Snape has made the deal with Dumbledore to kill him when the time comes. We also know that, now more than ever, he must keep up his Death Eater appearance, particularly in front of Bellatrix (and possibly Wormtail).
Of course. Still I don't think he had to make that vow. Of course he knew he would do it anyway, he would save Draco (as part of the plan between him and DD) but he needn't have let the conversation get as far as this point, the whole thing could have been safely stopped where he and Bella told Narcissa that she ought not to speak if she was forbidden. The only reason that I can think of for Snape to continue the conversation (and it was Snape who continued it) is to give some hope or comfort to Narcissa and he could not tell her that Draco would be saved anyway. That is how he ended up making the vow.
They seem to have been friends a long time.
That is a question... Narcissa is desperate and ready to do anything. Asking someone to make that vow (instead of a promise) is not something typical between real friends. On the other hand, she knows where Snape lives and Snape is kind to her from the first moment. But then Narcissa is so similar to Snape-on-the-hilltop...
The Prank again: I think Snape is convinced that James was involved in the Prank. Maybe past experience taught him to think that Sirius and James were doing these things together and, of course, his opinion of James. But I don't think he is angry with Sirius really only because of the Prank. He does not want to tell them there that the (probably) main reason why he hates Sirius is that he "betrayed" (as he, as almost everyone else, thinks) Lily. He thinks that he has caught the man who betrayed Lily and that is why he is so out of his mind.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 12:49 pm (#2378 of 2617)
I agree that this is not one of Snape's best moments (though perhaps we would be more sympathetic towards him if he were right and Sirius were a DE). However, I don't think either that this is the moment that best defines the character. On the one hand, he is still going to change and improve, so why should this be the "real" Snape when he has been worse and will be better? On the other hand, this is an extreme, agitated moment for him and I do think it is about much more than just the Prank. His whole life went irreversibly wrong when he could not save Lily from the danger he had brought on her and this is probably why he is half mad now.
This question may not belong to this thread but let me ask anyway: Does anyone know why Snape's role at the end of the movie version was changed so much? I have read it was JKR's idea but is it known why? Was the movie version something she had considered for the book before deciding on the final book version? (I like the movie version because it brings out certain similarities between Sirius and Snape: how both of them are protecting Harry. Snape is also in a way more book-Snape-like in this scene than in many other movie scenes that are closer to the books. It is very characteristic that in one moment he is furious with Harry but in the next moment he immediately shields him from the sudden danger.)
Orion - Jun 10, 2008 12:58 pm (#2379 of 2617)
MovieSnape is a mess. He is never nasty enough to explain Harry's problems with him, and they changed scenes when it doesn't result in saving screen time. At the beginning of COS, for example, when MovieSnape berates Ron and Harry over a newspaper clipping, it's a static and uninteresting scene when it would have been so much better if he had spotted them outside the Great Hall insulting him. It's just insensitive film-making, I suppose.
POA is my favourite film, but there are three important shortcomings: Lack of Marauders backstory, lack of temper tantrum, Snape as living shield between werewolf and trio instead of being dragged along with his head lolling and bumping against the ceiling.
wynnleaf - Jun 10, 2008 1:07 pm (#2380 of 2617)
So it looks like apart from the Occlumency lesson and the "dog" remark, we don't really have any examples of Snape's empathetic side. (Quinn)
Perhaps not regarding Harry, but we did have other examples of probable empathy for other characters. We can't prove empathy with practically any of the characters other than Harry, because unless we get to see their thoughts, we don't know if it's really empathy.
So ... is Snape really convinced that James and Lupin had a part in the prank, or is he just lying about it to hurt Harry? (Solitiare)
I cannot recall any instance in the series where Snape directly lies, or even indirectly, other than to the bad guys like Bella or Umbridge or LV. In general, his character is insulting and sarcastic, but he doesn't tell lies. Lupin, on the other hand, is shown to lie on numerous occasions, sometimes to make the past look a bit better, sometimes he lies to Snape, he lied to Dumbledore, etc. It would not be uncharacteristic for Lupin to lie about James' part in a prank if that would make James look better to Harry. On the other hand, without any proof one way or the other from JKR, we can't know whether James was in on the prank or not. I do think, given that we don't see Snape lie except to bad guys, that Snape did truly believe that James was in on it.
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been. (Snape in OOTP)
LOL! Yes, only from Snape can this be considered a compliment and I accept it as such. (Pesky)
I agree, from Snape it's a compliment. But if Snape is supposed to be from northern England, it could just stem from a local tendency to give backhanded compliments. Harry, having been in Snape's class for 5 years, might have recognized it as such if he didn't see everything about Snape through the "I hate Snape" lense. Personally, I do it myself much of the time and my kids are used to it and understand my "that's half-way decent" as "that's pretty good". Of course, my kids also know I actually love them, whereas Harry thinks, correctly, that Snape loathes him.
At the beginning of COS, for example, when MovieSnape berates Ron and Harry over a newspaper clipping, it's a static and uninteresting scene when it would have been so much better if he had spotted them outside the Great Hall insulting him. (Orion)
Yes, but if they'd shown that scene it would not have made Snape seem worse, it would have made Harry and Ron seem worse. After all, that's the first we see Snape in COS, and other than the previous book, where we discovered at the end that he was protecting Harry rather than trying to kill him, we have not much reason to dislike Snape. I'm speaking more of the film, because the film didn't give as much in PS/SS to make the viewer dislike Snape. So if in COS, Ron and Harry were shown right off as hoping Snape got fired and laughing about it, Snape's anger would come across as quite justified (which it was, by the way). And then Ron and Harry don't seem as sympathetic.
I've commented occasionally that the films often leave out bits from scenes that make the trio seem slightly less sympathetic or somewhat questionable -- no blowing up the potions class and injuring students in the films for instance, or laughing while ferret/Draco is being bounced onto the pavement. I think some things that we can pass off in print would look a lot worse acted out in film. The same might possibly be said for Snape in the classroom. If we saw Snape saying some of the things he does in the books, it might not be as easy to convince viewers later that Snape is on the good side.
tandaradei - Jun 10, 2008 1:18 pm (#2381 of 2617)
...[cut]...Empathy, of all the terms here discussed {Sympathy, pity, compassion, commiseration, condolence, ruth}, has the least emotional content; it describes a gift, often a cultivated gift, for vicarious feeling, but the feeling need not be one of sorrow; thus empathy is often used as a synonym for some senses of sympathy as well as in distinction from sympathy [what he lacks is not sympathy but empathy, the ability to put himself in the other fellow's place -- G. W. Johnson] Empathy is frequently employed with reference to nonhuman object (as a literary character or an idea, culture, or work of art) [a fundamental component of the aesthetic attitude is sympathy, or -- more accurately -- empathy. In the presence of any work of art ... the recipient ... must surrender his independent and outstanding personality, to identify himself with the form or action presented by the artist -- Read]....[cut]...
Webster's New Dictionary of Synonyms, p.809
I suppose, in storytelling, when an audience reacts to a character's situation, that happens more through empathy than sympathy. However, if one of the characters (for example) cares of animals and the audience does also, or at least believes it does, an amount of sympathy can evolve.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 10, 2008 1:45 pm (#2382 of 2617)
Lupin, on the other hand, is shown to lie on numerous occasions - Wynnleaf
Hm. I don't recall Lupin ever lying. Unless you are referring to his sort of "lying by omission" about knowing Sirius was an Animagus and not saying anything about it. In which case, I would say that that's really only one time. Still, I agree that Snape doesn't ever seem to lie, though he does withhold information (to Voldemort, especially).
I can understand Snape believing that Sirius was the one who betrayed the Potters' hiding place. Everyone thought this, after all, even Lupin initially. Nevertheless, Snape's immediate, "gut" reaction is to exact vengeance. "Vengeance is sweet. How I wished I would be the one to find you..." and also "Give me a reason..."
Later, though Snape doesn't directly exact the kind of vengeance he had earlier threatened ("Perhaps they'll even give you a little kiss...") he is still quite happy to actively try to discredit Harry, Ron and Hermione if it means Sirius will be sent back to Azkaban, or worse.
On empathy, I have always understood it to mean the ability to understand/comprehend the emotional experiences of others but without necessarily actively feeling the same thing. Sympathy is more the ability to actually feel what someone else is experiencing, but perhaps to a lesser degree. Is that not right?
Dryleaves - Jun 10, 2008 2:13 pm (#2383 of 2617)
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been. (Snape in OOTP)
LOL! Yes, only from Snape can this be considered a compliment and I accept it as such. (Pesky)
I know quite a few people who give this kind of compliments. Maybe it is a cultural thing. I think it is more common in the countryside and smaller towns than in bigger towns. And in the southern half of Sweden we have a prejudice that says that this is the only kind of compliment people give in the northern half. It may also be a class thing. In Sweden there is a conception called "Jantelagen" (the Jante-law, from a book by Norweigan author Aksel Sandemose, I think) and this "law" states among other things that you shall not think that you are "someone" or that you are better than anyone else. Similar notions probably exists in other parts of the world as well.
Regarding the prank and the reunion in the Shrieking Shack: I think Snape is convinced James is in on the joke. I think he sees the Marauders as an entity and believes they do everything together(probably from experience). He hates the Marauders and he can and wants to think nothing but ill of them (and I don't think this is a particularly Snapish tendency, I had similar feelings about bullies at school). I think he also feels that he is the one who is in the right but never is listened to, the one who never gets justice. When Sirius is accused of being the one that betrayed James and Lily this confirms what Snape "knew" of him all the time, and finally it is proved to the world that he was right. But most of all this is a bitter feeling, because it happened too late, as Sirius got Lily killed (in Snape's mind and at this time it is also the common opinion). In the Shack he still truly thinks the Marauders are villains, so of course he is not so willing to listen to Lupin and Sirius, who in his opinion (and to his experience) are accomplices and liars. When I read the Shrieking Shack scene for the first time I thought Snape was being totally unreasonable. When I reread it and knew about the Marauders and above all about Lily, I didn't think his reaction was that strange at all. It is not a good thing that it could have resulted in an innocent man being kissed by a Dementor, and concerning the Marauders I think he seems to never get enough justice and forgets that twenty years have passed since the last time, but it is not, I think, a situation that defines a character. Had he been listening, reasonable and understanding, though, it might have been.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 3:40 pm (#2384 of 2617)
Edited Jun 10, 2008 4:57 pm
If we saw Snape saying some of the things he does in the books, it might not be as easy to convince viewers later that Snape is on the good side. (wynnleaf)
We are yet to see how easy it will be after all that they did and that they did not do in the movies. Movie-Snape sometimes seems to be a bit too rough even for book-Snape in a physical sense but he talks less, so he is less sarcastic.
I don't recall Lupin ever lying. (Quinn)
He lies to Snape when Snape asks him about the map (he denies that he knows anything about it) and then takes Harry away from Snape's office saying that he wants to discuss his vampire essay. Moments later he reveals it to Harry that he does not want to talk about the essay and that he knows about the origin of the map, which indicates he finds it OK to have told lies to a colleague (to Snape at any rate) and does not mind that Harry knows it.
Snape tells lies only when it is a part of his job as a spy or his order work (to Voldemort, the DE's, to Umbridge). It is significant that when he reminds DD what he has been through to keep Harry alive, he mentions lying alongside mortal danger: I have spied for you and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you. To me this suggests he regards having to tell lies as one of the worst things he has been forced to put up with.
Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been. (Snape in OOTP)
LOL! Yes, only from Snape can this be considered a compliment and I accept it as such. (Pesky)
Interesting observations about dialects. (I will try to look it up.) I know differences of this kind exist between dialects.
Quinn Crockett - Jun 10, 2008 5:02 pm (#2385 of 2617)
Yes, I forgot that Lupin does lie about the Map. But to be fair, Snape lied about the map as well when he claimed it was "full of Dark magic" and pretended not to know who Moony, Wormtail Padfoot and Prongs were.
I think Lupin was protecting his shared past with Snape which both men seem to have wanted though obviously for different reasons. Both men could have used the opportunity to lambast the other, or at least reveal each other's secret, but neither does. They are each willing to keep the secret. For now.
And I may have caused some confusion when I said that the Shrieking Shack scene was what defined Snape's character for me. I meant it in a sort of cinematic way in that it's the first time that we got a sense of who this character is, where he comes from. Up to that point he is just sort of inexplicably nasty to Harry and his friends. But after this, we understand that he is carrying around this tremendous grudge (there is even an chapter called "Snape's Grudge") and that he's taking it out on Harry.
We have a starting place for his character arc, though of course we'll get the whole picture later on. Hope that clears things up.
ETA: Yes, Sirius's gut reaction was to kill Peter. But this seems only fair since Peter had, for all intents and purposes, "killed" Sirius. Besides, Peter was supposedly already dead. I don't think comparing Snape and Sirius is a very balanced comparison. They are both pretty stunted, emotionally. Sirius because he was in prison and Snape because... well he seems to want to cling to that hate, in my opinion.
wynnleaf - Jun 10, 2008 5:03 pm (#2386 of 2617)
I don't recall Lupin ever lying. (Quinn)
Julia mentioned important ones, but there seem to be more. Lying by omission to DD is very significant because of two things: 1. the severity of the danger, as far as he knew, that he put people in through his deceit and 2. he did it solely to keep the favor of the headmaster, his employer. Picture when the Fat Lady's portrait was shred and everyone knew Sirius Black, assumed mass murderer and Death Eater, was stalking the castle. Dumbledore sends the staff to search the school, Lupin along with them. Lupin allows everyone including DD to go on the search without telling them that they need to be searching for a dog. Or when the staff is trying to keep the castle safe and Lupin chooses to not tell about the secret entrances that Black knows of. We know that no one was guarding at least one, since Harry was able to continue to use it.
But there's more. In POA, Lupin tells Harry that Snape hated James because he was jealous of his Quidditch skills. Perhaps we could stretch that to a truth - barely. Surely Lupin knew their animosity went far and away deeper than the sort of animosity between Harry and McClaggen. Lupin chooses to not reveal his past friendship with James to Harry, in spite of Harry's questioning. That's not a lie, but it is concealment. My point isn't that we should never, ever trust Lupin, but that if we're going to choose to believe Lupin or Snape over the issue of what James knew and when he knew it, we already know that Lupin has a past of concealing things in efforts to keep the goodwill of others. It would be in character for him to conceal a negative about James from Harry so that Harry wouldn't feel badly about his father. Snape, on the other hand, has only been shown to lie in the line of duty, so to speak.
Another piece of evidence is the HBP detention files, in which we are only shown James and Sirius getting into misadventures together making it more likely that at least certain aspects of the Prank were known to James from the outset, than that Sirius acted completely alone.
All that said, I really don't think we can possibly make a definite call on it, because JKR never showed us whose story was correct, or even if either story was really correct. I do think she showed us enough to determine that Snape at least believed that James was in on it.
Snape's immediate, "gut" reaction is to exact vengeance. (Quinn)
Yes, indeed, but then again, that was also Lupin and Sirius' first reaction to Peter, right? And Lupin and Sirius wanted to exact vengence by killing Peter outright, without him ever having been taken before the authorities. Snape, on the other hand, threatened to take Sirius to the dementors who, whatever we personally feel about it, were indeed the ones charged with taking in Sirius Black. Further, Lupin and Sirius, when they had Peter in their immediate control, were actually going to follow through and kill him, if Harry hadn't stepped in. But Snape, when he actually had Sirius unconscious before him, did not take him to the dementors and instead put him on a stretcher and took him, with the children, into Hogwarts. The stretcher is particularly noteworthy, since we had just seen Sirius take the unconscious Snape floating along through the tunnel allowing his head to bump repeatedly on the ceiling.
Outside of his Death Eater role, Snape is mostly bark with little bite.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 5:22 pm (#2387 of 2617)
... and pretended not to know who Moony, Wormtail Padfoot and Prongs were (Quinn)
Did he really know these nicknames? Is this ever mentioned? Because I don't know. Or could he just think that Harry had an object offending him (Snape) and the most likely source, since Lupin was in the castle, was a former Marauder? Or did he just realize that the four nicknames might mean the four Marauders? ("Moony" must have been easy to guess but I'm not sure about the other nicknames: It was the Marauders' secret that they were animagi, so they may have kept their nicknames a secret as well.)
PeskyPixie - Jun 10, 2008 5:29 pm (#2388 of 2617)
"Snape ... seems to want to cling to that hate, in my opinion." -Quinn
Not everyone is equal in their ability to let go of old hurts, especially without closure. Some people aren't bothered by anything, but others need closure before they have any hope of moving on. Of course, 'moving on' would be the healthiest thing for Snape, but who's going to suggest this to him and help him through his muddled up emotions? Especially when there's a Dark Lord he's betrayed waiting around the corner to rise again?
I wonder why readers tend to give Sirius such breaks? He's a 'good guy', but there is a very unappealing arrogant streak in him. I've noticed that (in the past) many excuse his verbal assault on Snape aboard the Hogwarts Express then blame Snape for sticking up for his own beliefs. If only oddball Neville had done the same to Draco, we would be applauding him ... just thinking, that perhaps it does pay to be rich, good-looking, popular and a Gryffindor.
ETA: Julia, I'm not sure when Snape learns of the Marauders' nicknames (i.e. once the OotP has reformed or since his schooldays). I'm thinking the former, because how else would he know know to connect Lupin to the Map? I have a hunch that he feels Lupin is using his opportunity as professor to make a mockery of Snape ... just as he did not exercise his power as prefect to protect Snape all those years ago. Some people have a horrifically difficult time disassociating themselves from their high school image.
Julia H. - Jun 10, 2008 5:45 pm (#2389 of 2617)
I'm thinking the former, because how else would he know know to connect Lupin to the Map? (Pesky)
I tried to make some suggestions above... but I don't know. I just wondered whether the Marauders did not keep these nicknames secret. Illegal animagi break the law - it is more serious than ordinary rule breaking at school.
I have a hunch that he feels Lupin is using his opportunity as professor to make a mockery of Snape ...
You see that is likely (after the boggart incident, especially) and it may be a reason why Snape might connect Lupin to the Map, even without knowing the nicknames. But once he thinks of Lupin, "Moony" would be as obvious as an already solved riddle. (If you know what I mean. )
PeskyPixie - Jun 10, 2008 5:59 pm (#2390 of 2617)
Ah, I see, the tone of the insult coupled with the name 'Moony' makes him 'put two and two together as only Snape could.' That's an interesting way to look at it. I hadn't considered it before.
Last edited by Mona on Fri Nov 21, 2014 2:48 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Page 14 of 19 • 1 ... 8 ... 13, 14, 15 ... 19
Similar topics» Write Your Own Epilogue for Severus Snape
» Harry Potter Book Read Along Thread - Deathly Hallows
» Choose a Better or Worse Fate for Severus Snape
» Wizangamot Trial (Part 1): Severus Snape
» Wizangamot Trial (Part II): Severus Snape
» Harry Potter Book Read Along Thread - Deathly Hallows
» Choose a Better or Worse Fate for Severus Snape
» Wizangamot Trial (Part 1): Severus Snape
» Wizangamot Trial (Part II): Severus Snape
Page 14 of 19
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum|
|
|