Severus Snape: Character Analysis v.9

The only one I think I may be able to agree with was the Minister in PoA-- when he learned he has lost his Order of Merlin, correct? But we must remember that, at this time, he not only lost the Order of Merlin but has learned that Sirius excaped-- and at this point I'm not certain he was entirly convinced that Sirius really was innocent.

I don't think Severus cared about the Order of Merlin at all at the time. I'm sure his rage was caused by the fact that someone he considered Lily's murderer escaped only. The Order of Merlin seems such a minor, insignificant thing compared to it.


I agree that his home-life, and his humiliation at the hands of the Marauders contributed to it, but I find it hard to cut him some slack, because a lot of it, he brought down on himself, by choosing to associate with the wrong kind of people, and because of the ideals (or lack thereof) that he followed. Even the dark mark that burns him, he chose to accept willingly.

*Sigh* Just my honest opinion: I often hear that Snape doesn't deserve sympathy because he supposedly brought all the misery in his life down on himself, but I find this accusation to be extremely harsh. So yeah, he made mistakes. Horrible mistakes. In this respect he wasn’t really different from many other HP characters who also made terrible mistakes (Sirius comes to mind - his recklessness and arrogance doomed two of his closest friends and destoyed his entire life). But Snape made all these wrong choices when he was very young. I hear all the time that the Marauders’ arrogance and cruelty can be justified by their youth. They were immature, wanted to show off, didn’t really understand what they were doing, etc. To sum up, they were typical teenagers, so any behaviour of theirs at school can be excused by this very fact. Yet teenage Severus is for some reason expected to have been mature, wise and insightful enough not to fall for Voldemort’s agenda. Why? So yes, his mistakes were more serious and led to disastrous consequences for him and some other people. And of course, people are always going to point out that other characters we know of stayed on the path of goodness and "Light" as firmly as you can get. But honestly, the pressure that Snape had been subjected to from the very beginning was far greater than anything children from other Hogwarts Houses could imagine. He was a kid who was forced to spent 10 months of a year in the midst of DE wannabies and who then returned home to parents who seemingly didn’t give a fig about who their son hanged out with or what regime he was going to join once he was out of school because they were apparently too busy yelling at each other. It’s kind of difficult to expect an adolescent to have a remarkable amount of self-control and maturity and make wise decisions and right choices all the time when he or she doesn’t have someone’s support to fall back on and is exposed to bad influence most time of his/her life. And no, I don’t consider Lily a candidate for Snape’s “moral compass” and don’t understand how anyone can see her in this role – that’s too much to expect from one ordinary girl who, like Snape, was just a teenager with all the impatience, stubbornness and lack of wisdom and diplomacy that usually comes with it.

I want to point out that I’m not trying to shift Snape’s blame on somebody else or say that the rotten circumstances he was in completely excuse his choices. I'm as ready as anyone else to admit that Snape is far from perfect, and no one will ever find me defending or justifying the way he treated his students as a teacher. But I really feel that he is often judged much too harshly for the mistakes many other children could have made if they had been in his shoes.

I agree with you on this to an extent, but in the general sense I'm not seeing how James life was at risk. He could have transformed and been quite safe, as he always had been, with Remus at that time, or he could have run away too, while transformed. Being realistic, he had no fear of Remus- he proved that every month. What he had a fear of, was Snape dying as a result of a joke the marauders played.

Why did Sirius get hurt in POA? It takes two large animals to control Remus. Not ony that, James wasn't going to transform in front of Snape. So an untransformed James running into the tunnel after Snape was placing his life at risk in as much as Snape had done by running in there.

He feared guilt and trouble, not Snape being dead in the real sense. As James said himself, he hated Snape, for no good reason other than that he existed-(SWM).

I am not going to take something that was said in humor and apply it in support of someone's serious actions. If we are going to take the conversation to that level, then we are going to have to have long discussions as to why Snape was too unintelligent to see the distinction between Hermione's teeth when they were down past her shoulders and her normal teeth. :lol:.

Nonetheless, as I explained above, James' motivation had nothing to do with Snape being grateful, imo. James was intent on saving him, not killing him.

His motivations were suspect only because we didn't know what they were.

Well I meant after knowing what they were they became suspect.

James saved his life out of necessity. I cannot see that any other way. I don't think it qualifies as an honourable thing for James to have done- it was what he had to do, there was no choice.

You mean from Snape's point of view? I agree that is how he saw it because he could not understand saving the life of one's enemy unless one had a very good reason to do so. But I feel that is because Snape's mentality was molding into that of a Death Eater. They indeed would let people die if there was no urgent motivating factor to make them do otherwise. However, he failed to understand that some people simply don't let others die if they can save them, regardless as to whether they are considered enemies (Death Eaters notwithstanding). Harry hated Draco, but that was not a reason to allow him to die; but Snape didn't look at things that way at that time. This ideology, as I have pointed out, essentially left James with no choice as you indicated. He may as well have let Snape die, because the act cannot be a good one, so not acting is just as good. And of course James had the choice to adopt Sirius' viewpoint and hope Snape was merely harmed and frightened, but Snape didn't seem to note that either. Finally, James could have just thought like a Death Eater and been hopeful Snape would die and figured he'd deal with any consequences later. So I feel that even under Snape's irrational viewpoint, he failed to recognize that there is always a choice to act or not to act, more so when one's own life is going to be placed at risk - and that in and of itself was enough for him to be grateful for, imo. This even in light of his illogical belief that James could neither act or not act without doing the wrong thing, which in and of itself is the 'lesser of two evils' theory and choosing the lesser of two evils is still the correct way to act. Snape could have latched onto that in order to be grateful also.

But in my view; James was not a budding Death Eater, but rather a budding Order member, so his mentality was in terms of saving those from death that he could save (notwithstanding determined Death Eaters). I feel he saved Snape, simply because he feared the boy would die. That it was his enemy did not matter, imo. Whether he considered other consequences is unknown as we dont have James' POV, and largely irrelevant to the fact that he risked his life and acted, imo. That was a choice anyway you look at it because he did have the choice not to act regardless of the consequences, that is also a true fact.

Personally, I'd have agreed with your point if he was saying it in front of their parents or Bellatrix- but IMO, to belittle a student, especially a teenage student, over her appearance- and to do it in front of other students, too- was unnecessary and reprehensible of Snape as a teacher.

I agree normally that behaviour should have got a teacher suspended, for it shows a negative attitude towards certain students for no reason. But here in GOF we are looking at a different scene IMO.

Snape was first and foremost a spy; a man who Voldmeort believed had left him forever. A man who escaped Azkaban. A man who fell in line with Albus Dumbledore's orders to have a comfortable life and most importantly the man who did not harm Harry Potter IMO. (HBP - Spinner's End).

While we have it in the Spinner's End Chapter about why Snape was suspected by Bellatrix and other DEs, I think it is not unreasonable to suppose that Snape was preparing all that year (GOF) to go back to Voldemort; an event that looked as days passed to be happening any time IMO.

When Snape insulted Hermione, there were the Slytherin kids who told their DE parents everything. This comment against Hermione along with his other insults at Harry Potter over the years and tales about how much Snape hated that blasted Potter and that clever "mudblood" and his "unfair" treatment of the Gryffindors along with some nice misinformation from Dumbledore about what Snape had been gathering all those years he had been with Dumbledore IMO is what allowed Snape a chance with Voldemort, who at the graveyard told his DEs about "the one who left me forever and of course he will be killed" IMO.

Snape's role in the years after the fall of Voldmeort and before Harry started Hogwarts war was pretty low key, even though it was pretty dangerous, in the sense that Snape had to always be on his guard, but apart from that his role was pretty passive until Harry's first year IMO. For he only had to favour the Slytherins and act nasty to the Gryffindors. And meeting those DEs (whom we hear of in Spinner's End, who had been meeting each other and even thought of Harry as the Dark Lord around whom they could all rally, initially) IMO.

When Harry came on to the scene, everything changed IMO.

Snape was in the position of bahaving in such a manner to Harry, where he would incite Harry's hatred and also not harm Harry and by doing so, satisfy all those DEs who were watching for the boy, to see 1) if he was indeed a Darker Lord than voldemort, or 2) if he was a good guy who had actually managed to off their Lord, in which case, Harry would be their enemy.

Snape knew of course, that Harry was no Dark Lord and that he had also the job of protecting him IMO. He had to walk the tightrope and I think he started the war with Harry Potter in their first class, bewildering him and later convincing him that Snape hated Harry, Harry's father and Harry's everything and thereby keeping him safe.

While it could be and has been argued that Snape could have been pleasant to Harry, because he could always claim that Dumbledore would have his hide otherwise; the one fact I think that must be taken into account is that Voldemort could also use Snape's pleasant manner and ask Snape to bring Harry to him as a test of his loyalty when Snape went to Voldemort at the end of GOF.

Snape would of course not bring Harry and his work for the Light, Dumbledore, Harry and the WW for the next 3 years which were IMO the most crucial would have been lost and I am sure the Order would have found it far more difficult than it was during those 3 years, without Snape IMO. Perhaps the whole war may have changed completely IMO.

Snape made himself mildly unpopular before Harry came to Hogwarts, probably limiting to favouring the Slytherins and taking away points from the other Houses and giving more detentions than others.

But I think he became harsher once Harry came on the scene, because he had to IMO. It was for Harry's own protection and also for the protection of his role until the end of the war, which of course he was not destined to see IMO.

Hermione, he was harsh with, because she was a muggleborn, who was far above the Slytherin purebloods in intelligence (we see such a conversation between Lucius Malfoy and Draco in CoS), so Snape played the perfect Slytherin and was harsh to her.

Neville was not good at potions, which increased his fear of Snape, who already had a reputation of being very strict. This fear did not help him fare well and so he suffered the wrath of Snape, who could not teach him patiently because, he was also the son of 2 people who were aurors, who captured DEs and defied Voldmeort 3 times, before they were harmed by Bellatrix IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

That was a great post, "The_Green_Woods" :tu:

I will only summarize my agreement with this, The question of how Snape treated Harry or How Snape felt about Harry is moot.

Given the time and circumstance of their relationship - there is no way for that relationship to be anything else. Snape lived under the knowledge that 1) Dark Lord would return and 2) Voldemort could and would be aware of ALL observations about this relationship.

in DH: JKR used the first chapter to make the very serious point of how absolutely omniscient Voldemort is with his Death Eaters and how he uses legilimency to control his followers. The whole room is afraid to look in his eyes- and those are the die hard followers who fear his doubt.

Voldemort could literally look into thier minds, peruse their given memories at any time he pleased. I beleive she specifically set up this scene to demonstrate how Snape used his Occlumency and the direct thread Snape was under at all time.
Yes, SNAPE was the most qualified to control what Voldemort saw- but no one else was nearly as capable or anywhere near willing to withstand the Dark Lord's ruthless legillimency. Obviously, if Snape was seen by any of the DE, or their kids, or the community in general- as appearing lenient, suspect, dodegy, doubtful, patient, or showing anything but utter dislike of Harry Potter and his friends- Snape's cover would be suspect if not outright blown.

DH made a point of how information traveled, Harry heard and saw numerous conversations about the war without being involved. This made the point that word travels fast, especially around suspect people.

So Again: The question of how Snape treated Harry is moot. Snape had no room to consciously consider other feelings of compassion, or forgiveness, or anything sympathetic (though I do believe he displayed actions that show he had come to embrace these feelings towards humanity in general i.e. saving Lupin and Ginny et all.) He needed all that dark memory and feelings of bitterness to stay alive and to help Harry. Those feelings were his armament.

Of course Dumbledore knew this and he was counting on it. That is why he did nothing to correct Snape's behavior. DD knew what counted is not what pithy B**chiness or insults Snape lobbed at Harry or to the class , it is what Snape DID to help Harry and the cause over all that mattered.

Snape was Dumbledore's Dark knight- not in a Batman way- but in a chess game kind of way.

That was a great post, "The_Green_Woods" :tu:

Thank you! :)

in DH: JKR used the first chapter to make the very serious point of how absolutely omniscient Voldemort is with his Death Eaters and how he uses legilimency to control his followers. The whole room is afraid to look in his eyes- and those are the die hard followers who fear his doubt.

I agree. Snape had to be extra careful about what he said and where; I think Snape kept it very simple, by being like the way we saw him all the time, except when he was in the privacy of his own rooms. He makes sure he never slips with general or positive comments otherwise, even to Dumbledore IMO.

So Again: The question of how Snape treated Harry is moot. Snape had no room to consciously consider other feelings of compassion, or forgiveness, or anything sympathetic (though I do believe he displayed actions that show he had come to embrace these feelings towards humanity in general i.e. saving Lupin and Ginny et all.) He needed all that dark memory and feelings of bitterness to stay alive and to help Harry. Those feelings were his armament.

I agree. Snape could not conciously exhibit his feelings of compassion, but I think they were very much there IMO.

I think Snape cared for Harry; he used his real dislike of James and made sure Harry would hate him. If we see the punishments Snape has given Harry; I feel they were not much. He got one detention in HBP for talking back to Snape; one bottle smashed and a "0" in the potions class for looking into Snape's pensieve; for the sectumsempra, Harry did not play in the next match; the detentions IMO were to stop Harry form probing too much into what Draco was doing IMO.

The Map in third year with going into Hogsmeade without permission; Snape lets Harry walk away with Lupin without even a point taken off from Gryffindor and in addition he handed the Map to Lupin, who he knew would hand it over to Harry IMO.

He probably read Harry chucking the fireworks off Harry's surface thoughts and made some mafia comments of expelling those responsible, but does nothing IMO.

Snape, used James, never Harry's memories; did not call him a cheater when Snape knew Harry was using his old book or keep passing rude comments to Harry about James/Sirius when they were alone. In HBP, Snape sits silently until it's time for Harry to leave. He makes his opening remark slightly snneringly about James and Sirius; but then after that thre is only silence. He keeps his attacks for the crowd and also at times to keep Harry's hate at the proper level IMO.

Of course Dumbledore knew this and he was counting on it. That is why he did nothing to correct Snape's behavior. DD knew what counted is not what pithy B**chiness or insults Snape lobbed at Harry or to the class , it is what Snape DID to help Harry and the cause over all that mattered.

And like the discussion we had on this before in the last thread I think, Dumbledore went out of his way to make Harry dislike Snape equally (at the end of PS/SS, when he tells Harry his reason for Snape apparently disliking Harry); make Hwarry defiant and rude towards Snape for 2 reasons; one Harry would not get hurt when Snape spoke rudely/harshly about James and, Harry too will start disliking Snape, which was very important for both Snape and Harry's survival IMO.

I think Dumbledore actually fuelled Harry's dislike of Snape, thereby protecting both of them for the next few years.

Had Voldemort when he looked into Harry's mind through the link in 5th year, would have seen nothing except hate for Severus Snape in Harry's mind IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

Great post, TheGreenWoods.

I agree normally that behaviour should have got a teacher suspended, for it shows a negative attitude towards certain students for no reason. But here in GOF we are looking at a different scene IMO.


I'm afraid that I, in any case, pay little attention to behaviour that "normally...should have got a teacher suspended", because it seems to me that none of the staff at Hogwarts behaves professionally in a real-life sense (e.g. Trelawney is an obvious alcoholic, who wanders round blatantly smelling of cooking sherry, they almost all make snide comments about their colleagues in front of students in a way which would be highly unprofessional in a muggle school). I think we just have to accept that at Hogwarts different rules apply, and it seems unfair to single Snape out for criticism for unprofessional behaviour.

You've also got to remember that Snape did not choose to be a teacher. He initially applied for a job at Hogwarts on Voldemort's orders and took it at Dumbledore's request, in order to be there ready to protect Harry. I've always had the impression that he is not particularly suited to teaching mixed ability teenagers and might not have chosen that job, if it hadn't been for the Voldy wars and the promises he made. His treatment of Neville (who, from his descripton, I've always imagined to be dyspraxic, like Daniel Radcliffe and me :lol:) and Harry (particularly in Occlumency lessons) always makes me think that he is an academically brilliant man who just genuinely does not understand that his subject is not as easy for his students as it is for him, and finds it hard to be patient with those he perceives (wrongly) not to be trying. In real life, that wouldn't make him a bad man, you'd just advise him to get a different job. But Snape can't get a different job - he has to work there, in order to fulfil his promise to DD.


Snape was first and foremost a spy [...]When Snape insulted Hermione, there were the Slytherin kids who told their DE parents everything. This comment against Hermione along with his other insults at Harry Potter over the years and tales about how much Snape hated that blasted Potter and that clever "mudblood" and his "unfair" treatment of the Gryffindors along with some nice misinformation from Dumbledore about what Snape had been gathering all those years he had been with Dumbledore IMO is what allowed Snape a chance with Voldemort, who at the graveyard told his DEs about "the one who left me forever and of course he will be killed" IMO.

:tu: I totally agree. Contrast Snape's treatment of Hermione here with his reaction in DH when Phineas Nigellus calls her a "Mudblood" - and, no, I don't think his reaction against that word is merely a self-obsessed wincing at the bad memory of his use of that word to Lily. I believe that this shows that when he can speak freely and doesn't have to put on an act, he will stand up for Hermione and those like her.

Similarly, his body language gives him away when he grips the back of the chair when Ginny gets taken into the CoS. To me, this is a man who cares deeply for his students, including Gryffindors - he just is not allowed to show this.

Having said that, I do think Harry and Neville are slight exceptions. Snape's dialogues with Dumbledore in The Prince's Tale, when he doesn't have to pretend, do seem to make it pretty clear that he does not like Harry. And I've often wondered if his treatment of Neville is inspired by the awareness that if Voldy had interpreted the prophecy as being about the Longbottoms, not the Potters, and had gone after Neville, not Harry, then Lily would still be alive.

However, I've also noticed that his behaviour to Harry seems particularly nasty in OotP, when he knows that Voldemort coudl be getting flashes of Harry's thoughts, so it is particularly important to make Harry believe he hates him, and in HBP, when the whole death-trick set-up he's fixed up with Dumbledore is dependent on everyone (including Harry) being ready to believe that he's genuinely a DE. And his clever treatment of Neville and the rest of the DA when he's headmaster is inspired.

I'm afraid that I, in any case, pay little attention to behaviour that "normally...should have got a teacher suspended", because it seems to me that none of the staff at Hogwarts behaves professionally in a real-life sense (e.g. Trelawney is an obvious alcoholic, who wanders round blatantly smelling of cooking sherry, they almost all make snide comments about their colleagues in front of students in a way which would be highly unprofessional in a muggle school). I think we just have to accept that at Hogwarts different rules apply, and it seems unfair to single Snape out for criticism for unprofessional behaviour.

I respect your view, but it was not the readers or fans that did this, it was JKR herself. She singled Snape out saying: "Snape is a very sadistic teacher, loosely based on a teacher I myself had, I have to say. I think children are very aware and we are kidding ourselves if we don’t think that they are, that teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher does abuse his power." (The Connection, 12 October 1999). So I think it is a fair to interpret him as the author indicated she was writing him - which was distinct from the other professors (with the exception of Umbridge, who was similiarly abusing her power, imo).

You've also got to remember that Snape did not choose to be a teacher. He initially applied for a job at Hogwarts on Voldemort's orders and took it at Dumbledore's request, in order to be there ready to protect Harry. I've always had the impression that he is not particularly suited to teaching mixed ability teenagers and might not have chosen that job, if it hadn't been for the Voldy wars and the promises he made. His treatment of Neville (who, from his descripton, I've always imagined to be dyspraxic, like Daniel Radcliffe and me :lol:) and Harry (particularly in Occlumency lessons) always makes me think that he is an academically brilliant man who just genuinely does not understand that his subject is not as easy for his students as it is for him, and finds it hard to be patient with those he perceives (wrongly) not to be trying. In real life, that wouldn't make him a bad man, you'd just advise him to get a different job. But Snape can't get a different job - he has to work there, in order to fulfil his promise to DD.

I agree with the idea that Snape didn't want to teach, at least initially. However, I believe that once he took up the position and saw the power that he held over the students, he began to enjoy it. He quested for the DADA position; spoke ardently of the topics he was teaching; ridiculed the other DADA professors as if jealous and became highly defensive if he felt others were moving onto his teaching territory (Cos - declaring he was the potions master and would make any necessary potions as opposed to Lockheart who had offered to do so.)

I would disagree that in real life Snape's behavior while teaching would not make him a bad man (assuming we mean bad professor). I feel he'd eventually be fired by any Headmaster worth his salt. However, I do agree that Dumbledore wished for him to be present for other reasons, in my view, mainly to keep an eye on him. In my judgment, Dumbledore had to have realized that the protection Snape offered for Harry was in reality minimal and that his treatment of Harry and the students did not balance accounts on that score. However, as a double spy, it was necessary to keep Snape close at hand, imo.

:tu: I totally agree. Contrast Snape's treatment of Hermione here with his reaction in DH when Phineas Nigellus calls her a "Mudblood" - and, no, I don't think his reaction against that word is merely a self-obsessed wincing at the bad memory of his use of that word to Lily. I believe that this shows that when he can speak freely and doesn't have to put on an act, he will stand up for Hermione and those like her.

I respect your view, but that was not 'treatment of Hermione', but 'treatment of P. Black' imo, related to a comment relative to her blood status. His treatment of her is shown when she is actually present with him and it was negative for the most part, imo. Snape ignored her, called her a know it all, humiliated her with the tooth incident and belittled her accomplishments, imo. I feel he was loathe to admit that Hermione managed to be a better student than he had been without all the practice and tricks. She managed perfect potions without any of that type of extra work quite frequently, iirc. I believe his reaction to her was in part due to her association with Harry, who he loathed as well as jealousy with respect to her achievements.

Similarly, his body language gives him away when he grips the back of the chair when Ginny gets taken into the CoS. To me, this is a man who cares deeply for his students, including Gryffindors - he just is not allowed to show this.

I respect your view, but I don't buy this argument because Snape was not a "spy", he was a "double spy". To me, that means that he had to "act" correctly in both of his positions: with the Death Eaters and with the Good Siders. From Voldemort and the Death Eaters point of view, Snape would be jeopardizing his position at Hogwarts and his entire spy job for them if he behaved in a manner that got him kicked out or suspected of being in league with the death eaters, imo. So I disagree that Snape 'couldn't' be kind to Gryffindors - or even 'indifferent'. I feel that he could have easily been either if he wanted to be, he simply did not wish to be.

Having said that, I do think Harry and Neville are slight exceptions. Snape's dialogues with Dumbledore in The Prince's Tale, when he doesn't have to pretend, do seem to make it pretty clear that he does not like Harry. And I've often wondered if his treatment of Neville is inspired by the awareness that if Voldy had interpreted the prophecy as being about the Longbottoms, not the Potters, and had gone after Neville, not Harry, then Lily would still be alive.

Based on the fact that Voldemort's goal was to kill Harry, Snape gaining Harry's trust and faith by being nice would have actually been a boon for Voldemort, imo. What better way to ensnare Harry in the end? I think that if Voldemort had known the full extent of Snape's behavior at the school (which I don't believe he did), he would have ordered him to correct his behavior for his own ends.

However, I've also noticed that his behaviour to Harry seems particularly nasty in OotP, when he knows that Voldemort coudl be getting flashes of Harry's thoughts, so it is particularly important to make Harry believe he hates him, and in HBP, when the whole death-trick set-up he's fixed up with Dumbledore is dependent on everyone (including Harry) being ready to believe that he's genuinely a DE. And his clever treatment of Neville and the rest of the DA when he's headmaster is inspired.

I would respectfully disagree. I feel Snape's behavior was particualrly nasty in all 6 books before he finally fled Hogwarts. There was no call in GoF, for example, for him to whisper in Harry's ear that he was nothing more than a nasty little boy - or in POA for him to degrade him and his father in private, imo. In PS/SS and CoS, Snape's in-classroom behavior was equally negative, imo and in HBP, I feel that he continued to take advantage of his position of power over Harry. I was particularly pleased that JKR finally had Harry stand up for himself in that book, indeed showing he did carry the traits of impertinence and arrogance like his father. While those traits are flaws in many situations, in my view, he used them well against what I saw as Snape's unfair charges against him.

In as far as Snape's term as Headmaster, I am also dismayed by his inaction in stopping the child abuse that was taking place. The children were beaten, kidnapped, and tortured in detention with the crucio curse. In my view, Snape should have done his best to put a stop to it, even if it meant blowing his cover and getting the kids away. (And it is OT, but I hold the other good sider teachers equally culpable just so you understand I am not being unfair in my view toward Snape alone.) I do think all of the professors did 'this and that' as they could - like Snape when he actually had to punish students himself was shown to offer a better alternative - but allowing child abuse to go on was unacceptable, imo.

I respect your view, but it was not the readers or fans that did this, it was JKR herself. She singled Snape out saying: "Snape is a very sadistic teacher, loosely based on a teacher I myself had, I have to say. I think children are very aware and we are kidding ourselves if we don’t think that they are, that teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher does abuse his power." (The Connection, 12 October 1999). So I think it is a fair to interpret him as the author indicated she was writing him - which was distinct from the other professors (with the exception of Umbridge, who was similiarly abusing her power, imo).

Quite frankly, what an author intends to write and what an author does write, many times, are going to be two entirly different things. And, if you want to look only at what was intended by the author-- go ahead, that is a perfectly acceptable way to interpret the books. But know that many times a writer's work gets away from them and they, being so close to it, can't always see the changes happening. And interpreting the work without involving the writers state of mind is also a perfectly acceptable way to interprete the books.

I agree with the idea that Snape didn't want to teach, at least initially. However, I believe that once he took up the position and saw the power that he held over the students, he began to enjoy it. He quested for the DADA position; spoke ardently of the topics he was teaching; ridiculed the other DADA professors as if jealous and became highly defensive if he felt others were moving onto his teaching territory (Cos - declaring he was the potions master and would make any necessary potions as opposed to Lockheart who had offered to do so.)


It's possible that he may have enjoyed his power as a teacher. I mean, this is a man that, up until this point, never had any power. Not as a child, not as a student, not as a Death Eater-- but here, in the classroom, he is in charge and it is his domain. That he would seek some respect would be only natural. And, quite frankly, I can't blame him for his actions against Lockhart. I'm sure every teacher in the school would have responded in the same manner! :lol:

I would disagree that in real life Snape's behavior while teaching would not make him a bad man (assuming we mean bad professor).

No, from the context, I assumed it was meant being a bad teacher wouldn't make Severus a bad person. And I don't think being a poor teacher would make him a bad person at all, just not very good at getting his ideas across in a way that allows the students to learn effectivly.

Quite frankly, Severus is the sort of teacher I like to have-- but then again, I am just that sort of student who doesn't like to be patronized or have my hand held through the lesson (unless its math... then we can go as slow as need be ;))

Based on the fact that Voldemort's goal was to kill Harry, Snape gaining Harry's trust and faith by being nice would have actually been a boon for Voldemort, imo. What better way to ensnare Harry in the end? I think that if Voldemort had known the full extent of Snape's behavior at the school (which I don't believe he did), he would have ordered him to correct his behavior for his own ends.

I agree. By keeping Harry away from him, Severus was effectivly alienating himself from the position or role of being asked to bring Harry to Voldemort. Whether he did this on purpose, or it just happened, I'm not sure. It could go either way. I do think, however, that he did try to keep Harry away because of the memories of his mother that it brought to Severus.

In as far as Snape's term as Headmaster, I am also dismayed by his inaction in stopping the child abuse that was taking place. The children were beaten, kidnapped, and tortured in detention with the crucio curse. In my view, Snape should have done his best to put a stop to it, even if it meant blowing his cover and getting the kids away. (And it is OT, but I hold the other good sider teachers equally culpable just so you understand I am not being unfair in my view toward Snape alone.) I do think all of the professors did 'this and that' as they could - like Snape when he actually had to punish students himself was shown to offer a better alternative - but allowing child abuse to go on was unacceptable, imo.

It could go either way. I mean, I agree that they should have done something, but if they had (either Severus or the other teachers) it would be unlikely that it would actually put a stop to any sort of abuse or torture going on in the school, and it would get them kicked out-- effectivly preventing them from helping the few kids they could. Not to mention the fact that Voldemort would only replace them with people who would be more than happy to comply with the orders of abuse and torture, effectivly making it worse for the students at Hogwarts.

It would be a very hard thing to deal with, but given the circumstances I think they did the best they could.

Quite frankly, what an author intends to write and what an author does write, many times, are going to be two entirly different things. And, if you want to look only at what was intended by the author-- go ahead, that is a perfectly acceptable way to interpret the books. But know that many times a writer's work gets away from them and they, being so close to it, can't always see the changes happening. And interpreting the work without involving the writers state of mind is also a perfectly acceptable way to interprete the books.

I agree. I was only disagreeing with the view that it was unfair to share Jo's stated opinion of Snape.

It's possible that he may have enjoyed his power as a teacher. I mean, this is a man that, up until this point, never had any power. Not as a child, not as a student, not as a Death Eater-- but here, in the classroom, he is in charge and it is his domain. That he would seek some respect would be only natural. And, quite frankly, I can't blame him for his actions against Lockhart. I'm sure every teacher in the school would have responded in the same manner! :lol:

:lol:. Understand, I don't like Snape's character, but I very much like Jo's characterization - so I enjoyed Snape's comment as well, it was hilarious. The characterization is distinct from analysis to me. With respect to the latter, I put myself in the shoes of the character and I live in the actual context. I consider Snape's character from that angle and attempt to decide what drove him to say it; how he thought it would impact those around him and his resultant emotions. Like his comment to Hermione about her teeth - that was hilarious while reading; but in analysis, it is not funny at all.

No, from the context, I assumed it was meant being a bad teacher wouldn't make Severus a bad person. And I don't think being a poor teacher would make him a bad person at all, just not very good at getting his ideas across in a way that allows the students to learn effectivly.

Well I clarified in parenthesis because I wasn't referring to that. But I will address that now. I feel Snape was more than a poor teacher; I feel he crossed the line of appropriate behavior in abusing his position of power. So that moves into the territory of his character as a man, beyond being a professor. In my view, he was a bad man based on his behavior and actions. Not to be confused with evil akin to Voldemort (who was also a bad man, but evil as well).

I agree. By keeping Harry away from him, Severus was effectivly alienating himself from the position or role of being asked to bring Harry to Voldemort. Whether he did this on purpose, or it just happened, I'm not sure. It could go either way. I do think, however, that he did try to keep Harry away because of the memories of his mother that it brought to Severus.

In my view this is a contradictory notion. The whole reason that Snape was supposedly brave was because of his willingness to face Voldemort's exacting evil nature as a spy. Yet at every two turns, it is suggested that Voldemort was "okay" with all kinds of things Snape might do and say. I don't buy it. Voldemort had his own agenda, just like Dumbledore and imo, he wasn't going to patronize Snape and say "oh, you loathe Harry, okay then, forget how your behavior toward him might sabotage my plan". That is out of character for Voldemort.

I respect your view, but it was not the readers or fans that did this, it was JKR herself. She singled Snape out saying: "Snape is a very sadistic teacher, loosely based on a teacher I myself had, I have to say. I think children are very aware and we are kidding ourselves if we don’t think that they are, that teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher does abuse his power." (The Connection, 12 October 1999). So I think it is a fair to interpret him as the author indicated she was writing him - which was distinct from the other professors (with the exception of Umbridge, who was similiarly abusing her power, imo).

I take your point, but I think it is also important to remember the context in which JKR was speaking. Prior to DH, it was vital for her to preserve suspense and keep the end of the series firmly under wraps. She, obviously, would not lie about Snape in interviews, but it was in her interests to flag up the negative sides of Snape's character more than the positive, in order to lay a false scent.

Moreover, she does not specify how he abuses his power or with whom. I would agree that he at times abuses his power in order to take out his feelings about James on Harry (and possibly to "punish" Neville for having survived while Lily died). That does not necessarily mean that all, or even most, of his cruel comments are motivated by sheer sadism. I therefore don't see any contradiction between the theory that his comment about Hermione's teeth was just an act to convince the Slytherins he was biased against Mudbloods and JKR's comment which you have quoted.

I also agree with wimblemimble that characters can take on a life if their own beyond authorial intention.

EDIT (since we cross-posted):

I was only disagreeing with the view that it was unfair to share Jo's stated opinion of Snape.

But JKR at no point in the quotation you cite says that Snape should have been suspended for his behaviour, which was the point I was querying. I would never suggest that his behaviour is presented by JKR as something to be approved of, but I still maintain that it is impossible to judge Snape by real-life standards in a series of novels where a teacher's public drunkenness is presented as no big deal.

I agree with the idea that Snape didn't want to teach, at least initially. However, I believe that once he took up the position and saw the power that he held over the students, he began to enjoy it. He quested for the DADA position; spoke ardently of the topics he was teaching; ridiculed the other DADA professors as if jealous and became highly defensive if he felt others were moving onto his teaching territory (Cos - declaring he was the potions master and would make any necessary potions as opposed to Lockheart who had offered to do so.)

I respect your view, but I would read this very differently. I believe the interpretation of his behaviour as professional jealousy is something which we are constantly fed through Harry's unreliable narrative viewpoint as a red herring, to make us believe that he is the villain and/or to cover up who the real villain is in some of the individual books.

He actually had good reason to attack most of the other DADA professors.Quirrell and "Moody" were both servants of Voldemort, and Snape suspected this. I go with the school of thought that holds that Snape genuinely (if completely wrongly) believed that Sirius was a DE in PoA and that Lupin was his accomplice, so again his treatment of Lupin, although wrong, was not motivated by jealousy or territorialism. Lockhart was incompetent and could have done serious damage if he had made the potions he threatened to (and Snape was by no means the only staff member who became irritated by Lockhart's arrogant incursions onto their territory.).

Yes, he spoke ardently of his subject but, as Hermione points out, so does Harry. He does seem good at teaching DADA (as evidenced by Ernie Macmillan's enthusiastic endorsement) and I believe his desire for the DADA job could be motivated by a genuine (if slightly arrogant) belief that he could do a good job in very troubled times (It seems to me that his repeated pointed glances at Harry in the DADA lesson we see in HBP are not the bullying, withering looks of earlier books, but a silent hint to Harry that this spell could be particularly relevant to him, in view of the special responsibility he is shortly about to take on). His desire for the DADA job could also conceivably be motivated by what he discloses to DD in DH, after Lily's death: "I wish I were dead" - in view of the fate that Quirrell meets, taking on the cursed DADA job could have been an easy way to get his wish granted.


I would disagree that in real life Snape's behavior while teaching would not make him a bad man (assuming we mean bad professor).

No, as wimblemimble has correctly surmised, I meant bad person.

EDIT (since we cross-posted):
But I will address that now. I feel Snape was more than a poor teacher; I feel he crossed the line of appropriate behavior in abusing his position of power. So that moves into the territory of his character as a man, beyond being a professor.

And my point was that, had this been a real-world situation, he would have had the opportunity to leave Hogwarts and find a job more suited to him before the point where his frustration became bullying. As it was, though, he didn't.

However, I do agree that Dumbledore wished for him to be present for other reasons, in my view, mainly to keep an eye on him. In my judgment, Dumbledore had to have realized that the protection Snape offered for Harry was in reality minimal and that his treatment of Harry and the students did not balance accounts on that score. However, as a double spy, it was necessary to keep Snape close at hand, imo.

I respect your view, but disagree. "I trust Severus Snape" are not the words of someone who felt he had to keep Snape close at hand to cover his own back (and entrusting Snape with a secret mission to kill him to save Draco the task is certainly not the action of a man who felt he had to keep Snape close at hand because he was untrustworthy). I do think, however, that DD knew that if Voldemort believed Snape was spying on the Hogwarts staff he would be more likely to spare Snape active missions that involved actually killing and torturing people. I think that is another big reason why Dumbledore kept Snape on the staff.

I respect your view, but that was not 'treatment of Hermione', but 'treatment of P. Black' imo, related to a comment relative to her blood status.

Good point, but I still believe it shows that his true attitude to her was less contemptuous than we have been led to believe.

His treatment of her is shown when she is actually present with him and it was negative for the most part, imo. Snape ignored her, called her a know it all, humiliated her with the tooth incident and belittled her accomplishments, imo.

Yes, he did, but I believe that this was for the reason that The GreenWoods stated - in order to make the Slytherins with DE parents believe that he shared their anti-Muggle views. It was part of his cover, IMO.

I feel he was loathe to admit that Hermione managed to be a better student than he had been without all the practice and tricks. She managed perfect potions without any of that type of extra work quite frequently, iirc.

I would respectfully but totally disagree. IMO, he is portrayed as by far the better potion maker. Being able to concoct your own recipe which yields superior results to the textbook is the mark of a truly brilliant mind, IMO. His additions are often labour-saving, not "extra work" and, in any case, a student who is so fascinated by the subject that they spend time on it above and beyond the requirements of the syllabus is (in my ten years of experience as a teacher) more likely to be Oxbridge material than someone who merely does what they are required to do and slavishly follows the standard-issue textbook. And it is made clear that Hermione's potions in the 6th year are not "perfect" - they don't match Harry's when he's following the Prince's instructions.

I believe his reaction to her was in part due to her association with Harry, who he loathed .

I would agree that this is possible, although I seem to remember that his poor treatment of Hermione begins in the very first lesson, before she is Harry's friend, so it cannot, IMO, be the only reason.

I respect your view, but I don't buy this argument because Snape was not a "spy", he was a "double spy". To me, that means that he had to "act" correctly in both of his positions: with the Death Eaters and with the Good Siders. From Voldemort and the Death Eaters point of view, Snape would be jeopardizing his position at Hogwarts and his entire spy job for them if he behaved in a manner that got him kicked out or suspected of being in league with the death eaters, imo. So I disagree that Snape 'couldn't' be kind to Gryffindors - or even 'indifferent'. I feel that he could have easily been either if he wanted to be, he simply did not wish to be.

This is a fair point, but to me it is clear that Snape's treatment of the Gryffindors delights Malfoy, who almost certainly reports it back to his father (who also seems not to have any complaints).

I also still hold that in the alternative reality of Hogwarts, where real world employment practices clearly do not apply, Snape is in no danger of being kicked out, and both he and Voldemort know it.

In my view this is a contradictory notion. The whole reason that Snape was supposedly brave was because of his willingness to face Voldemort's exacting evil nature as a spy. Yet at every two turns, it is suggested that Voldemort was "okay" with all kinds of things Snape might do and say. I don't buy it. Voldemort had his own agenda, just like Dumbledore and imo, he wasn't going to patronize Snape and say "oh, you loathe Harry, okay then, forget how your behavior toward him might sabotage my plan". That is out of character for Voldemort.

Well, Severus first met Harry in PS/SS, and at the time Voldemort had not yet regained power. He didn't regain power (and Severus didn't return to him) until GoF-- by that time the animosity between Harry and Severus had already been created. To have Severus go back and start being nicer to Harry-- even to further Voldemort's own gains-- would be rather odd. Could you see the look on Harry's face if Severus started giving him copious amounts of praise or, heck, even smiling at him? He (and the reader) would be very suspicious.

I take your point, but I think it is also important to remember the context in which JKR was speaking. Prior to DH, it was vital for her to preserve suspense and keep the end of the series firmly under wraps. She, obviously, would not lie about Snape in interviews, but it was in her interests to flag up the negative sides of Snape's character more than the positive, in order to lay a false scent.

I respect your view, but I have a question. If this were true, don't you think it is a huge revelation? Why was it left unrevealed in your view?

Moreover, she does not specify how he abuses his power or with whom.

I agree she does not say how, because that is in the book. But she does indicate that it is with the children.

I respect your view, but I would read this very differently. I believe the interpretation of his behaviour as professional jealousy is something which we are constantly fed through Harry's unreliable narrative viewpoint as a red herring, to make us believe that he is the villain and/or to cover up who the real villain is in some of the individual books.

I respect your view, but my impression was not based on Harry's opinions in his POV, solely on Snape's actions. Harry wasn't lying to us when he saw Snape ignore Hermione's raised hand or call her a know it all. He wasn't lying when he heard the words Snape said to her about her teeth. These are not opinions or viewpoint, but facts of what transpired, imo. So that is all I based my idea on.

I respect your view, but disagree. "I trust Severus Snape" are not the words of someone who felt he had to keep Snape close at hand to cover his own back (and entrusting Snape with a secret mission to kill him to save Draco the task is certainly not the action of a man who felt he had to keep Snape close at hand because he was untrustworthy). I do think, however, that DD knew that if Voldemort believed Snape was spying on the Hogwarts staff he would be more likely to spare Snape active missions that involved actually killing and torturing people. I think that is another big reason why Dumbledore kept Snape on the staff.

I respect your view, but a couple of points: First, Dumbledore's avowed "I trust Severus Snape" clearly did not mean "I trust Snape in every single way" because as we know, Dumbledore kept many things from Snape and besides, did not trust anyone completely as he admitted in Kings Cross (and to Snape directly when asked; he didn't want all of his eggs in 1 basket, especially (not only) a person who was seated in Voldemort's nest from time to time as a spy. Second, I did not mean that Dumbledore keep Snape close because he felt he was untrustworthy, I meant because of his position as a spy - which may be what you are saying as well.

Yes, he did, but I believe that this was for the reason that The GreenWoods stated - in order to make the Slytherins with DE parents believe that he shared their anti-Muggle views. It was part of his cover, IMO.

Well as I asked above - why wasn't this 'character changing' notion made clear in the canon? The anti-muggle view was not the issue that needed to be corrected; I feel Snape's cruel humiliation of Hermione was - Neville and Ron were not muggles and he treated them in an equally poor manner, imo. Being dismissive of her would have been sufficient for the purpose you state, imo.

I would respectfully but totally disagree. IMO, he is portrayed as by far the better potion maker.

I think because it is a subjective notion, it has nothing to do with who was actually the better potion maker. I speak in terms of Hermione being lauded for it by her peers and the other professors. Not just potions, but all subjects, she was the best in her year (not unlike his enemies as a youngster and that would likely also propell the jealousy, imo.) Snape would have liked to have had that honor when young - any honor in reality, imo. He quested for power and to be impressive, imo. So this galled him. Hermione did make perfect potions prior to HBP; I recall Snape disregarding her work in that regard. In addition, his comments to her were not conducive to encouraging a brilliant student to achieve, imo, but rather an incentive to fail.

I would agree that this is possible, although I seem to remember that his poor treatment of Hermione begins in the very first lesson, before she is Harry's friend, so it cannot, IMO, be the only reason.

Excellent point and that is why I feel that right off the bat, he had problems with 'know it alls' - based in the same reasons I gave above.

I think that Snape might have enjoyed having an owl. I think that they are affectionate creatures to their owners, to a certain degree, and it would have given Snape something to take care of, as well as having something like a friend, like Harry when he has Hedwig.

I respect your view, but I have a question. If this were true, don't you think it is a huge revelation? Why was it left unrevealed in your view?.

I believe that the revelation at the end of DH that Snape had been working for the order against Voldemort since Lily's death was a huge revelation, and one which necessitates a reevaluation of everything which we have been led to believe about Snape up until that point. Like I said, I do not believe that JKR directly lied to us about Snape in previous books or interviews, but she IMO most definitely misdirected us in the books, and it therefore seems to me a reasonable assumption that she also misdirected us in interviews.

I agree she does not say how, because that is in the book. But she does indicate that it is with the children.

With respect, I don't believe that she does indicate that it was with all the children. She says he abuses his power. She does not specify that he abuses his power on every occasion when he says something unpleasant to a student.

I respect your view, but my impression was not based on Harry's opinions in his POV, solely on Snape's actions. Harry wasn't lying to us when he saw Snape ignore Hermione's raised hand or call her a know it all. He wasn't lying when he heard the words Snape said to her about her teeth. These are not opinions or viewpoint, but facts of what transpired, imo. So that is all I based my idea on.

I take your point, but in the quotation to which you respond here, I was questioning your earlier suggestion that Snape regularly exhibited professional jealous of his adult colleagues. Whether or not he exhibited jealousy of Hermione is a completely separate issue, IMO.

I respect your view, but a couple of points: First, Dumbledore's avowed "I trust Severus Snape" clearly did not mean "I trust Snape in every single way" because as we know, Dumbledore kept many things from Snape and besides, did not trust anyone completely as he admitted in Kings Cross (and to Snape directly when asked; he didn't want all of his eggs in 1 basket, especially (not only) a person who was seated in Voldemort's nest from time to time as a spy. Second, I did not mean that Dumbledore keep Snape close because he felt he was untrustworthy, I meant because of his position as a spy - which may be what you are saying as well.

Yes, I think we're more or less in agreement here. :)

I speak in terms of Hermione being lauded for it by her peers and the other professors. Not just potions, but all subjects, she was the best in her year (not unlike his enemies as a youngster and that would likely also propell the jealousy, imo.)

Well, IMO, Snape was also lauded for his Potions ability (Slughorn's interrupted "Even you, Severus..." at the Christmas party in HBP must remain ambiguous, precisely because it was interrupted, but to me it suggests that Slughorn's opinion of Snape's potion-making ability was high). I can buy your suggestion that Snape was jealous of Hermione, though (and parallel with his feelings about James)- I'd not thought of that before.

I would contend, though, that jealousy of James's and Sirius's academic abilities constituted, at most, only a small part of his resentment of the Marauders. It's made clear in The Prince's Tale that there was friction (IMO initiated by James) between James/Sirius and Snape on the Hogwarts Express, before Snape knew anything about their academic ability. And I've always thought that Lupin's and Sirius's guesswork that Snape hated James because he was jealous of his academic ability/Quidditch-playing (I trust it's OK to call it guesswork? they use words like "I suppose" when talking about this apparent jealousy, suggesting that this is the characters' opinion, not canonical fact) was misdirection - they picked up that Snape was jealous of James (which is a clue) but didn't realise the real object of the jealousy (Lily), IMO.

I believe that the revelation at the end of DH that Snape had been working for the order against Voldemort since Lily's death was a huge revelation, and one which necessitates a reevaluation of everything which we have been led to believe about Snape up until that point. Like I said, I do not believe that JKR directly lied to us about Snape in previous books or interviews, but she IMO most definitely misdirected us in the books, and it therefore seems to me a reasonable assumption that she also misdirected us in interviews.

In my judgment, the only thing revealed was that Snape's loyalty was to Dumbledore and his motivation was to make up for what he'd done to Lily because he still had emotions for her. But that said nothing about his behavior, imo.

Another problem with this reasoning for me is that Snape was behaving in the same negative manner throughout. Most of the Death Eaters did not believe Voldemort was going to return (recall in GoF, Voldemort accused them all of disloyalty). Those who were loyal, were all in Azkaban with the exception of 1 man who had no son at Hogwarts. So, there was no 'children' bearing witness to Snape's mistreatment of Harry and his friends - or other Gryffindors at that time, imo. Further, Snape told Bella that he had remained at Hogwarts because he thought Harry might be the dark lord. Imo, he would not say that to Bella if he hadn't also said it to Voldemort because he'd be caught in a lie if they compared notes. Snape didn't say that he'd been trying to appear a loyal death eater the whole time, he said just the opposite - that he'd considered alternatives. Imo, he therefore had no reason to have mistreated the children.

JKR's comments about Snape's behavior did not change after publication either. She said he died the same cruel, bullying and vindictive man he'd been when alive. So I am unsure why you feel that she was indicating misdirection in her writing.

With respect, I don't believe that she does indicate that it was with all the children. She says he abuses his power. She does not specify that he abuses his power on every occasion when he says something unpleasant to a student.

Oh I don't believe that either. When he was instructing them on the beauty of potions and DADA, he was not abusing his power at all. I refer only to his bullying, cruel and sarcastic behavior with respect to the "incidents" we've been discussing. There is never a call to humiliate children to the level I feel Snape did - the kids do that to one another quite enough.

I take your point, but in the quotation to which you respond here, I was questioning your earlier suggestion that Snape regularly exhibited professional jealous of his adult colleagues. Whether or not he exhibited jealousy of Hermione is a completely separate issue, IMO.

Yeah that is what I was referring to, not to the other professors.

Well, IMO, Snape was also lauded for his Potions ability (Slughorn's interrupted "Even you, Severus..." at the Christmas party in HBP must remain ambiguous, precisely because it was interrupted, but to me it suggests that Slughorn's opinion of Snape's potion-making ability was high). I can buy your suggestion that Snape was jealous of Hermione, though (and parallel with his feelings about James)- I'd not thought of that before.

I would contend, though, that jealousy of James's and Sirius's academic abilities constituted, at most, only a small part of his resentment of the Marauders. It's made clear in The Prince's Tale that there was friction (IMO initiated by James) between James/Sirius and Snape on the Hogwarts Express, before Snape knew anything about their academic ability. And I've always thought that Lupin's and Sirius's guesswork that Snape hated James because he was jealous of his academic ability/Quidditch-playing (I trust it's OK to call it guesswork? they use words like "I suppose" when talking about this apparent jealousy, suggesting that this is the characters' opinion, not canonical fact) was misdirection - they picked up that Snape was jealous of James (which is a clue) but didn't realise the real object of the jealousy (Lily), IMO.

Well I was mainly refering to Snape thinking back to his childhood in a comparative manner, not to his prowess in potions as an adult. Naturally he was better than all of the children, imo.

Actually, I discounted Lupin's statement altogether because it was said with doubt. I base my belief solely on Snape's own words and behavior. He claimed that James had a "little bit of talent on the Quidditch pitch" (like Harry), which was a lie under the circumstances. As a reader I knew this because Harry was great and because Harry saw his dad celebrated in the school's trophy room - plus everyone and their uncle said Harry flew as great as his dad. Also, when Snape's jealousy got the better of him, he said to Lily 'big Quidditch hero' in a disparaging way and that he wanted to show her that James and his friends were not as wonderful as everyone thought (DH). Finally he said to Harry that James strutted around (like Harry) - POA. These comments made me feel that Snape was jealous of the popularity that James and Harry garnered from their ability. Also, the way people gathered around them after games in congratulations and liked them in general, imo, made Snape jealous. This was not necessarily for their ability which he did not have, but because it made them seem powerful and impressive, imo, something Snape quested after. It was the same with James academic achievements because it just added to his whole aura of popularity in Snape's eyes, imo. And Snape was not lauded by his peers, as he was unpopular - likely due to the gang he hung with - and there is no canon that as a youngster Snape was lauded by his professors as a student. It would seem he was not because that would have given him at least something to feel powerful and impressive about, something to balance the equation in his mind and I don't feel he felt that way. He had talent in potions it appears, and with the dark arts, but the latter would not be lauded and we don't know if Snape actually mastered his potions in class or at a later time for Slughorn to praise him in class. Still, one professor praising him would not have served when his enemies were getting praise from them all, imo.

So that is the book canon I was basing it on, not on Lupin's statement at all. Lupin was uncertain in my view, but Snape confirmed it to be true himself as I saw it. And of course I agree that Jealousy relative to Lily was also involved.

JKR's comments about Snape's behavior did not change after publication either. She said he died the same cruel, bullying and vindictive man he'd been when alive. So I am unsure why you feel that she was indicating misdirection in her writing.

Oh, but they did. She said she likes him. :lol:

Oh, but they did. She said she likes him. :lol:

:rotfl: Um, yeah, I remember that interview...all of it. But to be fair to JKR, she has never said she didn't like Snape, she merely expressed surprise that any of her readers might like him.

In addition, his comments to her [Hermione] were not conducive to encouraging a brilliant student to achieve, imo, but rather an incentive to fail.

While this is certainly one way of viewing the situation it is not the way I view it. I can see sense in the way Snape treats Hermione's academic work and it can be seen as pushing her imo. One of Hermione greates wishes is praise for her work from her teachers, we know that boggarts believe that her biggest fear is academic failiure! I feel that part of Snapes problem with Hermione's work is that she slavishly follows the text book, there is no expreimentation, which can be a sign that she does not understands the basic rules of potion making in a pratical way. I think t is safe to say (& I believe this is demonstrated in HBP) that for Hermione to improve she needs to step beyond just following the directions - to implement the rules & theories she parrots.

Buy withholding praise Snape could quite easily imo be trying to push Hermione to do try something new, to take that step past relying on the text book so heavily. I think it actually makes sense for Hermione, although for other students such a tactic might be disasterous!

While this is certainly one way of viewing the situation it is not the way I view it. I can see sense in the way Snape treats Hermione's academic work and it can be seen as pushing her imo. One of Hermione greates wishes is praise for her work from her teachers, we know that boggarts believe that her biggest fear is academic failiure! I feel that part of Snapes problem with Hermione's work is that she slavishly follows the text book, there is no expreimentation, which can be a sign that she does not understands the basic rules of potion making in a pratical way. I think t is safe to say (& I believe this is demonstrated in HBP) that for Hermione to improve she needs to step beyond just following the directions - to implement the rules & theories she parrots.

Buy withholding praise Snape could quite easily imo be trying to push Hermione to do try something new, to take that step past relying on the text book so heavily. I think it actually makes sense for Hermione, although for other students such a tactic might be disasterous!

I respect your view, however, in my judgment, six years of Snape behaving in a browbeating manner with Hermione did not cause her to change her method of study. I feel a good professor changes his methods when they are obviously failing especially with a talented student. Furthermore, I don't feel that reasoning explains why Snape crushed her spirit and dissed her before he knew her actual ability: on the first day of class. She was the most brilliant student in her year, doing things that other students her age only dreamed of achieving. She was given a time turner to double her classes - and her knowledge. Additionally, she used that knowledge in creative and inventive ways, imo, like charming the coins.

Snape did impart knowledge and he likely had some workable ideas as a longstanding professor. However, rudely remarking to Hermione that she should give him more than what was in the book, isn't the proper way to get a message across, imo. Calling Hermione a know it all is not conducive to discouraging her reliance on book knowledge, imo. I also don't see how disallowing her from answering questions helps in that regard either. So in my opinion, Snape's motive was not to give Hermione an incentive to be more successful, but rather to unleash the negative feelings her brilliance engendered within him.

Buy withholding praise Snape could quite easily imo be trying to push Hermione to do try something new, to take that step past relying on the text book so heavily. I think it actually makes sense for Hermione, although for other students such a tactic might be disasterous!I've never seen any recommendation for withholding praise as a strategy to improve a student's performance. The types of praise or constructive advice can vary per student, but withholding praise is negative reinforcement (i.e. discouragement), not positive reinforcement (i.e. encouragement).

I agree with the idea that Snape didn't want to teach, at least initially. However, I believe that once he took up the position and saw the power that he held over the students, he began to enjoy it. He quested for the DADA position; spoke ardently of the topics he was teaching; ridiculed the other DADA professors as if jealous and became highly defensive if he felt others were moving onto his teaching territory (Cos - declaring he was the potions master and would make any necessary potions as opposed to Lockheart who had offered to do so.)

I respectfully disagree that Snape wanted power with the students. I also don't think he wanted the DADA position, for he would have noticed as Harry did (if Dumbledore did not tell him that is) that the job was the best way to leave Hogwarts alive or dead. :D

I think he ridiculed the other DADA teachers because I think he felt they were not able professors more than anything else and I think he was correct as well; Quirrell, Lockhart, Lupin (who was an able teacher, but Snape did not like Lupin because he was suspicious of Lupin aiding Sirius and he was correct in that as well, for Lupin did not tell Dumbeldore about Sirius's animagus; and also because I think he knew more than Lupin on the subject as well; in POA we see Lupin say that while there are other ways to drive a dementor away, he knows only one, while in HBP, Snape tells the class about another way, which Harry refuses to acknowledge even though he would get no marks for his essay), Umbridge in fifth year and Moody in fourth, whom Snape does not say anything much about IMO.

I would disagree that in real life Snape's behavior while teaching would not make him a bad man (assuming we mean bad professor). I feel he'd eventually be fired by any Headmaster worth his salt. However, I do agree that Dumbledore wished for him to be present for other reasons, in my view, mainly to keep an eye on him. In my judgment, Dumbledore had to have realized that the protection Snape offered for Harry was in reality minimal and that his treatment of Harry and the students did not balance accounts on that score. However, as a double spy, it was necessary to keep Snape close at hand, imo.

I think in RL we have no idea how Snape would be; for without the spying and the act he had to put on for the Slytherins, Snape could be a very different person/teacher IMO.

I respect your view, but I don't buy this argument because Snape was not a "spy", he was a "double spy". To me, that means that he had to "act" correctly in both of his positions: with the Death Eaters and with the Good Siders. From Voldemort and the Death Eaters point of view, Snape would be jeopardizing his position at Hogwarts and his entire spy job for them if he behaved in a manner that got him kicked out or suspected of being in league with the death eaters, imo. So I disagree that Snape 'couldn't' be kind to Gryffindors - or even 'indifferent'. I feel that he could have easily been either if he wanted to be, he simply did not wish to be.

But Snape's loyalty was towards only one side and that side knew it and Snape allowed that side to take advantage of it as well IMO.

If Snape was kind to the Gryffindors, as I wrote before, Voldemort could have asked Snape to bring a couple of Gryffindors as a test of his loyalty, which Snape could not of course obey.

By making himself hated throughout the School, except with the Slytherins, I think Snape protected them all IMO.

Based on the fact that Voldemort goal was to kill Harry, Snape gaining Harry's trust and faith by being nice would have actually been a boon for Voldemort, imo. What better way to ensnare Harry in the end? I think that if Voldemort had known the full extent of Snape's behavior at the school (which I don't believe he did), he would have ordered him to correct his behavior for his own ends.

This I think Snape would have done, if he were a loyal DE. Snape was on the side of the Light; he had to protect Harry, not deliver him to Voldemort IMO.

In as far as Snape's term as Headmaster, I am also dismayed by his inaction in stopping the child abuse that was taking place. The children were beaten, kidnapped, and tortured in detention with the crucio curse. In my view, Snape should have done his best to put a stop to it, even if it meant blowing his cover and getting the kids away.

I respectfully disagree. Had Snape blown his cover, I think the Light would not have won the war against Voldemort that year and would have seen far more deaths than they did IMO.

I respectfully disagree that Snape wanted power with the students. I also don't think he wanted the DADA position, for he would have noticed as Harry did (if Dumbledore did not tell him that is) that the job was the best way to leave Hogwarts alive or dead. :D

I respect your view, but I trust JKR on this one, so we'd have to agree to disagree. :)

I think he ridiculed the other DADA teachers because I think he felt they were not able professors more than anything else and I think he was correct as well; Quirrell, Lockhart, Lupin (who was an able teacher, but Snape did not like Lupin because he was suspicious of Lupin aiding Sirius and he was correct in that as well, for Lupin did not tell Dumbeldore about Sirius's animagus; and also because I think he knew more than Lupin on the subject as well; in POA we see Lupin say that while there are other ways to drive a dementor away, he knows only one, while in HBP, Snape tells the class about another way, which Harry refuses to acknowledge even though he would get no marks for his essay), Umbridge in fifth year and Moody in fourth, whom Snape does not say anything much about IMO.

I am not sure what you are referring to with the dementor thing. Can you tell me which canon? I don't recall Snape giving another method - although it would make sense because the Death Eaters would have had to deal with them during the first war as they were all on the same side together.

I think in RL we have no idea how Snape would be; for without the spying and the act he had to put on for the Slytherins, Snape could be a very different person/teacher IMO.

I respect your view, but since we never met a 'different' Snape, or even heard about him, I would have to respectfully disagree. In my judgment, this would be a very important revelation and it was not made in canon.

If Snape was kind to the Gryffindors, as I wrote before, Voldemort could have asked Snape to bring a couple of Gryffindors as a test of his loyalty, which Snape could not of course obey.

I don't follow your reasoning here. There was no Voldemort for four years while Harry was at Hogwarts and when he did return, why would he want Gryffindors? And even if he did want them, he would just tell Snape to kidnap them - that was the normal Death Eater method. But Voldemort wasn't going to ask Snape to do anything that would risk his position as a spy, he was to valuable in that regard. Voldemort wanted Snape to appear faithful to Dumbledore - not like he was a Death Eater. So I am not sure what you mean.

This I think Snape would have done, if he were a loyal DE. Snape was on the side of the Light; he had to protect Harry, not deliver him to Voldemort IMO.

But that is exactly what Snape did; he adopted Dumbledore's plan and delivered Harry to Voldemort via his memories.

I respectfully disagree. Had Snape blown his cover, I think the Light would not have won the war against Voldemort that year and would have seen far more deaths than they did IMO.

Well I respect your view, but we will never know, so I feel we'd have to agree to disagree on this one. ;)

I've never seen any recommendation for withholding praise as a strategy to improve a student's performance. The types of praise or constructive advice can vary per student, but withholding praise is negative reinforcement (i.e. discouragement), not positive reinforcement (i.e. encouragement).

I have. And I don't say that as a Snape fan, I say it as someone who just passed out of a school where it was common to two of my eight classes. Namely, Maths and Biology.

Being frank about it, I was too aggravated to give in, so I kept going. So I have seen it happen and I do think it works, but I also think Snape was too mush into it. He was just plain downright mean at times. It doesn't mean he was a poor teacher. On the contrary, the message that comes across is that many of his students do well.

I respect your view, but since we never met a 'different' Snape, or even heard about him, I would have to respectfully disagree. In my judgment, this would be a very important revelation and it was not made in canon.

You don't think the Snape who cried and mourned, the one who begged on his knees, the one who put himself out there to make a muggle friend... was different?

But that is exactly what Snape did; he adopted Dumbledore's plan and delivered Harry to Voldemort via his memories.

Yes, because that was the promise he made- that he would ally with Dumbledore to do what he could. He did do this, feeling that Dumbledore, as head of the Order, was in a good position to help the Potters. He had no way of knowing that he too was being manipulated.

Being frank about it, I was too aggravated to give in, so I kept going. So I have seen it happen and I do think it works, but I also think Snape was too mush into it. He was just plain downright mean at times. It doesn't mean he was a poor teacher. On the contrary, the message that comes across is that many of his students do well.

I respect your view. I was not referring to Snape's knowledge; I think he knew what he was talking about in potions. I was speaking of his treatment of the children. In that light he was a poor professor, imo, and that is putting it lightly.

You don't think the Snape who cried and mourned, the one who begged on his knees, the one who put himself out there to make a muggle friend... was different?

Different from what? Understand, I always thought he was on the good side, I never doubted it for a minute. I knew Dumbledore was begging him to go through with killing him. So I never saw Snape as a Death Eater - I figured he'd truly changed sides like Dumbledore said. I felt like he was trying to reform throughout the series and that was why his basic behavior was so much like Voldemort's. But I knew he was not evil.

He cried and mourned over some personal loss when Lily died, that had nothing to do with her, imo. He couldn't care less that Harry and James were dead and finding out Harry was alive didn't infuse him with joy. He mourned over a ripped photo that he stole from Harry. Neither of those things made me feel any different about him because he was behaving like a scoundral in both instances, despite his imo, selfish mourning. It did not surprise me at all that he'd had Lily as a friend; it would not have surprised me if he'd been in the Order or was an ex-Marauder - or Dumbledore's son. His background didn't change a thing about the man he'd become in the series in my judgment.

Yes, because that was the promise he made- that he would ally with Dumbledore to do what he could. He did do this, feeling that Dumbledore, as head of the Order, was in a good position to help the Potters. He had no way of knowing that he too was being manipulated.

I was speaking about the memories he gave at death. :)

I am not sure what you are referring to with the dementor thing. Can you tell me which canon? I don't recall Snape giving another method - although it would make sense because the Death Eaters would have had to deal with them during the first war as they were all on the same side together.

It was in HBP. In the Unknowable Chapter!

Ron was now struggling to finish a particularly vicious essay for Snape that Harry and Hermione had already completed. Harry fully expected to receive low marks on his, because he disagreed with Snape on the best way to tackle dementors, but he did not care;

"There are certain defences one an use," said Lupin. 'But there was only one dementor on the train. The more there are, the more difficult it becomes to resist."

"What defences? said Harry at once. "Can you teach me?"

"I don't pretend to be an expert at fihghting dementors Harry - quite the contrary..."

I think Snape knew more about both the Dark Arts and their defence than any of the teachers we saw, including Lupin IMO.

I respect your view, but since we never met a 'different' Snape, or even heard about him, I would have to respectfully disagree. In my judgment, this would be a very important revelation and it was not made in canon.

We have not met a different Snape, so we don't know how Snape would be without the pressure of his spying duties IMO. All through the books we see him as a DE on Voldemort's side and Dumbledore's and Harry's man on the side of the Light. Without both these duties which were 24x7 and one where Snape had to always be on his guard, Snape may have been very different IMO.

I don't follow your reasoning here. There was no Voldemort for four years while Harry was at Hogwarts and when he did return, why would he want Gryffindors? And even if he did want them, he would just tell Snape to kidnap them - that was the normal Death Eater method. But Voldemort wasn't going to ask Snape to do anything that would risk his position as a spy, he was to valuable in that regard. Voldemort wanted Snape to appear faithful to Dumbledore - not like he was a Death Eater. So I am not sure what you mean.

Voldemort was not there, I agree, but the left over DEs were and they were meeting regularly; and they discussed as well, so much that they thought of Harry as their Dark Lord, wanting to observe him and they were keeping tabs on each other. Snape had to be on his guard all the time IMO. And it was because he was, that he was able to convince Voldemort, who would have surely verified Snape's statements form DEs like Lucius Malfoy, Crabbe Sr and others, who in turn got their information from their kids IMO.

But that is exactly what Snape did; he adopted Dumbledore's plan and delivered Harry to Voldemort via his memories.

Not as a DE, as an Order member. I think there is a lot of difference between the 2. As a DE rthat action would be to help Voldemort win the war and what Snape did actually was to help the Light and the WWE win the war IMO.

It was in HBP. In the Unknowable Chapter!

Ron was now struggling to finish a particularly vicious essay for Snape that Harry and Hermione had already completed. Harry fully expected to receive low marks on his, because he disagreed with Snape on the best way to tackle dementors, but he did not care;

"There are certain defences one an use," said Lupin. 'But there was only one dementor on the train. The more there are, the more difficult it becomes to resist."

"What defences? said Harry at once. "Can you teach me?"

"I don't pretend to be an expert at fihghting dementors Harry - quite the contrary..."

I think Snape knew more about both the Dark Arts and their defence than any of the teachers we saw, including Lupin IMO.

I respect your interpretation, but I don't think this supports the idea that Snape knew more about DADA. He didn't know where Kappas were from as shown in POA; pretty basic stuff, imo. If Harry disagreed with Snape on the best way to down a dementor, then I would conclude Snape didn't know what he was talking about. Harry is the one who fought them ultimately - 100's at once - and was victorious. Snape told the minister that he didn't know how it was achieved and as I said, Snape had worked with Dementors as a Death Eater, not against them, so it is doubtful that he'd ever fought one, imo.

We have not met a different Snape, so we don't know how Snape would be without the pressure of his spying duties IMO. All through the books we see him as a DE on Voldemort's side and Dumbledore's and Harry's man on the side of the Light. Without both these duties which were 24x7 and one where Snape had to always be on his guard, Snape may have been very different IMO.

That was my point also. While I would have to respectfully disagree that Snape was "acting", if he had been, then I believe his 'true persona' would have shown him to behave in an even worse manner than what we saw. I felt Snape was controlling his anger, bitterness, vindictiveness and cruelty at times. I can only imagine how he would have been if he'd of had no one to answer to; imo, much worse.

Voldemort was not there, I agree, but the left over DEs were and they were meeting regularly; and they discussed as well, so much that they thought of Harry as their Dark Lord, wanting to observe him and they were keeping tabs on each other. Snape had to be on his guard all the time IMO. And it was because he was, that he was able to convince Voldemort, who would have surely verified Snape's statements form DEs like Lucius Malfoy, Crabbe Sr and others, who in turn got their information from their kids IMO.

This does not explain why Snape would have to act like a DE. If they were thinking of rallying behind Harry, they had no need to behave like DEs at the time. Nonetheless, it should have ruined Snape's spy story that he was so cruel to the non-Slytherins, but JKR saved him, imo.

I agree! He brought everything on himself! But vivek, it is us Snape fans who cuts him some slack! Not Snape himself! If I read the books, Snape never ever gets into a self-pity state, or justifies his lack of home life; never says that Lily left him so he went astray, never says that he was placed in Slytherin and so he made mistakes; or even calling Lily a mudblood was in a fit of anger because he was in a deeply humiliating position; there is only an apology; he was prepared to sleep outside Gryffindor what what he considered a great mistake; but even there he never justifies IMO.
I don't agree with that. If he 'just accepts' everything, then why does he still hold a grudge against a man who's been dead for seventeen years, for something that happened twenty years before? Why does he let that grudge carry over to the next generation? Why does he act bitter to everyone unfortunate enough to be acquainted with him? IMO, that is not 'simply accepting' at all. It is going out of his way to be as horrible as he can get away with to anyone he can, because he did not get his way. It is making innocent people pay for the mistakes he made.

He had a bad childhood, had no guidance like Harry or a family like Ron and went on to make wrong choices; he lost the love of his life, because of those choices, he had a hand in the death of the only person who had cared for Severus and whom he loved and instead of blaming the fates, or others or simply breaking down, he makes amends IMO.

To be fair, there's no canon evidence that his childhood was that bad. Alll we have is that his parents quarelled a lot. That does not mean that Snape wasn't loved at all as a child. As for guidance, he certainly had some, in the form of Lily, but he chose to ignore it, possibly because he thought her to be beneath him.

And because Snape never cuts any slack for himself, I cut an awful lot of it for him. :D
On the contrary, I think that Snape is cutting himself a lot of slack. He seems to think that he deserves a lot of credit for what he has done to save Harry. Why else would he ask Harry to thank him on his hands and knees?

The only student from a "neutral" House that expresses an opinion, IIRC, is Ernie McMillan (Hufflepuff) in HBP. He compliments the first DADA class (and expresses no surprise, so I think from his viewpoint, Snape as DADA teacher seemed no different than Snape as Potions teacher).
All Ernie says is that it was a good lesson. I don't see how that extends to Snape's behaviour, or his performance asa Potions Teacher.


I don't think Severus cared about the Order of Merlin at all at the time. I'm sure his rage was caused by the fact that someone he considered Lily's murderer escaped only. The Order of Merlin seems such a minor, insignificant thing compared to it.
It should, but it does seem that Snape did care for it. He does seem to go out of his way to be polite to Fudge, and is prepared to go over Dumbledore's head for it. I think that the Order of the Merlin would have been the icing on the cake for him.

But Snape made all these wrong choices when he was very young. I hear all the time that the Marauders’ arrogance and cruelty can be justified by their youth. They were immature, wanted to show off, didn’t really understand what they were doing, etc. To sum up, they were typical teenagers, so any behaviour of theirs at school can be excused by this very fact. Yet teenage Severus is for some reason expected to have been mature, wise and insightful enough not to fall for Voldemort’s agenda. Why?
The difference I see is that Snape, and the other DEs, were making mistakes on a completely different level. Their behaviour is akin to a kid bringing a gun to his school, IMO. As you said, Snape's choices would lead to people dying, of which Lily and James wouldn't even be the first.

But honestly, the pressure that Snape had been subjected to from the very beginning was far greater than anything children from other Hogwarts Houses could imagine. He was a kid who was forced to spent 10 months of a year in the midst of DE wannabies and who then returned home to parents who seemingly didn’t give a fig about who their son hanged out with or what regime he was going to join once he was out of school because they were apparently too busy yelling at each other.
The point is that he was not forced at all. He was completely willing, all the way. I don't see the point about his parents not guiding him correctly, because we have no clear idea what was going on there.

And no, I don’t consider Lily a candidate for Snape’s “moral compass” and don’t understand how anyone can see her in this role – that’s too much to expect from one ordinary girl who, like Snape, was just a teenager with all the impatience, stubbornness and lack of wisdom and diplomacy that usually comes with it.
I agree that Lily couldn't help. Snape didn't care about her opinion anyway, and I also got the feeling that he thought her naiive.

Why did Sirius get hurt in POA? It takes two large animals to control Remus. Not ony that, James wasn't going to transform in front of Snape. So an untransformed James running into the tunnel after Snape was placing his life at risk in as much as Snape had done by running in there.
Exactly. I'm surprised how many posters don't take this into account. :tu:

I am not going to take something that was said in humor and apply it in support of someone's serious actions. If we are going to take the conversation to that level, then we are going to have to have long discussions as to why Snape was too unintelligent to see the distinction between Hermione's teeth when they were down past her shoulders and her normal teeth. :lol:.
True. While it may not have been funny either time, they did think that it was funny.

James was not a budding Death Eater, but rather a budding Order member, so his mentality was in terms of saving those from death that he could save (notwithstanding determined Death Eaters). I feel he saved Snape, simply because he feared the boy would die. That it was his enemy did not matter, imo. Whether he considered other consequences is unknown as we dont have James' POV, and largely irrelevant to the fact that he risked his life and acted, imo. That was a choice anyway you look at it because he did have the choice not to act regardless of the consequences, that is also a true fact.
I agree. James simply did not have to risk his life. He was not involved in the plot, and could have gone to Dumbledore, or a similar, less riskier path. I think that this incident and Snape's opinion of it shows the fundamental difference between James and Snape's way of thinking.

ISnape was first and foremost a spy; a man who Voldmeort believed had left him forever. A man who escaped Azkaban. A man who fell in line with Albus Dumbledore's orders to have a comfortable life and most importantly the man who did not harm Harry Potter IMO. (HBP - Spinner's End).
I agree with WWB on this. Snape was a double agent. As such, it would be just plain stupid of him to seem to be working for Voldemort when he is at Hogwarts. I don't think that his profession had to do with his behaviour as a teacher. Besides, his story is that he thought Voldemort to be dead, and that he was working for Dumbledore at the time.

When Snape insulted Hermione, there were the Slytherin kids who told their DE parents everything. This comment against Hermione along with his other insults at Harry Potter over the years and tales about how much Snape hated that blasted Potter and that clever "mudblood" and his "unfair" treatment of the Gryffindors along with some nice misinformation from Dumbledore about what Snape had been gathering all those years he had been with Dumbledore IMO is what allowed Snape a chance with Voldemort, who at the graveyard told his DEs about "the one who left me forever and of course he will be killed" IMO.
Again, Snape's story is that he had been working for Dumbledore because he thought Voldemort dead. I don't see how this would benefit that at all. Besides, Snape is sadistic. The author sees him as sadistic, and writes him as sadistic. That's all there is to it.

I agree with the idea that Snape didn't want to teach, at least initially. However, I believe that once he took up the position and saw the power that he held over the students, he began to enjoy it. He quested for the DADA position; spoke ardently of the topics he was teaching; ridiculed the other DADA professors as if jealous and became highly defensive if he felt others were moving onto his teaching territory (Cos - declaring he was the potions master and would make any necessary potions as opposed to Lockheart who had offered to do so.)
I agree. :tu:

I take your point, but I think it is also important to remember the context in which JKR was speaking. Prior to DH, it was vital for her to preserve suspense and keep the end of the series firmly under wraps. She, obviously, would not lie about Snape in interviews, but it was in her interests to flag up the negative sides of Snape's character more than the positive, in order to lay a false scent.
I don't see this at all. So what if it was a suspense? That does not change the man's nature completely and reform him overnight. Even if she was laying a false scent, it does not imply that she lied. So, Snape remains as sadistic as he was, even after it's revealed that he's been working for Dumbledore.

Moreover, she does not specify how he abuses his power or with whom.
I think that it is made very clear. Snape is described as a sadistic teacher who abuses his power. Well, who else does a teacher have power over? House-elves?

That does not necessarily mean that all, or even most, of his cruel comments are motivated by sheer sadism.
Of course not. Considering the context, we would only need to take into account those instances where he abuses his power as a teacher, and behaves in what appears to be a sadistic manner to his students.

I would never suggest that his behaviour is presented by JKR as something to be approved of, but I still maintain that it is impossible to judge Snape by real-life standards in a series of novels where a teacher's public drunkenness is presented as no big deal.
First of all, Trelawney was kept at Hogwarts because of the prophecy. Snape was kept as a teacher because he was valuable as a spy. In both cases, Dumbledore needed them there. It is shown clearly that other teachers disapprove of the appointments. Harry simply doesn't care about it. It does not mean that a drunken teacher is not a big deal. Why would Trelawney be hiding her Sherry bottles, if it wasn't?

I don't agree with that. If he 'just accepts' everything, then why does he still hold a grudge against a man who's been dead for seventeen years, for something that happened twenty years before? Why does he let that grudge carry over to the next generation? Why does he act bitter to everyone unfortunate enough to be acquainted with him? IMO, that is not 'simply accepting' at all. It is going out of his way to be as horrible as he can get away with to anyone he can, because he did not get his way. It is making innocent people pay for the mistakes he made.

Exactly, and I would add that when one considers that he is holding grudges for acts done when both he and his enemies were 15 years old - and he got in some good licks against them too - it makes even less sense, imo. In reality, I feel the same way about Snape's obssession with Lily because she held him in disdain when they where last in the vicinity together, imo. It wasn't as if she was nice and speaking to him, showing him kindness and understanding; she called him a budding death eater and told him to head off on his own path alone (DH TPT). So I would think that Snape would have let go of his emotions for her also, however, I think this goes back to Snape being socially inept; an obstacle that he was never able to overcome.

On the contrary, I think that Snape is cutting himself a lot of slack. He seems to think that he deserves a lot of credit for what he has done to save Harry. Why else would he ask Harry to thank him on his hands and knees?

I agree and this is what I meant when I said that Snape behaved in an arrogant manner in my opinion. I feel he saw others beneath him for varied reasons, many based on his personal misconstructions of their characters.

All Ernie says is that it was a good lesson. I don't see how that extends to Snape's behaviour, or his performance asa Potions Teacher.

I would have to concur. I did not understand Ernie's comment to mean anything except that the particular lesson was good. I don't think canon supports the idea that his comment can be further extrapolated in relation to Ernie. As for Snape's overall behavior in HBP in comparison to previous years, I can only quote Snape; I see no difference.

I agree. James simply did not have to risk his life. He was not involved in the plot, and could have gone to Dumbledore, or a similar, less riskier path. I think that this incident and Snape's opinion of it shows the fundamental difference between James and Snape's way of thinking.

Precisely. I felt the same way when I first read POA. Not only that, there was further evidence because Snape's statements were all directed at both father and son and I believed he was misreading Harry altogether. It made no sense for me to believe that Snape would not be similarly misreading his enemy. In addition, I felt Dumbledore had told the truth, as one who knew all of the facts. So when Lupin informed us that James hadn't known, I was not surprised at all because I felt Snape had been lying when I originally read it. As it turned out, he may have simply been stating his opinion as fact.

I don't see this at all. So what if it was a suspense? That does not change the man's nature completely and reform him overnight. Even if she was laying a false scent, it does not imply that she lied. So, Snape remains as sadistic as he was, even after it's revealed that he's been working for Dumbledore.

In addition, JKR said as much after publication. She did not say that Snape had been acting, she called him on having the same characteristics he'd always had.

I'm in the process of re-reading GoF and last night I came across a quote I had apparently forgotten about in my many re-readings:

Page 516 -- US Version
"You might be laboring under the delusion that the entire wizarding world is impressed with you, " Snape went on, so quickly that no one else could hear him (Harry continued to pound his scarab beetles, even though he had already reduced them to a very fine powder), "but I don't care how many times your picture appears in the papers. To me, Potter, you are nothing but a nasty little boy who considers rules to be beneath him."

I was appalled at how horrible Snape treated Harry at moments like this. I am still to this day trying to delve into Snape's character and why he handled things the way he did.

Was he trying to knock Harry down a peg? Perhaps he was acting out on the fact that he missed Lily so badly and here, her flesh and blood sits in front of him? Maybe his rage about how much alike Harry and James looked and (in Snape's opinion) acted?

Help me out here.

IMO, Snape has zero business speaking to Harry, a student, in this manner. Drawing from personal experience, when a teacher spoke to me in a manner much like this, authority was brought into the picture.

"but I don't care how many times your picture appears in the papers. To me, Potter, you are nothing but a nasty little boy who considers rules to be beneath him."

Snape here was speaking about Harry breaking rules, because of the absence of boomslang which Barty Cruch Jr. had stolen from Snape's stores and Gillyweed which Dobby had stolen for Harry for the second task. Snape had placed wards around his office and Barty Crouch Jr had broken them; but on that night Harry had been out with the egg and snape thinking back to second year had thought Harry stole them and the Gilly weed Dobby did steal for Harry IMO.

I think the wards being broken in Snape's stores angered him and he tried to get Harry to confess IMO. It was because he deduced Harry had been out that night; he saw the golden egg and I think, that Snape said that Harry was there in his invisibility cloak at that time IMO.

Snape here was speaking about Harry breaking rules, because of the absence of boomslang which Barty Cruch Jr. had stolen from Snape's stores and Gillyweed which Dobby had stolen for Harry for the second task. Snape had placed wards around his office and Barty Crouch Jr had broken them; but on that night Harry had been out with the egg and snape thinking back to second year had thought Harry stole them and the Gilly weed Dobby did steal for Harry IMO.

I think the wards being broken in Snape's stores angered him and he tried to get Harry to confess IMO. It was because he deduced Harry had been out that night; he saw the golden egg and I think, that Snape said that Harry was there in his invisibility cloak at that time IMO.

Speculating that a pupil had broken the rules is no excuse for speaking in that manner. JKR had a reason for writing the scene that way and I think she did it to show how appalling Snape acted at times. She chose to portray him in that manner for a reason, and I think the reason was she wanted him to be shown as a bitter, angry man who blamed a child for his own mistakes. Also it's fun to write about someone with so many personal faults but also with hidden depths. He's the charactor who kept us all guessing.

I'm in the process of re-reading GoF and last night I came across a quote I had apparently forgotten about in my many re-readings:

Page 516 -- US Version
"You might be laboring under the delusion that the entire wizarding world is impressed with you, " Snape went on, so quickly that no one else could hear him (Harry continued to pound his scarab beetles, even though he had already reduced them to a very fine powder), "but I don't care how many times your picture appears in the papers. To me, Potter, you are nothing but a nasty little boy who considers rules to be beneath him."

I agree this is one of Snape's lowest moments towards Harry. :sigh: It's particularly vicious.

Personally I think it's genuine frustration at what he perceives to be the worst aspects of James Incarnate ... as Dumbledore said to him, he 'sees what he chooses to see' in Harry, and the bitterness overwhelms him. Of course he has no business taking out his own inner demons on Harry.

Speculating that a pupil had broken the rules is no excuse for speaking in that manner.

Indeed not.

Also it's fun to write about someone with so many personal faults but also with hidden depths. He's the charactor who kept us all guessing.

Exactly. :agree:

I was so very intrigued, at the end of GoF, to discover that Severus had been a former Death Eater. At that point I began to discern his better qualities -- his hidden courage :cool: -- when Dumbledore told him to get himself hence to the graveyard. He looked 'paler than usual', but he was resolute. What a horrible prospect, I realised ...

I began to be convinced from that moment onwards (as if Philosopher's Stone hadn't got the ball rolling) that JKR would finally reveal him to have been on the right side after all.

I respect your interpretation, but I don't think this supports the idea that Snape knew more about DADA. He didn't know where Kappas were from as shown in POA; pretty basic stuff, imo. If Harry disagreed with Snape on the best way to down a dementor, then I would conclude Snape didn't know what he was talking about. Harry is the one who fought them ultimately - 100's at once - and was victorious. Snape told the minister that he didn't know how it was achieved and as I said, Snape had worked with Dementors as a Death Eater, not against them, so it is doubtful that he'd ever fought one, imo.

But this isn't the point-- no one doubts that a Patronus is a perfectly acceptable way to fight off dementors. Severus, however, was presenting alternate methods, which Harry rejected. It isn't even a matter of liking one over the other, Harry clearly rejects even the notion that other methods of fighting dementors exist.

As for the Kappas-- didn't that information come from JKR's companion books? Are those even technically canon? JKR easily could have changed things around later on. I doubt she was about to search through her copy of PoA to see what she made Severus say. In all honesty, she may have even forgotten they were mentioned in the text. I doubt you can use this to show that Severus isn't knowledgable about the Dark Arts, when he has shown so many other reasons why he is. (The other, slightly tongue-in-cheek answer to this question is that Severus has 'corrected' this textbook as well, like he did his Potions book. ;))

To be fair, there's no canon evidence that his childhood was that bad. Alll we have is that his parents quarelled a lot. That does not mean that Snape wasn't loved at all as a child.

Well, we don't know that he was completely unloved. Maybe Eileen loved him, and showed it, in her own dour way. :whistle: But JKR gives several strong hints in canon that his home life was not a happy one. Among those clues is the highly telling comparison between James and Severus on the train. We are told that James has an air of being adored and cared for that Snape so conspicously lacks.

Harry understands. He classifies himself, Snape and Voldemort as 'the lost boys of Hogwarts' ... another very telling phrase.

(The other, slightly tongue-in-cheek answer to this question is that Severus has 'corrected' this textbook as well, like he did his Potions book. ;))

I like it. :D :tu: I really wouldn't put it past him, would you? :lol:

Snape's Dark Arts knowledge is being questioned? Surely not! ;)

But this isn't the point-- no one doubts that a Patronus is a perfectly acceptable way to fight off dementors. Severus, however, was presenting alternate methods, which Harry rejected. It isn't even a matter of liking one over the other, Harry clearly rejects even the notion that other methods of fighting dementors exist.

I respectfully disagree. If you re-read the quote, it does not say that Harry was rejecting the fact that there were other methods, it says that he disagreed with Snape on the best method of fighting dementors. As I said, I personally trust that Harry would be the better judge of that, having personally tussled with them successfully, on more than one occassion. There is no canon that Snape ever did so and based on his various positions in life, I highly doubt he ever did.

In further evidence of this, Snape was unwisely going to take Sirius and Lupin to be kissed by the dementors, presumably with the children in tow. Well when Harry was near Sirius and the Dementors moved to kiss Sirius, they kissed Harry just because he was perceived as an enemy - he was not wanted by them. Well the same would have likely happened to the trio if they had been accompanying Sirius and Lupin when Snape, in yet another not so brilliant move, Snape would have called them over to kiss Sirius and Remus and got them all kissed. The trio would have fought against it and appeared as enemies to them, just as Harry had at the lake. It was clear to me that Snape had little knowledge of the deathly-like behavior of dementors and I would not trust his opinion at all on the best method of fighting them. Harry would have had to of saved them all with the help of his dad, just as he did by the lake for Sirius and himself.

As for the Kappas-- didn't that information come from JKR's companion books? Are those even technically canon? JKR easily could have changed things around later on. I doubt she was about to search through her copy of PoA to see what she made Severus say. In all honesty, she may have even forgotten they were mentioned in the text. I doubt you can use this to show that Severus isn't knowledgable about the Dark Arts, when he has shown so many other reasons why he is. (The other, slightly tongue-in-cheek answer to this question is that Severus has 'corrected' this textbook as well, like he did his Potions book. ;))

JKR didn't invent Kappas, she adopted them into her story, same as werewolves, vampires and centaurs. She did not change the basic fact of the very true myth which arises from Japan. These water loving creatures are believed to live off of the shores of Japan - indeed it is believed that being out of water for more than a short while, they will explode and die. Thus, they could not possibly live in Mongolia which is landlocked.

This was not Dark Arts information (which I think Snape did know more about than most of the professors except perhaps Dumbledore), but rather, Defense of the Dark Arts. If Snape "corrected" his DADA book, then he would have done so with his tongue in his cheek, imo, because he had it wrong, both according to the legand JKR adopted the Kappa's from and according to her own book which accompanies the series, was published and was used by the students at Hogwarts in the 7 book series. Imo, Snape was dead wrong; thus, there was no basis for Snape to belittle Lupin's ability before the class, imo.

About the Kappas and Dementors: While I do agree that with the Kappas as water-loving Dark beings Snape may have been wrong (and just as an aside, Newt Scamander the "author" of FB wasn´t always correct either - he did claim there were no Acromantulae in Scotland ;) ), there is a difference. In spite of being 3rd year DADA material, Kappas are quite irrelevant to the main story and the VoldeWar, while Dementors are not.

I don´t have my books handy as I´m currently moving house, but if I remember correctly that Dementors were already known to have had Voldemort leanings in VoldeWar 1 (can anyone please check up on that?), that would have been a very good reason for someone working against Voldemort to brush up your knowledge on how to get rid of them - and the more ways you know, the better. A Patronus may be the best way, but not always the most practical in all circumstances (e.g. in a situation when you don´t have your wand handy, I´ve seen a kind of Occlumency suggested for such cases - also, Snape´s blatant doe Patronus might be just a bit inconvenient if used in front of his DE pals...), and for such cases it might be practical IMHO to know some alternatives.

(BTW, I also find it somewhat surprising why DEs fighting alongside them wouldn´t want to know how to stop them from sucking their souls out. Dementors are blind after all... :scared: )

About the Kappas and Dementors: While I do agree that with the Kappas as water-loving Dark beings Snape may have been wrong (and just as an aside, Newt Scamander the "author" of FB wasn´t always correct either - he did claim there were no Acromantulae in Scotland ;) ), there is a difference. In spite of being 3rd year DADA material, Kappas are quite irrelevant to the main story and the VoldeWar, while Dementors are not.

I don´t have my books handy as I´m currently moving house, but if I remember correctly that Dementors were already known to have had Voldemort leanings in VoldeWar 1 (can anyone please check up on that?), that would have been a very good reason for someone working against Voldemort to brush up your knowledge on how to get rid of them - and the more ways you know, the better. A Patronus may be the best way, but not always the most practical in all circumstances (e.g. in a situation when you don´t have your wand handy, I´ve seen a kind of Occlumency suggested for such cases - also, Snape´s blatant doe Patronus might be just a bit inconvenient in front of his DE pals...), and for such cases it might be practical IMHO to know some alternatives.

Well I don't think anyone disagrees that there was more than one way. The issue was the "Best way". Snape's inconvenience in using the best method does not change the fact that the best method is the use of a patronus against them, imo. Harry didn't say it was the only way, nor that other methods couldn't come in handy. All he disagreed on was the "Best Way". And as far as I can ascertain from the canon, he was correct. We never saw another way used; indeed in the resurrection stone scene, Harry's loved ones acted as Patronus to ward off the dementors. If there was a better way, they would have acted in the other way, imo, seeing as they were all wisdom and such having returned from the afterworld.

Yes the dementors were comrads of the DEs in the Voldywar. As such, it is highly unlikely that the DEs ever had to fight with them. They were on the same side. If they were constantly attacking DEs, Voldemort wouldn't stand for it - he would not wish to lose his own men to the Dementors, that would defeat his purpose, imo. We have no canon that the Dementors ever attacked their own men when sided with them - neither the Aurors at Azkaban, nor the DEs when they were working for Voldemort. We do have canon that they indiscriminantly attacked those on the 'other side' of that which they were fighting on though.

As for the Kappas, Newt was not wrong in this case based on the actual lore.

Well I don't think anyone disagrees that there was more than one way. The issue was the "Best way". Snape's inconvenience in using the best method does not change the fact that the best method is the use of a patronus against them, imo. Harry didn't say it was the only way, nor that other methods couldn't come in handy. All he disagreed on was the "Best Way". And as far as I can ascertain from the canon, he was correct.

I would argue that the "best" way of doing anything is usually somewhat subjective and that there probably isn't a "correct" answer here - it will depend on the individual wizard or witch and the specific situation they are in. I don't believe that this shows that Snape doesn't know his subject. The most negative thing I think you can extrapolate from this is that perhaps Snape is a tad inflexible as a teacher and expects the students to answer questions exactly as he would, rather than develop their own thinking. However, even then, I don't think it's conclusive - I don't believe we ever find out whether or not Snape actually did mark Harry down for disagreeing with him, merely that Harry thought he would.

I think the wards being broken in Snape's stores angered him and he tried to get Harry to confess IMO. It was because he deduced Harry had been out that night; he saw the golden egg and I think, that Snape said that Harry was there in his invisibility cloak at that time IMO.

I understand why his mind jumped there -- but honestly is it excusable?

Speculating that a pupil had broken the rules is no excuse for speaking in that manner. JKR had a reason for writing the scene that way and I think she did it to show how appalling Snape acted at times. She chose to portray him in that manner for a reason, and I think the reason was she wanted him to be shown as a bitter, angry man who blamed a child for his own mistakes. Also it's fun to write about someone with so many personal faults but also with hidden depths. He's the charactor who kept us all guessing.

I agree completely, Eliza. JKR had to portray Snape as someone whom has evil thoughts, responses, and actions to keep the readers guessing. I feel we were supposed to dislike Snape. We as readers were supposed to rally behind Harry and feel sorry for him.

Snape has to know the deplorable conditions in which Harry was raised but my guess is that he feels no sympathy for him due to the conditions he was forced to grow up in.

I'm sure that this has been argued many times within this particular thread but why is it permissible for Snape to treat Harry this way? Dumbledore know how horribly Harry was being treated by Snape -- why did he not step in? It took Dumbledore until the abomination of Occlumency lessons for Dumbledore to take notice and take action.

Of course he has no business taking out his own inner demons on Harry.

Quite true. It saddens me that Harry carried such hatred for Snape (and rightly so) for so long only to find out that he had been protecting Harry for so long.

Another school of thought could be was that Snape did not want to become close to Harry because it would be too painful for him. Harry is a piece of Lily -- IMO Harry is more his mother's child than his father's but maybe Snape thought that if kept his distance and maintained nastiness toward Harry -- no relationship would result, especially a close relationship like that of Harry and Dumbledore's.

I respectfully disagree. If you re-read the quote, it does not say that Harry was rejecting the fact that there were other methods, it says that he disagreed with Snape on the best method of fighting dementors. As I said, I personally trust that Harry would be the better judge of that, having personally tussled with them successfully, on more than one occassion. There is no canon that Snape ever did so and based on his various positions in life, I highly doubt he ever did.

In further evidence of this, Snape was unwisely going to take Sirius and Lupin to be kissed by the dementors, presumably with the children in tow. Well when Harry was near Sirius and the Dementors moved to kiss Sirius, they kissed Harry just because he was perceived as an enemy - he was not wanted by them. Well the same would have likely happened to the trio if they had been accompanying Sirius and Lupin when Snape, in yet another not so brilliant move, Snape would have called them over to kiss Sirius and Remus and got them all kissed. The trio would have fought against it and appeared as enemies to them, just as Harry had at the lake. It was clear to me that Snape had little knowledge of the deathly-like behavior of dementors and I would not trust his opinion at all on the best method of fighting them. Harry would have had to of saved them all with the help of his dad, just as he did by the lake for Sirius and himself.


Actually, we see later that Severus does not take Sirius to the dementors-- he actually puts him on a stretcher (contrasted with Sirius, who allowed Severus' head to constantly hit the top of the cave wall) and brings him to the authoritize in Hogwarts. Sirius was passed out at the time. Quite frankly, Severus had free range to do anything he wanted with him, including 'accidentaly' leaving him in a dementor-heavy area. But he didn't-- and I think that is very telling.

I don't know why you think Severus was going to take Sirius to the dementors on his own, or why you think he would underestimate them. He knew that even Albus had trouble keeping them under control (when they came onto the Quidditch field) and I seriously don't think we have anything in canon to assume that he thought he could control them himself, or that he was really going to try to take Sirius to the dementors on his own-- that is just speculation on very loose terms.

I understand why his mind jumped there -- but honestly is it excusable?
Threatening to use veritaserum? Actually, that's a remarkably fair way to do things. Snape has a good reason to suspect that Harry has been up to stuff he shouldn't be - possibly dangerous and/or hurtful things. They certainly hurt Snape. If the veritaserum was used on Harry and Harry hadn't done anything wrong, then he had nothing to fear and Snape would know that Harry was innocent. If Harry had been stealing from Snape, which he had in an indirect way (well, in the fourth book, anyway), then is there any reason not to punish Harry? Stealing from Snape was wrong and dangerous, especially considering the circumstances (strictly talking about the fourth book right now) and instead of taking matters into their own hands, stealing, and risking their own heads, perhaps the trio should have gotten help from adults. Wouldn't that have been the responsible thing to do?

IMO, there's more to the scene 9and3quarters posted than appears on the surface. That's pretty much the case for every Snape scene.

I agree with those that say that simple rule-breaking does not warrant the sort of talk Snape used. However, I think that while Harry's imagined rule-breaking formed a part of Snape's motivation here, it is not the only factor to consider.

Once again, we must look at what Snape is saying, and not how harsh his words are.
Snape is picking at Harry's fame. He alludes to the article (which he just caught the trio reading during class) and says that Harry's fame does not matter and that despite Moody having joined Harry's "little fan club", Snape "will not tolerate [Harry's] behavior".

Once again we are faced with evidence of that assumption that Severus has built up for himself all these years that Harry is a carbon copy of his arrogant father.
Snape sees Harry reading the magazine during class and on top of that, he has what seems to be pretty good evidence that the boy has flouted the rules by breaking into his stores. Add into the mix his belief that Harry is like James and it paints an unflattering portrait of a boy so arrogant and pleased with his own fame that he thinks himself above the rules. This is the image of Harry Severus has constructed, and this is what he's reacting to.
It does not justify his acting on assumptions, but on the other hand, were those assumptions correct, his behavior would not be considered as bad.


As for the dementors-
We do not see how Snape reacted to Harry's disagreement, but I would have loved to see that. I think it would say a lot about Snape.

Another point I want to make is that I like how Harry actually attempts to convey his opinion to Snape through his essay. He could easily have thought that Snape wouldn't care what he thought one way or another and just wrote whatever he thought would be wanted. But instead he puts more effort and heart into his work, even when the teacher in question is Snape.
I'd have to think more about that, but doesn't it seem to say something positive about their relationship?

Actually, we see later that Severus does not take Sirius to the dementors--

In my view, Snape didn't take Sirius and Lupin to the dementors because he got palmed by the trio. Later, the dementors had returned to their posts, as Snape told the Minister. Apparently he had no means of alerting them to Sirius' presence because it wasn't like he'd changed his mind that Sirius should be kissed (as we found out the next day).

he actually puts him on a stretcher (contrasted with Sirius, who allowed Severus' head to constantly hit the top of the cave wall)

Several times. I think Sirius saw it as trying to knock sense into Snape's head, metaphorically - because he didn't try to kill Snape or anything. But Sirius' wrong does not make Snape's wrong any better, it just makes them both wrong, imo.

and brings him to the authoritize in Hogwarts. Sirius was passed out at the time. Quite frankly, Severus had free range to do anything he wanted with him, including 'accidentaly' leaving him in a dementor-heavy area. But he didn't-- and I think that is very telling.

Snape was unconscious when Sirius carried him also - at which point he could have just killed Snape. So in that light, the actions of both were telling. I don't know what you mean by Snape leaving Sirius in a dementor heavy area. They had all returned to their posts. Snape did still wish Sirius kissed as we saw by his words and behavior the next day. Thus, I feel it most reasonable to assume he didn't attempt to have it done later because there was no means of achieving it.

I don't know why you think Severus was going to take Sirius to the dementors on his own, or why you think he would underestimate them. He knew that even Albus had trouble keeping them under control (when they came onto the Quidditch field) and I seriously don't think we have anything in canon to assume that he thought he could control them himself, or that he was really going to try to take Sirius to the dementors on his own-- that is just speculation on very loose terms.

Um...I don't understand what you mean. Snape stated that is what he was going to do in canon. He bound Lupin and was going to 'drag' the werewolf and take them both to be kissed by the dementors. He didn't say he was taking them to the authorities, but to the dementors. He claimed he wanted personal revenge and he was glad it was he who had found Black. (POA) Black even tried to convince Snape to take them to the castle instead, saying that he'd come quietly if that were allowed. If all Snape was going to do was take them to the castle, then the trio would not have attacked him, because they knew Dumbledore would become involved prior to the Dementors. Snape was not being fair, he refused to listen to reason and even though the trio wasn't convinced at that point, they understood it was only fair to let the two unarmed men have their say.

Snape sees Harry reading the magazine during class and on top of that, he has what seems to be pretty good evidence that the boy has flouted the rules by breaking into his stores. Add into the mix his belief that Harry is like James and it paints an unflattering portrait of a boy so arrogant and pleased with his own fame that he thinks himself above the rules. This is the image of Harry Severus has constructed, and this is what he's reacting to. It does not justify his acting on assumptions, but on the other hand, were those assumptions correct, his behavior would not be considered as bad.

I would respectfully disagree for two reasons. First, looking back at what Snape actually said, there was absolutely no call for him to say those particular words 'to me you are just a nasty little boy' - when is it ever correct for a professor to speak like that to a student? Especially since Snape knew good and well that the 'nasty little boy' had dealt with Voldemort through Quirrell, and later again through the Diary as well as the Balisk. He'd killed a troll that was threatening Hermione and so he knew good and well that Harry's 'rule breaking' had merit. Snape chose to believe Harry had snuck his own name into the hat and stolen the G. weed, which was simply wrong and based on Snape's general misconstruction of Harry's character, imo.

That leads to the second consideration. Even the basis for Snape's transference of ill will on Harry due to his father was highly flawed. Snape didn't know James Potter any better than Harry Potter, imo. He knew him as a classmate (like Harry as a student) and he knew him from tussling with him (as he knew Harry from their tussling). He watched James play Quidditch, hang with his friends, do pranks and make arrogant and impertinent statements from time to time - but he watched Harry play Quidditch, hang with his friends, engage in hex wars with Draco and enjoy pranking of Fred and George (plus get into a bit of his own) as well as make arrogant and impertient statements from time to time (although likely fewer than his dad). Yet Snape reached the same conclusion about both of them, from his deeply jaded viewpoint while watching them both. He saw James sneak out at night and saw Harry do the same - but he didn't know why - he didn't understand James was running off at times to keep Lupin company or become an animagus - he didn't know Harry was seeking to stop Snape from getting ahold of the P. Stone or investigating the CoS. He didn't ask and he simply assumed that they were both up to no good at all times.

So for those two reasons, I see no justification for Snape's words and I found him to be behaving in a jealous, inappropriate and altogether despicable manner in GoF when he said that to Harry.

You are kidding, right? If so, I do see the humor. :lol:. But if not, I guess I'd have to remind you that Snape didn't take Sirius and Lupin to the dementors because he got palmed by the trio. Later, the dementors had returned to their posts, as Snape told the Minister. Apparently he had no means of alerting them to Sirius' presence because it wasn't like he'd changed his mind that Sirius should be kissed (as we found out the next day).

But after that, when Harry and Sirius were passed out, Severus did not take them to the dementors, or call the dementors over-- he turned Sirius over to the authorities.

Several times. I think Sirius saw it as trying to knock sense into Snape's head - because he didn't try to kill Snape or anything. But Sirius' wrong does not make Snape's wrong any better, it just makes them both wrong.

I didn't mean to imply that Sirius was trying to kill him (and what a stupid way to go about it, anyway) but rather just meant to contrast the way the two men reacted to the situation. Sirius was very childish, imho.

Snape was unconscious when Sirius carried him also - at which point he could have just killed Snape. So in that light, the actions of both were telling. I don't know what you mean by Snape leaving Sirius in a dementor heavy area. They had all returned to their posts. Snape did still wish Sirius kissed as we saw by his words and behavior the next day. Thus, I feel it most reasonable to assume he didn't attempt to have it done later because there was no means of achieving it.

Of course he watned him kissed! I never denied that-- at this point in time Severus still believes that Sirius betrayed the Order, James, and Lily-- but your point was that Severus was going to risk his life, and the lives of the trio to do this. My point is that Severus had the perfect opportunity to do so, but did not take it. (What prevented him from finding the dementors at their posts, for example) I don't think he would have taken it even if he hadn't been originally knocked out.

Um...I don't understand what you mean. Snape stated that is what he was going to do in canon. He bound Lupin and was going to 'drag' the werewolf and take them both to be kissed by the dementors. He didn't say he was taking them to the authorities, but to the dementors. He claimed he wanted personal revenge and he was glad it was he who had found Black. (POA) Black even tried to convince Snape to take them to the castle instead, saying that he'd come quietly if that were allowed. If all Snape was going to do was take them to the castle, then the trio would not have attacked him, because they knew Dumbledore would become involved prior to the Dementors. Snape was not being fair, he refused to listen to reason and even though the trio wasn't convinced at that point, they understood it was only fair to let the two unarmed men have their say.

I get the feeling we are arguing two different points here. I never denied that Severus wanted Sirius kissed (as I mentioned above) my only issue is assuming that Severus was going to do this all himself. I mean, if he really was, why not do so after everyone had been knocked out? No one would have known it was him-- and even if they did, no one would (likely) get upset at him. To the wizarding public, Sirius was still a mass-murderer.

In the Shrieking Shack he wasn't thinking clearly (the same could be said of Sirius-- but Lupin was able to settle him down because they are friends. Severus didn't trust any of the people in the Shack (Lupin's presence there 'confirmed' his suspicion that Lupin was helping Sirius Black) so why would (or should) he listen to them?

I get the feeling we are arguing two different points here. I never denied that Severus wanted Sirius kissed (as I mentioned above) my only issue is assuming that Severus was going to do this all himself. I mean, if he really was, why not do so after everyone had been knocked out? No one would have known it was him-- and even if they did, no one would (likely) get upset at him. To the wizarding public, Sirius was still a mass-murderer.

If he really wasn't, why did everyone in the room believe he was going to? And when they expressed their displeasure at his doing so, why didn't he explain he was merely taking them all up to the castle where they could present their case to Dumbledore?

In the Shrieking Shack he wasn't thinking clearly (the same could be said of Sirius-- but Lupin was able to settle him down because they are friends. Severus didn't trust any of the people in the Shack (Lupin's presence there 'confirmed' his suspicion that Lupin was helping Sirius Black) so why would (or should) he listen to them?

Why indeed. Best just to kill Black and Lupin without hearing what they have to say?

If he really wasn't, why did everyone in the room believe he was going to? And when they expressed their displeasure at his doing so, why didn't he explain he was merely taking them all up to the castle where they could present their case to Dumbledore?

I agree with wimble, but even if Snape wanted to kiss Sirius, he would not have been in the wrong, because the Ministry had given orders for Sirius to be kissed on sight IMO.

Why indeed. Best just to kill Black and Lupin without hearing what they have to say?

Black was a murderer according to the WW. For 13 years he was in Azkaban; he had admitted his guilt all those years ago, when he had brokenly cried, demented, that he had killed James and Lily. He was guilty as far as the WW was concerned. And now he had broken out of Azkaban IMO.

Lupin was aiding him, Snape would have felt and the 3 children were in danger, Confunded or having the Imperius on them in Snape's mind, when he saw them defend Black IMO.

And he wanted both kissed. With Lupin, Snape was indeed correct, because Lupin was aiding Black, in one way, by not revealing to Dumbledore about Black's animagus form, which had Black come for Harry when he broke into the Gryffindor dorm, would have killed him and escaped IMO.

And even after that incident Lupin did not tell Dumbeldore about the animagus form IMO.

While Snape did not know about the animagus form, seeing Lupin there, talking to Black, I think would have made Snape suspicious, not to mention that Harry and the other 2 were supporting Black. He would have thought they were Confunded and lumped Black and Lupin together IMO.

There was no need to hear, because Black had admitted to his crime, all those years ago IMO. (Of course he was crying out of guilt, but then, no one knew that).

If he really wasn't, why did everyone in the room believe he was going to? And when they expressed their displeasure at his doing so, why didn't he explain he was merely taking them all up to the castle where they could present their case to Dumbledore?

Should Severus be penalized for Harry's assumptions? My thinking is that he wanted to gloat over Sirius-- he may not have gotten to win over the Werewolf prank, but he is certainly going to win here! (or, so it would seem) He isn't about the give in to Sirius' request to go to the castle-- at least not straightaway, at least as I see it.

Why indeed. Best just to kill Black and Lupin without hearing what they have to say?

Was he planning on killing Lupin, too? I guess that would make sense-- if he thought Lupin was in on it-- but I've not read that book in a while and can't quite remember what happened.

But, really, he was probably anticipating a list of excuses or reasons-- I doubt he thought they actually had concrete proof of Sirius' innocence. Besides, why let them speak when you are finally in control of the situation, something he's wanted since he was a student at Hogwarts.

I realize that it still isn't the most logical reaction, but neither was Sirius' going out to attack Peter after he found out about the betrayal, or his laughing maniacally after he 'blew himself up'.

EDIT: The_Green_Woods: That is a really good point about Sirius' confession. Adding that to everything else, and I think it is more obvious why Severus didn't want to hear what they had to say.

Was he planning on killing Lupin, too? I guess that would make sense-- if he thought Lupin was in on it-- but I've not read that book in a while and can't quite remember what happened.

He suggested that the dementors might have a kiss for Lupin too when he brought everyone outside of the shack.

But, really, he was probably anticipating a list of excuses or reasons-- I doubt he thought they actually had concrete proof of Sirius' innocence. Besides, why let them speak when you are finally in control of the situation, something he's wanted since he was a student at Hogwarts.

Plus, Sirius is talking about a rat and Pettigrew being alive. Several eyewitnesses reported that Pettigrew was dead, and a reference to a rat seems way too weird to be plausible, especially to a man who is already in an emotional frenzy.

But, really, he was probably anticipating a list of excuses or reasons-- I doubt he thought they actually had concrete proof of Sirius' innocence. Besides, why let them speak when you are finally in control of the situation, something he's wanted since he was a student at Hogwarts.

We are not talking about a trip to Hogsmead; we are discussing Snape taking the decision regarding life and (good as) death into his own hands. It is not good, but not fatal, if you deny someone the right to speak over a trifling issue like a school trip. But when you are going to have someone (good as) executed, yes, they deserve the right to speak. Even the most villainous of men have allowed their opponents a final last word. The justification you provided only makes the situation worse, imo. He was behaving in a villainous manner because he wanted control? Because he anticipated excuses and reasons when imo, he is famous for his bad judgment and making terrible assumptions - and he knows this about himself? I don't see how that serves to justify his behavior at all. I do agree it explains his illogical reasoning, but it doesn't make his behaivor any less despicable in my view; only more so.

As to his poor judgment - for example - he considered Harry a fame seeker with nothing to show for it; later his opinion didn't change by the end of POA where he repeated that assertion. And yet, I've already recounted the things that Harry had done to that date. Snape seriously didn't see anything special about Harry at that point? A blind man with hearing problems could have told him that the kid was living up to any fame Snape felt he had been dubbed with, imo. Snape's miscontruction of other's characters was so outstanding, I can hardly believe he didn't realize it. Thus, in my view, he knew that the judgments he was making were poor, but he stubbornly asserted them anyway.

I realize that it still isn't the most logical reaction, but neither was Sirius' going out to attack Peter after he found out about the betrayal, or his laughing maniacally after he 'blew himself up'.

I respect your view, but how does that help Snape's case exactly? All five people were behaving in a logical fashion in trying to reason with Snape. However, Snape was being completely unreasonable, which is why the trio palmed him, imo. They realized that he was being unfair and any judgment he was making was totally poor in nature. Snape had to be stopped because he was not only in the wrong, he was threatening to take the lives of others in his hands based on their being enemies as school children and his misconceptions about their current undertakings. It would have cost Snape nothing to listen; he was the person armed with a wand and for a few moments, the person with all of the control in the situation. Luckily, Snape's judgment of the children's characters was equally poor and they ensured he didn't put two possibly innocent men to their deaths. Ironically, because Snape was entirely guilty of having assisted in killing the Potters, he was truly the only blameworthy one among them. If anyone deserved kissed for their behavior, it was Snape - for he had heard enough to know that there was mitigation for Sirius and Lupin, he simply refused to acknowledge it might be true and would not listen. And he wasn't just ignoring Sirius and Lupin, but Hermione, Ron and Harry as well.

I agree with wimble, but even if Snape wanted to kiss Sirius...

:rotfl:...that cracked me up! I knew what you meant though and I have answered above as the sentiments were similar to Wimble's. :)

we are discussing Snape taking the decision regarding life and (good as) death into his own hands. It is not good, but not fatal, if you deny someone the right to speak over a trifling issue like a school trip. But when you are going to have someone (good as) executed, yes, they deserve the right to speak. Even the most villainous of men have allowed their opponents a final last word. The justification you provided only makes the situation worse, imo. He was behaving in a villainous manner because he wanted control?

I don't think control was ever a main factor in Severus' behavior-- it may have been a factor, but it was not a main one-- because we must remember that Sirius is thought of as the murderer of Lily, which is something that Severus would not be able to abide by.

As for giving Sirius a chance to speak-- we know that Sirius confessed to the crimes when he was originally arrested. Should Severus have given him another chance? Yes, I believe he should have, but at the same time, in the state of mind Severus was in at the time (he had just finally caught who he thought betrayed Lily) I don't think he was being logical or orderly about anything. Heck, he isn't Spock!

Ironically, because Snape was entirely guilty of having assisted in killing the Potters, he was truly the only blameworthy one among them. If anyone deserved kissed for their behavior, it was Snape - for he had heard enough to know that there was mitigation for Sirius and Lupin, he simply refused to acknowledge it might be true and would not listen. And he wasn't just ignoring Sirius and Lupin, but Hermione, Ron and Harry as well.


I'm not sure what you mean about him knowing the 'mitigation' between Sirius and Lupin, but I like what you brought up Severus' part to play in the death of Lily!

And I think this may be part of the reason that Severus was so estatic that it was he who caught Sirius. Because, in Severus' mind, it was Sirius who undid all the work that he (Severus) had done to ensure Lily's safety. And, even in a small way, he could be the one to avenge Lily's death.

I don't think control was ever a main factor in Severus' behavior-- it may have been a factor, but it was not a main one-- because we must remember that Sirius is thought of as the murderer of Lily, which is something that Severus would not be able to abide by.

I respect your view; but then that leaves a mystery as to why he was able to abide Peter - living with him to boot. I think there was more to it than that; I feel that Snape was more upset by the childhood animosity angle than anything to do with Lily's death. That is because as we noted, Snape too had burdens to bear in that regard.

As for giving Sirius a chance to speak-- we know that Sirius confessed to the crimes when he was originally arrested. Should Severus have given him another chance? Yes, I believe he should have, but at the same time, in the state of mind Severus was in at the time (he had just finally caught who he thought betrayed Lily) I don't think he was being logical or orderly about anything. Heck, he isn't Spock!

I respect your opinion, however, Sirius and Lupin were under the same duress. They too had just caught the person who they felt had killed both of their beloved friends and left Harry an Orphan. That is what they were trying to tell Snape. In my view, they could have gone off their rockers just as easily under the stress of the situation; but all things taken into consideration, Snape was the only one out of control, imo. Nobody was Spock, I agree :lol:. However, in my opinion, there was much more to it than Snape merely wanting to avenge Lily. I feel he was still very upset by the school yard animosity between he, Lupin and Black.

I'm not sure what you mean about him knowing the 'mitigation' between Sirius and Lupin, but I like what you brought up Severus' part to play in the death of Lily!

And I think this may be part of the reason that Severus was so estatic that it was he who caught Sirius. Because, in Severus' mind, it was Sirius who undid all the work that he (Severus) had done to ensure Lily's safety. And, even in a small way, he could be the one to avenge Lily's death.

I don't know if I feel Snape was thinking along those lines. Primarily because it was Voldemort and Dumbledore who had betrayed Snape in the end regarding Lily's safety. Imagine if Peter had never told Voldemort the truth - do you think he would have stopped hunting Harry? I don't. I feel he would have found a way to get to him no matter what because he feared the prophecy. I also feel that Snape had some pleasure in the thought that Sirius had betrayed his presumably best friend/brother. He would of course have some anger at Sirius for playing a role in it; but I think his own role was so much more terrible in its consequences, that even Snape couldn't try to lay it all off on Sirius. I mean, if Voldemort had never gotten the prophecy, there would have been no targeting Harry and Sirius (Peter) would be irrelevant. In my view, it was not Sirius that Snape wished to have vengeance on for Lily's death, but rather Voldemort. I think it was mainly childhood animosity driving Snape in the shack; that is supported by the fact that he finally popped out of hiding when they spoke of the werewolf prank - not before when they spoke of how dear James was to them (and all about the animagus stuff) - which would be blasphemy if they'd betrayed him and Lily - and I would think he'd pop out then in a furious rage, since the issue would have dealt more with the actual betrayal, imo.

:rotfl:...that cracked me up! I knew what you meant though and I have answered above as the sentiments were similar to Wimble's. :)

:blush: :blush: I meant even if Snape wanted to get Sirius kissed by the dementors...! :lol:

----------------

In the Shack I think Snape's actions were not wrong at all. Sirius was a murderer who had admitted his crimes, including that of killing Peter and the muggles.

I think Snape may have felt that he did not need to hear once again and believe the words of whom he thought of and knew as did the WW; a murderer IMO. After 13 years Sirius was suddenly innocent? Then why did he not go to Dumbeldore? Would be the questions on Snape's mind, for which he would have had no answers, and would not belive any answer Sirius gave, because of the near attack in the Gryffindor dorm IMO.

But when you are going to have someone (good as) executed, yes, they deserve the right to speak.

Not when they have already admitted to their guilt like Sirius did all those years ago. Added to that like Dumbledore said, Sirius's actions were not correct; when he had, instead of meeting with Dumbeldore and explaning about Peter and what had happened all those years ago, tried to get into the Gryffindor dorms with a knife, slashing the Fat Lady, and then in the shack, luring Harry, Hermione and an obviously injured Ron along with Lupin, who seemed to be on Sirius's side, which is how it would have looked to Snape IMO.

All five people were behaving in a logical fashion in trying to reason with Snape. However, Snape was being completely unreasonable, which is why the trio palmed him, imo.

But who were those 5 people?

One murderer, one accomplice (Lupin, who Snape suspected all along) and three kids who could be Confunded, because they were talking for the murderer. In fact I think Snape thought they were, for he screams to Hermione or is it Harry that he should be thanking Snape on bended knees for saving them IMO.

How will Snape in such a senario want to listen to Sirius, when the lives of 3 kids and Harry among them was in danger according to him. I really don't think he was wrong at all.

The main point IMO is that there was no need for Snape to listen to Sirius's words, because his case was not a trial that went wrong, or because there was a mystery or suspicion; Sirius was in Azkaban, because he said he was guilty of the crimes he was accused of. Now after a whole lot of them in Azkaban heard that Sirius say "he was at Hogwarts" all athe time and then one day Sirius escapes and a while later also attacks the Fat lady and is seen standing over Ron's bed with a knife, I think it would not have even crossed Snape's mind that Sirius could be innocent. There was nothing at that time to show that IMO.

I respect your view; but then that leaves a mystery as to why he was able to abide Peter - living with him to boot. I think there was more to it than that; I feel that Snape was more upset by the childhood animosity angle than anything to do with Lily's death. That is because as we noted, Snape too had burdens to bear in that regard.


I don't see why Severus would not be able to abide, if he had too. (And he did, under Voldemorts orders) It isn't as if he enjoyed living with Peter.

Besides, even Harry wanted to murder Sirius himself, yet when he finally had the opportunity (only, this time it was Peter) he decided it would be best not too, but to take him to the castle. Harry's original action was due to intense emotions, just as Severus' were. We know that, when he needs too, Severus is capable of shoving his emotions away. Perhaps not in the heat of the moment, but I'm sure he had some time to think of Peter living with him.

They too had just caught the person who they felt had killed both of their beloved friends and left Harry an Orphan. That is what they were trying to tell Snape. In my view, they could have gone off their rockers just as easily under the stress of the situation; but all things taken into consideration, Snape was the only one out of control, imo. Nobody was Spock, I agree :lol:. However, in my opinion, there was much more to it than Snape merely wanting to avenge Lily. I feel he was still very upset by the school yard animosity between he, Lupin and Black.


No, I agree that his personal feelings for Sirius played a part-- but I don't think it diminishes that much of his anger was over Lily.

I don't know if I feel Snape was thinking along those lines. Primarily because it was Voldemort and Dumbledore who had betrayed Snape in the end regarding Lily's safety. Imagine if Peter had never told Voldemort the truth - do you think he would have stopped hunting Harry? I don't. I feel he would have found a way to get to him no matter what because he feared the prophecy. I also feel that Snape had some pleasure in the thought that Sirius had betrayed his presumably best friend/brother. He would of course have some anger at Sirius for playing a role in it; but I think his own role was so much more terrible in its consequences, that even Snape couldn't try to lay it all off on Sirius. I mean, if Voldemort had never gotten the prophecy, there would have been no targeting Harry and Sirius (Peter) would be irrelevant.

By that logic we should lay the most blame on Merope and Tom Riddle Senior-- if they never had their child, never abanonded him in the orphanage, everything would be irrelevant. Just because someone starts something doesn't automatically mean they have the most blame. Severus started Voldemort on his quest, but Peter gave him the means to finish it.

I also feel that Snape had some pleasure in the thought that Sirius had betrayed his presumably best friend/brother.

I'm sure he did! The man who took so much pleasure in being a gryffindor, then turns around and betrays his best friend? The irony of that situation would be far too much to resist.

that is supported by the fact that he finally popped out of hiding when they spoke of the werewolf prank - not before when they spoke of how dear James was to them (and all about the animagus stuff) - which would be blasphemy if they'd betrayed him and Lily - and I would think he'd pop out then in a furious rage, since the issue would have dealt more with the actual betrayal, imo.

At the risk of creating another revolving argument, we don't and can't know how long Severus was actually standing at that door-- so your point is moot.

I don't see why Severus would not be able to abide, if he had too. (And he did, under Voldemorts orders) It isn't as if he enjoyed living with Peter.

Besides, even Harry wanted to murder Sirius himself, yet when he finally had the opportunity (only, this time it was Peter) he decided it would be best not too, but to take him to the castle. Harry's original action was due to intense emotions, just as Severus' were. We know that, when he needs too, Severus is capable of shoving his emotions away. Perhaps not in the heat of the moment, but I'm sure he had some time to think of Peter living with him.

I agree per se, but it is highly indicative to me that "Lily's betrayer" was not always something that would drive Snape to lose control.

By that logic we should lay the most blame on Merope and Tom Riddle Senior-- if they never had their child, never abanonded him in the orphanage, everything would be irrelevant. Just because someone starts something doesn't automatically mean they have the most blame. Severus started Voldemort on his quest, but Peter gave him the means to finish it.

Oh no, you misunderstood me. Snape was in no way more blameworthy than Voldemort and Peter. In fact, since he actually undertook an action to undo at least a portion of the murderous deed they had planned, his blameworthiness is mitigated to some degree (qualified by his undertaking the action only with respect to Lily, imo.)

What I meant to say was that in the Shack on that evening, from a reader's point of view in hindsight after HBP, Snape was the only person in that room who had any blame with respect to the Potter's death (with the exception of Peter, who was not interacting with them when Snape was there).

I'm sure he did! The man who took so much pleasure in being a gryffindor, then turns around and betrays his best friend? The irony of that situation would be far too much to resist.

Indeed, that is why I feel it was a tremendous let down for Snape to discover he was wrong and part of the reason he didn't wish to listen to Sirius and Remus. He wanted them to have betrayed James. It seemed to me that Peter having been the betrayer had much less impact on Snape; perhaps becaue he'd known all along or if that was not intended by the author, maybe Snape felt he could relate more to Peter than the others. They were commonly vulnerable and insecure according to JKR, so maybe there was a kinship of sorts between them on that front. They had both fallen under Voldemort's lure and both participated in the furtherance of the prophecy.

But that brings up another point. Of all of the Death Eaters, Peter would have likely been the easiest to convince to rejoin the good side, imo. He knew what was right and he realized he'd taken a horrible tumble based on my impression of canon. I wonder why Snape (and Dumbledore) didn't try to bring him back into the fold while he was staying with Snape. They could have easily kidnapped him and brought him in to talk sense into his head over what he was doing and what he'd become.

At the risk of creating another revolving argument, we don't and can't know how long Severus was actually standing at that door-- so your point is moot.

Oh I agree, we don't know if he was standing there outside of the door and actually overheard nearly the entire conversation - thus knew what Lupin and Sirius planned to tell him. However, JKR made a point of signaling when he actually entered the room, so we know he heard everything from that point forward (POA Servant of Lord Voldemort.) That is what makes my point valid. He definitely overheard the portion about the Animagi forms, the night time adventures as well as the details of the werewolf prank. That is when he found out that he'd misconstrued James' character in as far as 'getting cold feet for a plan he'd been in on'. And that confirmed that Dumbledore wasn't a liar also (POA, ibid). But you know, James was undoing the wrong of another. Under the worst construction, he was saving Sirius and Remus - that is a good motivation anyway you look at it, imo.

That is the whole point. It should have been Sirius that risked his life to stop Snape from making the huge mistake of venturing into the tunnel, not James. That he moved to do so, was in action: risking his life to pull Snape from danger, mortal or otherwise. In consequence: save Snape from possible death or harm and save Sirius and Remus from possible negative outcomes. Where I ask is the bad in that in as far as James is concerned? From Snape's initial view, it is possible to construct something slightly negative, but after he found out the truth, he never brought the matter up again because he knew he had no leg to stand on, imo. That is why I don't understand dwelling on the point now that we know the entire story. James, whatever he was thinking, did a wonderful act and Snape should have been grateful; I don't understand seeing it any other way once the truth was known. This is totally the opposite of what Snape did once he discovered that his own action had placed James in mortal danger, imo. Snape tried to save Lily and did nothing motivated by the fact that James would die. That right there shows you the very huge distinction between those two individuals at that time, imo. In my judgment, that is why Snape placed such a poor construction on James' actions - becuase it is exactly the way he would have behaved and indeed did behave when the opportunity arose. It was not important to save James even though it would cost the woman he loved infinite pain. So Snape's behavior was overall worse than the construction he'd placed on James' behavior in my judgment.

When I was reading the later books in the Harry Potter series I got to wondering about how Snape might have treated Harry differently if Harry had looked exactly like Lily, rather than like James. JKR stated in more than 1 book how much Harry looked like James. Except for his eyes. He had his mother's green eyes. It was those eyes,Lily's eyes, that made Snape loyal to Dumbledore and ultimately Harry. But Snape, despite having Harry's best interests at heart in the end, was thoroughly despicable to him most of the time. Harry looked like James, and he was "Potter's Son", and Snape wasn't completely able to move past his detest for James and see Harry as anything but another James.
What if, however, Harry had looked exactly like his mother Lily? What if Harry had red hair and did not wear glasses to go along with Lily's green eyes? Would Snape have been kinder and friendlier to him? Or at least not so thoroughly nasty and unpleasant to Harry? Or would Harry still have been "Potter's Son" to Snape? If Snape had been kinder to a red haired, glasses free Harry, how might the whole story have changed?

Personally I think that Snape, being deep down, one of the good guys, would not have been so dreadful to Harry if he'd looked like Lily. I'm not sure Snape would have been a father figure to him, and maybe not even as kind to Harry as other grown men in his life were. More like the way Dudley was towards Harry at start of DH, maybe. Although it would have been nice if Snape had been a Sirius or Lupin figure to Harry from his first day at Hogwarts. For me, I think the story ultimately would have ended the same, with Voldemort vanquished. Harry simply would have had a more pleasant experience at Hogwarts when dealing with Snape. I think Harry probably would have been better at Occlumency. But then part of me wonders whether Snape needed to be harsh with Harry in order to give Harry the strength to do what he needed to do---defeat Voldemort.

Well, no matter the circumstances, Snape simply could not be too close to Harry. Otherwise, Voldemort would just say: "So, the boy trusts you? Cool. Bring him to me."

But as for Severus' personal opinion, I think Harry's resemblance to James reinforced the prejudice, but did not cause it. What caused it, IMO, was Severus' fear of his own feelings. He's quite consistently shown that he prefers to show anger rather than any softer feeling, as a defence mechanism. I think this is at work not only in his outward reactions, but in his inner ones as well. It's easier to be angry at Harry for being James' son than to be constantly reminded of Lily and the fact that she is gone.

If Harry looked like his mother, maintaining his anger at Harry would be made much more difficult. Not that Severus wouldn't try-- I'm sure he would. But maintaining that opinion over many years would, IMO, be very hard to do.

Personally I think that Snape, being deep down, one of the good guys, would not have been so dreadful to Harry if he'd looked like Lily. I'm not sure Snape would have been a father figure to him, and maybe not even as kind to Harry as other grown men in his life were. More like the way Dudley was towards Harry at start of DH, maybe. Although it would have been nice if Snape had been a Sirius or Lupin figure to Harry from his first day at Hogwarts. For me, I think the story ultimately would have ended the same, with Voldemort vanquished. Harry simply would have had a more pleasant experience at Hogwarts when dealing with Snape. I think Harry probably would have been better at Occlumency. But then part of me wonders whether Snape needed to be harsh with Harry in order to give Harry the strength to do what he needed to do---defeat Voldemort.

Unfortunately we might not have seen any difference- or at least known of any difference- in any event. Harry would still have been the boy- Lily's son- under threat of Voldemort's return.

And Snape would still beeen Snape the former Deatheater turned spy-under threat of Voldemort's return.

In GOF Crouch/Moody said something very fateful - I always took it to as a hint to part of the reason of how and why Snape behaved the way he did and why Dumbledore tolerated it. Moody said to Harry, Paraphraising "Use your strength's - use the tools that ya got."

Snape's best method and tools for helping the cause was to be a spy for DD and the Order and ultimately, his role as a spy depended on being nasty to Harry and in the very least appearing to loathe him. Snape used his bitterness and anger to position himself closer to Voldemort and provide that last final stronghold between Voldemort and Harry Potter.

I am afraid that as JKR wrote- Voldy- there was no other option for Snape. There was simply no imaginable course for visible "understanding" or the slightest signs of "empathy" under Voldemort's shadow. Snape risked his life saving the boy's life in the first year and had to explain that away as well.

No, I would rather imagine what would have happened if Snape had lived to see the end of Voldemort. Severus and Harry and would never have been friends - but I like to think that perhaps established a grudging and unspoken "understanding" could have been established and maybe even a respect of some kind.

Well, no matter the circumstances, Snape simply could not be too close to Harry. Otherwise, Voldemort would just say: "So, the boy trusts you? Cool. Bring him to me."

Do you feel that is because Voldemort was averse to kidnapping? :lol:. I don't think that was a problem for him. When he wanted Luna, he didn't have Snape butter up to her first in order to get her. Voldemort couldn't get at Harry until he was 17 in any case, so there was no use in capturing the boy. Even if Voldemort did not realize this, Snape and the other Order members knew. Snape could have merely told him this to get out of the task and it would have been reaffirmed by what had happened at GoF and what subsequently happened in OOTP when Voldemort tried.

But as for Severus' personal opinion, I think Harry's resemblance to James reinforced the prejudice, but did not cause it. What caused it, IMO, was Severus' fear of his own feelings. He's quite consistently shown that he prefers to show anger rather than any softer feeling, as a defence mechanism. I think this is at work not only in his outward reactions, but in his inner ones as well. It's easier to be angry at Harry for being James' son than to be constantly reminded of Lily and the fact that she is gone.

Well according to JKR, Harry was a constant reminder that Lily had a preference for another man. So I would say that jealousy was a main underlying factor fueling Snape's outward reactions and inner feelings. Actually, popular opinion seems to agree, beyond JKR's acknowledgement; as that was a poll question for the CoS thread and (jealousy/envy) overwhelmingly defeated other explanations. And I feel that is reinforced by your initial opinion, which I agree with; Snape was volatile toward Harry (Potter's son) before they ever met - recall his words to Dumbledore on that topic, some 11 years before ever setting eyes on Harry. At that time, for all he knew, Harry was the spitting image of Lily; he knew for certain Harry had her eyes. The point for Snape was that he was "Potter's son". But he was indebted to Potter because James had saved his life when they were young and Snape's act had cost James his. So I think that may have also played a role in Snape's grudging agreement to help protect Harry - in addition to wanting to try and make up for that same act that had ultimately taken Lily's life. And of course he would not wish to go to Azkaban.

We are not talking about a trip to Hogsmead; we are discussing Snape taking the decision regarding life and (good as) death into his own hands. It is not good, but not fatal, if you deny someone the right to speak over a trifling issue like a school trip. But when you are going to have someone (good as) executed, yes, they deserve the right to speak.

Harry wanted to kill Sirius without letting him speak, and Sirius wanted to hurry up and kill Peter without speaking before Harry stopped him.

Even the most villainous of men have allowed their opponents a final last word.
Snape was never going to kill them anyway - it was up to Fudge, who was at the castle already with Dumbledore, and Snape knew that because of Buckbeak's execution and the Malfoy's part in that.


The justification you provided only makes the situation worse, imo. He was behaving in a villainous manner because he wanted control? Because he anticipated excuses and reasons when imo, he is famous for his bad judgment and making terrible assumptions - and he knows this about himself? I don't see how that serves to justify his behavior at all. I do agree it explains his illogical reasoning, but it doesn't make his behaivor any less despicable in my view; only more so.

Sorry, I don't agree with any of that. Severus couldn't break the law by letting Sirius and Lupin tell him any old story, could he? He thought they conspired to kill Lily and James, which is just the flip side of the coin to what Sirius and Lupin thought about Peter. If Snape is "villainous" (maybe you need another word for that because repetition doesn't make it true) then so are they.

Harry wanted to kill Sirius without letting him speak, and Sirius wanted to hurry up and kill Peter without speaking before Harry stopped him.

Harry's wrongful action does not make Snape's right, imo. He would have been equally wrong (and villainious) - but note that canon provides that he "couldn't do it" even though he had ample opportunity to do so before Lupin intervened. So we don't ultimately know what Harry would have done, imo. In as far as your other example; Peter was questioned and allowed to speak for four and a half pages in canon before the decision was made to kill him, so I do not understand why you feel he was not given a chance to speak.

Sorry, I don't agree with any of that. Severus couldn't break the law by letting Sirius and Lupin tell him any old story, could he? He thought they conspired to kill Lily and James, which is just the flip side of the coin to what Sirius and Lupin thought about Peter. If Snape is "villainous" (maybe you need another word for that because repetition doesn't make it true) then so are they.

Again, the action of others does not justify Snape's act or make it right, imo. Sirius and Remus however, did give Peter an opportunity to speak; they questioned him and no one was demanding that they give Peter more of an opportunity to speak. They did not forcefully tell the trio to shut up and just let them kill Peter - first they discussed it and everyone there believed Peter was guilty, despite the things he said - he admitted to his guilt. So the situation is distinct in any case, imo. In fact, Lupin made a point of it; he told Sirius he had to wait until explanations were had - that Harry had a right to understand the truth that the both of them already understood. Sirius did not tell Lupin to shut up or bind him up so he could then kill Peter; he agreed and allowed Peter a chance to speak. Thus I would respectfully disagree it was he flip side of the coin. If Snape had allowed Sirius and/or Lupin to speak as much as Peter had been allowed to do, I would not be making this point. :lol:.

Snape was wrong to not listen, imo, despite 5 people asking him to do so. He was wrong to determine for himself that he had the right to take them to be kissed - that is what he said he was going to do - not take them up to the castle. In fact, this was made definitive in canon because originally Sirius believed Snape was only planning to take them up to the castle - he told Snape that he'd come quietly as long as the rat came too. But then Snape informed him that they were not going to the castle at all, but rather, he was going to take them directly to the dementors to be kissed. That is when Sirius became frightened - he realized he was dealing with someone who would not allow the truth to be told - ever - prior to having him and Lupin killed - the only two people who knew the truth. And it is also what provoked the trio to act together to stop Snape with their spell that knocked him unconscious, imo. Note even Hermione participated in this - and she would Never attack a professor and was worried sick afterward for having done so - but at the moment she felt she had to because Snape was being both irrational (unwilling to listen) and unfair (stating he was planning to have them kissed, imo.)

I am not sure what you mean by "any old story" - Snape didn't listen at all which means he could not make a judgment as to the nature of the story. It may have been great or poor to him, but he could not know because he refused to listen, imo. Listening would not have been breaking any laws, imo. I am not placing judgment on what Snape felt was the truth - I am only placing judgment on his wrongfullness in not allowing Sirius and Lupin to speak. He was so ademant about it, it was clear to me that Snape wanted to see Sirius and Remus dead at all costs and thus, did not wish for them to have any opportunity to say anything that might exonerate them.

Snape IMO was not in the wrong at all with reference to his action towards Sirius. I see it like this. Sirius had said he was guity. He had accepted his crime. He was placed in Azkaban where he stayed for 13 years. He then broke out of Azkaban and was on the run for one year. He somehow manages to convince Remus Lupin one of his closeset friends, Harry, Ron and Hemione that even though he had admitted his crime, he was still innocent IMO.

Meanwhile The MInistry had given orders for him to be kissed on sight and Sirius himself had broken into the Gryffindor dormitory with a knife in hand and was standing with intention to kill in Harry's dormitory IMO.

Snape knew only this. And he burst in on a scene, where the Trio were pleading Snape not to kill Sirius and Remus and Sirius too were asking Snape to "listen" to the convicted murderer. Snape may have thought that 3 children may have been brainwashed and Remus was all along with Sirius, helping him IMO.

Snape decided to take them to the dementors as per the Ministry orders or he may have said it to frighten them IMO.

Whatever it may have been, why should Snape listen to Sirius, when he had no reason to trust a murderer, an accomplice (for Remus at that time was obviously on Sirius's side in Snape's eyes) and Snape may have thought that Sirius and Remus had somehow convinced the three students IMO.

I would like to ask, why should Snape have listened to Sirius when Sirius had so much stacked against him?

Sirius and Remus gave Peter an opportunity to speak, because they wanted to know his reason for the betrayal. Snape had no such curiosity, for as far he knew Sirius was guilty and he was planning to harm Harry. Snape would not have needed to ask Sirius anything at that time IMO.

:tu: :agree: Exactly. Add Lily's death to the mix, and it's a dangerous combination for Severus. He has sworn to protect her son, and here that son is, apparently about to die at the hands of the man who (it seems) betrayed the boy's parents. I don't think Severus is going to really be merciful when faced with the prospect of a second failure: this time the failure to save Harry.

And even despite his highly emotional state at the time, as TGW says, there is some logic to his decisions. Sirius, as Dumbledore later said, was not acting like an innocent man. Breaking into Gryffindor tower with a knife is just one example. He also laughed when cornered by the Ministry shortly before his incarceration. He'd been muttering "He's a Hogwarts" in his sleep. Everyone drew the same conclusion as Snape: That Sirius had broken out of prison to kill Harry.

I would like to ask, why should Snape have listened to Sirius when Sirius had so much stacked against him?

I can only answer because Dumbledore had done the same for Snape when he went to the hill; Snape begged not to be killed and to be heard. Dumbledore heeded Snape's request, despite believing him evil (and having so much stacked against him), because he realized Snape may not only be speaking to exonerate himself in some way, but also to give an important message toward Dumbledore's goals. That was the case then...

...that was the case in the Shrieking Shack where Snape found himself in the position of Dumbledore. Instead of behaving as Dumbledore did toward him, Snape elected to embrace Voldemort's way of thinking, imo - kill first and if you turn out to be wrong, the attitude is "shrug, so what?"

In my judgment, Snape failed to learn that lesson from Dumbledore, which he should have and as it turned out, the five people did have something to say that would help Snape's purported goal of keeping Harry safe. In consequence, I feel he not only wronged the five individuals, he also failed himself.

I can only answer because Dumbledore had done the same for him when he went to the hill; Snape begged not to be killed and to be heard.

I respectfully disagree. Snape when he was in the shack was in a position where he was in the middle of a fight/war where he was trying to protect 3 students against one convicted murderer and one werewolf who had forgotten to take his medicine and who was the murderer's accomplice IMO.

Snape could not stand there and listen to a man who9 was a murderer.

Snape, when he came to Dumbeldore on the hill, was not a convicted murderer broken out of Azkaban after 13 years IMO.

I would also like to point out that no one heard Sirius 13 years ago. Had they, then he would have never gone to jail. Dumbeldore never asked him anything then; Sirius who had worked in the Order, who was the Potters SK; who had supposedly betrayed his close friend who had stood up for his sake against Dumbeldore, when Dumbeldore offered to be SK. Dumbledore did not want to know anything then IMO.

He did at this time though, because Sirius was imprisoned and he had broken out wanting to come after "someone" in Hogwarts and Dumbeldore believed that someone to be Harry. So information from Sirius was important. Like Sirius and Remus wanted to knoiw why Peter betrayed all of them, Dumbeldore wanted to know why Sirius was after Harry; Dumbeldore wanted information IMO.

Like how Sirius broke out of Azkaban, and why he wanted to kill Harry? Especially why he wanted to kill Harry, thinking perhaps Voldemort was getting closer to reserructing again IMO.

That was when I believe he heard Sirius's story and probably verified it with legilimency as well.

Dumbledore all those 13 years ago never heard Sirius's story.

Snape at the time he was in the shack would not have been curious about any reason, except the fact he needed to protect Harry and the other 2 from Sirius and Remus IMO.

And Sirius meeting everyone in the Shack in the middle of the night would not have impressed Snape to listen as well IMO.

I respectfully disagree. Snape when he was in the shack was in a position where he was in the middle of a fight/war where he was trying to protect 3 students against one convicted murderer and one werewolf who had forgotten to take his medicine and who was the murderer's accomplice IMO.

Snape could not stand there and listen to a man who9 was a murderer.

Why not? Dumbledore did.

Snape, when he came to Dumbeldore on the hill, was not a convicted murderer broken out of Azkaban after 13 years IMO.

I am missing your distinction. Snape knew Sirius was a convicted murderer. Dumbledore knew Snape was a Death Eater - a murderer, kidnapper, maimer, torturer who had not been caught and there he was - he could be captured or killed and Snape knew this - he begged for his life and to be heard. What is the difference?

The fact that Snape wasn't "convicted" made no difference; Voldemort wasn't "convicted" either. Yet Dumbledore and his Order were attempting to capture and incarcerate the lot of them - and kill them if they attempted to kill their way out of capture. Dumbledore could have assumed that whatever Snape had to say was unimportant and killed him or carried him off to Azkaban claiming he was a confirmed Death Eater. Others may not have known Snape's status, but Dumbledore knew for sure: he immediately disarmed Snape and asked what message Snape's master had for him.

Snape at the time he was in the shack would not have been curious about any reason, except the fact he needed to protect Harry and the other 2 from Sirius and Remus IMO. And Sirius meeting everyone in the Shack in the middle of the night would not have impressed Snape to listen as well IMO.

But that is my point. Snape stood there listening for a good long while. If it was Sirius and Lupin's intent to kill Harry and the trio, why hadn't they? What possible reason would they have to "brainwash" the kids before killing them? So they could talk about old times first? That makes no sense at all. What purpose would that serve?

Sirius would have simply murdered Harry on sight if he was the rampaging murderer he'd been made out to be. Even if somehow that had not been possible, Snape knew Lupin had seen the map - it was open on his desk and he followed him there - Lupin was alone. Why wouldn't Lupin bust in and kill Harry and the rest of the kids and be done with it?

In my judgment, Snape could not answer those questions because he didn't consider them - he considered nothing at all. He was simply bent on having Lupin and Black kissed, imo. Harry even asked Snape a similar question - why hadn't Lupin killed him yet all year long when they'd been together in private so much? Remember Snape's answer? "Don't ask me to fathom the mind of a werewolf". :lol:. While funny, imo, it made no sense whatsoever and that is why Snape ultimately got knocked out by the trio - they did have a response for Snape's illogical reasoning, imo, and they replied to Snape together: "wrong answer".

Why not? Dumbledore did.

Yes, when he wanted information from Sirius. He did not 13 years ago IMO.

I am missing your distinction. Snape knew Sirius was a convicted murderer. Dumbledore knew Snape was a Death Eater - a murderer, kidnapper, maimer, torturer who had not been caught and there he was - he could be captured or killed and Snape knew this - he begged for his life and to be heard. What is the difference?

Sure! He knew Snape was a DE. His opening words to Snape after he disarmed him were precisely that. But Dumbeldore disarmed Snape and had Snape said anything wrong, I have no doubt Dumbeldore would have captured him and turned him over. Actually Dumbledore did capture Snape and in a far worse way than a stint in Azkaban, by making him work as a double agent, but still he wanted first to know why Snape had wanted to meet him.

Secondly Snape met with Dumbeldore. Dumbledore was not chasing Snape, knowing him to be a murderer and then listening to his reasons of why he was innocent IMO.

With Sirius too, the first time Dumbeldore never bothers. It is only after Sirius breaks away from Azkaban that Dumbeldore wants to know how he broke out and what he wants with Harry and does he know anything about Voldmeort. So he questioned Sirius IMO.

I really don't think there is a comparison between the meeting on the him between Snape and Dumbeldore, and the situation with Sirius.

I really don't think there is a comparison between the meeting on the him between Snape and Dumbeldore, and the situation with Sirius.

I agree. I think it was totally the opposite. In my judgment Dumbledore showed compassion, patience and fairness and Snape showed none of these things. Imo, these attributes were never among Snape's strong points, but JKR did show that Snape had the ability to consider certain things intelligently when he wanted to. However, here, Snape simply behaved with unfairness, vindictiveness and in an irrational manner, imo.

Snape had no logical reason for assuming the kids were confunded or brainwashed; Sirius would have absolutely no reason to do so, imo - nor could Snape explain why Lupin hadn't killed Harry at some point during the year. The trio agreed and knocked Snape out; Dumbledore also agreed and kicked Snape out of the room. Ultimately, the Minister simply believed that Snape had gone crazy and admoinished Dumbledore to watch him carefully (POA - Servant of Lord Voldemort/Owl Post Again).

Snape had no logical reason for assuming the kids were confunded or brainwashed; Sirius would have absolutely no reason to do so, imo - nor could Snape explain why Lupin hadn't killed Harry at some point during the year. The trio agreed and knocked Snape out; Dumbledore also agreed and kicked Snape out of the room. Ultimately, the Minister simply believed that Snape had gone crazy and admoinished Dumbledore to watch him carefully (POA - Servant of Lord Voldemort/Owl Post Again).

I respectfully disagree.

Snape saw 3 students, one of them Harry Potter, who even Dumbledore thought was in danger from Sirius, asking Snape to give a murderer another chance, a man who had been given a "shoot at sight" order by the Ministry, only here it was "kissed on sight" IMO.

There was Lupin, of whom Snape was suspicious all along, for he was Sirius's close friend and rightly too, for lupin never told Dumbeldore about Sirius's animagus, and Sirius himself, a man who had admitted his guilt all those years ago and 3 students who looked Confunded, because they were asking Snape to listen to Sirius.

What I don't understand is why Snape should listen to the words of Sirius, a murderer, Lupin the man who thought his good standing with Dumbeldore more important than Harry's life (for he never told Dumbeldore about the animagus even after Sirius broke into the Gryffindor dorm and Snape was always suspicious of him) and 3 students, who did not know what happened that Halloween day all those years ago.

As far as Snape was concerned, Harry and the others did not even know Sirius had been SK IMO.

So I don't think Snape was wrong in not listening to their words, when he had overwhelming evidence that Sirius and Lupin were dangerous.

This situation is IMO vastly different from Snape meeting Dumbeldore on the Hill, where Dumbedlore was in control. Here leaving aside the personal anger Snape must have had seeing Sirius, Snape had to protect the 3 from Sirius and Lupin, who was talking for Sirius IMO.

I respectfully disagree.

Snape saw 3 students, one of them Harry Potter, who even Dumbledore thought was in danger from Sirius, asking Snape to give a murderer another chance, a man who had been given a "shoot at sight" order by the Ministry, only here it was "kissed on sight" IMO.

There was Lupin, of whom Snape was suspicious all along, for he was Sirius's close friend and rightly too, for lupin never told Dumbeldore about Sirius's animagus, and Sirius himself, a man who had admitted his guilt all those years ago and 3 students who looked Confunded, because they were asking Snape to listen to Sirius.

What I don't understand is why Snape should listen to the words of Sirius, a murderer, Lupin the man who thought his good standing with Dumbeldore more important than Harry's life (for he never told Dumbeldore about the animagus even after Sirius broke into the Gryffindor dorm and Snape was always suspicious of him) and 3 students, who did not know what happened that Halloween day all those years ago.

As far as Snape was concerned, Harry and the others did not even know Sirius had been SK IMO.

So I don't think Snape was wrong in not listening to their words, when he had overwhelming evidence that Sirius and Lupin were dangerous.

This situation is IMO vastly different from Snape meeting Dumbeldore on the Hill, where Dumbedlore was in control. Here leaving aside the personal anger Snape must have had seeing Sirius, Snape had to protect the 3 from Sirius and Lupin, who was talking for Sirius IMO.

I respect your view, but it does not explain why Snape felt Sirius would need to brainwash or confund the trio. Snape also felt Sirius wanted to kill them - why bother confunding them?

I respect your view, but it does not explain why Snape felt Sirius would need to brainwash or confund the trio. Snape also felt Sirius wanted to kill them - why bother confunding them?

Because there was always danger that while Sirius could be attacked by the three. Confusing them would make them stay quiet? Else, Sirius could also be planning to take Harry with him, kidnap him and take him away to Voldmeort, who Dumbeldore knew was still alive and kicking IMO.

I just checked the book now. :D

There is nothing about Snape thinking the students were Confunded. So I am sorry about that. :)

What was there was;

1) Lupin admitting that he was too cowardly to tell Dumbeldore.

2) Sirius asking about Snape

3) Lupin explaining about why Snape hated the Marauders (which IMO was an incomplete account and during which it looks as if Snape came and overheard)

4) He seemed to have seen the Map, but there is a plothole, because he did not see Peter's name on it.

5) Hermione wants to "listen" to what Sirius has to say

And there Snape gets really angry. Snape uses the words "convicted murderer", which means that Sirius at that time was a man who had escaped prison and was guilty, because he never approached Dumbedlore or Lupin or anyone else to prove his innocence all through the year IMO.

When he feels that Sirius and Lupin have somehow convinced the Trio to listen to them, he does not feel the need to do so for Sirius was convicted clearly; there was no doubt in anyone's mind about Sirius not being the SK, for Sirius himself had admitted his crimes 13 years ago, which is again quite different from Snape meeting Dumbeldore IMO.

When Harry also joins Hermione, Snape is enraged and he shouts and quite correctly IMO that James was "too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black - now get out of the way or I will make you." (POA)

And then Snape is stunned.

Because there was always danger that while Sirius could be attacked by the three. Confusing them would make them stay quiet? Else, Sirius could also be planning to take Harry with him, kidnap him and take him away to Voldmeort, who Dumbeldore knew was still alive and kicking IMO.

I just checked the book now. :D

There is nothing about Snape thinking the students were Confunded. So I am sorry about that. :)

No, you were not wrong. The bit about the students being confunded is in Hermione's secret and repeated by Snape again in Owl Post Again. So as I was saying, what makes no sense is that Sirius would wish to confund the trio in order to have a chat about the past with them before killing them. Why hand't he and/or Lupin simply killed them on sight? Why hadn't Lupin killed Harry when they were alone together (a whole lot) during the year? Snape couldn't explain - and that is were his reasoning became faulty, imo.

If the trio was confunded and calmly listening and asking questions when Snape appeared - his whole contention makes no sense. That is because if they were confunded for a reason, what was it? Certainly not to have a cheerful discussion about the past. Why weren't the two men killing or kidnapping the "confunded" trio?

In my judgment, Snape was lying and he knew it. He said nothing about the trio being confunded in the shack (as you pointed out). He came up with that story the next day in order to explain himself. Because his behavior in the shack was irrational and unfair - as pointed out by Dumbledore having listened to and believed Sirius. Snape didn't know what Sirius had told Dumbledore because he hadn't listened to any of the five people himself. But Snape knew that if he had listened (and he knew this while he was in the shack) - Sirius and Lupin would likely exonerate themselves. Imo, Snape did not want that - he wanted to have them kissed. That is why he did not wish to take them to the castle - he didn't want to give them a chance to speak to anyone else either. Snape liked the idea that Black (and later Lupin) would betray James, in my judgment. Imo, he left Lily completely out of the equation (even though she had a mind of her own and would have also agreed to having Black as the SK) and he could then blame Harry's father in his mind - and the betrayers, Black and Lupin. He didn't want to know any other "truth" and he certainly did not want to see any 'proof', imo. Snape admitted that he was vindictive - he claimed he was very glad it was he who had found Black because he wanted revenge.

I feel Snape was also deeply embarrased over the werewolf incident. He had misconstrued the events to make James look culpable for sending him there (without proof) and later claimed Sirius had tried to murder him, several times (POA Snape's grudge/Owl Post Again). Finding out the truth, did not make Snape any happier and he never admitted his own culpability in the event until he knew he would be dead when Harry saw it. Then he comes forth with the information that he'd not revealed: he suspected Lupin was a werewolf and went into the tunnel anyway. The ridicule from Sirius and Harry was avoided as well as direct accusation by Dumbledore - because Dumbledore knew, imo, but did not accuse Snape outright, because he knew Snape was lying about it (via omission) and was more disturbed with the fact that Snape was lying than anything else. However, it is a testiment to Dumbledore's character that he made his feelings on the matter clear to Snape - recall the very stern and depreciating attitude and look he gave Snape when Snape accused Sirius before him. I would opine James and Lily knew also, and it says something about their characters that they had not laughingly told Sirius and Remus the truth - I think it showed the mature outlook that Sirius too had been behaving in a wrongful manner. Nonetheless, I feel the embarassment and wrongfullness of Snape's behavior both in the past and in the Shrieking Shack were the reasons he suddenly came up with the "trio was confunded" idea the next day when speaking with the Minister and later Dumbledore and Harry. He was unwilling to admit he had been mistaken and face up to his wrongful behavior and statements, imo.

But it all backfired, mainly because of Snape's attitude, but also because of his behavior in the Shack, imo, which he desperately wished to keep under wraps. However, instead of being vindicated for his actions and behavior, as I pointed out, the trio as one tried to disarm him, punching him into the wall and knocking him unconscious; Dumbledore sent him away in disgust and the Minister believed he was crazy and required close watching (POA Owl Post Again - Servant of Lord Voldemort). None of these people (the five in the shack, Dumbledore or the Minister) apologized to Snape for their treatment of him because they all felt it was deserved, imo. Snape had behaved in a very despicable manner, imo, and I feel that those around him were interested in Snape knowing they felt that way about his actions.

When Harry also joins Hermione, Snape is enraged and he shouts and quite correctly IMO that James was "too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black - now get out of the way or I will make you." (POA)

Surely we are not supposed to take Severus's words here so literally. :huh: The HP books are full of subtext, and this is one of those prime examples!

Surely the point is that James had not been mistaken in trusting Sirius. So Severus has that completely backwards!

But the intensity and anger of Snape's words also point to something deeper. When I first read those words, I did read a subtext into them, and I still do ... it was clear there was something really eating away at Snape, and I thought those words also betrayed a fierce, twisted, peculiar desire to protect Harry. And I still think that, especially in the light of what we now know about Snape.

But that doesn't make Snape's judgement of James correct.

And also ... the first time I read PoA, I was very much of the opinion that Severus did lie to Fudge about the kids being Confunded ... I thought it was obvious that Snape knew very well that they had not been.

I still don't know what I think of this whole plot point. The sheer intensity of Snape's anger towards Sirius in PoA does makes perfect sense if he thought Sirius was the man responsible for Lily's death ... and that's the interpretation I would go for, because it's the one that makes most sense. I would simply love JKR to throw more light on it. :D

But that still doesn't make Snape's assessment of James right, or justify his wanting to hand over Sirius and Remus to the rough justice of the Ministry: I now believe that Remus behaved rather irresponsibly in PoA but that doesn't mean he deserved to be 'kissed', for pete's sake. :)

The only way I can make sense of this whole convoluted narrative is that Severus really couldn't bear to hear the truth.

But as for Severus' personal opinion, I think Harry's resemblance to James reinforced the prejudice, but did not cause it. What caused it, IMO, was Severus' fear of his own feelings. He's quite consistently shown that he prefers to show anger rather than any softer feeling, as a defence mechanism. I think this is at work not only in his outward reactions, but in his inner ones as well. It's easier to be angry at Harry for being James' son than to be constantly reminded of Lily and the fact that she is gone.

If Harry looked like his mother, maintaining his anger at Harry would be made much more difficult. Not that Severus wouldn't try-- I'm sure he would. But maintaining that opinion over many years would, IMO, be very hard to do.

I agree, he probably wouldn't have liked any child of Lily and James, but I agree that if Harry had been Harriet Potter, a little girl who was the spitting image of Lily, Snape would have probably found it much harder to resent that little girl than he did to resent James's son.

In Owl Post it was Fudge and not Snape who was talking about Harry and the other 2 being Confunded, but even then Snape seemed to be giving possible explanations for the 3's behaviour rather than stating this as a fact. May be I need to read it once more. :D

Snape didn't know what Sirius had told Dumbledore because he hadn't listened to any of the five people himself. But Snape knew that if he had listened (and he knew this while he was in the shack) - Sirius and Lupin would likely exonerate themselves. Imo, Snape did not want that - he wanted to have them kissed.

No one had any reason to believe that Sirius could in any be innocent until Dumbeldore questioned Sirius. Why should Snape alone need to believe it?

Dumbeldore questioned Sirius this time for the information, not because he realised that Sirius had been wronged and so he must be given a chance to speak IMO.

Had Dumbleore felt so, I think he would/should have done this 13 years ago. So should have Remus IMO. But neither believed that Sirius was innocent, until Remus saw Peter and Dumbeldore wanting to know why/how Sirius broke out of Azkaban and why he was after Harry, decided to ask him tough questions and then he got very different answers IMO.

Dumbledore was okay with dementors in a school full of children (howevr uncomfortable he was with the idea), for he recognised the danger Sirius presented and knew that Sirius if caught by the dementors would be kissed on capture as per the Orders of the Ministry and he never did anything about that either IMO.

I feel Snape was also deeply embarrased over the werewolf incident. He had misconstrued the events to make James look culpable for sending him there (without proof) and later claimed Sirius had tried to murder him, several times (POA Snape's grudge/Owl Post Again).

How do you conclude this? From what in canon I mean. For I don't think Snape misconstrued the werewolf incident in any way as against what we have been told in the books.

Finding out the truth, did not make Snape any happier and he never admitted his own culpability in the event until he knew he would be dead when Harry saw it.

From the time Snape found out the truth and that was at the end of POA I presume, I think Snape never ever called Black a traitor nor did he ever repeat James was arrogantly mistaken in Black, even though that was the truth IMO.

However, instead of being vindicated for his actions and behavior, as I pointed out, the trio as one tried to disarm him, punching him into the wall and knocking him unconscious; Dumbledore sent him away in disgust and the Minister believed he was crazy and required close watching (POA Owl Post Again - Servant of Lord Voldemort).

Dumbeldore, who knew the story from Sirius by that time, was wanting to save him (which was nort wrong) and so he, as usual, shut up Snape (which was wrong IMO; for I feel he could have gone about it in a better way IMO). Well, Dumbeldore did not recognize Snape's death in King's cross, I would hardly expect him to acknowledge an attempt on his life, when he survived after all.

Surely we are not supposed to take Severus's words here so literally. :huh: The HP books are full of subtext, and this is one of those prime examples!

Surely the point is that James had not been mistaken in trusting Sirius. So Severus has that completely backwards!

Have answered in the Marauder's thread. :)

Surely we are not supposed to take Severus's words here so literally. :huh: The HP books are full of subtext, and this is one of those prime examples!

Surely the point is that James had not been mistaken in trusting Sirius. So Severus has that completely backwards!

I am puzzled. Why would we not take what Snape is saying here literally? He is not making any metaphoric statements, he is making a straightforward statement of his opinion. What is going on here is not subtext, it seems to me, but an honest mistake based on misinformation spread by Sirius and James themselves, a mistake which is explicitly explained to the readers.

Replace Black with Pettigrew, and the point is certainly arguable. Severus means the literal words he is saying, would you not agree? Even though they are, as you state, factually incorrect in that the specific instance of trust (using someone as the SK) to which Snape presumably refers, was trust of someone other than Black.

I am puzzled. Why would we not take what Snape is saying here literally? He is not making any metaphoric statements, he is making a straightforward statement of his opinion. What is going on here is not subtext, it seems to me, but an honest mistake based on misinformation spread by Sirius and James themselves, a mistake which is explicitly explained to the readers.

Replace Black with Pettigrew, and the point is certainly arguable. Severus means the literal words he is saying, would you not agree? Even though they are, as you state, factually incorrect in that the specific instance of trust (using someone as the SK) to which Snape presumably refers, was trust of someone other than Black.

I agree he can be taken literally - but unless I am mistaken, I believe that Pearl meant that we cannot take the fact that James should not have trusted Sirius, literally, precisely because as you say, Snape was mistaken (or feigning to be mistaken) in who the betrayer was.

I agree he can be taken literally - but unless I am mistaken, I believe that Pearl meant that we cannot take the fact that James should not have trusted Sirius, literally, precisely because as you say, Snape was mistaken (or feigning to be mistaken) in who the betrayer was.

Are you suggesting Snape was not really mistaken?

When Harry also joins Hermione, Snape is enraged and he shouts and quite correctly IMO that James was "too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black - now get out of the way or I will make you." (POA)

If we discuss most of Snape's comments in half sentences and partial statements taken from canon, I feel we can make a lot of the things he said more rational and reasonable. However, his statements taken as a whole, generally include a direct lie, a half lie, a lie of omission or his opinion stated as fact (without disclosure), imo.

In my judgment, Snape often spoke in a very vindictive and cruel manner, showing a lack of compassion and a lack of proper respect for the feelings of those he was speaking to. I feel he often set out to hurt their sensibilities and cause mental anguish via degradation based on purposeful or misguided misconstruction of their character. I feel Snape often showed little tact in this regard; he spoke sarcastically, complete with smirks and sneers; usually did not allow others a chance to speak or interrupted their speech; behaved as if he has not heard what others are saying and/or disregarded their remarks as it suited him to do so. On the other hand, I feel he very much was intent on the listeners hearing his tirades and all of the unpleasant things he wished to say without being interrupted, misinterpreted, rebuked or called upon to provide proof.

I feel JKR very often failed to confirm what Snape really knew or did not know, but she has stated that she wrote him to be a horrible person. In my opinion, that is fundamentally why it was not important to justify his statements or behavior. This was something that was not going to ever be rectified by JKR because she fully intended for him to remain horrible based on her comments after publication of DH that Snape was the same sarcastic, cruel, vindictive and bullying person he had always been. So in my view, it was completely unnecessary to have him apologize for his mistakes, misstatements or misconstructions, even if he believed he was speaking the truth at the time he stated them – or if he knew that he was lying directly, via omission or by stating his opinion as fact without disclosure.

The only problem with this, imo is if one requires behavioral justification for Snape's redemption - because redemption is something JKR wanted for Snape. However, for her, it was not required, imo. That is, my understanding is that he was not supposed to be good at heart, he was only supposed to be on the good side. The only facts that had to be rectified were those that came down to the fundamental issue as to whether he was good or evil. Evil included his not caring that an innocent individual died (especially one that he disliked or disrespected for some reason unrelated to evil) and a reversal of his blood prejudice, imo. The latter is not important for your average character, because it does not make one evil per se, but for someone who killed based on that reason, it becomes a relevant question. In his case, the issue was raised regarding his prejudice and feeling of superiority toward Muggleborns and Werewolves, imo. JKR, I believe felt that she addressed these things in having Snape attempt to save Lupin from being killed in 7 Potters and his telling P. Black not to call others Mudblood. The former issue, she resolved by his saying that he no longer allowed those to die that he could save.

For those who only require a rejection of evil for redemption, I feel that JKR was able to show that Snape had achieved that. For those who require expression of regret for all of his past evil deeds, redemption would be unavailable for Snape unless they were willing to infer it, imo. Inference can be difficult however, precisely because of Snape's ongoing behavior and attitude, imo. I feel that for those who require behavioral justification for complete redempton, Snape's character, as written, was unable to provide that, so he would not be redeemed for those individuals.

In any case, in my opinion, there is no need to find excuses or justifications for his behavior in the shack or the morning after. Snape is not going to be justified for this; he is not going to be excused or vindicated, imo. I feel Snape was wrong and that everyone agreed that he was wrong in canon and nothing was ever said or done to attempt to make him right or vindicate his words or actions. In fact, I feel that Snape went on to behave in an even worse manner in the wake of his horrible behavior in the shack and the morning after, in vindictively ratting out Lupin and being rude and irrational with Harry, the Minister and Dumbledore.

The half statement you presented, could be a misunderstanding on his part as the entire wizard world believed Sirius was the betrayer at the time. But the portion you left out; his assertion that James (and Harry) deserved to die for arrogantly trusting his friend was simply bad form for many reasons, imo. I feel it showed blatant disrespect for the dead; unfair contribution of blame; distrespect for the orphan and loved ones of the dead; considering his involvement, audacity in attempting to shift the blame to innocents; and what I feel is a despicable opinion that anyone innocent (not evil) might deserve to die for any reason, especially the one he gave.

Snape was never exonerated or vindicated for saying or doing these things, imo. I also don't feel that he received any payback for saying them except the digust, disrespect and disregard of those present. Snape was not apologetic or willing to admit he was wrong, imo. I think that in Snape's view, he did not feel any desire to apologize or own up to his mistakes, miscontructions or various methods of lying; I believe that is because he truly had no consideration for the feelings and sensibilities of others in general, with rare exception - very rare, imo, as I can only think of three instances when he showed any consideration for another's feelings (attempting to tell Lily he didn't mean to call her a Mudblood, welcoming McGonagall back to Hogwarts and agreeing to the vow with Narcissa - although the last is qualified.)

Are you suggesting Snape was not really mistaken?

No, canon provides he was mistaken. I was suggesting that Pearl was saying that we cannot take Snape literally precisely because he was mistaken (that is, we cannot believe Sirius was the SK and betrayed James). Whereas I felt you were saying that he could be taken literally because it was his true belief at the time (although he was mistaken). :)

The "feigning to be mistaken" bit rests on the notion that Snape may have known Peter was the betrayer and was not disclosing that fact. In truth, I have not made up my mind about that at this point.

I am puzzled. Why would we not take what Snape is saying here literally? He is not making any metaphoric statements, he is making a straightforward statement of his opinion. What is going on here is not subtext, it seems to me, but an honest mistake based on misinformation spread by Sirius and James themselves, a mistake which is explicitly explained to the readers.

You're quite right, of course. :) I got carried away with the 'subtext' argument, because with Snape, what we see is not always what is really going on. If you follow me. :)

The emotion being expressed here is genuine, I agree. I do believe, in hindsight, that Snape believed Sirius to have been the betrayer.

The half statement you presented, could be a misunderstanding on his part as the entire wizard world believed Sirius was the betrayer at the time. But the portion you left out; his assertion that James (and Harry) deserved to die for arrogantly trusting his friend was simply bad form for many reasons, imo. I feel it showed blatant disrespect for the dead; unfair contribution of blame; distrespect for the orphan and loved ones of the dead; considering his involvement, audacity in attempting to shift the blame to innocents; and what I feel is a despicable opinion that anyone innocent (not evil) might deserve to die for any reason, especially the one he gave.

Here's where we differ vastly in our interpretations of Snape. While I don't deny his dark side (which is patently there in the narrative), I don't always interpret his words and actions in the darkest light possible. :)

He blurts this stuff out in a moment of extreme anger and frustration at what he IMO perceives as Harry's obduracy. No, I don't think what he says in anger to Harry is right or appropriate: neither the content nor the manner. But I don't interpret it to mean that he literally meant that James deserved to die, or that Harry deserved to die either.

My feeling about Snape for a long time has been: yes, he can be a right git. But he's not quite the magnitude of git he would seem to be on the surface ... and this, to me, was the game of misdirection with the character that JKR was playing all along.

Snape was never exonerated or vindicated for saying or doing these things, imo. I also don't feel that he received any payback for saying them except the digust, disrespect and disregard of those present.

You mean he didn't receive any payback in PoA or in general throughout the series? If the former, then getting knocked out by the Trio, not getting that Order of Merlin, and feeling betrayed by Albus (although I don't doubt the rightness of Albus's actions) was probably punishment enough. :whistle: If the latter, well, if the vicious manner of Snape's death at the fangs of Nagini isn't sufficient 'payback' for readers who felt that Snape deserved it, I really have no comment for that. :whistle: :)

Personally, I find the bleak character of Snape's life and death more than sufficient 'payback'. It seems his creator thought so too, however 'horrible' she may find him. ;)

Snape was not apologetic or willing to admit he was wrong, imo. I think that in Snape's view, he did not feel any desire to apologize or own up to his mistakes, miscontructions or various methods of lying; I believe that is because he truly had no consideration for the feelings and sensibilities of others in general, with rare exception - very rare, imo, as I can only think of three instances when he showed any consideration for another's feelings (attempting to tell Lily he didn't mean to call her a Mudblood, welcoming McGonagall back to Hogwarts and agreeing to the vow with Narcissa - although the last is qualified.)

It is quite true that we never see Snape apologise.

But then Rowling never lets us in on the inner workings of his mind either. We only ever observe Snape from the outside.

Snape had no logical reason for assuming the kids were confunded or brainwashed; Sirius would have absolutely no reason to do so, imo - nor could Snape explain why Lupin hadn't killed Harry at some point during the year. The trio agreed and knocked Snape out; Dumbledore also agreed and kicked Snape out of the room. Ultimately, the Minister simply believed that Snape had gone crazy and admoinished Dumbledore to watch him carefully (POA - Servant of Lord Voldemort/Owl Post Again).

Ah well, Snape finally figured out what was really going on when Lupin started telling the truth. :tu: As long as Lupin kept all the facts to himself and withheld information from both Dumbledore and Fudge, Snape couldn't know anymore than they did.

Dumbledore knew that Snape would be upset over letting Sirius escape because at that point Snape still wanted revenge for Lily.

By the way - the title of that chapter refers to Peter, and not Snape. We are supposed to believe it's Snape, but it's a deception on JKR's part to keep up the mystery. :)

Here's where we differ vastly in our interpretations of Snape. While I don't deny his dark side (which is patently there in the narrative), I don't always interpret his words and actions in the darkest light possible. :)

He blurts this stuff out in a moment of extreme anger and frustration at what he IMO perceives as Harry's obduracy. No, I don't think what he says in anger to Harry is right or appropriate: neither the content nor the manner. But I don't interpret it to mean that he literally meant that James deserved to die, or that Harry deserved to die either.

I respect your view. Whether he meant it or not had no bearing on the things I said. I felt that way about Snape because he said it.

I am not unwise. I fully understand Snape blurts out things he doesn't mean; as I noted, I believe he tells various forms of lies as well - and I don't think he truly believes all of those either. I feel Snape's biggest problem was his vocalizing these things. By doing so, in my judgment he shows: blatant disrespect for the dead; unfair contribution of blame; distrespect for the orphan and loved ones of the dead; considering his involvement, audacity in attempting to shift the blame to innocents; and what I feel is a despicable opinion that anyone innocent (not evil) might deserve to die for any reason, especially the one he gave. All of which I stated before. With respect to the latter two statements, I don't mean to say it was his true opinion or belief - it was merely an opinion and belief I feel he inappropriately declared at the time.

My feeling about Snape for a long time has been: yes, he can be a right git. But he's not quite the magnitude of git he would seem to be on the surface ... and this, to me, was the game of misdirection with the character that JKR was playing all along.

Well in light of my above statement, you likely already understand that for the most part I agree with you. However, in as far as the misdirection; I do not believe the statement we were speaking about, nor other cruel statements that Snape made were misdirection at all. In my judgment, that is the way Snape spoke because as Jo pointed out, he was a horrible person. This type of statement was not made by Snape to make him appear evil, imo, because it doesn't make him appear evil. It simply makes him appear cruel, bullying and vindictive, imo, something that JKR said he always was until his dying day. The misdirection, imo, was exclusive to those ambiguous acts that made Snape actually appear "evil" - like upholding DE values and carrying them out as a loyal Death Eater (i.e., killing Dumbledore) and certain statements about his involvement with Death Eaters to the "bad guys", like some of what he said to Bella at Spinner's End.

You mean he didn't receive any payback in PoA or in general? If the former, then getting knocked out by the Trio, not getting that Order of Merlin, and feeling somewhat betrayed by Albus (although I don't doubt the rightness of Albus's actions) was probably punishment enough. :whistle: If the latter, well, if the vicious manner of Snape's death at the fangs of Nagini isn't sufficient 'payback' for those readers who dislike Snape, there's not an awful lot I can say. :)

No, I didn't mean either of those things actually :lol:. Snape definitely had to actually suffer - and he suffered more of his own accord by wrongly perceiving slights and misconstructing the characters and thus, the remarks of others. What I am referring to is that no one ever said to Snape:

"you love Lily, eh? Some love! You helped to kill her! You called her a Mudblood! You fought with the DEs who were daily trying to kill her as an Order member! You would be well served to die because you arrogantly did all of that and still feel you have the right to love her! And on top of it she was worthless; Lily thought she knew it all but knew nothing."

Doesn't that hit you the wrong way? It does me. I would look completely askance at someone saying something like that to Snape. It doesn't take into account the regret or remorse he felt for what he'd done; it doesn't take into account that he really does have emotions for Lily; it would be totally disrespectful to him as a human being to taunt him about a dead person that he claimed to love. Finally because the second to last sentence is an unwarranted opinion - and the last sentence is disrespecting her memory, highly derogatory and said to Snape, who claimed to love her. Even if the person didn't mean it. Snape never had to suffer that type of pain and anguish and he ensured that he would not by making the only person in the world who was aware of it, promise to never tell - and he never revealed it to anyone until he was certain he was dying.

But others were not so lucky. Their deepest secrets, their deepest points of pain were known to the general public and Snape had no problem throwing it in their faces, imo, and often twisting his words in such a way as to make his statements as painful as possible.

So imo, Snape never had to "suffer" in this regard, he never got a similar payback for his negative behavioral actions. I agree with you that he got payback in other ways, but I was not attempting to draw a balance between overall payment of sins. :lol:.

It is quite true that we never see Snape apologise.

But then Rowling never lets us in on the inner workings of his mind either. We only ever observe Snape from the outside.

Well that was my point. :tu:

By the way - the title of that chapter refers to Peter, and not Snape. We are supposed to believe it's Snape, but it's a deception on JKR's part to keep up the mystery. :)

:lol:...I've never thought it applied to Snape - I always believed it meant Peter. But that is an interesting take. I suppose if one believed Snape was on Voldemort's side they might consider it. I never thought that though.

WOW; Version 9! :clap: Go Snape! :love: :love:

"Who let Jessica make the poll this time?" :D

I know, LOL:lol:

The only problem with this, imo is if one requires behavioral justification for Snape's redemption - because redemption is something JKR wanted for Snape. For those who only require a rejection of evil for redemption, I feel that JKR was able to show that Snape had achieved that. For those who require expression of regret for all of his past evil deeds, redemption would be unavailable for Snape unless they were willing to infer it, imo. Inference can be difficult however, precisely because of Snape's ongoing behavior and attitude, imo. I feel that for those who require behavioral justification for complete redempton, Snape's character, as written, was unable to provide that, so he would not be redeemed for those individuals.

In any case, in my opinion, there is no need to find excuses or justifications for his behavior in the shack or the morning after.

I respectfully disagree. I see the whole remorse/redemption thing differently.

I feel remoprse/redemption is in the mind and soul, not in the words spoken. I feel that makes the whole remorse of any person more sincere, than pleasant words and not much feeling inside. :)

Sirius, was willing to stay for an eternity in Azkaban, for misleading the Potters. That was also remorse, where he chose to suffer. Snape did the same thing but in another manner. In stead of staying in Azkaban where he would not be able to help, he decided to use his dark mark and his DE membership in a way that would help the Light. And that's what he did IMO.

But the moment he became a DE for all the remaining DEs, he had a role to play. That meant acting all the time, even when Voldemort was not on the scene. It meant disliking Gryffindors, being mean and nasty to everyone who was not a sympathiser or supporter of Voldemort and acting tough IMO.

He could not be polite, kind and nice to anyone who was seen as an enemy by the DEs and Voldemort and he could not be seen as nice to Harry IMO.

And I think Snape chose to get a bad name, did not mind being called nasty, a bully, a horrible person, because he chose to see the bigger picture.

Yes he used his very real hatred of James Potter, but if he did not, he would have had to use Harry's own insecurities and that IMO would have hurt Harry a lot more and made him very vulnarable.

This way, Harry was able to brush it all of as jealousy and envy. While Snape did feel jealous of James, I don't think it was because he had messy hair or was a Quidditch captain.

I think Snape was jealous because James had the one thing he desperately wanted. Lily's love.

While Harry was James's son, I think Snape never forgot that he was Lily's too! And I also believe he was deliberately cruel knwoing he would be hated IMO.

That makes him all the more admirable rather than despicable in my opinion.

But the moment he became a DE for all the remaining DEs, he had a role to play. That meant acting all the time, even when Voldemort was not on the scene. It meant disliking Gryffindors, being mean and nasty to everyone who was not a sympathiser or supporter of Voldemort and acting tough IMO.

I respect your view. Out of curiosity, do you feel that somewhere in the series of books there is an example of how Snape really was as an adult - when he was not acting?

And I think Snape chose to get a bad name, did not mind being called nasty, a bully, a horrible person, because he chose to see the bigger picture.

Snape did not mind being called nasty, a bully or a horrible person by whom? By JKR you mean?

I respect your view. Out of curiosity, do you feel that somewhere in the series of books there is an example of how Snape really was as an adult - when he was not acting?

I don't understand. What did you mean by "Snape really was as an adult - when he was not acting?".

I think there are very few instances where we caught sight of the real Snape (if this is what you meant). He was playing a role almost all the time we saw him, because we saw him through Harry's eyes in the books.

I will look through the books to see if there are instances where even through Harry's eyes we can glimpse the adult Snape. Apart from the TPT, Occlumency lessons and Spinner's End, I mean (where TPT and Spinner's End are not through Harry's eyes).

Snape did not mind being called nasty, a bully or a horrible person by whom? By JKR you mean?

By Harry and the other characters in the books.

I don't understand. What did you mean by "Snape really was as an adult - when he was not acting?".

I think there are very few instances where we caught sight of the real Snape (if this is what you meant). He was playing a role almost all the time we saw him, because we saw him through Harry's eyes in the books.

I will look through the books to see if there are instances where even through Harry's eyes we can glimpse the adult Snape. Apart from the TPT, Occlumency lessons and Spinner's End, I mean (where TPT and Spinner's End are not through Harry's eyes).

Okay. :tu:

By Harry and the other characters in the books.

Ah, because I was referring to what JKR said in terms of how the character was written. I didn't mean how the other characters saw him in the book :lol:.

And I think Snape chose to get a bad name, did not mind being called nasty, a bully, a horrible person, because he chose to see the bigger picture.

I'm just popping in...haven't in quite a few versions of this thread.

I agree with you there. And it was always my personal opinion that Severus had a kind of self-loathing that made him almost revel in receiving derision from others because he could not give enough to himself. I think his guilt for what he had done wrong in his life made him want others to see him that way and so he made himself become someone everyone would find easy to hate. Perhaps in Lily's place...

I agree with you there. And it was always my personal opinion that Severus had a kind of self-loathing that made him almost revel in receiving derision from others because he could not give enough to himself. I think his guilt for what he had done wrong in his life made him want others to see him that way and so he made himself become someone everyone would find easy to hate. Perhaps in Lily's place...

I find this view fascinating... I hadn't seen it that way before. It's an intriguing angle to look Severus from. I like it :tu:

Well in light of my above statement, you likely already understand that for the most part I agree with you. However, in as far as the misdirection; I do not believe the statement we were speaking about, nor other cruel statements that Snape made were misdirection at all. In my judgment, that is the way Snape spoke because as Jo pointed out, he was a horrible person. This type of statement was not made by Snape to make him appear evil, imo, because it doesn't make him appear evil. It simply makes him appear cruel, bullying and vindictive, imo, something that JKR said he always was until his dying day.

Well, he's her character and she can say what she likes about him. :) I am not sure why I should agree with her. :lol: Just because Rowling regards one of her characters as 'horrible', or even 'deeply horrible', doesn't mean that I am duty-bound to accept her opinion of her own character. :)

I think she portrays him as a very damaged person with a very dark side, certainly. He's my favourite character, alongside Harry, but I'm the last person to deny that he can be a complete and utter git. :lol: But it is precisely his twisted psychology that makes Snape interesting to me. :cool:

No, I didn't mean either of those things actually :lol:. Snape definitely had to actually suffer - and he suffered more of his own accord by wrongly perceiving slights and misconstructing the characters and thus, the remarks of others.

I agree that a lot of his suffering was self-inflicted.

Snape never had to suffer that type of pain and anguish and he ensured that he would not by making the only person in the world who was aware of it, promise to never tell - and he never revealed it to anyone until he was certain he was dying.

Personally, I think he suffered pain and anguish in other ways.

But others were not so lucky. Their deepest secrets, their deepest points of pain were known to the general public and Snape had no problem throwing it in their faces, imo, and often twisting his words in such a way as to make his statements as painful as possible.

Quite often, somebody who is very hard on other people is also very hard on themselves. Mexicant makes the point for me:

I agree with you there. And it was always my personal opinion that Severus had a kind of self-loathing that made him almost revel in receiving derision from others because he could not give enough to himself. I think his guilt for what he had done wrong in his life made him want others to see him that way and so he made himself become someone everyone would find easy to hate. Perhaps in Lily's place...

In view of how Snape is drawn, I find this a believable description of his psychology. He is a very damaged person.

So imo, Snape never had to "suffer" in this regard, he never got a similar payback for his negative behavioral actions.

Well, I dunno. I'm sure Albus told him he was being a real prat on occasion. :relax:

Well, he's her character and she can say what she likes about him. :) I am not sure why I should agree with her. :lol: Just because Rowling regards one of her characters as 'horrible', or even 'deeply horrible', doesn't mean that I am duty-bound to accept her opinion of her own character. :)

At the same time, you have to respect the fact that I saw Snape as characterised exactly the way JKR said she set out to do. I do accept her opinion of her own character, especially when it comes to factors that I feel readers cannot possibly glean from the books because we don't have his POV. So when Snape does something horrible in canon, I see no point in twisting and reinterpreting his action until I see him in a different light. But I respect your right to your opnion on this also. :)

I think she portrays him as a very damaged person with a very dark side, certainly. He's my favourite character, alongside Harry, but I'm the last person to deny that he can be a complete and utter git. :lol: But it is precisely his twisted psychology that makes Snape interesting to me. :cool:

This is how I feel about Voldemort; but I don't count mysel as a fan of his because I don't feel he distinguished himself as an outstanding dark lord.

Quite often, somebody who is very hard on other people is also very hard on themselves

I agree, but I don't see it as a justification or excuse for their poor treatment of others. I think in Snape's case, he was unreasonably so based on the circumstances given in canon.

Mexicant agree with you there. And it was always my personal opinion that Severus had a kind of self-loathing that made him almost revel in receiving derision from others because he could not give enough to himself. I think his guilt for what he had done wrong in his life made him want others to see him that way and so he made himself become someone everyone would find easy to hate. Perhaps in Lily's place...

Well it worked with me :lol:. In seriousness, I would respectfully disagree with the conclusion because Snape actually left the DEs and moved to try to make up for what he had done. I do agree that he likely felt self-loathing, but I feel it was at war with his arrogance and his quest to be seen as someone important. Hence Snape's behavior in the classroom where he did not wish for the kids to show hatred toward him, but fearful respect, and his continued attempt to place himself as Dumbledore's 'man in the know'. To me, a person who thrived only on self-loathing and the desire for everyone to hate him would not behave in the manner of Snape when it came to getting ahead. For example with the Minister of Magic, Dumbledore, and others in positions of power who could elevate him as an individual. In that way he was very much like Lucius Malfoy, imo.

I believe his self-loathing was waring with his natural desire for greatness (which he'd had since a young man) caused him to be very bitter, because he was unable to garner the respect and position he desired. This is why certain things sent him into a tailspin: being called a coward; Neville's boggart; Harry seeing his negative memories, Lily falling in love with James, Harry using his spells against him, and here is the rub: James using his spell against him when the majority of the whole student body was using it as well - a classic example of his juxtaposition in dealing with respect and tailspinning, imo.

I don't feel Snape caused himself to become someone everyone wanted to hate after what he'd done to assist in Lily's death and her subsequent death. I feel he was someone that people naturally disliked from the beginning. He had always been unpopular; he'd never taken care of his person; he adopted an attitude and friends that would increase his unpopular situation and embraced those things while eschewing the opportunity he had to turn the table around for himself. That is because he had a popular friend, who was well liked and dumping all of the other things that were making him unpopular would have helped turn things around for him, imo. To me, it all comes down to choices, not just for Voldemort, but for everyone, including Snape. Snape made a series of very bad choices and there were consequences to be faced as a result.

In view of how Snape is drawn, I find this a believable description of his psychology. He is a very damaged person.

Like Voldemort and Bella; Greyback and Lupin, Sirius and Mundungus. It all comes down to what you choose to do about it though, don't you think?

Well, I dunno. I'm sure Albus told him he was being a real prat on occasion. :relax:

The distinction is that Albus did not belittle and degrade Lily before Snape. He did not belittle and degrade Snape comparatively with Lily either. It would seem that the only time Dumbledore ever spoke to Snape about Lily was the evening after her death (which wasn't the nicest - 'her eyes, you recall precisely her eyes) - but it was not degrading of either of them. I feel that is true because of Dumbledore's later remark when Snape issued the doe: "after all this time". So if they had been speaking about it constantly he would not have said that, imo. But Dumbledore knew anyway, imo, he counted on it.

So Snape was not put through this particular hell that he put others through, imo. Belittling people is not nice, but most people can handle it in the long run, imo. However, I feel belittling and degrading their dead loved ones before them is beyond the scope of what a reasonable person should (and often can) withstand emotionally. It was especially terrible for Harry who didn't have a chance to get to know his mother and father and knew little to nothing about them. Yet, they were his greatest desire and losing them, his greatest pain, and hearing of them, his greatest joy. One can constructively tell of the "tall tales" of the youth of his parents in such a way that would have had Harry reeling with laughter and feeling utter joy - at the same time realizing they were not perfect and privy to all of the footfalls of mankind.

"Oh your mum used to needle me endlessly about my wrong doing; she was overboard, but a wonderful girl" - reminds Harry of Hermione - and he can laugh and still think of her in a good light. However, "your mother was a filthy little mudblood" doesn't quite have the same effect. To Snape's credit, he gave it the old college try when he died (a day late and a dollar short - but an attempt nonetheless). In the memories, Harry could take home different takes on his mother and father in relation to all that he'd heard Snape say about them because I feel Snape revealed the depth of his jealousy and petty behavior as well as his own culpability. But this was after years of humiliation, anguish and pain applied by Snape toward Harry in this regard - unnecessarily, imo. And even within the memories, Snape couldn't help himself from continuing to show himself as behaving like a very small man, imo; I speak of the scene in which he stands degrading Harry and his dad before Dumbledore - a completely useless and unnecessary scene to include except to send the message that he still loathed them both very much and offer his opinion in an extremely nasty fashion, imo - further, advising that he would do so before anybody - even Dumbledore. Snape ignored Dumbledore's response, imo, but I did not, and I don't feel Harry did either: what Dumbledore said in essence, imo, was: you are behaving like the smallest and pettiest of men Snape, in comparison to all of your academic peers, including myself. A message completely lost on Snape, imo.

In seriousness, I would respectfully disagree with the conclusion because Snape actually left the DEs and moved to try to make up for what he had done.

I honestly don't see how what I said about his character goes against that notion.

I do agree that he likely felt self-loathing, but I feel it was at war with his arrogance and his quest to be seen as someone important. Hence Snape's behavior in the classroom where he did not wish for the kids to show hatred toward him, but fearful respect, and his continued attempt to place himself as Dumbledore's 'man in the know'. To me, a person who thrived only on self-loathing and the desire for everyone to hate him would not behave in the manner of Snape when it came to getting ahead. For example with the Minister of Magic, Dumbledore, and others in positions of power who could elevate him as an individual. In that way he was very much like Lucius Malfoy, imo.

I truly and honestly don't even see the reference you are trying to make here. I've known several people like Snape, down to the idiocy as a young man and subsequent tries to change. It's what helps shape my opinion of the character.
I don't feel Snape was arrogant - I think he was good at what he did, knew that fact, and didn't think more highly of himself than he ought to. That's pride, not arrogance. Oh, I'm having flashbacks to a man named Darcy... :love:
:lol: Sorry, you lost me there for a moment. *ahem*
I think it's natural for a teacher to want their students' respect. And I think that regardless what the teacher's behavior is, a student should respect them. There are times when I feel a student getting out of line is justifiable, but for the most part I believe respect should be in place. So I can't fault him for wanting his students to have a healthy fear of the (basically) chemicals they were working with while under his care. Though I think others could have handled the situations with more finesse, you can't deny that playing around with some of the potions those students made would be monumentally stupid and I can't fault Snape for dealing with those situations in the best way he could. I can't see it in his character that he would coddle students, or anyone really. And we see McGonagall get tough on students who aren't giving their work 100% of their focus as well because misapplied magic can be dangerous.
Snape was Dumbledore's "man in the know" - why shouldn't some people know that? It wasn't some fake attempt to seem more important than he was. It was simply fact. Again, that's not arrogant because it's true. Not an exaggeration.
As to Snape "getting ahead"...you've lost me. He didn't try to "get ahead". His place was by Dumbledore's side doing whatever Dumbledore asked of him. End of story. I don't understand what you are referring to there.

I believe his self-loathing was waring with his natural desire for greatness (which he'd had since a young man) caused him to be very bitter, because he was unable to garner the respect and position he desired. This is why certain things sent him into a tailspin: being called a coward; Neville's boggart; Harry seeing his negative memories, Lily falling in love with James, Harry using his spells against him, and here is the rub: James using his spell against him when the majority of the whole student body was using it as well - a classic example of his juxtaposition in dealing with respect and tailspinning, imo.

I never saw him as having a desire for greatness - I saw him as trying to impress the girl he loved the only way he really seemed to know how based on how he was brought up. It takes a strong person to rise above the way they were raised and change their ideals and values. Sadly, it took Lily's death to spur Severus in that direction, but it happened. I don't think as an adult he desired to be above where he was at. What he was doing was worthwhile to him, because it was in memory of Lily and his life's mission was to do anything and everything to help rectify what could be rectified from his mistake.
Like any other human, I think Snape just had his moments where he lost control of himself. I don't think it makes him a worse person than it made anyone else in the series who did it.

I don't feel Snape caused himself to become someone everyone wanted to hate after what he'd done to assist in Lily's death and her subsequent death. I feel he was someone that people naturally disliked from the beginning. He had always been unpopular; he'd never taken care of his person; he adopted an attitude and friends that would increase his unpopular situation and embraced those things while eschewing the opportunity he had to turn the table around for himself. That is because he had a popular friend, who was well liked and dumping all of the other things that were making him unpopular would have helped turn things around for him, imo. To me, it all comes down to choices, not just for Voldemort, but for everyone, including Snape. Snape made a series of very bad choices and there were consequences to be faced as a result.

I can't fault a little boy who is ten or eleven years old for not having good hygiene - that is a fault I give to parents alone. His clothing and lack of taking proper care of himself is directly influenced by his parents and how they did or didn't take care of him.
As for always being unpopular...well, goodness, that's just mean to fault him for other people looking at him for the first time and not liking him, as it seemed to happen with James and Sirius.
I don't believe Severus adopted the pureblood attitude; his mother raised him with it. He was an only child who obviously hardly saw other children, being raised by a pureblood witch who likely steeped her son in pureblood ideology. Then he was sorted into a house which did the same and at the time he sadly wasn't strong enough to turn away from it.

But like you said, it's choices that matter, and turn away he did.

Hope no-one minds me butting in with my views - I haven't posted much on this thread recently, either.

Posted by wickedwickedboy
I don't feel Snape caused himself to become someone everyone wanted to hate after what he'd done to assist in Lily's death and her subsequent death. I feel he was someone that people naturally disliked from the beginning. He had always been unpopular; he'd never taken care of his person; he adopted an attitude and friends that would increase his unpopular situation and embraced those things while eschewing the opportunity he had to turn the table around for himself. That is because he had a popular friend, who was well liked and dumping all of the other things that were making him unpopular would have helped turn things around for him, imo. To me, it all comes down to choices, not just for Voldemort, but for everyone, including Snape. Snape made a series of very bad choices and there were consequences to be faced as a result.

I won't deny that some (indeed, many) of Snape's choices were bad, but I don't see his unpopularity being solely rooted in his own choices.

For a start, the "never taking care of his person" issue - it's made very clear that he wasn't "adored" by his parents, like James, and at least part of his unkempt appearance, pre-Hogwarts (i.e. his ill-fitting, badly-matched clothes) were the result of poverty and neglect. Yes, that doesn't entirely excuse him not washing his hair, but he was clearly not encouraged to take care of his appearance at home.

It's also made clear in The Prince's Tale that his "unpopularity" with the Marauders was initiated merely by his saying that he thought Lily had "best be in Slytherin" - you may feel that this was an offensive statement, inviting unpopularity, but I certainly don't.

I also feel a bit uncomfortable with the idea that certain people are "naturally" disliked "from the beginning" and that this is "proof" of their inherent unpleasantness - that notion, to me, seems a bit like a bully's charter. Luna, Neville, even Harry himself at times seem to "naturally" inspire dislike "from the beginning" with a lot of people, and I was rather under the impression that ostracising people because there's something you instinctively find odd about them (in other words, "because they're there") is one of the things the books seek to discourage.

Not that this excuses him befriending emergent DEs or calling people Mudbloods, but with the being unpopular/involvement with Dark Arts cause-effect relationship, I do think it's a moot point which was the chicken and which was the egg.

And Snape's being accustomed to and accepting of unpopularity turned out to be a huge boon to the Order, anyway - can you think of any other character in the Order who would agree to show a Dark Mark off in public, [re]join the DE or kill Dumbledore, if the cause demanded it? That, for me, is what makes Snape such a star - he's prepared to do the unglamorous dirty work that will not win him popularity and glory, indeed which will make him hated and reviled by his own side, if that's what it takes to bring Voldemort down (I also think this is an argument against the view of him as being an arrogant man, desperate for glory and status). Arguably, it was Snape's talent for unpopularity which won the war.


I believe his self-loathing was waring with his natural desire for greatness (which he'd had since a young man) caused him to be very bitter, because he was unable to garner the respect and position he desired. This is why certain things sent him into a tailspin: being called a coward; Neville's boggart; Harry seeing his negative memories, Lily falling in love with James, Harry using his spells against him, and here is the rub: James using his spell against him when the majority of the whole student body was using it as well - a classic example of his juxtaposition in dealing with respect and tailspinning, imo.

I respect your view, but I don't see any arrogance or desire for greatness in any of this.

I think it was natural to feel pain at being called a coward at the end of HBP, in the context - he'd just had to do something incredibly brave and extremely distatsteful, i.e. kill someone he respected and revered, at risk of ripping his own soul.

Re Neville's Boggart - What teacher would like to feel that a colleague had encouraged students to mock him publicly? I don't it this is arrogance to feel angry and touchy about this. And, in any case, I don't believe it is ever stated definitively that Snape's anger (in general, or aimed at Lupin in particular) in PoA was because of the Boggart incident. My recollection is that it is said that the students thought that the Boggart incident is what had made Snape more resentful generally and of Lupin in particular. I've always thought this was misdirection, to cover up the real reason for his increased touchiness - his resentment that Dumbledore is employing a man he suspects of being in league with the man he believes betrayed the woman he loved.

Again, I don't think it's unreasonable for Snape to feel angry at Harry for snooping through his private memories.


"Oh your mum used to needle me endlessly about my wrong doing; she was overboard, but a wonderful girl" - reminds Harry of Hermione - and he can laugh and still think of her in a good light. However, "your mother was a filthy little mudblood" doesn't quite have the same effect.

Snape never tells Harry that his mother was a "filthy little mudblood" and, indeed, since he put that particular memory in the Pensieve explicitly to hide it from Harry, I don't see how he can be accused of deliberately giving that perception of Lily to Harry.

To Snape's credit, he gave it the old college try when he died (a day late and a dollar short - but an attempt nonetheless). In the memories, Harry could take home different takes on his mother and father in relation to all that he'd heard Snape say about them

As far as I remember, he never said anything about Lily to Harry, so I don't see how his posthumous memories could possibly have given a "different take" on her.

Yes, in view of the fact that Harry never knew his parents and desperately wishes he had, if this were real life, it would have been a nice thing of Snape to do to tell Harry that Lily had been a friend and share his memories of her with him. However, in view of the fact that Snape's and Lily's friendship was a shock plot twist which was deliberately withheld by JKR (apart from a few very subtle, ambiguous hints) until the end of the 7th book, I don't believe that Snape's refusal to talk about Lily is anything more than a literary device. Nor do I believe that it is any indication of his character, any more than I believe that Harry's at times apparent total lack of curiosity about his mother (e.g. although he asks lots of question about the Marauders, he apparently never bothers asking anyone any questions about his mother or who her friends were in, and in SWM, when he finds himself in the exam hall, he's more interested in looking for Pettigrew than he is in looking for his mother!) is supposed to be indicative of callousness, indifference or misogyny on Harry's part. IMO, people in general don't talk about Lily throughout HP, because if they did, it would give away an important plot twist, that's all. Is it possible to draw inferences about one character's refusal to talk about her, while overlooking everybody else's refusal?

And even within the memories, Snape couldn't help himself from continuing to show himself as behaving like a very small man, imo; I speak of the scene in which he stands degrading Harry and his dad before Dumbledore - a completely useless and unnecessary scene to include except to send the message that he still loathed them both very much and offer his opinion in an extremely nasty fashion, imo - further, advising that he would do so before anybody - even Dumbledore. Snape ignored Dumbledore's response, imo, but I did not, and I don't feel Harry did either: what Dumbledore said in essence, imo, was: you are behaving like the smallest and pettiest of men Snape, in comparison to all of your academic peers, including myself. A message completely lost on Snape, imo.

I respect your view, but I read that memory completely differently - it proved that Snape wasn't two-faced. Whatever his faults, he didn't bully Harry in the privacy of his classroom whilst pretending to his employer and his colleagues that his conduct was better than it was. And it revealed the openness and intimacy he had with Dumbledore.

I don't feel Snape was arrogant - I think he was good at what he did, knew that fact, and didn't think more highly of himself than he ought to. That's pride, not arrogance.

In my judgment, insolent pride is the same as arrogance and I feel that is how Snape's behavior was portrayed in the canon. He was not only proud of his personal achievements, he wished for others to extol them and at the same time, wished to show that he was superior in knowledge. For example, Lupin was degraded before the class in his assignment grading and syllabus. I feel JKR cleverly wrote this in a manner that allowed the reader to know that Snape was not merely portraying arrogance, but under false pretense – akin to Lockheart, but not as flagrantly.

Snape was Dumbledore's "man in the know" - why shouldn't some people know that? It wasn't some fake attempt to seem more important than he was. It was simply fact. Again, that's not arrogant because it's true. Not an exaggeration.

I feel that Snape was faced with admitting that he was not Dumbledore’s “man in the know” to the degree to which he envisioned. He complained directly to Dumbledore in this regard, accusing him of lacking trust and withholding information that he shared with another. Dumbledore was quite frank in explaining to Snape that he could never be his “man in the know”, not only because Dumbledore had no "man in the know" (he refused to put all of his eggs in any one basket), but especially due to Snape’s position as a double spy and close proximity to Voldemort.

I never saw him as having a desire for greatness - I saw him as trying to impress the girl he loved the only way he really seemed to know how based on how he was brought up

I was referring to JKR’s statement that Snape was vulnerable and insecure, like wormtail, and sought to be a powerful and impressive person.

As for always being unpopular...well, goodness, that's just mean to fault him for other people looking at him for the first time and not liking him

I respect your view, however, I referred to 5th year when he was shown to be highly unpopular in school – an outcast of sorts – and by then the student body at looked at him quite a lot, so it went well beyond a first impression. One of course expects an individual to be unpopular with their enemies, but I meant the rest of the student body who also held him as unpopular. Indeed, all of the budding Death Eaters were likely unpopular, like Draco, Crabbe and Goyle in their day. But on top of it Snape appeared to be a bit more of an outcast due to his personal hygiene, attitude and behavior.

But the fact remains that he was unpopular when young, for whatever reason, so he didn’t have to do anything special to remain unpopular and disliked throughout his life. A change would be for Snape to have become likeable and/or popular. So that is why I disagreed that he behaved the way he did due to a desire for people to hate him. I don’t think he wanted hate; I feel he wanted respect – immense respect - which would make him feel powerful and impressive.

Hope no-one minds me butting in with my views - I haven't posted much on this thread recently, either.

No one is ever butting in; and personally, I love hearing your viewpoint :tu:

I won't deny that some (indeed, many) of Snape's choices were bad, but I don't see his unpopularity being solely rooted in his own choices.

Actually, that was not the point I was attempting to make. With respect to his youthful unpopularity, my only point was that it existed and as such, he would not have had to change anything about himself as an adult to continue to be unpopular and largely disliked.

I also feel a bit uncomfortable with the idea that certain people are "naturally" disliked "from the beginning" and that this is "proof" of their inherent unpleasantness - that notion, to me, seems a bit like a bully's charter. Luna, Neville, even Harry himself at times seem to "naturally" inspire dislike "from the beginning" with a lot of people, and I was rather under the impression that ostracising people because there's something you instinctively find odd about them (in other words, "because they're there") is one of the things the books seek to discourage.

I agree and I believe that was shown in the case of Snape as well. The entire student body were not personal enemies of Snape. Just as the entire student body were not personal enemies of Neville, Luna or Draco in Harry's day. There is a distinction between the unpopularity of Neville and Draco however. When Draco and gang stood around tormenting Neville, the response of those around was unpleasant toward Draco and gang. On the other hand, when MadEye turned Draco into a ferret and tossed him around in a humiliating and degrading fashion, everyone cheered and laughed.

Snape was unpopular like Draco, for the same reasons - calling others Mudblood, using dark magic on students and finding it a laugh and hanging with a group that were planning to join up with the evil dark lord. In addition, Snape had other problems that would have likely seen him as a bit of an outcast in any case (like Neville) - but as we saw, Neville eventually made good friends and grew into his own, so those types of problems can be overcome. A fascination with the dark arts, Voldemort and the DE values cannot be overcome in the same sense, because people can forgive unwashed hair, but they are unwilling to forgive one's desire to join a group going around killing people - or for calling them or their friends and acquaintances "Mudbloods".

And Snape's being accustomed to and accepting of unpopularity turned out to be a huge boon to the Order, anyway - can you think of any other character in the Order who would agree to show a Dark Mark off in public, [re]join the DE or kill Dumbledore, if the cause demanded it? That, for me, is what makes Snape such a star - he's prepared to do the unglamorous dirty work that will not win him popularity and glory, indeed which will make him hated and reviled by his own side, if that's what it takes to bring Voldemort down (I also think this is an argument against the view of him as being an arrogant man, desperate for glory and status). Arguably, it was Snape's talent for unpopularity which won the war.

I respect and appreciate reading your viewpoint. I would pretty much disagree with the idea that Snape was the only one who "would" do what he did (although if you'd written "could" I would be more in agreement.) In addition, I disagree that Snape did the things you said, solely to bring the dark lord down (for me it was also a means of 'making up for' in his mind) - as well as his work being the most dirty and unglorious - there were tales of far more "dirty" work being done by others in canon, imo. Futher, Snape's work was glorified in the end - as he hoped it would be in life - speaking to his arrogance and quest for power, imo. I would disagree with the implication (if it is being made) that Snape would care one whit if he were hated and reviled by his own side - he didn't want their love, he wanted their respect, imo, and ultimately he knew he would have it, imo, one way or the other.). Finally, I don't think Snape's work won the war - not by a long shot. Although I would agree that his efforts were of great assistance like those of the many others who participated.

Nonetheless, my conclusion about his unpopularity was solely to indicate that it was ongoing from youth through adulthood and as such, nothing new for Snape, imo.

I respect your view, but I don't see any arrogance or desire for greatness in any of this.

I addressed this in my post in response to Mexicant above. :)

I think it was natural to feel pain at being called a coward at the end of HBP, in the context - he'd just had to do something incredibly brave and extremely distatsteful, i.e. kill someone he respected and revered, at risk of ripping his own soul.

I agree - but Snape's response to it was extreme both times he was called a coward in that scene, imo. In the first case, he became extremely vindictive and searched about to find a means of hurting his accuser in the most painful way possible, imo. And on the second occassion, he took vengeance by physically whipping his accuser in a harsh manner (HBP Flight of the Prince). Snape did these things , knowing that his accuser had no way of knowing he'd just killed someone he'd respected and revered at risk of ripping his own soul, imo. This, knowing that his accuser considered him the vilest of men, a loyal Death Eater, who had just killed his beloved mentor, imo. I feel a more humble and selfless man; a less vindictive person, would have taken that into consideration and tempered his response.

Re Neville's Boggart - What teacher would like to feel that a colleague had encouraged students to mock him publicly? I don't it this is arrogance to feel angry and touchy about this. And, in any case, I don't believe it is ever stated definitively that Snape's anger (in general, or aimed at Lupin in particular) in PoA was because of the Boggart incident. My recollection is that it is said that the students thought that the Boggart incident is what had made Snape more resentful generally and of Lupin in particular. I've always thought this was misdirection, to cover up the real reason for his increased touchiness - his resentment that Dumbledore is employing a man he suspects of being in league with the man he believes betrayed the woman he loved.

I respect your view, however, the canon does say that Snape became more vindictive and isolent in his behavior toward Neville Longbottom, not Lupin. Indeed, the fact that Snape was Neville's boggart (greatest fear) could not be helped. To overcome it, it had to be turned into something funny. It is incomprehensible to me that focus would be placed on Snape's resultant feelings of humiliation about this when it was his attitude, words and behavior which caused such deeply ingrained fear in one of his students in the first place. Was Neville to be yet again singled out in class, told that his fear of Snape was so wrongful that he must try to overcome it in private - even though it had been wrought via public humiliation by Snape? It makes no sense to me that Neville should suffer this further humiliation, belittlement and shown to be inept yet again - deplorably and defeatingly so - i.e., he can't even get his innate fear right. In my judgment, that would have further damaged Neville's growth and self esteem. Snape depicted wearing a dress and carrying a handbag was fairly mild considering the wealth of options available that would make Snape funny, imo - he could have been a laughingstock if, for instance, my own transformation idea was used. :lol:. So relatively speaking, it was an attempt to undo damage that Snape himself had wrought, imo, and it was successful. The point was not to mock Snape (or the bear or the spider), but to mock "fear" and the Boggart's attempt to frighten. If Snape made himself feared, then like the fear inducing bear or spider, he must be transformed into something that can render laughter to defeat the Boggart.

Again, I don't think it's unreasonable for Snape to feel angry at Harry for snooping through his private memories.

I absolutely agree; but we have in canon a more reasonable response to finding someone snooping through your private pensieve in Dumbledore. But more options were open to Snape, imo. The damage was done; a strong set down and detention was the worst punishment available to him as a professor behaving appropriately in my opinion - and if he wished, he could recommend expulsion (which is going too far to me, but an option nonetheless). However, an incorrect and inappropriate response is to shove the child with all of your might to the ground, belittle their parent, threaten them and send them away with a jar of cockroaches flying at their head, imo. This, I feel, was done precisely because Snape's self-esteem had been trounced, both in Harry having envisioned a hex war wherein Snape was the loser (in the sense of Draco having been the loser in the Sectumsempra hex war with Harry - not to say that Draco or Snape were solely in the wrong) - and also because of the whole Mudblood portion which Harry would not understand - but Snape, being the type of person he was, would not take that into consideration, but rather his own feelings on the matter, imo.

Snape never tells Harry that his mother was a "filthy little mudblood" and, indeed, since he put that particular memory in the Pensieve explicitly to hide it from Harry, I don't see how he can be accused of deliberately giving that perception of Lily to Harry.

I would respectfully disagree. Snape called her a Filthy Little Mudblood right before Harry's eyes and he knew that. The fact that Harry was totally in the wrong in seeing the memory wasn't erase the fact that he had seen it. I did not say that Snape deliberately placed the perception; I said Snape deliberately allowed Harry to retain it. In HBP Harry declared that Snape hated his mother too; he'd called her a Mudblood. As we know from Harry's response when Draco said this to Hermione; he considered it one of the gravest forms of belittlement known to mankind.

We can easily say that of course Harry did not think of his mother as a "mudblood" and so the relevance of this perception was pure negativity toward Snape. But this is exactly the same as when Snape called James his "Filthy Father" before him - Harry didn't think his father was filthy either and so again it could be seen to reflect poorly, solely upon Snape. However, in both cases, if one places themselves in Harry's shoes, I think it becomes a little easier to see that the pain of hearing one's parents spoken about in those terms is both anger and pain inducing. I feel this is very similar to Voldemort, who during the final battle compared Lily to a 'Mudblood' and a 'cockroach that he'd stamped out'. Sure, on the one hand, who cares, after all, it was Voldemort who said it and he is despicable, evil and a dark lord. But on the other hand, Harry can only feel anguish at the words on behalf of his mum - although he was beyond anger at that point in the tale.

The thing is, Snape was supposed to be better than Voldemort - a good sider and Order member - so saying these things and allowing such a perception to lie, merely out of jealousy and loathing, humiliation and arrogance, was not appropriate, imo. Before one contends that Snape had to allow such things to lie due to his position, I would forestall that particular argument in this instance by reminding that Harry was supposed to believe that Snape was working for the Order at the time (in story), and against Voldemort. Dumbledore took pains to convince the Order members, as well as Harry, that they should trust Snape. Additionally, we known that Snape did not wish for Harry to have any clue of his true feelings about Lily - again, for purely selfish reasons, imo, which would also serve as a reason for his saying nothing. But as I will explain below, Snape could have still achieved this goal while this and other considerations in that regard remained intact.

As far as I remember, he never said anything about Lily to Harry, so I don't see how his posthumous memories could possibly have given a "different take" on her.

Harry said Snape hated his mother based on viewing SWM (HBP). After the memories, he didn't believe that anymore, imo. I would say that gave Harry a different take on how Snape viewed his mother. I feel the same about Harry's take on how Snape viewed his father as well. (If you thought I meant Harry himself, I apologize for not making it clear I meant Harry's view of Snape's take. :lol:)

Yes, in view of the fact that Harry never knew his parents and desperately wishes he had, if this were real life, it would have been a nice thing of Snape to do to tell Harry that Lily had been a friend and share his memories of her with him. However, in view of the fact that Snape's and Lily's friendship was a shock plot twist which was deliberately withheld by JKR (apart from a few very subtle, ambiguous hints) until the end of the 7th book, I don't believe that Snape's refusal to talk about Lily is anything more than a literary device. Nor do I believe that it is any indication of his character, any more than I believe that Harry's at times apparent total lack of curiosity about his mother (e.g. although he asks lots of question about the Marauders, he apparently never bothers asking anyone any questions about his mother or who her friends were in, and in SWM, when he finds himself in the exam hall, he's more interested in looking for Pettigrew than he is in looking for his mother!) is supposed to be indicative of callousness, indifference or misogyny on Harry's part. IMO, people in general don't talk about Lily throughout HP, because if they did, it would give away an important plot twist, that's all. Is it possible to draw inferences about one character's refusal to talk about her, while overlooking everybody else's refusal?

I respect your view, but it is an overbroad solution relative to the point I was making. I don't feel that Snape should have told Harry all about his friendship or anything at all except that calling her a Mudblood was a slip of the tongue (without whys and hows). Spoken slyly, it would lead to even more ambiguity for the reader, so JKR could have done it, imo, and even made Harry feel that Snape was lying in his POV and that Snape actually hated Lily. However, it would have been out of character for Snape, imo, to offer anything even approaching an apology or explanation for his behavior, past or present. That, imo, is why it was not done. Snape was not interested in belittling Lily before Harry - he had no desire to do any such thing, imo.

As it was, Snape saying in the memory "I didn't mean to...(call you a Mudblood)" was wholly insufficient in explaining why he'd done it - more importantly how he could do such a thing to a girl he purported to be friends with and who he claimed to fancy. There is simply no "good" construction one can put on Snape's saying that - even the most favorable ones I've heard to date: 'he was speaking on practiced automatic (having said it to others so much) out of jealousy, humiliation, momentary anger at Lily, anger at Sirius and James, degredation, self-loathing, a product of his father's behavior and torment, a product of his friends deep and scaring influence, because buried in his subconscious he actually felt Lily a Mudblood, but made an exception for her because he fancied her and liked her as a person; the devil made him do it...etc." I've heard them all. In my judgment, none justify a purported friend who loves you as a person and fancies you, using a prejudicial statement aimed at you 'Mudblood' - in such a highly derrogatory manner 'filthy little'. Sure it hurt James, Lily, and likely many in the crowd to hear it, but what does it say about Snape? I don't mean the justifications and reasons, I mean what does it say about him as the person he was - the person he'd become for whatever reason? The memories with Lily didn't help to resolve any of that in Harry's mind, imo, what helped was his later telling P. Black not to call Hermione a Mudblood. It still failed as a complete explanation in as far as Snape's take on Lily, but it did allow for the "root" - the status of inferiority that I feel Snape had placed on Muggleborns to be addressed. That is, if nothing else, Snape finally understood what the real problem had been in his saying that and it had nothing at all to do with Lily, imo. That was the only part relevant for Harry and so all we were given, imo.

In my judgment, insolent pride is the same as arrogance and I feel that is how Snape's behavior was portrayed in the canon. He was not only proud of his personal achievements, he wished for others to extol them and at the same time, wished to show that he was superior in knowledge. For example, Lupin was degraded before the class in his assignment grading and syllabus. I feel JKR cleverly wrote this in a manner that allowed the reader to know that Snape was not merely portraying arrogance, but under false pretense – akin to Lockheart, but not as flagrantly.

I can see why you hold this view and it's perfectly consistent with the text, but I read it very differently. Yes, Snape does degrade Lupin in front of the class and imply (inaccurately and unfairly) that his teaching has been poor, but I don't feel that this is because he wishes the students to perceive his own knowledge as superior to Lupin's. In my view, it is because Snape is doing everything in his power at that time to undermine Lupin and get him sacked, because he believes that Lupin is not to be trusted, with the students in general and Harry in particular. For me, the clearest demonstration of this is when he takes the wolfsbane potion to Lupin in his office and seems angry that Lupin is there alone with Harry (and, yes, I know that that can be interpreted very differently, too - that, to me, is the beauty of Snape's character - that it is so ambiguous and lends itself to vastly different interpretations by different readers).

Yes, he's wrong in this belief and, yes, he does show a kind of arrogance, in that he is absolutely 100% convinced that he is right and Dumbledore is wrong about Lupin (IMO strikingly similar to Harry's arrogance in continuing to believe that he is 100% right about Snape and Dumbledore is wrong, although admittedly Harry doesn't take that extra arrogant step of trying to go over DD's head and take matters into his own hands, as Snape does with Lupin), but I don't believe it's pride in his own DADA knowledge, let alone a wish for the students to perceive his own DADA knowledge as superior to Lupin's. As I see it, at this point he's attacking Lupin, not trying to big himself up .

And I can't think of any other examples of him (adult Snape, I mean) wishing for others to recognise and extol his achievements. I don't believe the Order of the Merlin was ever an issue, for example, at the end of PoA - IMO he wanted Sirius dead because he believed (wrongly) that he betrayed Lily, and that's it.

OK, he does smile when Draco asks him why he doesn't apply for the job of Headmaster the first time DD is suspended, but that could be for any number of reasons (amusement that Draco is sucking up in such an inept, unsubtle way? amusement at the irony that Draco thinks he'd be the sort of headmaster who'd support blood prejudice and the Dark Arts, when actually he'd do nothing of the sort?). It's part of the misdirection that encourages us to believe that he's anti-Dumbledore and pro-Voldemort, wen actually he's not.

And when Umbridge broaches the question of his application for the DADA post in the class inspection in OotP, giving him a golden opportunity to slate Dumbledore and push his own chances of promotion, he gets angry and tells her to discuss it with Dumbledore - is that the action of an arrogant, power-mad, ambitious man? (I know there's the argument that she is alluding to his DE past and he gets angry because he doesn't want that brought out in front of the students/thinks it will harm his standing with the Ministry, but I can't buy that - several of the students aready know he's an ex-DE, as do the Ministry. I read his reaction to Umbridge as outrage at her sly attempts to undermine Dumbledore - the response of a teacher who is loyal and subservient to his headmaster, not a man anxious to do anything for status and respect.)

I was referring to JKR’s statement that Snape was vulnerable and insecure, like wormtail, and sought to be a powerful and impressive person.

I don't think I've read this interview - was she referring to adult Snape or teenage Snape here? I can see this explains why he joined the DE, but unless she has actually specified so, I don't see that it necessarily applies to his aspirations as a Hogwarts teacher.


But the fact remains that he was unpopular when young, for whatever reason, so he didn’t have to do anything special to remain unpopular and disliked throughout his life. A change would be for Snape to have become likeable and/or popular. So that is why I disagreed that he behaved the way he did due to a desire for people to hate him. I don’t think he wanted hate; I feel he wanted respect – immense respect - which would make him feel powerful and impressive.

I am not sure either that he wanted people to hate him. But I don't see him as mad for respect and power - not, at least, beyond what is normal. Most people want to be respected - what's wrong with that?

No one is ever butting in; and personally, I love hearing your viewpoint :tu:

Thanks :) I also love reading your views, which are always very well-argued, even though I frequently disagree with them.

Actually, that was not the point I was attempting to make. With respect to his youthful unpopularity, my only point was that it existed and as such, he would not have had to change anything about himself as an adult to continue to be unpopular and largely disliked.

Ah, I misunderstood you. Sorry.

I respect and appreciate reading your viewpoint. I would pretty much disagree with the idea that Snape was the only one who "would" do what he did (although if you'd written "could" I would be more in agreement.) In addition, I disagree that Snape did the things you said, solely to bring the dark lord down (for me it was also a means of 'making up for' in his mind) - as well as his work being the most dirty and unglorious - there were tales of far more "dirty" work being done by others in canon, imo.

Well, I was perhaps wrong to use superlatives and "only". But I still maintain that his readiness to do unglamorous, unglorious work contrasts with some "good" characters who seem resentful when asked to do unheroic tasks, and suggests he's not in it for the glory.

Futher, Snape's work was glorified in the end - as he hoped it would be in life - speaking to his arrogance and quest for power, imo.

I don't see any evidence that Snape either hoped or sought to have his work "glorified". IMO, he handed his memories to Harry (a) because Dumbledore asked him to tell Harry about the fact that Harry is a Horcrux, as soon as he notices that Voldemort is taking extra care of Nagini. The fact that he repeatedly (to an exent that I found almost tedious) keeps glancing at Nagini in her bubble, then asking to be allowed to "go to the boy" in his final conversation with Voldy, suggests to me that -apart from Lily, obviously, who is always on his mind - DD's instructions are the only thing on his mind in his final moments - not glory, not respect, not posthumous Orders of Merlin. (b) most crucially, because we, the readers, need this information to realise that Snape was on the Order's side really throughout the series, and why.

And also I've not seen any evidence that his work was glorified in the end, except by Harry.

For me, Snape's only real ambitions after Lily's death are the ones which he clearly states in canon "I wish I were dead" and "keep[ing] Lily Potter's son safe".

I would disagree with the implication (if it is being made) that Snape would care one whit if he were hated and reviled by his own side - he didn't want their love, he wanted their respect, imo, and ultimately he knew he would have it, imo, one way or the other.).

I agree that Snape really doesn't care whether he's liked or not. I disagree that he sought their respect.

Finally, I don't think Snape's work won the war - not by a long shot. Although I would agree that his efforts were of great assistance like those of the many others who participated.

OK, I agree I overstated. My point was that Snape's willingness to be unpopular was ultimately a very good thing.

Nonetheless, my conclusion about his unpopularity was solely to indicate that it was ongoing from youth through adulthood and as such, nothing new for Snape, imo.

Yes, I see this - I missed the point earlier, sorry.

Have to stop for lunch. Will try to edit to add comments on your points about Lily later.

At the same time, you have to respect the fact that I saw Snape as characterised exactly the way JKR said she set out to do.

Sure :) but I am of the persuasion that what you see with Snape, in the text, is not always what you get. :relax:

I do accept her opinion of her own character, especially when it comes to factors that I feel readers cannot possibly glean from the books because we don't have his POV. So when Snape does something horrible in canon, I see no point in twisting and reinterpreting his action until I see him in a different light. But I respect your right to your opinion on this also. :)

I respect your posts but very much challenge the view that my individual interpretation of Snape is ‘twisting and reinterpreting his action until I see him in a different light’. I do realise there can be a fine line between Canon Snape and Fanon Snape. But in this thread I attempt to analyse Canon Snape, whose bitterness I would never deny, any more than I would deny his courage, since both are a part of his character, and that, IMO, is made obvious.

Snape’s issues of bitterness (and on occasion, vengefulness) are perfectly apparent in the text. His motives for his actions are not always so easy to nail down. There is so much going on with Snape as a character and so much that JKR simply doesn’t tell us.

Like Voldemort and Bella; Greyback and Lupin, Sirius and Mundungus. It all comes down to what you choose to do about it though, don't you think?

Sure it does :), but personally I happen to think that Snape did rather more to redeem himself than Bella, Voldy or Greyback. ;)

I can see why you hold this view and it's perfectly consistent with the text, but I read it very differently. Yes, Snape does degrade Lupin in front of the class and imply (inaccurately and unfairly) that his teaching has been poor, but I don't feel that this is because he wishes the students to perceive his own knowledge as superior to Lupin's. In my view, it is because Snape is doing everything in his power at that time to undermine Lupin and get him sacked, because he believes that Lupin is not to be trusted, with the students in general and Harry in particular. For me, the clearest demonstration of this is when he takes the wolfsbane potion to Lupin in his office and seems angry that Lupin is there alone with Harry (and, yes, I know that that can be interpreted very differently, too - that, to me, is the beauty of Snape's character - that it is so ambiguous and lends itself to vastly different interpretations by different readers).

Yes, he's wrong in this belief and, yes, he does show a kind of arrogance, in that he is absolutely 100% convinced that he is right and Dumbledore is wrong about Lupin (IMO strikingly similar to Harry's arrogance in continuing to believe that he is 100% right about Snape and Dumbledore is wrong, although admittedly Harry doesn't take that extra arrogant step of trying to go over DD's head and take matters into his own hands, as Snape does with Lupin), but I don't believe it's pride in his own DADA knowledge, let alone a wish for the students to perceive his own DADA knowledge as superior to Lupin's. As I see it, at this point he's attacking Lupin, not trying to big himself up .

I totally agree. :tu:

And I can't think of any other examples of him (adult Snape, I mean) wishing for others to recognise and extol his achievements. I don't believe the Order of the Merlin was ever an issue, for example, at the end of PoA - IMO he wanted Sirius dead because he believed (wrongly) that he betrayed Lily, and that's it.

With hindsight, I believe that is more misdirection from JKR. We are supposed to think, on first reading, that Snape is an arrogant git who both wants Sirius dead and (as the icing on the cake) an Order of Merlin, so he can get all the glory. I actually don't think that any more. I do think he wanted Sirius dead (unfortunately :whistle: ) but not because he gave a stuff about the Order of Merlin.

OK, he does smile when Draco asks him why he doesn't apply for the job of Headmaster the first time DD is suspended, but that could be for any number of reasons (amusement that Draco is sucking up in such an inept, unsubtle way? amusement at the irony that Draco thinks he'd be the sort of headmaster who'd support blood prejudice and the Dark Arts, when actually he'd do nothing of the sort?). It's part of the misdirection that encourages us to believe that he's anti-Dumbledore and pro-Voldemort, when actually he's not.

:agree:

I've always thought Draco was very funny in that scene, btw ... what a sycophantic little prat! :lol: Perhaps Severus thought so too. ;)

And when Umbridge broaches the question of his application for the DADA post in the class inspection in OotP, giving him a golden opportunity to slate Dumbledore and push his own chances of promotion, he gets angry and tells her to discuss it with Dumbledore - is that the action of an arrogant, power-mad, ambitious man? (I know there's the argument that she is alluding to his DE past and he gets angry because he doesn't want that brought out in front of the students/thinks it will harm his standing with the Ministry, but I can't buy that - several of the students aready know he's an ex-DE, as do the Ministry. I read his reaction to Umbridge as outrage at her sly attempts to undermine Dumbledore - the response of a teacher who is loyal and subservient to his headmaster, not a man anxious to do anything for status and respect.)

Totally agree. :agree:

And I just luuuuuuurve how he winds her up in front of Harry and DA, later on. :evil:

"Yes," (with a smirk) "I should have Veritaserum ready for you ... in about a week." :rotfl:

If that doesn't prove what he really thinks of Delores and her repugnant methods, I don't know what does. ;)

As it was, Snape saying in the memory "I didn't mean to...(call you a Mudblood)" was wholly insufficient in explaining why he'd done it - more importantly how he could do such a thing to a girl he purported to be friends with and who he claimed to fancy.

Yes, Snape did make a grave mistake and he being utterly humiliated at that time was not excuse enough to call a girl he loved and one who was his best friend a "mudblood" IMO.

But I wonder what that makes James, because it looks like he too was not able to respect the friendship of a girl he liked very much, perhaps even loved at that time and wanted to date so badly that he kept asking her at very opportunity, when he kept attacking Snape because "he exists", even without the humiliation/rage and embarrassment that made Snape call Lily a "mudblood" that day.

Snape was Lily's best friend and James and Co., it seems were not able to respect that friendship at any time, while Snape crossed the line one time and got the whole friendship broken IMO.

But then I presume James was lucky; Lily did not seem to mind her friend being attacked too much, while she did very much mind being called a mudblood by Snape, who looked in danger of having his underpants removed in front of the whole school at that time IMO.

In my judgment, none justify a purported friend who loves you as a person and fancies you, using a prejudicial statement aimed at you 'Mudblood' - in such a highly derrogatory manner 'filthy little'. Sure it hurt James, Lily, and likely many in the crowd to hear it, but what does it say about Snape? I don't mean the justifications and reasons, I mean what does it say about him as the person he was - the person he'd become for whatever reason?

We have talked a lot of how Snape was unable to accept James Potter, even though he was Lily's husband. Lily, whom Snape loved and changed for and so because of that Snap[e's love itself is called into question. But I feel James too never respected Lily's love for Snape; love as a friend only, but still, he was her best friend and I feel James was unable to accept and respect her friendship with another boy, and was constantly trying his best to put Snape down and even break their friendship, perhaps and like Dumbledore said (OOTP), create wounds that were too deep to be healed IMO.

On the contrary, we never see Snape breaking Lily's happiness by trying to harm James IMO. I would like to know what that says about James?

I can see why you hold this view and it's perfectly consistent with the text, but I read it very differently. Yes, Snape does degrade Lupin in front of the class and imply (inaccurately and unfairly) that his teaching has been poor, but I don't feel that this is because he wishes the students to perceive his own knowledge as superior to Lupin's. In my view, it is because Snape is doing everything in his power at that time to undermine Lupin and get him sacked, because he believes that Lupin is not to be trusted, with the students in general and Harry in particular. For me, the clearest demonstration of this is when he takes the wolfsbane potion to Lupin in his office and seems angry that Lupin is there alone with Harry (and, yes, I know that that can be interpreted very differently, too - that, to me, is the beauty of Snape's character - that it is so ambiguous and lends itself to vastly different interpretations by different readers).

Yes, he's wrong in this belief and, yes, he does show a kind of arrogance, in that he is absolutely 100% convinced that he is right and Dumbledore is wrong about Lupin (IMO strikingly similar to Harry's arrogance in continuing to believe that he is 100% right about Snape and Dumbledore is wrong, although admittedly Harry doesn't take that extra arrogant step of trying to go over DD's head and take matters into his own hands, as Snape does with Lupin), but I don't believe it's pride in his own DADA knowledge, let alone a wish for the students to perceive his own DADA knowledge as superior to Lupin's. As I see it, at this point he's attacking Lupin, not trying to big himself up .


I actually think Snape's correct in wanting to get lupin sacked and his suspicions and his conviction that Dumbeldore was wrong about Lupin was also correct IMO.

Lupin was not a traitor. He was not working in secret with Sirius. But, he also never told everything he should have to Dumbedlore when it was certain the Sirius would come for Harry as far as everyone was concerned ("he's at Hogwarts", the guards had heard him say in his sleep in Azkaban, before Sirius broke out) and even after Sirius had broken into Gryffindor Tower with a knife in hand and had even entered Harry's dormitory, Lupin is silent IMO.

While Snape did not know the details, I still think his mistrust and suspicion of Lupin is not misplaced, when we see that Harry would have died that day in Gryffindor Tower had Sirius really intended to kill Harry that day IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

I can see why you hold this view and it's perfectly consistent with the text, but I read it very differently. Yes, Snape does degrade Lupin in front of the class and imply (inaccurately and unfairly) that his teaching has been poor, but I don't feel that this is because he wishes the students to perceive his own knowledge as superior to Lupin's. In my view, it is because Snape is doing everything in his power at that time to undermine Lupin and get him sacked, because he believes that Lupin is not to be trusted, with the students in general and Harry in particular. For me, the clearest demonstration of this is when he takes the wolfsbane potion to Lupin in his office and seems angry that Lupin is there alone with Harry (and, yes, I know that that can be interpreted very differently, too - that, to me, is the beauty of Snape's character - that it is so ambiguous and lends itself to vastly different interpretations by different readers).

I respect your view, but one part of it I don't understand. Even if Snape was successful in undermining Lupin's ability as a professor, why would that get him sacked? He was fulfilling the DADA position, previously held by professors of dubious ability and/or character. The kids had learned nothing and Lupin was bringing them up to speed. Snape would have to show Lupin less capable than Lockheart to have Dumbledore even take notice in terms of academics alone - do you feel Snape thought that was possible?

And when Umbridge broaches the question of his application for the DADA post in the class inspection in OotP, giving him a golden opportunity to slate Dumbledore and push his own chances of promotion, he gets angry and tells her to discuss it with Dumbledore - is that the action of an arrogant, power-mad, ambitious man?

Umbridge was derrogatory in her comments, that is why Snape became angry - not because she offered him a promotion. So I do not really understand what you mean. Snape was well aware she was not going to promote him, any ambitions he had were quashed by her words.

I don't think I've read this interview - was she referring to adult Snape or teenage Snape here? I can see this explains why he joined the DE, but unless she has actually specified so, I don't see that it necessarily applies to his aspirations as a Hogwarts teacher.

Teenage Snape. The examples I gave were to support my conclusion that he still sought power and to be impressive. I do not know if Snape had planned to overtake Voldemort's position as a dark lord - I never understood it to mean that though. In the same way, I didn't mean to say he wanted to usurp Dumbledore's position in some sort of quest for endless power. I think Snape had set his goal (for the time being) on being Dumbledore's #1 man. But Dumbledore didn't have any #1 men because he didn't wish to "put all of his eggs in one basket" - and there were many things he did not share with Snape particularly because he was in such close proximity to Voldemort. But Snape was bothered by this; he brought the issue of his lack of information up twice in canon - both times concerning things that had nothing to do with his work.

I am not sure either that he wanted people to hate him. But I don't see him as mad for respect and power - not, at least, beyond what is normal. Most people want to be respected - what's wrong with that?

Nothing. I was merely explaining what I felt lay behind his behavior. The problem wasn't that Snape sought respect in my judgment; the problem was that he did not try to earn it, but instead attempted to compell it.

Thanks :) I also love reading your views, which are always very well-argued, even though I frequently disagree with them.

:rotfl:.

Well, I was perhaps wrong to use superlatives and "only". But I still maintain that his readiness to do unglamorous, unglorious work contrasts with some "good" characters who seem resentful when asked to do unheroic tasks, and suggests he's not in it for the glory.

I am not following you on this. Who was resentful? Also, how do we know Snape wasn't resentful? I'm sure everytime he had to hob knob with Voldemort who'd killed the woman he had emotions for - and every time a scheme was put into motion to kill someone that triggered the memory of his own past actions resulting in Lily's death, he resented his position as a spy. But he did it anyway because in the end Voldemort would fall and it was what he promised to do in honor of Lily's sacrifice. He remained loyal to his promise with regard to his spying, imo.

I don't see any evidence that Snape either hoped or sought to have his work "glorified". IMO, he handed his memories to Harry (a) because Dumbledore asked him to tell Harry about the fact that Harry is a Horcrux, as soon as he notices that Voldemort is taking extra care of Nagini. The fact that he repeatedly (to an exent that I found almost tedious) keeps glancing at Nagini in her bubble, then asking to be allowed to "go to the boy" in his final conversation with Voldy, suggests to me that -apart from Lily, obviously, who is always on his mind - DD's instructions are the only thing on his mind in his final moments - not glory, not respect, not posthumous Orders of Merlin. (b) most crucially, because we, the readers, need this information to realise that Snape was on the Order's side really throughout the series, and why.

I think we were looking at this distinctly. I was speaking about after Voldemort's death. Snape wasn't planning to continue pretending to be a loyal Death Eater if he survived, imo, and spend the rest of his life in Azkaban. Imo, he would have intended to have it understood that he'd been working for the good side all along. That is what happened and what would have happened if he were alive because Harry still would have told everyone the truth. There was a definite chance for Snape to seem impressive and have his efforts glorified in the future if he survived, imo.

And also I've not seen any evidence that his work was glorified in the end, except by Harry.

Harry and Ginny, to be exact. But according to JKR the world would be divided like fandom. Those who glorified, those who shrugged and those who condemned. Like Voldemort and Dumbledore, world wide glorification was not necessary; just so that there were those within society who would do so.

For me, Snape's only real ambitions after Lily's death are the ones which he clearly states in canon "I wish I were dead" and "keep[ing] Lily Potter's son safe".

Did Snape really wish he were dead? Did he really want to join James and Lily in the afterworld? :lol:. Kidding - JKR did that all the time and it is a plot hole joke. Anyway, I agree he saw no point in living after Lily died and he did make a promise to Dumbledore to do as he asked. But in my view, he did not retain that completely sluggish attitude throughout the rest of his life. The two ideas do not mesh; he could not both wish to die and wish to stay alive to keep his promise, imo.

OK, I agree I overstated. My point was that Snape's willingness to be unpopular was ultimately a very good thing.

In as far as his job as a loyal DE after killing Dumbledore, I agree. However, I don't believe that it was a good thing for him on a personal level.

Yes, Snape did make a grave mistake and he being utterly humiliated at that time was not excuse enough to call a girl he loved and one who was his best friend a "mudblood" IMO.

But I wonder what that makes James...

Will answer in the James thread. :)

I respect your posts but very much challenge the view that my individual interpretation of Snape is ‘twisting and reinterpreting his action until I see him in a different light’. I do realise there can be a fine line between Canon Snape and Fanon Snape. But in this thread I attempt to analyse Canon Snape, whose bitterness I would never deny, any more than I would deny his courage, since both are a part of his character, and that, IMO, is made obvious.

I didn't mean to imply that you were twisting and reinterpreting. :lol:. I really was speaking only about myself. I personally don't feel it necessary to try and readjust or change the face value of what is written because I feel it shows exactly what JKR meant for it to show per her statements.

Snape’s issues of bitterness (and on occasion, vengefulness) are perfectly apparent in the text. His motives for his actions are not always so easy to nail down. There is so much going on with Snape as a character and so much that JKR simply doesn’t tell us.

I respect your view. I was explaining that in my view, JKR didn't tell us because it didn't matter. I felt that she offered no apologies or explanations for Snape except where she felt it necessary. Imo, she only felt it necessary if it would leave the impression that Snape was an evil, loyal Death Eater. Everything else I felt I was to understand as written. :) So for example, Snape calling Neville an idiot or telling Hermione he saw no difference in the way her overgrown teeth appeared as compared to her regular molars was not "evil" in the sense that one could declare him a death eater merely for saying those things. Thus, there was no point in having Snape apologize to either of them and explain in detail what had made him say those things at that time, imo. That is what I meant when I said that I felt JKR was not attempting to show that Snape had a good heart, only that he was on the good side, imo.

I actually think Snape's correct in wanting to get lupin sacked and his suspicions and his conviction that Dumbeldore was wrong about Lupin was also correct IMO.

Lupin was not a traitor. He was not working in secret with Sirius. But, he also never told everything he should have to Dumbedlore when it was certain the Sirius would come for Harry as far as everyone was concerned ("he's at Hogwarts", the guards had heard him say in his sleep in Azkaban, before Sirius broke out) and even after Sirius had broken into Gryffindor Tower with a knife in hand and had even entered Harry's dormitory, Lupin is silent IMO.

While Snape did not know the details, I still think his mistrust and suspicion of Lupin is not misplaced, when we see that Harry would have died that day in Gryffindor Tower had Sirius really intended to kill Harry that day IMO.

I'd never really thought about that before, but I see what you mean.

And, actually, even Lupin thinks that Lupin ought to have been sacked, albeit for a different reason - because if he can't be trusted to remember to take his wolfsbane (which he forgets at the end of PoA), then he's a danger to his colleagues and students. He makes this point very emphatically to Harry when explaining his decision to resign.

Both these reasons make Snape's decision to "out" Lupin as a werewolf at the end of PoA seem more understandable and less like personal spite, even if his means of achieving his goal are rather dubious.

Posted by wickedwickedboy
Even if Snape was successful in undermining Lupin's ability as a professor, why would that get him sacked? He was fulfilling the DADA position, previously held by professors of dubious ability and/or character. The kids had learned nothing and Lupin was bringing them up to speed. Snape would have to show Lupin less capable than Lockheart to have Dumbledore even take notice in terms of academics alone - do you feel Snape thought that was possible?

Fair point. I don't think Snape is trying to bring Lupin's completely fictional inadequacies as a teacher to Dumbledore's attention, though - that is never going to work, as Snape must know that Dumbledore knows that Lupin knows his stuff. I think he's trying to whip up parental opposition to Lupin by badmouthing him in front of the students (which does actually work at the end of PoA, when Lupin anticipates the parental owls of outrage arriving following Snape's outing of him). We know from elsewhere that Snape likes having a back-up plan and will often try more than one way to get a goal (e.g. when he asks both Voldemort and Dumbledore to save Lily, in a belt-and-braces act of desperation). As he simultaneously criticises Lupin's teaching and hints that he is a werewolf in the same DADA class, it seems reasonable to infer that both tactics have the same goal, the one he actually achieves at the end of the book, by reprising one of those tactics - securing Lupin's dismissal or resignation.

Umbridge was derrogatory in her comments, that is why Snape became angry - not because she offered him a promotion. So I do not really understand what you mean. Snape was well aware she was not going to promote him, any ambitions he had were quashed by her words.

I think this one is very much a matter of interpretation. What in Umbridge's comments do you view to be "derogatory" and "quashing", because I don't see it?

I do not know if Snape had planned to overtake Voldemort's position as a dark lord - I never understood it to mean that though. In the same way, I didn't mean to say he wanted to usurp Dumbledore's position in some sort of quest for endless power. I think Snape had set his goal (for the time being) on being Dumbledore's #1 man. But Dumbledore didn't have any #1 men because he didn't wish to "put all of his eggs in one basket" - and there were many things he did not share with Snape particularly because he was in such close proximity to Voldemort. But Snape was bothered by this; he brought the issue of his lack of information up twice in canon - both times concerning things that had nothing to do with his work.

I don't see this as evidence of unhealthy ambition, any more than I see Harry's frustration that Dumbledore won't share his reasons for trusting Snape and avoids him totally in Year 5 as evidence of unhealthy ambition or wanting to be Dumbledore's #1 man. I see a lot of parallels betwen Harry and Snape, actually, and I think both of them get frustrated that he won't confide in them for the same reasons - they want to do as much as possible for the Order and they love and look up to Dumbledore and don't like to think that he doesn't trust them.

And, actually, McGonagall gets equally miffed when Harry won't share Dumbledore's plans with her at the end of HBP. I just think if getting shirty at being kept out of the loop were evidence of desire for glory and egomania, pretty much everyone in the Potterverse would be guilty as charged.

The problem wasn't that Snape sought respect in my judgment; the problem was that he did not try to earn it, but instead attempted to compell it.

I'd agree with this to an extent as far as the students are concerned - although as a teacher I'd still give my right arm for his classroom management skills! I don't feel that it applies beyond the classroom, though.

I am not following you on this. Who was resentful? Also, how do we know Snape wasn't resentful? I'm sure everytime he had to hob knob with Voldemort who'd killed the woman he had emotions for - and every time a scheme was put into motion to kill someone that triggered the memory of his own past actions resulting in Lily's death, he resented his position as a spy. But he did it anyway because in the end Voldemort would fall and it was what he promised to do in honor of Lily's sacrifice. He remained loyal to his promise with regard to his spying, imo.

Oh, I'd agree with this, 100%. I don't want to amplify contrasts too much, because I don't want to get sidetracked too much onto other characters and I'd like to emphasise that I like all the characters involved - it is not my intention to criticise them. But Lupin would much rather be off on exciting adventures with the Trio than looking after his pregnant wife, Sirius resents being told to stay at home and do the cleaning, Harry resents being asked to shut his mind to Voldemort. I think there is a general (if perfectly understandable) tendency amongst many of the male characters to be attracted to glamorous action and resentful of necessary, but less overtly exciting or glorious options.

Perhaps Snape is part of this, too - he does, after all, argue with DD about having to kill him and I've often wondered if his needling of Sirius in OotP is partly motivated by his own resentment at not being given a more active, fighting role, and being stuck with the passive role of spy.

But in a context in which many characters are portrayed as preferring glamorous swashbuckling to thankless spadework, I still think his taking on of tasks that are likely to bring him public revulsion rather than glory is admirable.

I think we were looking at this distinctly. I was speaking about after Voldemort's death. Snape wasn't planning to continue pretending to be a loyal Death Eater if he survived, imo, and spend the rest of his life in Azkaban. Imo, he would have intended to have it understood that he'd been working for the good side all along. That is what happened and what would have happened if he were alive because Harry still would have told everyone the truth. There was a definite chance for Snape to seem impressive and have his efforts glorified in the future if he survived, imo.

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood this earlier.

I still disagree, though, because I don't think Snape either expected or hoped to still be alive after Voldemort's death.

Did Snape really wish he were dead? Did he really want to join James and Lily in the afterworld? . Kidding - JKR did that all the time and it is a plot hole joke. Anyway, I agree he saw no point in living after Lily died and he did make a promise to Dumbledore to do as he asked. But in my view, he did not retain that completely sluggish attitude throughout the rest of his life. The two ideas do not mesh; he could not both wish to die and wish to stay alive to keep his promise, imo.

Yes, I do really think he wished he were dead. I think the second was a modification of the first, not a contradiction of it. DD makes him see that Lily would have wanted her son protected, so he is prepared to stay alive only up until such a point as he has completed what she would have wanted. For me, The Prince's tale makes it clear that Lily and Lily's wishes, are the only things that make his life worth living. Had he lived, once the job was done and Voldemort was defeated, I don't think he would have been after the glory at all - he'd have been annoyed he was still alive!

Going back to your earlier post:

I respect your view, but it is an overbroad solution relative to the point I was making. I don't feel that Snape should have told Harry all about his friendship or anything at all except that calling her a Mudblood was a slip of the tongue (without whys and hows). Spoken slyly, it would lead to even more ambiguity for the reader, so JKR could have done it, imo, and even made Harry feel that Snape was lying in his POV and that Snape actually hated Lily. However, it would have been out of character for Snape, imo, to offer anything even approaching an apology or explanation for his behavior, past or present. That, imo, is why it was not done.

I see your point, but I see it differently. Firstly, I think if Snape had tried to give an apology or explanation for his behaviour, he would stand accused of self-centredness, seeking sympathy, putting his own need to be seen in a better light before Harry's needs etc.

More importantly, for me, Snape's total silence on Lily was absolutely crucial to JKR's delicate balance of clues and misdirection. Before DH came out, two main things throughout the series were leading me to expect some kind of friendship/romantic relationship/unrequited love betwen Snape/Lily. One was Snape's absolute silence about Lily, which seemed very odd and highly suspicious, given his readiness to abuse James in front of Harry at every turn and the fact that it had been made clear in various places that he must have known Lily, too. I think any attempt by Snape at all to engage Harry in conversation about his mother would diminish the effectiveness of that powerful silence as a clue that there's somethign we haven't been told.

My second reason for suspecting a Snape/Lily connection brings me onto another one of your points:

we have in canon a more reasonable response to finding someone snooping through your private pensieve in Dumbledore. But more options were open to Snape, imo. The damage was done; a strong set down and detention was the worst punishment available to him as a professor behaving appropriately in my opinion - and if he wished, he could recommend expulsion (which is going too far to me, but an option nonetheless). However, an incorrect and inappropriate response is to shove the child with all of your might to the ground, belittle their parent, threaten them and send them away with a jar of cockroaches flying at their head, imo.

Yes, this is not the most responsible way of a teacher to respond to this, but it is one of only a handful of incidents in the series where Snape really loses control. Snape's usual modus operandi of being nasty is absolutely emotionally controlled, passive-aggressive snarkiness. For him to completely lose the plot like this is highly unusual, and can usually be connected with Lily. This, in my view, was another clue to the reader that something regarding Snape and Lily is not quite right. so I think Snape's behaviour here is more shaped by the demands of clue-planting rather than naturalistic character development.

I'd also add that the stakes were far higher here than when Harry snooped on Dumbledore's thoughts (and Dumbledore is, in any case, an exceptionally easy-going and non-judgemental man, not a yardstick of normal human behaviour). I would argue that the main reason Snape placed the thoughts in the Pensieve (and DD lent it to him) is not to selfishly spare his embarrassment at Harry seeing his private moments, but to ensure that years of patient Occlumency work in Voldemort's presence were not wasted by handing him Snape's real thoughts through the connection in Harry's mind. (Yes, I know that isn't what I argued last post, and you were quite rightly rebutting my lazy assertion that Snape's anger at Harry's snooping was justifiable on normal privacy grounds). Remember that Snape interrupts Harry - Harry may have gone on to see the memories which he later sees in the Prince's Tale, which would have been a disaster for the Order. So on these grounds, too, I don't think his response to Harry's snooping should necessarily be viewed as evidence of a manic desire for respect.

Regarding Umbridge: Snape displays his hostility to her before she says a word to him about anything. (His voice is not invariably sneering - however, it is in this instance when he notes Umbridge's presence). Hardly the action of someone who would ingratiate himself with a powerful person in the Ministry for personal advancement.

'You will notice,' said Snape, in his low, sneering voice, 'that we have a guest with us today.'

He gestured towards the dim corner of the dungeon and Harry saw Professor Umbridge sitting there, clipboard on her knee.

Her first remark to him (half of the class period later, after she has been sitting in the back "observing") is, if anything, complimentary, noting the advanced level to which he has been successful in teaching the course:

'Well, the class seem fairly advanced for their level,' she said briskly to Snape's back. Though I would question whether it is advisable to teach them a potion like the Strengthening Solution. I think the Ministry would prefer it if that was removed from the syllabus.'

The opinion she expresses regarding the particular potion of the day is expressed politely, in a way that someone wanting to ingratiate himself could easily agree with. (E. g. "I am surprised, Madam Umbridge, as I have always taught this potion in fifth year, but naturally I have the highest respect for the Ministry's opinion on such matters and will give your input due consideration.") Snape merely refrains from comment (just as Minerva suggests Harry ought to, about considerably more important/touchy matters than the teaching of a single potion).

The conversation continues:

'Now… how long have you been teaching at Hogwarts?' she asked, her quill poised over her clipboard.

'Fourteen years,' Snape replied. His expression was unfathomable.

Again, a completely neutral question from her. We see her ask the same of other teachers, and it is the sort of question one might expect, as it addresses the experience of the person being evaluated.

'You applied first for the Defence Against the Dark Arts post, I believe?' Professor Umbridge asked Snape.

'Yes,' said Snape quietly.

'But you were unsuccessful?'

Snape's lip curled.

'Obviously'

Who is being rude to whom here? I'd say Snape. He has every opportunity to provide an explanation that is unfavorable to Dumbledore here, or promote his qualifications for that position if he longs for it, but he contents himself with minimal responses, the last of which displays his contempt for her apparent inability to draw simple conclusions from observable facts. :lol:

'And you have applied regularly for the Defence Against the Dark Arts post since you first joined the school, I believe?'

'Yes,' said Snape quietly, barely moving his lips. He looked very angry.

'Do you have any idea why Dumbledore has consistently refused to appoint you?' asked Umbridge.

'I suggest you ask him,' said Snape jerkily.

'Oh, I shall,' said Professor Umbridge, with a sweet smile.

It is at this point that I would agree that she begins to go on the offensive, as evidenced by the amping up of her "sweet" demeanor, but Snape has been uncooperative, unencouraging, and displaying a thinly veiled dislike of her for the whole conversation, as far as I can see. It is only after all this, at the very end, that Dolores makes an oblique reference to Snape's criminal past, long after it is evident from the text that he is already angry with her. This is not what provokes his anger, this is her parting shot.

'I suppose this is relevant?' Snape asked, his black eyes narrowed.

'Oh yes,' said Professor Umbridge, 'yes, the Ministry wants a thorough understanding of teachers' - er - backgrounds.'

Fair point. I don't think Snape is trying to bring Lupin's completely fictional inadequacies as a teacher to Dumbledore's attention, though - that is never going to work, as Snape must know that Dumbledore knows that Lupin knows his stuff. I think he's trying to whip up parental opposition to Lupin by badmouthing him in front of the students (which does actually work at the end of PoA, when Lupin anticipates the parental owls of outrage arriving following Snape's outing of him). We know from elsewhere that Snape likes having a back-up plan and will often try more than one way to get a goal (e.g. when he asks both Voldemort and Dumbledore to save Lily, in a belt-and-braces act of desperation). As he simultaneously criticises Lupin's teaching and hints that he is a werewolf in the same DADA class, it seems reasonable to infer that both tactics have the same goal, the one he actually achieves at the end of the book, by reprising one of those tactics - securing Lupin's dismissal or resignation.

I agree. I don't have any problem with Snape holding the view that Lupin was evil and working with Sirius (also evil) with the purpose of killing Harry. He's reasons for thinking that are not given apart from the closeness of Sirius and Lupin's relationship in the past. But, it is a rational, if not compelling reason, so I cannot fault Snape for holding it.

Snape's problem, imo, was that he acted on, and spoke relevant to his opinions, quite frequently without proof - and he did not disclose the fact that he had no proof. Dumbledore knew he did not have proof, so it was less relevant. However, he spoke to Dumbledore in front of others and to others directly. I think it was fine for him to accuse Lupin, covertly or openly to his face, but speaking to others about it I felt was wrongful. In my judgment, this was general behavior for Snape, and at times he went too far. In this case he did when he told his students about Lupin (who had already resigned). It had the impact of making Lupin's condition universally known, jeopardizing his ability to find any work in England in the future and imo, making it common knowledge among parents like Nott, Malfoy, Goyle and Crabbe, who would return to work for Voldemort, who also became informed and targeted Lupin and Tonks for death as a result.

Snape didn't mean for his act to be so far reaching perhaps; but that is the problem when you act vindictively. Snape could have gone directly to Lupin and warned him that he would spill his secret if he didn't quit (if safety was his goal) - but Snape knew very well that no one kept the position for more than a year in any case (he'd been there 14 years or so at the time) - so he could have merely waited to ensure Lupin was leaving as all the others had. So Snape's behavior here was wrongful, imo, no matter what his reason, and there were far reaching consequences, whether or not Snape foresaw them.

You know, Sirius told Snape to his face that he believed him a Death Eater, no matter what Dumbledore thought (OOTP). That was Sirius' view, and it was fine for him to hold it. But if he then sent owls to all of the non-ex-Death Eater parents at Hogwarts expressing his view, anonymously, and they all sent letters to Dumbledore in outrage, he would have been carrying his personal opinion (unsupported with fact) too far. Snape was lucky that Sirius didn't carry his vindictiveness to that level - but Sirius was also lucky he did not do that, because just like with what happened when Snape did so with Lupin, that kind of action can have far reaching, unforseen consequences.

I think this one is very much a matter of interpretation. What in Umbridge's comments do you view to be "derogatory" and "quashing", because I don't see it?

Well after Zara's refresher course post with the conversation, I think it is easy to see that Snape knew that his ambition to teach DADA was not going to happen through Umbridge - further, Snape didn't want to teach in the manner Umbridge would allow (her own classes were a farce and that is what she believed proper). So he was hostile toward her from the beginning, her view was derogatory toward his ambition and quashing in terms of his being able to teach it in the manner he wished, imo. That is why I opined this was not an example I felt demonstrated whether or not Snape was ambitious - Umbrigdge, despite her position in the Ministry, would not be able to further Snape's goals. In addition, I mis-spoke, this would not be a promotion, but merely a change in position from Potions to DADA professor. So it is not really relevant to the point I was attempting to make. :)

I don't see this as evidence of unhealthy ambition, any more than I see Harry's frustration that Dumbledore won't share his reasons for trusting Snape and avoids him totally in Year 5 as evidence of unhealthy ambition or wanting to be Dumbledore's #1 man. I see a lot of parallels betwen Harry and Snape, actually, and I think both of them get frustrated that he won't confide in them for the same reasons - they want to do as much as possible for the Order and they love and look up to Dumbledore and don't like to think that he doesn't trust them.

I would respectfully disagree because Harry believed Snape was evil and that drove his distrust; whereas Snape did not believe Harry was evil. Harry was not an Order member and thus, could not entertain an ambition to rise in its ranks. Snape knew everything he needed to know in order to do what he was supposed to do, in Dumbledore's view; but Snape wished to know more and in my view, there was no other reason for his wanting to know more other than to be #1 in Dumbledore's confidence. I do not understand what good Snape would feel he could do for the Order knowing what Harry was up to. In fact, it would seem Snape would realize that the less he knew about what Harry was doing the better, because it would mean keeping less hidden from Voldemort via Occlucmency when they were together.

And, actually, McGonagall gets equally miffed when Harry won't share Dumbledore's plans with her at the end of HBP. I just think if getting shirty at being kept out of the loop were evidence of desire for glory and egomania, pretty much everyone in the Potterverse would be guilty as charged.

Imo, this is not comparable; this is like when Kingsley, Molly, Arthur and Lupin asked Harry what he was doing in DH. Dumbledore was dead, the knowledge would not advance their positions. Nor did they feel that Harry was evil and working in opposition to the overall plan of the Order to bring down Voldemort.

Oh, I'd agree with this, 100%. I don't want to amplify contrasts too much, because I don't want to get sidetracked too much onto other characters and I'd like to emphasise that I like all the characters involved - it is not my intention to criticise them. But Lupin would much rather be off on exciting adventures with the Trio than looking after his pregnant wife, Sirius resents being told to stay at home and do the cleaning, Harry resents being asked to shut his mind to Voldemort. I think there is a general (if perfectly understandable) tendency amongst many of the male characters to be attracted to glamorous action and resentful of necessary, but less overtly exciting or glorious options.

Well those were not missions, so I am not following your reasoning here. The proposition was that Snape was willing to do dirty work when others resented doing so. But staying home doing nothing or staying with one's pregnant wife isn't dirty work or mundane, it is not working for the Order at all. We have Harry's POV, and he was not resentful because he felt closing his mind was a menial task and not glorious and exciting, so I am not understanding the correlation you are drawing. Could you clarify?

But in a context in which many characters are portrayed as preferring glamorous swashbuckling to thankless spadework, I still think his taking on of tasks that are likely to bring him public revulsion rather than glory is admirable.

I would agree, however, I don't recall characters resentful for being given missions that were mundane and safe, while complaining that they'd rather have more swashbuckling and glamourous work. Could you provide examples of what you mean? If you mean the examples you gave, then I would have to respectfully disagree because Sirius was resentful because he was doing nothing at all - not because he wasn't doing something swashbuckling; and Lupin wasn't ordered to stay with Tonks - Dumbledore was dead, it wasn't a mission. Additionally, his reason for wishing to go with Harry wasn't based in a desire for glory and excitement, he said as much in his POV and explained why he didn't wish to be at home with her. So I don't think these examples support your contention.



I see your point, but I see it differently. Firstly, I think if Snape had tried to give an apology or explanation for his behaviour, he would stand accused of self-centredness, seeking sympathy, putting his own need to be seen in a better light before Harry's needs etc.

While I agree with you that readers might accuse Snape of those things prior to DH, I think in hindsight, it would have shown that Snape was good at heart. But JKR did not wish to show that, imo, because he was not.

Snape's usual modus operandi of being nasty is absolutely emotionally controlled, passive-aggressive snarkiness. For him to completely lose the plot like this is highly unusual, and can usually be connected with Lily. This, in my view, was another clue to the reader that something regarding Snape and Lily is not quite right. so I think Snape's behaviour here is more shaped by the demands of clue-planting rather than naturalistic character development.

This is where we would likely have to agree to disagree. I agree with you completely that Snape's behavior was imperative to the plot. However, I think JKR created Snape's character to move the plot along, rather than create the plot and move Snape's character along with it. :lol:. That likely made little sense - but what I mean is that she meant for Snape to be the cruel, bullying, vindictive, and small person that he was; and she planted clues and shaped his plot relevant to his character. So if she had him do something vindictive - it was because he really was vindictive - that it also helped the plot was meant to be. It wasn't like she pulled Snape out of character to make him make a nasty remark in order to further his ambiguity, imo, rather, Snape's true behavior served to further the plot because saying something nasty is what he would do normally, imo.

This is why I keep saying that she did not have Snape make some big apology in canon; for instance showing scenes with he and Dumbledore where he is sulking and upset in the office, mourning over the fact that he has to treat people and the kids rudely, in a bullying fashion and cruelly - or tearfull and remorseful that he had to belittle Harry - or his dad - or Tonks - or Neville and Hermione, and that he didn't know how much longer he could go on behaving in that manner, imo. This is why there were no scenes with him lovingly holding a young Draco and tickling his belly, or in Slytherin house lovingly laughing and joking with the members as head of house. This is not the character that JKR was trying to draw, imo; Snape was not a loving, kind, deeply compassionate, highly sympathetic character shrouded by pretense and contrived unpleasant behavior on his part, in my judgment. That would have been easy to show, imo, but we got nothing of this sort because JKR did not see her character this way (per her own statements). Snape was to be drawn as a horrible person in her opinion and as such, he could not be shown doing any of the above.

On the other hand, JKR was very interested in showing that Snape had rejected evil and was on the good side. We did see him attempt to save Lupin from death; we did hear him in Dumbledore's office saying that he would save those he could rather than watch them die; we did hear him tell P. Black not to call Hermione a Mudblood; we did see him do acts for Dumbledore that were good side acts like deliever the sword and send the kids to Hagrid for punishment. We did see him plan Dumbledore's death with him and ask about his soul. We did see him in several scenes that proved he had developed feelings for Lily so that could serve as the reason he rejected Voldemort. These things countered all of the "evil" acts we knew Snape had also done like being a Death Eater, killing Dumbledore, telling Bella he was a loyal Death Eater and fooling Dumbledore at Spinner's End, watching Charity die and perhaps issuing the AK against her; talking to Draco about Voldemort, and showing past blood prejudice (only important because it was the basis for any killing as a DE.) So in this way, JKR was showing that Snape had rejected evil and was on the good side. But none of these scenes countered Snape's non-evil behavior.

In fact, some of the scenes in TPT made Snape's non-evil behavior appear worse in nature, imo. Other scenes revealed that Snape was not as innocent in his youth as he'd purported to be, imo. For instance (all my personal impression from the reading of DH TPT): he shows in memories #5 and #6, that yes, he was highly jealous and vindictive; yes he thought it a laugh to use dark magic against others; yes he suspected Lupin was a werewolf when he went into the tunnel and wished to expose him; no he didn't listen to Lily's warnings about the dark path; yes he followed the Marauders around and issued the dark curse at them that he'd invented; no he'd had no intention of allowing Lily to be with James, so sure even back then he'd said to Lily some the stuff he'd said to Harry about James attempting to belittle his character. But like Harry, Lily had seen through his belittlement to the real person James became, because at the time she felt he was an arrogant toerag and didn't want to date him. Yes Snape had hung with a bad crowd and his good friends were Mulciber and Avery; No he didn't wish to protect James' son, only Lily's and no that didn't mean he'd be open with, or like the child - ever. And even realistically at the time of his turning, sure he wanted to save Lily, but despite the fact that James had saved his life as an enemy, no he was not interested in returning the favor when his act targeted James for death - nor was he interested in trying to save any son of his. But yes, for Lily he'd cop Harry and James a break, defacto most assuredly and in no way dejure, imo. And yes Dumbledore had to show disgust and make him concede to what was right; and yes Dumbledore played a large role in his turning to the good side.

It was a slew of admissions, but there was not one scene of Snape admitting that he saw any of this his non evil behavior, acts and words distinctly and as he grew older he was spouting all the same stuff and behaving in the same manner, imo. These scenes showed a boy who had not grown into one who was good at heart and who had been bent on evil, imo. But while the subsequent scenes moved to reverse the "evil" bits associated with Snape's character, there was no attempt to reverse the non-evil portion of his behavior: all the jealousy, vindictiveness, bullying, cruel misconstruction of character, and loathing for Harry's dad and Harry himself, that was not reversed and remained a part of Snape's real character throughout his life, imo. This was something Snape, for whatever reason, could not overcome and why, imo, JKR referred to Snape as a small man after the publication of DH.

So on a non-evil behavior level, Snape was never vindicated in canon and in my judgment, that was done specifically because his non-evil behavior as shown was exactly the man he was. But Snape was not "evil" - he was not like Voldemort and completely without compassion. Those scenes were careful to show that Snape was capable of some compassion and that is what both supported his ability to be on the good side (all of the good side acts revealed) and his ability to show some compassion for those he cared about, Dumbledore and Lily, even if in the latter case I feel his love was detrimentally flawed, it still sprung from the compassion he was capable of, imo. In a final example of this dichotomy: No he was not helping the DEs escape from Hogwarts in HBP Flight of the Prince - he was forcing them out of Hogwarts, because he was on the good side, imo. But yes his subsequent negative treatment of Harry when they were alone and he whipped him was characteristic of Snape, because he was not a man who was good at heart, imo.

I agree. I don't have any problem with Snape holding the view that Lupin was evil and working with Sirius (also evil) with the purpose of killing Harry. He's reasons for thinking that are not given apart from the closeness of Sirius and Lupin's relationship in the past. But, it is a rational, if not compelling reason, so I cannot fault Snape for holding it.

Snape's problem, imo, was that he acted on, and spoke relevant to his opinions, quite frequently without proof - and he did not disclose the fact that he had no proof. Dumbledore knew he did not have proof, so it was less relevant. However, he spoke to Dumbledore in front of others and to others directly. I think it was fine for him to accuse Lupin, covertly or openly to his face, but speaking to others about it I felt was wrongful. In my judgment, this was general behavior for Snape, and at times he went too far. In this case he did when he told his students about Lupin (who had already resigned). It had the impact of making Lupin's condition universally known, jeopardizing his ability to find any work in England in the future and imo, making it common knowledge among parents like Nott, Malfoy, Goyle and Crabbe, who would return to work for Voldemort, who also became informed and targeted Lupin and Tonks for death as a result.

Snape didn't mean for his act to be so far reaching perhaps; but that is the problem when you act vindictively. Snape could have gone directly to Lupin and warned him that he would spill his secret if he didn't quit (if safety was his goal) - but Snape knew very well that no one kept the position for more than a year in any case (he'd been there 14 years or so at the time) - so he could have merely waited to ensure Lupin was leaving as all the others had. So Snape's behavior here was wrongful, imo, no matter what his reason, and there were far reaching consequences, whether or not Snape foresaw them.


I wouldn't disagree with most of this. I love Snape, but I don't see him as completely flawless. (In fact, one of the main reasons I love him is because of his flaws. He is so human, in a way I can totally relate to - but then I'm probably a more horrible person than most people on CoS :lol:). I do think one of his main flaws is a refusal to ever consider that he might have made a mistake or got things wrong and to act unilaterally when older and wiser people disagree with him.

I do think, though, that the closeness of Lupin's and Sirius's past relationship was not the only reason for him to suspect them of collusion. From his point of view, the fact that Lupin applies for and gets a job at the school at exactly the same time as Sirius breaks out of Azkaban must look mighty suspicious (it is, if you think about it, a very strange coincidence - or it would be, if it had happened in real life, not been engineered by JKR:lol:). Given that he (again, totally wrongly, but in my opinion not unreasonably) already believes that as teenagers they tried to murder him in the Whomping Willow incident and got away with it then by persuading Dumbledore that it was an ill-advised but innocent prank (I know it was, and that Lupin had nothing to do with it, but I don't think Snape has ever realised this), he is predisposed to look at them as untrustworthy, dangerous and former partners-in-crime, who have a history of pulling the wool over too-trusting DDs eyes. I can actually see exactly why Snape thinks they're in it together, why he thinks he has enough evidence to support that conclusion, and can understand (if not condone) why he felt tempted to use malicious means to sort it out himself when Dumbledore didn't seem to be doing anything.

And I don't think it's personal vindictiveness at all. Even after Sirius has escaped and Lupin has resigned and so they are no longer an active "threat" to Harry (from Snape's viewpoint), he still believes, IMO, that Sirius has got away with betraying Lily and that Lupin has let him (I believe that it wasn't until he rejoined the DE at the end of GoF that he realised he was wrong about Pettigrew).

I think his actions are completely wrong, but his motivations here are reasonable, non-selfish ones: "keeping Lily Potter's son safe" and vengeance for Lily.

You know, Sirius told Snape to his face that he believed him a Death Eater, no matter what Dumbledore thought (OOTP). That was Sirius' view, and it was fine for him to hold it. But if he then sent owls to all of the non-ex-Death Eater parents at Hogwarts expressing his view, anonymously, and they all sent letters to Dumbledore in outrage, he would have been carrying his personal opinion (unsupported with fact) too far. Snape was lucky that Sirius didn't carry his vindictiveness to that level - but Sirius was also lucky he did not do that, because just like with what happened when Snape did so with Lupin, that kind of action can have far reaching, unforseen consequences.

I don't think these situations are analogous, but in any case, I'm not going to get into an in-depth discussion of Sirius on the Snape thread.

Well after Zara's refresher course post with the conversation, I think it is easy to see that Snape knew that his ambition to teach DADA was not going to happen through Umbridge

I thought Zara's analysis was excellent, but I still don't see how you're getting this conlusion. Zara has shown that Snape is hostile to Umbridge before she even raises the DADA question or is hostile to him, so how are you concluding that it was obvious that she wasn't going to help his ambition?

further, Snape didn't want to teach in the manner Umbridge would allow (her own classes were a farce and that is what she believed proper).

I'd agree with this, to an extent. However, we have canon of another member of staff (Filch) enthusiastically embracing her regime, as she increases his status in the school and gives him the chance to lord it over the students and administer ever more cruel punishments. Snape must know that getting cosy with Umbridge would bring benefits and opportunities (especially if his priorities, as you suggest, are sadism and status), but he shows no inclination to court her favour. Hardly the sign, I would argue, of a power-mad man.

And, also, if he doesn't want the DADA job under Umbridge's terms because he wouldn't be able to teach the subject properly, does this not underline the fact that his desire for the post (if it actually exists - to me that desirehas always seemed more like a widespread studnet rumour than a canonical fact) is motivated by a love of the subject, not by a desire for power and status?

So he was hostile toward her from the beginning, her view was derogatory toward his ambition and quashing in terms of his being able to teach it in the manner he wished, imo.

I really can't see where you're getting this. Could you clarify?


In addition, I mis-spoke, this would not be a promotion, but merely a change in position from Potions to DADA professor. So it is not really relevant to the point I was attempting to make. :)

It would not be a promotion, but it is a post which Snape is often perceived as extremely ambitious to get, and it is often argued that Snape's alleged desire to do anything to get his hands on the DADA job is an example of his ambition and desire for status. So I think it is relevant. He does nothing here to further his alleged ambition.


I would respectfully disagree because Harry believed Snape was evil and that drove his distrust; whereas Snape did not believe Harry was evil. Harry was not an Order member and thus, could not entertain an ambition to rise in its ranks.

Does the Order have "ranks"? I always saw it as quite an egalitarian thing. To me, all Snape wants is Dumbledore's love and trust, not status.

Snape knew everything he needed to know in order to do what he was supposed to do, in Dumbledore's view; but Snape wished to know more and in my view, there was no other reason for his wanting to know more other than to be #1 in Dumbledore's confidence. I do not understand what good Snape would feel he could do for the Order knowing what Harry was up to. In fact, it would seem Snape would realize that the less he knew about what Harry was doing the better, because it would mean keeping less hidden from Voldemort via Occlucmency when they were together.

I am assuming that he feels he could help Harry. He wouldn't be the only person in the text to show doubts about whether a 16/17-year-old schoolboy is up to the job.

And I'd also add, the person who, in a completely different context, most consistently in HBP accuses Snape of snooping into affairs which aren't his business because he wants to steal the glory and status - Draco - is completely mistaken. We have canon of Snape being unjustly accused of being ambitious and fixated on glory when it's not the case.


Well those were not missions, so I am not following your reasoning here. The proposition was that Snape was willing to do dirty work when others resented doing so. But staying home doing nothing or staying with one's pregnant wife isn't dirty work or mundane, it is not working for the Order at all. We have Harry's POV, and he was not resentful because he felt closing his mind was a menial task and not glorious and exciting, so I am not understanding the correlation you are drawing. Could you clarify?

Actually, Sirius was not required to "stay home doing nothing", he was required to decontaminate his house, the Order's headquarters - this was Order work, a "mission" of a sort (although perhaps you, like Sirius, do not perceive it as such, because it's not glamorous or glorious enough?).

If I remember correctly, it is emphasised time and time again that Dumbledore has ordered Harry to practise closing his mind, but he doesn't bother. "I didn't practise, I didn't bother" which he openly admits to, suggests that it was hard work and he couldn't see the point. He is portrayed as neglecting his mundane Occlumency practice to concentrate on training the DA (a more obviously exciting, glamorous task) and actually welcoming the visions which he is supposed to be blocking out to help him with his "saving-people thing"


would agree, however, I don't recall characters resentful for being given missions that were mundane and safe, while complaining that they'd rather have more swashbuckling and glamourous work. Could you provide examples of what you mean? If you mean the examples you gave, then I would have to respectfully disagree because Sirius was resentful because he was doing nothing at all - not because he wasn't doing something swashbuckling; and Lupin wasn't ordered to stay with Tonks - Dumbledore was dead, it wasn't a mission. Additionally, his reason for wishing to go with Harry wasn't based in a desire for glory and excitement, he said as much in his POV and explained why he didn't wish to be at home with her. So I don't think these examples support your contention.

I think Harry's response to this ("I think you're feeling a bit of a daredevil...You fancy stepping into Sirius's shoes...coward") makes it amply clear that he doesn't believe Lupin's stated reason for wishing to abandon his wife and son, and, frankly, nor do I.

But. actually, this is all getting off the topic of Snape. Snape does nasty jobs that will bring him disgust and revilement, not glory or excitement, so whatever his other faults, I just can't see him as unduly fixated on status or glory.

While I agree with you that readers might accuse Snape of those things prior to DH, I think in hindsight, it would have shown that Snape was good at heart. But JKR did not wish to show that, imo, because he was not.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this, because to me a Snape who did try to justify or excuse his treatment of Lily to Harry would not only be ruining the planting of clues and red herrings, but would be a whining, self-centred weakling, more interested in gaining understanding and forgiveness for himself than in helping Harry gain an accurate view of his mother.


This is where we would likely have to agree to disagree. I agree with you completely that Snape's behavior was imperative to the plot. However, I think JKR created Snape's character to move the plot along, rather than create the plot and move Snape's character along with it. :lol:. That likely made little sense -

No, it did, it made perfect sense

but what I mean is that she meant for Snape to be the cruel, bullying, vindictive, and small person that he was; and she planted clues and shaped his plot relevant to his character. So if she had him do something vindictive - it was because he really was vindictive - that it also helped the plot was meant to be. It wasn't like she pulled Snape out of character to make him make a nasty remark in order to further his ambiguity, imo, rather, Snape's true behavior served to further the plot because saying something nasty is what he would do normally, imo.

This is why I keep saying that she did not have Snape make some big apology in canon; for instance showing scenes with he and Dumbledore where he is sulking and upset in the office, mourning over the fact that he has to treat people and the kids rudely, in a bullying fashion and cruelly - or tearfull and remorseful that he had to belittle Harry - or his dad - or Tonks - or Neville and Hermione, and that he didn't know how much longer he could go on behaving in that manner, imo.

I'd agree with this, to a degree. I've never been a supporter of the idea of Saint Snape and I accept that not every unpleasant word or deed of his can be explained away by his need to keep cover.

This is why there were no scenes with him lovingly holding a young Draco and tickling his belly, or in Slytherin house lovingly laughing and joking with the members as head of house.

Actually, I seem to remember that there are one or two glimpses of this, particularly in the early books - I always get the impression that he's a warm and caring (if outrageously biased) Head of House. The reason I think there aren't more is because the books are from Harry's PoV and he doesn't see Snape en famille, as it were, because he's not a Slytherin. The Slytherin boys certainly seem to love him, and I don't think that's just self-promoting sycophancy.

I also, incidentally, think his affection for the Malfoys is not entirely feigned - his disgust at Voldemort's torturing of Lucius and Narcissa by giving Draco mission impossible is quite poignant, he seems genuinely compassionate to Narcissa at Spinner's End, and noticeably always calls Draco by his first name, something eh doesn't even extend to other Slytherins. His tenderness when healing the Sectumsempra on Draco was also quite sweet, I thought. I think he's rejected the Malfoys' pureblood creed and would have no compunction about spying on them or bringing them down with the DEs if he has to as part of the fight against Voldemort, but I think he still cares about them very much as individuals.

On the other hand, JKR was very interested in showing that Snape had rejected evil and was on the good side. We did see him attempt to save Lupin from death; we did hear him in Dumbledore's office saying that he would save those he could rather than watch them die; we did hear him tell P. Black not to call Hermione a Mudblood; we did see him do acts for Dumbledore that were good side acts like deliever the sword and send the kids to Hagrid for punishment. We did see him plan Dumbledore's death with him and ask about his soul. We did see him in several scenes that proved he had developed feelings for Lily so that could serve as the reason he rejected Voldemort. These things countered all of the "evil" acts we knew Snape had also done like being a Death Eater, killing Dumbledore, telling Bella he was a loyal Death Eater and fooling Dumbledore at Spinner's End, watching Charity die and perhaps issuing the AK against her; talking to Draco about Voldemort, and showing past blood prejudice (only important because it was the basis for any killing as a DE.) So in this way, JKR was showing that Snape had rejected evil and was on the good side.

I'm glad you've acknowledged this :)

It was a slew of admissions, but there was not one scene of Snape admitting that he saw any of this his non evil behavior, acts and words distinctly and as he grew older he was spouting all the same stuff and behaving in the same manner, imo. These scenes showed a boy who had not grown into one who was good at heart and who had been bent on evil, imo. But while the subsequent scenes moved to reverse the "evil" bits associated with Snape's character, there was no attempt to reverse the non-evil portion of his behavior: all the jealousy, vindictiveness, bullying, cruel misconstruction of character, and loathing for Harry's dad and Harry himself, that was not reversed and remained a part of Snape's real character throughout his life, imo. This was something Snape, for whatever reason, could not overcome and why, imo, JKR referred to Snape as a small man after the publication of DH.

I'd agree with some of these flaws, but for me they seem human and understandable, if at times reprehensible, and no worse than the flaws shown by some of the other "good" characters.

I also think that she shows the reasons why he has become like this - she didn't have to stress his origins in a poor, conflict-filled home, his neglect by his parents and ostracism by his peers pre-Hogwarts (and, yes, I know the same was true of Harry and he didn't turn out like Snape), the fact that he had a Slytherin witch mother who preached Slytherin superiority to him and a hostile muggle father and peers, whom he ahd reason to despise, which go some way to explaining why he was tempted initially to blood prejudice and Slytherin values. I also think that crossed wires and misunderstandings account for a lot, too (e.g. combining Sirius's assertion that James hated Snape because he was into the Dark Arts from the moment he arrived at Hogwarts [for which we've seen no evidence] with what we see in The Prince's Tale, I think his fatal feud with the Marauders was probably sparked by a fatal crossed wire over one word - "Slytherin". James, hearing Snape praise Slytherin to Lily, immediately assumed he was fond of the dark arts, because that is what the word connoted to him, and responded with hostility. This provoked hostility in return from Snape.)

So I think her portrait of Snape is very compassionately drawn, and does not, to me, present a senselessly bad man.

I also think that she couldn't draw our attention to every tiem she'd used misdirection throughout 7 long books, so I think in some places it is reasonable to use inference to reappraise Snape more kindly in the light of what we now know, even if this hasn't been explicitly flagged up. But I'd agree, not in every place.

I wouldn't disagree with most of this. I love Snape, but I don't see him as completely flawless. (In fact, one of the main reasons I love him is because of his flaws. He is so human, in a way I can totally relate to - but then I'm probably a more horrible person than most people on CoS :lol:). I do think one of his main flaws is a refusal to ever consider that he might have made a mistake or got things wrong and to act unilaterally when older and wiser people disagree with him.

I do think, though, that the closeness of Lupin's and Sirius's past relationship was not the only reason for him to suspect them of collusion. From his point of view, the fact that Lupin applies for and gets a job at the school at exactly the same time as Sirius breaks out of Azkaban must look mighty suspicious (it is, if you think about it, a very strange coincidence - or it would be, if it had happened in real life, not been engineered by JKR:lol:). Given that he (again, totally wrongly, but in my opinion not unreasonably) already believes that as teenagers they tried to murder him in the Whomping Willow incident and got away with it then by persuading Dumbledore that it was an ill-advised but innocent prank (I know it was, and that Lupin had nothing to do with it, but I don't think Snape has ever realised this), he is predisposed to look at them as untrustworthy, dangerous and former partners-in-crime, who have a history of pulling the wool over too-trusting DDs eyes. I can actually see exactly why Snape thinks they're in it together, why he thinks he has enough evidence to support that conclusion, and can understand (if not condone) why he felt tempted to use malicious means to sort it out himself when Dumbledore didn't seem to be doing anything.

Lupin told Harry in POA that Dumbledore had asked him to take the position; he didn't apply for it. Snape never accused Lupin of that, so I believe he knew Lupin had been asked. That is why I felt the only reason we were presented with in canon was the old friendship of Remus and Sirius.

And I don't think it's personal vindictiveness at all. Even after Sirius has escaped and Lupin has resigned and so they are no longer an active "threat" to Harry (from Snape's viewpoint), he still believes, IMO, that Sirius has got away with betraying Lily and that Lupin has let him (I believe that it wasn't until he rejoined the DE at the end of GoF that he realised he was wrong about Pettigrew).

I think his actions are completely wrong, but his motivations here are reasonable, non-selfish ones: "keeping Lily Potter's son safe" and vengeance for Lily.

I didn't follow what you meant here. If Snape still believed that Lupin had allowed Sirius to get away with betraying Lily and it was for that reason he ratted Lupin out, wouldn't that have been revenge? That is what I meant by his behaving in a vindictive manner.

I don't think these situations are analogous, but in any case, I'm not going to get into an in-depth discussion of Sirius on the Snape thread.

I wasn't attempting to draw a direct analogy, I was trying to tell a story :lol:. It was just to say that "anyone", not just Snape, can find themselves in trouble when they act out of vindictiveness because the consequences may hurt them in addition to whomever they are trying to harm.

I thought Zara's analysis was excellent, but I still don't see how you're getting this conlusion. Zara has shown that Snape is hostile to Umbridge before she even raises the DADA question or is hostile to him, so how are you concluding that it was obvious that she wasn't going to help his ambition?

Mainly due to the fact that Snape's ambition was not to teach DADA in the way that the Ministry had decided it would be taught. That was not an arbitrary decision by Umbridge, that was a requirement of the Ministry.


I'd agree with this, to an extent. However, we have canon of another member of staff (Filch) enthusiastically embracing her regime, as she increases his status in the school and gives him the chance to lord it over the students and administer ever more cruel punishments. Snape must know that getting cosy with Umbridge would bring benefits and opportunities (especially if his priorities, as you suggest, are sadism and status), but he shows no inclination to court her favour. Hardly the sign, I would argue, of a power-mad man.

But kissing up to Umbridge would not help Snape in the same way because the decision was not Umbridge's to make according to her. The decree regarding how DADA classes were to be taught came down from the Ministry. They were determined to disbelieve and ignore the fact that Voldemort had returned and did not want classic defense taught because it made it seem to the kids that there was actually some danger out there to fight. They were attempting to discount that belief altogether.

And, also, if he doesn't want the DADA job under Umbridge's terms because he wouldn't be able to teach the subject properly, does this not underline the fact that his desire for the post (if it actually exists - to me that desirehas always seemed more like a widespread studnet rumour than a canonical fact) is motivated by a love of the subject, not by a desire for power and status?

Yes.

It would not be a promotion, but it is a post which Snape is often perceived as extremely ambitious to get, and it is often argued that Snape's alleged desire to do anything to get his hands on the DADA job is an example of his ambition and desire for status. So I think it is relevant. He does nothing here to further his alleged ambition.

I have never been among the group that made this argument and I don't agree with it. I don't think Snape wanted the job out of ambition, but because he loved the subject matter.

Perhaps you misunderstood because I do believe that Snape's in classroom behavior toward the kids showed that he wished to be respected and thought of highly. That was an ambition of his, imo, and I don't think that is an abnormal ambition for a professor. However, Snape wished to compel it, rather than earn it and that is where the problem lay, imo. Another problem was that he abused his position of power and authority over the students, imo, and that links back to his desire to be powerful - I feel he took it where he could find it - in the classroom. But I don't think this ambition in this regard has anything to do with his wanting the DADA job.

Does the Order have "ranks"? I always saw it as quite an egalitarian thing. To me, all Snape wants is Dumbledore's love and trust, not status.

I agree, but I don't feel Snape saw it that way. I feel he was used to a system of rank since Hogwarts and his view of the Order was similar. There was reason he could feel this way; Dumbledore asked everyone to trust him, yet supplied no reason why they should (considering they knew he was an ex-Death Eater and double spy.) Imo, Snape would look upon those who doubted him with smugness, knowing that there was nothing they could do because the leader had declared him an Order member. In otherwords, his work was so superior to everyone else's, no explanations or justifications were required for the trust others were asked to have for him (from his view of their opinion.) That as not true of course; Snape had made Dumbledore swear not to tell his secret which would serve as a basis of trust. But I feel Snape failed to realize that the Order members knew that Dumbledore would have done the exact same thing for everyone, it is just that everyone else was open about their past and allegiance. But Snape, based on his personal view of how others saw him, wished to propagate that place of power as truth, imo, that is, he wished to truly be superior to everyone else for a real reason, so that the respect and/or civilty that he was being shown could be commanded by him, in my judgment.

I am assuming that he feels he could help Harry. He wouldn't be the only person in the text to show doubts about whether a 16/17-year-old schoolboy is up to the job.

I don't understand what you mean. How would it help Harry for him to have useless information about the Order in his mind to cover up when he was around Voldemort?

And I'd also add, the person who, in a completely different context, most consistently in HBP accuses Snape of snooping into affairs which aren't his business because he wants to steal the glory and status - Draco - is completely mistaken. We have canon of Snape being unjustly accused of being ambitious and fixated on glory when it's not the case.

I have never accused Snape of wishing to be glorified for his status as a Death Eater. I don't feel that position (which he attained as Voldemort's right hand man) gave him any pleasure.

Actually, Sirius was not required to "stay home doing nothing", he was required to decontaminate his house, the Order's headquarters - this was Order work, a "mission" of a sort (although perhaps you, like Sirius, do not perceive it as such, because it's not glamorous or glorious enough?).

I see it like this:

"Dumbledore; I would like to offer you #12 G Place for the Order to use. It is a bit of a wreck as it has sat unused for many years, but it has a lot of great wards about it placed by my dad and if you would like to use it, it is yours."

"Thank you, Sirius, that is very kind of you. It would be perfect for us to use!"

"No problem at all." Sirius smiles pleasantly.

"You'll decontaminate it and clean it for us. Bring it up to par for our meetings there."

:wow: "Uh...thanks?" :rotfl: :lol:.

So no, I don't think that after offering the use of his home to the Order that Dumbledore should have had the audacity to ask him to clean it. In any case, Sirius may have volunteered to do so for all we know. But that is not a mission at all, imo. It is like a brave, experienced, military commander being asked by the prime minister or president to work for him. He arrives at the office and is handed a toilet brush and told his job will be to clean the toilets for the term of his employ. :lol:. Sirius only agreed to stay there at all because it meant he got to see Harry - otherwise, he had been doing just fine on the run and I am sure he would have preferred that. :lol:.

I think Harry's response to this ("I think you're feeling a bit of a daredevil...You fancy stepping into Sirius's shoes...coward") makes it amply clear that he doesn't believe Lupin's stated reason for wishing to abandon his wife and son, and, frankly, nor do I.

We'd have to agree to disagree on this. Lupin pours his heart out in cover up for wishing to desert his wife so he could go swashbuckling? Do you really believe that is what JKR meant for us to take away from that conversation?

But. actually, this is all getting off the topic of Snape. Snape does nasty jobs that will bring him disgust and revilement, not glory or excitement, so whatever his other faults, I just can't see him as unduly fixated on status or glory.

We'd have to agree to disagree on this as well. I believe Snape saw his job (and felt others saw his job) as daring and dangerous; thus saw him as brave and skilled (even those who felt he was or might be a DE would feel that way). As such, I feel he did not consider himself doing anything menial. As I pointed out above, Snape couldn't care less what the Order members thought of him in terms of like and dislike, he only wanted their respect. The temporary time during which he would be thought a loyal Death Eater notwithstanding, he knew in the end it would bring him glory from all of the Order members. It was only society who would have split views because they would not know all of the details or have been told by Dumbledore that he "trusts Snape". So I would disagree with this particular point regarding Snape.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this, because to me a Snape who did try to justify or excuse his treatment of Lily to Harry would not only be ruining the planting of clues and red herrings, but would be a whining, self-centred weakling, more interested in gaining understanding and forgiveness for himself than in helping Harry gain an accurate view of his mother.

If he had made a sly comment such as the one I provided, I would not see it negatively in hindsight.

Actually, I seem to remember that there are one or two glimpses of this, particularly in the early books - I always get the impression that he's a warm and caring (if outrageously biased) Head of House. The reason I think there aren't more is because the books are from Harry's PoV and he doesn't see Snape en famille, as it were, because he's not a Slytherin. The Slytherin boys certainly seem to love him, and I don't think that's just self-promoting sycophancy.

I respect your view; but Harry never saw Snape speaking alone with Dumbledore or talking to his mum or interacting with his father either. He only viewed these things in the pensieve and JKR could have included any scene she wished for Snape to provide. If it was a scene with him showing goodness, kindness and being loving toward others that she wished to show, the fact that we only get Harry's POV normally would be irrelevant because he'd be looking in the pensieve.

I also, incidentally, think his affection for the Malfoys is not entirely feigned - his disgust at Voldemort's torturing of Lucius and Narcissa by giving Draco mission impossible is quite poignant, he seems genuinely compassionate to Narcissa at Spinner's End, and noticeably always calls Draco by his first name, something eh doesn't even extend to other Slytherins. His tenderness when healing the Sectumsempra on Draco was also quite sweet, I thought. I think he's rejected the Malfoys' pureblood creed and would have no compunction about spying on them or bringing them down with the DEs if he has to as part of the fight against Voldemort, but I think he still cares about them very much as individuals.

I would include the Malfoys as people that Snape had some compassion for. That takes us up to 5. :)

I'm glad you've acknowledged this :)

I dislike Snape's character very much, but I refuse to be unfair about it or place the worst possible construction on his every deed. The reason I dislike the character is because I feel a reasonable construction on all of the scenes he was involved in shows him to have been the person JKR described ("a horrible person") - but also on the good side. This is not to be confused with my belief that all of JKR's character portrayals were brilliant, including Snape's.

I also think that she shows the reasons why he has become like this - she didn't have to stress his origins in a poor, conflict-filled home, his neglect by his parents and ostracism by his peers pre-Hogwarts (and, yes, I know the same was true of Harry and he didn't turn out like Snape), the fact that he had a Slytherin witch mother who preached Slytherin superiority to him and a hostile muggle father and peers, whom he ahd reason to despise, which go some way to explaining why he was tempted initially to blood prejudice and Slytherin values. I also think that crossed wires and misunderstandings account for a lot, too (e.g. combining Sirius's assertion that James hated Snape because he was into the Dark Arts from the moment he arrived at Hogwarts [for which we've seen no evidence] with what we see in The Prince's Tale, I think his fatal feud with the Marauders was probably sparked by a fatal crossed wire over one word - "Slytherin". James, hearing Snape praise Slytherin to Lily, immediately assumed he was fond of the dark arts, because that is what the word connoted to him, and responded with hostility. This provoked hostility in return from Snape.)

Because Snape was fond of Gryffindor up to that point? I would respectfully disagree. Like Draco, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott, Parkinson and Zabini, Snape loved Slytherin, and hated Gryffindor on account, imo. Like Ron, Ginny, and the Twins, James loved Gryffindor and hated Slytherin on account, imo.

So I think her portrait of Snape is very compassionately drawn, and does not, to me, present a senselessly bad man.

I don't feel that explaining why Snape behaved in a horrible manner served to show him as compassionately drawn. I feel that as you mentioned, Harry, Sirius, Lupin and others were shown to have equally troubling youthful problems and overcame them to be loving and compassionate people. So I feel that Snape was a case study in the other direction. To me he was a bad man who was on the good side. I don't really like the term "bad man" which has "evil" connotations. What I mean is that I feel he was mean-spirited, cruel, bullying and vindictive; that he not only couldn't overcome his past, but he relished the present on accout of his behavior. JKR wrote in far too many sneers, smirks, and enjoyment of humiliating sarcastic remarks and put downs as well as taunting statements for me to understand that Snape was not taking pleasure from behaving in the manner he did. There were times when he acted in that manner when he was truly upset, but more often than not, it was in the classroom where he was simply enjoying his unpleasantness, imo.

"To me, you are nothing more than a nasty little boy" he says to Harry in GoF, whose hand was trembling indicating the affect the words were having for Snape to see. ~~

And from POA: "how extraordinarily like your father you are, Potter,' Snape said suddenly, his eyes glinting. 'He too was exceedingly arrogant. A small amount of talent on the Quidditch pitch made him think he was a cut above the rest of us, too. Strutting around the place with his friends and admirers...the resemblance between you is uncanny."

"My dad didn't strut,' said Harry, before he could stop himself. 'And nor do I.'

"Your father didn't set much store by rules, either,' Snape went on, pressing his advantage, his thin face full of malice. 'Rules were for lesser mortals, not Quidditch Cup-winners. His head was so swollen -'

'SHUT UP!'

Right there, if Snape hand't realized that he was twisting a particularly delicate knife in Harry's heart with his words, he would have. Harry may have been cheeky, but never shown such blatant disrespect before. But JKR already advised us that he was pressing his advantage and his face was full of malice, so he had realized what he was doing, imo. Nonetheless, let's say for conversation's sake he hadn't realized how hurtful his statement would be - well Harry's response advised him of that. Someone who didn't wish to twist a knife in Harry's heart would make an apologetic statement at that point, imo (not necessarily an apology). For example, 'Potter, you have to understand that your behavior is beyond the pale because *insert explanation*.

But Snape does not do this, instead he says: "What did you say to me, Potter?" Suddenly the conversation is all about Snape - how dare you speak to me that way Potter! Because we know he heard what Harry yelled at him. Harry repeats his assertion and adds that his father saved Snape's life, which is true. And Snape's response to that is to continue twisting the knife in Harry's heart. Forget about disrespecting the dead, forget about that Snape tells only part of the truth, forget about the fact that Snape tells a tale that is half opinion and doesn't disclose that to Harry. Rather, let's focus just on Harry - Snape is now continuing to twist the same heartwrenching knife into his heart by bad mouthing his father. No longer is there even a pretense of comparison going on, it is flat out vindictiveness, imo. And proven by the fact that at the end of his tale, Snape says nothing about any moral lesson - he even admits in canon that his only purpose is to not have Harry run away with a false idea of his father. And then went on to tell a false tale, which he knew might be false (guessing about James' participation and motivation without having ever heard it from James) and was not complete to his knowledge (leaving out his culpability). ~~

No apology and no remorse later, Snape repeats (and had repeated) this type of behavior again and again throughout the series in my judgment. So that is the type of behavior I feel supports my view.

I also think that she couldn't draw our attention to every tiem she'd used misdirection throughout 7 long books, so I think in some places it is reasonable to use inference to reappraise Snape more kindly in the light of what we now know, even if this hasn't been explicitly flagged up. But I'd agree, not in every place.

Well I do personally, that is what I was trying to show in the long paragraph I wrote regarding how Jo had "reversed" all of Snape's evil bits. I simply don't feel that she did that with respect to his personal comportment or behavior. And she confirmed that she had not intended to do so in interview after DH, so I don't see the purpose (for myself) in attempting to see his behavior for other than it was in canon. The things that could be construed as evil, I totally agree that they require reappraisal. The only small pitfall is that some people have a different idea of "evil" than Jo. For example, she does not consider bullying children on par with Voldemort's evil, however, some people do see them as equivalent in terms of evilness. Others feel killing, no matter what the reason, cannot be justified under any circumstances for a good person - and so Snape killing Dumbledore would render him completely evil under that view - even though he did so for a good purpose. So the take on Snape is going to vary widely from reader to reader in my judgment.

I agree with Melaszka. I don't think Severus is shown as being very ambitious.

Imo, this is not comparable; this is like when Kingsley, Molly, Arthur and Lupin asked Harry what he was doing in DH. Dumbledore was dead, the knowledge would not advance their positions. Nor did they feel that Harry was evil and working in opposition to the overall plan of the Order to bring down Voldemort.

This argument can be applied to Snape too. Indeed, in DH, he asked Dumbledore's portrait why Harry needed the sword of Gryffindor. Dumbledore was dead at the time and he always wanted to know what Harry's mission was.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this, because to me a Snape who did try to justify or excuse his treatment of Lily to Harry would not only be ruining the planting of clues and red herrings, but would be a whining, self-centred weakling, more interested in gaining understanding and forgiveness for himself than in helping Harry gain an accurate view of his mother.

I agree. Moreover, I really can't blame Severus for not having apologized to Harry for his past behaviour. I think that even if one admit it was the right thing to do, you can't expect that anyone in Severus' position would think of the perception of Lily it would give to Harry. It is simply unrealistic. Actually, it would not have crossed my mind and yet I don't think I am bad. And I think it's important to keep in mind Harry put himself in that situation. He was at fault and it was certainly not to Severus to apologize.

Sorry for my poor english. I'm good to read it but not to speak it.

This argument can be applied to Snape too. Indeed, in DH, he asked Dumbledore's portrait why Harry needed the sword of Gryffindor. Dumbledore was dead at the time and he always wanted to know what Harry's mission was.

That's an excellent point - clearly he wasn't trying to gain status in the Order and be Dumbledore's No 1 Man there, he's just inquisitive. (And your English is great, btw).

WWB, I wish you wouldn't make so many interesting points - reading and replying to your posts is making it impossible for me to get any work done! :lol: I'm not going to hve time to do your post justice -I may respond to the excellent Sirius/cleaning point on the Feminism thread, because it ties in with the arguments there about JKR debunking macho notions of heroism.

Posted by wickedwickedboy
I would include the Malfoys as people that Snape had some compassion for. That takes us up to 5.

I find it hard to believe that he doesn't have compassion for Harry when he complains that Dumbledore has been "raising him like a pig for the slaughter". Or for Ginny when his hands whiten because he's gripping the chair so hard when he hears she's been taken into the Chamber of Secrets. Or for Hermione when he rebukes Phineas for calling her "Mudblood". I think he has compassion for many people - he just doesn't like them.

Because Snape was fond of Gryffindor up to that point? I would respectfully disagree. Like Draco, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott, Parkinson and Zabini, Snape loved Slytherin, and hated Gryffindor on account, imo. Like Ron, Ginny, and the Twins, James loved Gryffindor and hated Slytherin on account, imo.

I'm not saying Snape was fond of Gryffindor - like Draco et al, I presume he was taught by his mother that Slytherin=good, Gryffindor=bad and has never questioned that. I suspect that he never took anti-Gryffindor hatred on board enough to preach it to Lily, though (she clearly wasn't saying "Not Gryffindor, please not Gryffindor" when she had the Sorting Hat on). And he clearly, in my view, was not deliberately insulting or provoking Gryffindors when he said to Lily "You'd best be in Slytherin".

My point was that many people attribute the Snape/Marauders feud to things that make it Snape's fault - his jealousy at James's Quidditch skill or success with Lily, his supposed interest in the Dark Arts (and others to things that make it James's fault, like unprovoked bullying). While I don't doubt that some of these things happened later on and deepened the feud, I think that their initial Hogwarts journey shows that the feud started from something that was neither of them's fault - Snape made an innocent private comment to Lily, which James overheard, misinterpreted, and went on the attack about, to which Snape responded. That's why I say that, to an extent, Snape is a victim of circumstances and misunderstandings.


I don't feel that explaining why Snape behaved in a horrible manner served to show him as compassionately drawn. I feel that as you mentioned, Harry, Sirius, Lupin and others were shown to have equally troubling youthful problems and overcame them to be loving and compassionate people. So I feel that Snape was a case study in the other direction.


I think the circumstances were different for Snape, though. Not worse, but different.

Sirius had an upbringing more like Draco's than Snape's - wealth and privilege, as well as pureblood indoctrination and pressure from his parents. That he rose above the latter is admirable (although I do also wonder how much the rejection of everything his parents stood for was intrinsic goodness, and how much of it was just a natural rebellious streak, and whether he would have rejected their values whatever they believed in - but that's probably one for the Sirius thread) but he didn't face the poverty and social ostracism that Snape did.

Lupin and Harry had more in common with Snape and their childhood problems were as bad or worse, and they, too, faced poverty, bullying and ostracism before they attended Hogwarts. But, unlike him, they didn't have a mother who preached Slytherin superiority and who possibly (this is circumstantial, at best, I know, but I believe it's hinted) badmouthed his Muggle father and blamed all the family problems on her mesalliance with a Muggle.

So I think Snape faced both the pureblood indoctrination/confrontational home life that Sirius faced AND the poverty and ostracism that Lupin faced. A double whammy.

Afer childhood rejection, Harry, Lupin and Snape (and Pettigrew, come to that) were all lucky enough to find a group of peers who accepted them when they came to Hogwarts, but while Snape was accepted by Dark Arts-obsessed pureblood supremacists who reinforced his distrust and hatred of Muggles and encouraged his cruelty, Harry and Lupin were accepted by Gryffindors, who reinforced good qualities.

Yes, I know he was accepted by Lily, too, but I think it's hard for teenagers to resist the lure of a peer group, which is always going to be more powerful than the lure of one person at that age, no matter how much you love that person.

I agree that this explains his DE involvement more than his general cruelty. I also agree that circumstances are never a total excuse for poor behaviour.

But I do think that JKR lets him off the hook a little bit - why else would she stress the contrast between "pampered", "adored" James and Snape as heavily as she does, if not to indicate that Snape's background was a contributory factor to his nastiness and that James never faced the same pressures and temptations that Snape did?

Thinking about Snape-James-Pettigrew often brings to mind Defoe's comment on Moll Flanders, "She who yields when she is asked is one step ahead of her who is never asked, and two steps ahead of her who yields before she is asked."

And, actually, it's a bit off-topic, but I don't think Sirius and Lupin are portrayed as having "overcome their youthful problems" - they both seem flawed in their own ways by their experiences, and that's why they are my favourite characters after Snape - because, like him, they are psychologically complex, damaged and very far from perfect.

To me he was a bad man who was on the good side. I don't really like the term "bad man" which has "evil" connotations. What I mean is that I feel he was mean-spirited, cruel, bullying and vindictive; that he not only couldn't overcome his past, but he relished the present on accout of his behavior. JKR wrote in far too many sneers, smirks, and enjoyment of humiliating sarcastic remarks and put downs as well as taunting statements for me to understand that Snape was not taking pleasure from behaving in the manner he did. There were times when he acted in that manner when he was truly upset, but more often than not, it was in the classroom where he was simply enjoying his unpleasantness, imo.

I've still not come to any firm conclusions about how much of Snape's behaviour I think is genuinely cruel nastiness. I've never been one to try and excuse every single cruel comment Snape makes on "having to maintain his cover" or "trying to toughen Harry and Neville up", to make them more able to control their emotions when they face Voldemort (although I think in some places there are elements of both). I accept that The Prince's Tale does confirm, beyond any shadow of doubt, that he does not like Harry, because he reminds him of James, and is frequently nasty to him just for that reason.

I'd say this makes him flawed, rather than blanket bad, though.

I'd also say that we also have canon that on some occasions his cruelty is an act. Umbridge's office at the end of OotP is the classic example - his lines about Umbridge having his sincerest sympathies if she wanted to poison Harry, and the casual comment to Crabbe (or is it Goyle?) about loosening his hold on Neville a little, because if he kills him it will mean a lot of tedious paperwork, are classic Snape put-downs, similar in manner to cruel things he says elsewhere. In this context, though, they are clearly not just gratuitous cruelty, but manufactured for a purpose - so Snape can help the Order, while appearing not to help the Order. This scene has always opened up for me the tantalising possibility that he is doing a similar thing elsewhere.

I think there's a lot of self-loathing in Snape's treatment of other people, too. It seems to me that often when he seems needlessly cutting to others, it's because their behaviour actually reminds him of himself.

This is probably most obvious when he has a go at Tonks about changing her Patronus to a "weak" one. We know that he's been in almost exactly the same situation - hopelessly in love with someone who doesn't appear to return the feelings (and please don't say that he's malicious here because he's jealous that Lupin loves her back, because he can't know that - even Tonks doesn't know that at that point) and his Patronus was affected as a result.

I think the other obvious one is in Occlumency lessons when he tells Harry that "Fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked so easily - weak people in other words - [...] will find [themselves] easy prey for the Dark Lord". If ever there's a phrase that ought to be followed by "But that's enough about me, Potter, let's talk about you", then that is it.

I can think of many other examples. What's going on here? Is he merely taking out his own faults on other people (which I agree he is doing to an extent) or is he trying (in his own inept way) to help them? I would argue that he is, that he is anxious that they should not make the same mistakes that he did. The only problem is that he goes the wrong way about it.

I also have a theory that although he thinks Harry winds him up because he reminds him of James, that actually he winds him up because he reminds him of himself. But I'm wandering into wild conjecture here...

I really like your thoughts, Melaszka. Especially that last one, which is intriguing. It really works when you consider the sort of self-loathing Severus must feel and the similarity between him and Harry.

While he may or may not see himself in Harry most of the time, I think the "fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves" speech is, quite plainly, at least one instance of that. I agree that he is mainly talking about himself there, but why bring it up? Because Harry has just done something to remind Severus of the man he used to be.

WWB, I wish you wouldn't make so many interesting points - reading and replying to your posts is making it impossible for me to get any work done! :lol: I'm not going to hve time to do your post justice.

:lol:. Well take your time; if you answer a week or two later, I will still read it.

I'm not saying Snape was fond of Gryffindor - like Draco et al, I presume he was taught by his mother that Slytherin=good, Gryffindor=bad and has never questioned that. I suspect that he never took anti-Gryffindor hatred on board enough to preach it to Lily, though (she clearly wasn't saying "Not Gryffindor, please not Gryffindor" when she had the Sorting Hat on). And he clearly, in my view, was not deliberately insulting or provoking Gryffindors when he said to Lily "You'd best be in Slytherin".

I agree.

My point was that many people attribute the Snape/Marauders feud to things that make it Snape's fault - his jealousy at James's Quidditch skill or success with Lily, his supposed interest in the Dark Arts (and others to things that make it James's fault, like unprovoked bullying). While I don't doubt that some of these things happened later on and deepened the feud, I think that their initial Hogwarts journey shows that the feud started from something that was neither of them's fault - Snape made an innocent private comment to Lily, which James overheard, misinterpreted, and went on the attack about, to which Snape responded.

I agree, only I don't think James misinterpreted; I simply think he didn't like Slytherin. It was a pretty simple statement; Snape planned to be in Slytherin and he wanted Lily to be in the same house with him. What other interpretation would there be?

That's why I say that, to an extent, Snape is a victim of circumstances and misunderstandings.

I don’t think there were any misunderstandings. However, I agree that Snape, Sirius, James and Lily were all victims of circumstance (if that is what you meant).

I think the circumstances were different for Snape, though. Not worse, but different. Sirius had an upbringing more like Draco's than Snape's - wealth and privilege, as well as pureblood indoctrination and pressure from his parents. That he rose above the latter is admirable (although I do also wonder how much the rejection of everything his parents stood for was intrinsic goodness, and how much of it was just a natural rebellious streak, and whether he would have rejected their values whatever they believed in - but that's probably one for the Sirius thread) but he didn't face the poverty and social ostracism that Snape did.

Well for Snape it never got to the point where he ran away from home - his name stricken from the family tree. We are missing pieces for Sirius, but imo, things were worse than simple denial of values or a rebellious streak. Poverty wasn't a problem for him, but social ostracism was - in the reverse. For example, Sirius had not accumulated a group of pureblood friends as Draco had with Nott and others. So I would say in his own way, his situation was as bad as Snape's.

Lupin and Harry had more in common with Snape and their childhood problems were as bad or worse, and they, too, faced poverty, bullying and ostracism before they attended Hogwarts. But, unlike him, they didn't have a mother who preached Slytherin superiority and who possibly (this is circumstantial, at best, I know, but I believe it's hinted) badmouthed his Muggle father and blamed all the family problems on her mesalliance with a Muggle.

So I think Snape faced both the pureblood indoctrination/confrontational home life that Sirius faced AND the poverty and ostracism that Lupin faced. A double whammy.

But I do not follow you because it seems your reasoning is very Snape-Centric. With respect to Lupin; Snape did not have to face being a werewolf or the pain and anguish of transformation once a month. Revealing poverty can be embarrassing, but revealing one is a werewolf has real social consequences, so this type of hiding and secreting information was also something he did not have to face. He also didn't have to face the fact that his parent's poverty was at least in part due to his being a werewolf (setting up a special room in the house, searching for cures, buying healing potions, etc.) With respect to Harry; Snape had no bully equivalent to Dudley who lived with him and tormented him in and out of the house; he did not live in a cupboard or that we know of, or receive merely an orange for dinner. He was not told his parents had been alcoholic wastrels that died in a car crash and he was thus, worthless. Snape's whole family was poor, but the Dursleys were middle class - only Harry was treated as if they were poor. Thus, I would respectfully disagree that Snape had it worse.

Afer childhood rejection, Harry, Lupin and Snape (and Pettigrew, come to that) were all lucky enough to find a group of peers who accepted them when they came to Hogwarts, but while Snape was accepted by Dark Arts-obsessed pureblood supremacists who reinforced his distrust and hatred of Muggles and encouraged his cruelty, Harry and Lupin were accepted by Gryffindors, who reinforced good qualities.

I agree in part; but Snape (perhaps because of his mum) wanted to be in Slytherin and be accepted by these people. This was not something that merely "happened" to Snape - he wanted Slytherin. So while I agree with the reinforcing part, his being in Slytherin wasn’t "happenstance" imo, nor was making friends with those in the house who shared his views. That is what Snape wanted from the get go, imo.

Yes, I know he was accepted by Lily, too, but I think it's hard for teenagers to resist the lure of a peer group, which is always going to be more powerful than the lure of one person at that age, no matter how much you love that person.

I agree; but again, you have to take Snape's personal desires into account as well, imo. He was not buffeted along on the wind of the desires of others. He had determined what he wanted and allowed those who thought like he did to reinforce his ideology, rather than adopt Lily's which was different from his own, imo.

But I do think that JKR lets him off the hook a little bit - why else would she stress the contrast between "pampered", "adored" James and Snape as heavily as she does, if not to indicate that Snape's background was a contributory factor to his nastiness and that James never faced the same pressures and temptations that Snape did?

Imo, that was not revealed to let either boy off the hook. It was merely an explanation to help us understand where they were coming from. I agree that Snape’s background contributed to his nastiness; but by the same token, James’ background contributed to his being too arrogant. In my judgment, both would have to work to overcome the flaws wrought by their backgrounds. Admittedly, James’ childhood flaws were more common and easier to overcome, and like most kids, he was successful at doing so. Whereas Snape’s, were less common and more difficult to overcome and he was unable to surmount them. The thing is, one doesn’t give up on overcoming a flaw merely because it is difficult to overcome; it just means a longer and harder struggle. But, imo, Snape was unwilling to recognize some of his flaws as flaws (even when they were pointed out to him), so he never desired to work toward overcoming them and died still burdened with them.

And, actually, it's a bit off-topic, but I don't think Sirius and Lupin are portrayed as having "overcome their youthful problems" - they both seem flawed in their own ways by their experiences, and that's why they are my favourite characters after Snape - because, like him, they are psychologically complex, damaged and very far from perfect.

I agree; I only meant to the extent of being able to show compassion more openly and being kind and loving toward many people, as opposed to the way Snape grew up to be.

I've still not come to any firm conclusions about how much of Snape's behaviour I think is genuinely cruel nastiness. I've never been one to try and excuse every single cruel comment Snape makes on "having to maintain his cover" or "trying to toughen Harry and Neville up", to make them more able to control their emotions when they face Voldemort (although I think in some places there are elements of both). I accept that The Prince's Tale does confirm, beyond any shadow of doubt, that he does not like Harry, because he reminds him of James, and is frequently nasty to him just for that reason. I'd say this makes him flawed, rather than blanket bad, though.

Yes, but if you are making the assumption that if Harry was James it would be all right to treat Harry the way he did, then I would disagree. First, I grant that they were a lot a like. But James being more arrogant, pranking more and more ready to hex when molested, would not serve as a sound basis for overt mistreatment, imo. That is to say, even young James would not merit the treatment that Snape was doling out to Harry, imo. In my judgment: you do not stricture people because they are popular and Quidditch stars and crowds gather around to congratulate them; if they are arrogant, you give a good basis for it and recommend a proper solution (i.e., reporting a person who molested you to a teacher rather than hexing them.) You do not stricture people for breaking rules without knowing the reason and assume it is a poor one. You do not stricture people for becoming angry when someone calls their friend a Mudblood or calls them a blood traitor (although you may stricture their response if it is incorrect). You don't belittle anyone's dead parent before them, stating your opinions as if they were facts. You don’t simply give your negative opinion because you are feeling vindictive (i.e., others may think your great, but to me you are just a nasty little boy.) You don’t cruelly humiliate just because it is funny (i.e., reading a negative article about the child from a newspaper in class.) So that is why I always get a little cautious when discussing this - I feel sometimes people make the assumption - that if it was actually James that Snape was dealing with, his behavior would be all right. To me it would not be all right.

I realize this puts an extra burden on Snape because it takes away from his justification. But I feel it is important to really look deeply into the entire scope of the matter. What Snape was doing was taking out his jealousy and childhood animosity for James on Harry, imo. Even if Harry merited stricture, and even if he was behaving just like James, he did not merit gross mistreatment; that was simply improper behavior on Snape’s part, imo.

I'd also say that we also have canon that on some occasions his cruelty is an act. Umbridge's office at the end of OotP is the classic example - his lines about Umbridge having his sincerest sympathies if she wanted to poison Harry, and the casual comment to Crabbe (or is it Goyle?) about loosening his hold on Neville a little, because if he kills him it will mean a lot of tedious paperwork, are classic Snape put-downs, similar in manner to cruel things he says elsewhere. In this context, though, they are clearly not just gratuitous cruelty, but manufactured for a purpose - so Snape can help the Order, while appearing not to help the Order. This scene has always opened up for me the tantalising possibility that he is doing a similar thing elsewhere.

For me, this possibility was never really opened up because I always thought Snape was on the good side - there were no surprises for me in TPT except the "why". So I did not have to do much reappraising of his character after DH.

I think there's a lot of self-loathing in Snape's treatment of other people, too. It seems to me that often when he seems needlessly cutting to others, it's because their behaviour actually reminds him of himself. This is probably most obvious when he has a go at Tonks about changing her Patronus to a "weak" one. We know that he's been in almost exactly the same situation - hopelessly in love with someone who doesn't appear to return the feelings (and please don't say that he's malicious here because he's jealous that Lupin loves her back, because he can't know that - even Tonks doesn't know that at that point) and his Patronus was affected as a result.

I agree with you about the reasoning; but Snape did say it maliciously, that is in the book. But that was not because he thought Lupin loved her back, imo, that was because he simply behaved in a malicious manner at times. "Malice" has an interpretation of its own that is the exact opposite of desiring to be helpful; I don't think JKR would have chosen that word if she wished for us to determine or reappraise Snape as being helpful in this scene.


I think the other obvious one is in Occlumency lessons when he tells Harry that "Fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked so easily - weak people in other words - [...] will find [themselves] easy prey for the Dark Lord". If ever there's a phrase that ought to be followed by "But that's enough about me, Potter, let's talk about you", then that is it.

:rotfl: indeed.

I can think of many other examples. What's going on here? Is he merely taking out his own faults on other people (which I agree he is doing to an extent) or is he trying (in his own inept way) to help them? I would argue that he is, that he is anxious that they should not make the same mistakes that he did. The only problem is that he goes the wrong way about it.

Where as I see it as Snape taking out his frustration and bitterness. I do not believe that he was benevolently attempting to help everyone around him. In example I ask a series of questions: What help did he give Hermione telling her there was no difference between her teeth and the overgrown ones? What good did it do Harry to belittle his father to the extent of stating his opinions as facts? What help was it to Lupin to rat him out to the students? What help was it to Sirius to belittle James before him? What help was it to Neville to tell Lupin that he was a dunce before the whole class? I do not see Snape acting with the purpose to help in these situations; he was acting with the purpose of doling out pain and anguish to these people, imo. (I don't mean to say he never helped anyone, btw - he was trying to help Draco when he spoke to him in the classroom for instance.)

I also have a theory that although he thinks Harry winds him up because he reminds him of James, that actually he winds him up because he reminds him of himself. But I'm wandering into wild conjecture here...

Well then James would have had to remind him of himself too as father and son were actually much a like as their stag patronuses evidenced. My theory in that regard is that Snape actually desired to be like both father and son in ways and that is why they wound him up. Harry was not like Snape, imo, so I am not sure why you feel that might have been the case. In my opinion, Harry (and James) were the antithesis of Snape.

I also have a theory that although he thinks Harry winds him up because he reminds him of James, that actually he winds him up because he reminds him of himself. But I'm wandering into wild conjecture here...
That is a very good point! It is acknowledged by Psychologists that the things that wind us up most about other people are the faults they have which we also have. So while it may be wild conjecture it does have some basis in reality. The thing that springs to mind is that Snape is always harping on about Harry "sneaking around" and being caught out of bed. Well Snape did his share of sneaking around - in the Hogs Head for example - and that lead to the greatest regret of his life.

I agree, only I don't think James misinterpreted; I simply think he didn't like Slytherin. It was a pretty simple statement; Snape planned to be in Slytherin and he wanted Lily to be in the same house with him. What other interpretation would there be?

I say "misinterpretation", because I'm speculating that James may have assumed that anyone enthusiastic about Slytherin must be into the Dark Arts. This is the only way I can make any sense of Sirius's assertion that James hated Snape from day one because of his Dark Arts interest. This is clearly untrue - James laid into Snape on the train before he had any evidence of Dark Arts interests, and other evidence suggests it was at least a couple of years before Snape got into the Dark Arts (in the memory in The Prince's Tale where Lily first berates Snape for his DA interests, we are told "a few years seemed to have passed since their Sorting", and in the HBP , we are told of the "increasing nastiness" of the spells in Snape's Potions book- implying that they were quite innocent at first).


I don’t think there were any misunderstandings. However, I agree that Snape, Sirius, James and Lily were all victims of circumstance (if that is what you meant).

Agreed

Well for Snape it never got to the point where he ran away from home - his name stricken from the family tree. We are missing pieces for Sirius, but imo, things were worse than simple denial of values or a rebellious streak. Poverty wasn't a problem for him, but social ostracism was - in the reverse. For example, Sirius had not accumulated a group of pureblood friends as Draco had with Nott and others. So I would say in his own way, his situation was as bad as Snape's.

I'd never thought of it like that. OK, I see what you mean, but I still find it hard to perceive Sirius as a socially inept Billy No Mates, desperate for a friend because nobody likes him. He strieks me as someone for whom the world was always his oyster.

But I do not follow you because it seems your reasoning is very Snape-Centric. With respect to Lupin; Snape did not have to face being a werewolf or the pain and anguish of transformation once a month. Revealing poverty can be embarrassing, but revealing one is a werewolf has real social consequences, so this type of hiding and secreting information was also something he did not have to face. He also didn't have to face the fact that his parent's poverty was at least in part due to his being a werewolf (setting up a special room in the house, searching for cures, buying healing potions, etc.) With respect to Harry; Snape had no bully equivalent to Dudley who lived with him and tormented him in and out of the house; he did not live in a cupboard or that we know of, or receive merely an orange for dinner. He was not told his parents had been alcoholic wastrels that died in a car crash and he was thus, worthless. Snape's whole family was poor, but the Dursleys were middle class - only Harry was treated as if they were poor. Thus, I would respectfully disagree that Snape had it worse.

I didn't mean to suggest that Snape had it worse, but I do think his peculiar combination of circumstances made it easier for him to drift into a DE position. (a) His poverty and sense of being different from his muggle peers gave him an inferiority complex and desire to prove himself, his ostracism made him seek friends and cling to them when he got them, and (b) the friends he was introduced to at Hogwarts were bad friends, whose ideas were not good ones to cling to. I agree that Lupin's childhood was far, far worse than Snape's (although he at least seems to have had loving parents), so he had (a) much worse than Snape (well, admittedly, to his credit, not the desire to prove himself), but by sheer luck he didn't get (b), so the lure to being a DE wasn't there.

I agree in part; but Snape (perhaps because of his mum) wanted to be in Slytherin and be accepted by these people. This was not something that merely "happened" to Snape - he wanted Slytherin. So while I agree with the reinforcing part, his being in Slytherin wasn’t "happenstance" imo, nor was making friends with those in the house who shared his views. That is what Snape wanted from the get go, imo.

But I don't believe he knew what "Slytherin" meant (and, actually, I don't think "Slytherin" does mean "Dark Arts", anyway. Slughorn's all right). I don't think eleven-year-old Snape chose Slytherin because he already wanted to be a Death Eater when he grew up. Just as Harry chose Gryffindor becasue the first two nice people he'd met in the wizard world (Hagrid and Ron) told him it was the best house, so Snape chose Slytherin because he's been told it's the best house by someone he loves. I don't think he's attracted by the pureblood/Dark Arts agenda. Evidence that he was?

I agree; but again, you have to take Snape's personal desires into account as well, imo. He was not buffeted along on the wind of the desires of others. He had determined what he wanted and allowed those who thought like he did to reinforce his ideology, rather than adopt Lily's which was different from his own, imo.

I don't believe he had an "ideology" at eleven. I think, because he'd been rejected by Muggles, he longed to be amongst wizards and witches, to gain a sense of belonging, and looked down on all Muggles in a kind of reactive "yah boo sucks, well, if you don't want to play with me, I don't care, because I wouldn't want to play with you, anyway" response, which explains his dismissal of Petunia. And, maybe because I'm not St Melaszka myself, I can really understand this rejecting-the-rejecter response.

I think it was this distrust of Muggles (NB NOT muggleborn witches and wizards) that made him open to pureblood ideology, when he encountered it at Hogwarts.

But I think he was very far from having a coherent pureblood or Dark Arts ideology when he arrived at Hogwarts, I think if he'd been in a different house he would have outgrown his anti-muggle feelings and, unlike the Malfoys et al, I don't believe he ever deep down had a problem with muggleborn witches/wizards.

Imo, that was not revealed to let either boy off the hook. It was merely an explanation to help us understand where they were coming from. I agree that Snape’s background contributed to his nastiness; but by the same token, James’ background contributed to his being too arrogant.

I'd never looked at it this way. I see what you mean (and I do think there's a weird kind of James/Dudley parallel going on, which would fit in with this idea that being "adored" is a form of abuse). i still feel that the contrast is emphasised, though, mainly to win sympathy for Snape, if not totally let him off the hook.

In my judgment, both would have to work to overcome the flaws wrought by their backgrounds. Admittedly, James’ childhood flaws were more common and easier to overcome

Yes. I think most people would find it hard to perceive being too rich, too loved by one's parents and too popular as being the same order of problem as being too poor, too neglected and too friendless.

and like most kids, he was successful at doing so.

I think my biggest problem with accepting the James = good, overcame his problems/ Snape=horrible, didn't bother to overcome his problems opposition is that we see so little of James in the text that I find it hard to see him as having overcome his arrogance and bullying. I accept that JKR intends us to believe that he did, as Sirius and Lupin tell us he did, and Hagrid and several of the other teachers say smashing things about him. But we don't really get a sustained, concrete example of James being nice to people, so our only vivid firsthand picture of him is SWM. I know I'm probably reading against the grain of what JKR wants us to think, but I do find the golden boy James image hard to swallow.

Yes, but if you are making the assumption that if Harry was James it would be all right to treat Harry the way he did, then I would disagree.

I think two things make Snape's treatment of Harry unfair - 1. he's not James 2. he's a child and Snape's an adult in loco parentis.

First, I grant that they were a lot a like. But James being more arrogant, pranking more and more ready to hex when molested, would not serve as a sound basis for overt mistreatment, imo.

as I see it, ready to hex even when not molested. But I don't want to get into a James debate on a Snape thread

That is to say, even young James would not merit the treatment that Snape was doling out to Harry, imo. In my judgment: you do not stricture people because they are popular and Quidditch stars and crowds gather around to congratulate them; if they are arrogant, you give a good basis for it and recommend a proper solution (i.e., reporting a person who molested you to a teacher rather than hexing them.)

But there is a bit of a convention in the HP books that you don't report fellow students to staff. Hermione gets away with it occasionally (e.g. reporting to McG Harry's broom that arrives mysteriously by OWL), but most of the time, those who report students to staff in HP are portrayed as either manipulative sneaks like Malfoy, or rule-obsessed jobsworths like young Hermione and Percy, who need to develop into more easygoing, nicer people as part of their character arc. Harry and Ron never report Malfoy - they merely make sure he gets his comeuppance. So, while reporting James to a teacher might have been the proper solution for Snape in real life, I don't feel it is portrayed as such in the books.

You do not stricture people for breaking rules without knowing the reason and assume it is a poor one.

In fairness to Snape, much of the time Harry lies to him when asked what he is doing/where he is going/why, so, while I agree that Snape doesn't listen to or respect Harry enough, I can't entirely blame him for jumping to his own generally wrong) conclusions.

And, anyway, surely the main reason Snape goes mental when he finds Harry breaking the rules (whatever Harry's reasons) is because of his special role as Harry's protector? "Keeping Lily Potter's son safe" is his whole raison d'etre, and Harry does make this job very hard work. I've always thought that his compulsive urge to get Harry expelled might be motivated by the same thing that motivates Dobby to try to get Harry out of Hogwarts in Year 2 - he thinks Harry will be safer elsewhere.

You do not stricture people for becoming angry when someone calls their friend a Mudblood or calls them a blood traitor (although you may stricture their response if it is incorrect).

I know this is often the lazy default response, but he does have to maintain his cover. In these cases I clearly think he has to appear to be biased towards the blood prejudice crowd, to make his role as a DE plausible.

Even if Harry merited stricture, and even if he was behaving just like James, he did not merit gross mistreatment; that was simply improper behavior on Snape’s part, imo.

I agree that Snape handles things badly and says things more cruelly than he needs to.

However, we have canon that Snape offends people even when he's trying to be nice (i.e. when he first reveals himself to Lily and says "you're a witch"), so there is some mileage in the argument that Snape is socially inept, not always deliberately vindictive.

Secondly, there is often not a problem with WHAT Snape says, it is HOW he phrases it. e.g. in PoA when he says:

"Everyone from the Minister for Magic downwards has been trying to keep famous Harry Potter safe from Sirius Black. But famous Harry Potter is a law unto himself. Let the ordinary people worry about his safety! Famous Harry Potter goes where he wants to, with no thought for the consequences"

- the main gist in this seems to me to be not much materially different from Dumbledore in HBP when he says:

"And lastly, while you stay here, The Burrow has been given the highest security the Ministry of Magic can provide. These measures have caused a certain amount of inconvenience to Arthur and Molly - all their post, for instance, is being searched at the Ministry, before being sent on. They do not mind in the slightest, for their only concern is your safety. However, it would be poor repayment if you risked your neck while staying with them."

Both characters are saying, "Look, people are busting their gut to keep you safe. The least you can do is help them out by not recklessly putting yourself in danger."

Yes, DD is much nicer and much more mature about it, showing a much deeper knowledge of Harry's character, by appealing to his good nature, rather than using sarcasm to try to humiliate him. (although, in fairness to Snape, Harry has already put himself in danger when they meet in PoA, so he has more to be angry about than DD, who is only warning Harry in advance not to put himself in danger). But I would argue that both characters have the same message and the same primary motivation - to keep Harry safe. I don't think humiliation is Snape's motivation here, it is the (poorly chosen) means of trying to effect his goal.

I agree with you about the reasoning; but Snape did say it maliciously, that is in the book. But that was not because he thought Lupin loved her back, imo, that was because he simply behaved in a malicious manner at times. "Malice" has an interpretation of its own that is the exact opposite of desiring to be helpful; I don't think JKR would have chosen that word if she wished for us to determine or reappraise Snape as being helpful in this scene.

But the narrative is sometimes unreliable (aka the Harry filter). e.g. in PoA when Sirius explains that he has lured Harry to the Shrieking Shack by kidnapping Ron because he expected Harry to come after him and rescue his best friend, because that is what his father would have done, the 3rd person narrative says, "The taunt about his father rang in Harry's ears as though Black had bellowed it." Of course, it wasn't a "taunt" at all, but JKR still chooses this word, even though she clearly wants us to go back and reappraise that remark later.

And nothing dictates that the "malice" Snape uses is aimed at Tonks - like the "hatred" and "revulsion" on his face when he kills Dumbledore, it is just possible that the "malice" at this point is self-inflicted, that he is remembering (as he did in the Occlumency lesson) how his own unrequited love made him "weak".

Where as I see it as Snape taking out his frustration and bitterness. I do not believe that he was benevolently attempting to help everyone around him.

I didn't say he was attempting to help everyone, all the time. I have already accepted that some of the time it's pure malice. I just don't think it is all of the time.

What good did it do Harry to belittle his father to the extent of stating his opinions as facts?

(a) Stopping him from making his father's mistakes and continuing to be as arrogant as him (I know he's not arrogant like his father, but there's canon that Snape genuinely - if wrongly and totally unfairly - thinks he is. I believe he's trying to snark the behaviour out of him)?

(b) Stopping Harry from making his own mistakes? I find it significant that the alleged trait of James/Harry that Snape most harps on - that he thought he was "special" and "important" - is the one which got Snape most into trouble as a young man, in that it was a desire to be "special" and "important" that led him to join the DE. I do feel that knowing how dangerous arrogance and an inflated view of himself proved in his own case, this makes him want to stamp them out in others.

What help was it to Lupin to rat him out to the students?

It wasn't helping Lupin at all, but as I've explained, I believe he thought he was getting justice for Lily (and possibly helping the students by keeping them safe from a DE's associate and a werewolf. And after what happens at the Shrieking Shack, even Lupin believes his condition isn't sufficently under control for him to be safe around students, so i don't think it's just half-breed prejudice on Snape's part)

What help was it to Sirius to belittle James before him? What help was it to Neville to tell Lupin that he was a dunce before the whole class? I do not see Snape acting with the purpose to help in these situations; he was acting with the purpose of doling out pain and anguish to these people, imo. (I don't mean to say he never helped anyone, btw - he was trying to help Draco when he spoke to him in the classroom for instance.)

I don't say he was trying to help in every situation, but I still feel he was trying to help in some situations where it looked like he wasn't (not just the obvious ones, like with Draco).

e.g. in Occlumency lessons, after seeing a burst of Harry's memories, including one where Aunt Marge's bulldog chased Harry up a tree, Snape asks "To whom did the dog belong?" That's a really odd question. Harry obviously perceives it as a humiliating taunt, as we're told he responds "hating Snape". But if it is a taunt, it's a surprisingly mild and ambiguous one for Snape, who is normally the ultimate tauntmeister. It was suggested by someone else a while back that we are meant to infer that a concerned Snape tells Dumbledore about this memory, and that is why several Order members turn up to have a go at the Dursleys at King's Cross at the end of the book. I don't know about that, but it's another possible example of a seeming taunt not really being a taunt.

Well then James would have had to remind him of himself too as father and son were actually much a like as their stag patronuses evidenced. My theory in that regard is that Snape actually desired to be like both father and son in ways and that is why they wound him up. Harry was not like Snape, imo, so I am not sure why you feel that might have been the case. In my opinion, Harry (and James) were the antithesis of Snape.

There are similarities between Harry and Snape, IMO. This is flagged up most clearly in HBP, when Harry identifies closely with the HBP of the Potions book and when Hermione says that Snape in DADA lessons sounds like Harry (ironically, that is the phenomenon I'm talking about in reverse - Harry sounds off about Snape most bitterly when he is actually behaving most like him!)

And I don't think Harry and James are that similar at all, except in looks. Harry is horrified by James's behaviour in SWM, Sirius is disappointed that Harry won't take the kind of risks that James would, and in DH Dumbledore himself rejects Snape's accusation that Harry is like his father by saying "In looks, perhaps, but his deepest nature is much more like his mother's"

And there's also the theory that Snape gives Harry a hard time because he can't bear to be reminded of Lily every time he looks into those green eyes.

I just think there are many, many possible reasons for Snape's snarkiness to Harry, other than just petty jealousy of his popularity (what popularity, anyway? Unlike James, Harry finds himself a pariah on several occasions, e.g. during the Triwizard, when everyone thinks he's put his own name into the goblet) and ability at Quidditch.

Posted by Cathy Weasley
That is a very good point! It is acknowledged by Psychologists that the things that wind us up most about other people are the faults they have which we also have. So while it may be wild conjecture it does have some basis in reality. The thing that springs to mind is that Snape is always harping on about Harry "sneaking around" and being caught out of bed. Well Snape did his share of sneaking around - in the Hogs Head for example - and that lead to the greatest regret of his life.

Good catch!

I say "misinterpretation", because I'm speculating that James may have assumed that anyone enthusiastic about Slytherin must be into the Dark Arts. This is the only way I can make any sense of Sirius's assertion that James hated Snape from day one because of his Dark Arts interest. This is clearly untrue - James laid into Snape on the train before he had any evidence of Dark Arts interests,

I don’t really follow you. Ron associated Slytherin with Voldemort’s entire regime, including the dark arts. Why wouldn’t James do the same?

I believe James did. I also believe that Snape knew some dark curses (although I doubt it was anywhere near more than any 7th year who bothered to learn dark curses. :lol:) So on the train, Snape saying to another: “You better be in Slytherin” was interpreted to mean that Snape backed Voldemort and the dark arts – and this was reinforced when they found out he knew dark curses (I would say even one, knowing kids.) I also agree that is a completely unfair judgment on James part about Snape, just like Ron made about Draco.

In the same way, I feel Snape made an unfair judgment of Gryffindor; accusing all of its members of being brawny with no intelligence (brains). I would say that included the unfair judgment that James was brawny and stupid.

Sirius, more knowledgeable about Slytherins and less ready to cave into generalizations altogether, imo, took the conversation to a whole new level. He went for flat out 11 year old insulting behavior: ‘since you are neither, which house will you be in?’

But I don't believe he knew what "Slytherin" meant (and, actually, I don't think "Slytherin" does mean "Dark Arts", anyway. Slughorn's all right). I don't think eleven-year-old Snape chose Slytherin because he already wanted to be a Death Eater when he grew up. Just as Harry chose Gryffindor becasue the first two nice people he'd met in the wizard world (Hagrid and Ron) told him it was the best house, so Snape chose Slytherin because he's been told it's the best house by someone he loves. I don't think he's attracted by the pureblood/Dark Arts agenda. Evidence that he was?

I don’t think that any of the kids had a clear idea about any of it. I think they just had general knowledge from their parents. I would agree that whatever dark curses Snape may have known and whatever supported his desire to be in Slytherin, if anything, only a very tenuous relationship to the pureblood rule that supported Voldemort’s regime. He would have only heard that type of talk from his mother and I am not convinced that her views were so insolated - she had married a Muggle after all. So it is more likely to me that she merely engaged his fascination in the dark arts and taught him a few dark curses to make him more accepted in Slytherin due to the fact that he was a half blood. I also agree this likely had nothing at all to do with being a Death Eater. I think even Regulus was encouraged in that regard by his parents a little later on.

I'd never looked at it this way. I see what you mean (and I do think there's a weird kind of James/Dudley parallel going on, which would fit in with this idea that being "adored" is a form of abuse). i still feel that the contrast is emphasized, though, mainly to win sympathy for Snape, if not totally let him off the hook.

James parents were not like the Dursleys. They were elderly and doted on their son, but they were good people, who unlike the Dursleys took Sirius in despite his belonging to the Black family and having a bit of their dangerous/reckless attitude. They showed him love and invited him over for dinner every Sunday even when he got his own place. This was the antithesis of the Dursleys who categorized Harry as a “freak” because he was of wizard birth and held disdain for him from the beginning for that reason alone.

James parents’ doted, and spoiled, but did not abuse James in overfeeding him and filling his head with nonsense about his birthright. After all, he teased Sirius out of his funk and continued to befriend him even after finding out about his ties to Slytherin house, merely because Sirius didn’t have an arrogant attitude about it, but rather a depressed one.

So while JKR’s comparative statement may have won sympathy for Snape for you, I don’t think we can conclude that was her purpose – I feel it was to explain. That is because it did not draw any sympathy for me and so it was not a foolproof means of doing that. JKR knew how to do that - she did it left and right with Harry after all. The distinction was that Harry behaved in a good hearted manner from the moment he stepped on the train. Snape on the other hand began with his “so what – she’d just a Muggle” statement to a crying Lily, which served to set my back up against him. So the comparison was more straight forward wealth, status and care oriented, imo.

I think my biggest problem with accepting the James = good, overcame his problems/ Snape=horrible, didn't bother to overcome his problems opposition is that we see so little of James in the text that I find it hard to see him as having overcome his arrogance and bullying. I accept that JKR intends us to believe that he did, as Sirius and Lupin tell us he did, and Hagrid and several of the other teachers say smashing things about him. But we don't really get a sustained, concrete example of James being nice to people, so our only vivid firsthand picture of him is SWM.

He was dead when the book began. That is a bit of a handicap, wouldn’t you say? :rotfl: But on the other hand, do you have a problem with Harry’s mum being a good person? In SWM we see her needling James while completely ignoring Sirius; then defending Snape while flirting with James – and more importantly, ignoring Snape as much as she did Sirius. Later she humiliates both boys and leaves. In the later memories, she is telling Snape that she does not approve of his behavior or that of his friends. We never see a kind, gentle, loving Lily who is patiently seeing the good in someone - we saw a harsh and slightly arrogant girl, pointing out the bad in everyone. So I could say that I have a hard time believing what JKR has said about her and also a hard time believing that she ever considered Snape a real friend because I never saw it. But I just take these things for granted. The most important fact for me however, is JKR said Harry had two loving parents (as adults) that worked for the good side - and that was all I needed to know about them, so I accept it, despite the scant vision we have of them and just accept all the other unimportant things she revealed about them they were never alive to show for themselves.

I know I'm probably reading against the grain of what JKR wants us to think, but I do find the golden boy James image hard to swallow.

But from that angle, I find it hard to swallow that James and Lily existed at all – I never saw them alive in canon. So if I am going to form an opinion of them as adults, I need help; not from their enemies – some girl who was jealous of Lily or a boy who hated James – but from their friends and acquaintances. And understand, to me all I need to know is what is necessary for the purposes of the storyline. They were good adults who showed their son love and prepared him to make it through his stint with the Dursleys without too much impact on his personality – rather they left their own mark on him. So I don’t care if Lily was argumentative and knew the bat bogey hex or if James was arrogant and pranked and hexed ad nausea when they were kids; for the purposes of the storyline, it is wholly immaterial to me. All I need to know about James and Lily that is important imo, is shown through Harry’s attitude, behavior, instinct and choices in life. That is because Harry behaved completely different than the Dursleys (the people who brought him up – and whom he might otherwise have behaved like) and instead reflected his real parents as they were when the reached adulthood (good people with normal flaws).

I think two things make Snape's treatment of Harry unfair - 1. he's not James 2. he's a child and Snape's an adult in loco parentis.

But my one and only point is this: if it was young James that Snape was treating the way he did, it would still be wrongful, imo. No child deserves overt mistreatment. If they are attempting to murder, or engaging in other criminal adult activities – then you need to put them in an institution for help. Neither James nor Harry fell into that category, but even if they had, overt mistreatment of them would not be the correct way to deal with them, imo.

I agree that Snape handles things badly and says things more cruelly than he needs to.

However, we have canon that Snape offends people even when he's trying to be nice (i.e. when he first reveals himself to Lily and says "you're a witch"), so there is some mileage in the argument that Snape is socially inept, not always deliberately vindictive.

I cut the paragraph for spatial reasons, because I wasn’t referring to the explanations behind Snape’s actions which we have discussed before. I respect your view on that. My only point was that you do not overtly mistreat children; not children like Draco, Tom Riddle, Harry, James, Snape or any kid. Professors must not do that because it is wrongful, imo.

But the narrative is sometimes unreliable (aka the Harry filter). e.g. in PoA when Sirius explains that he has lured Harry to the Shrieking Shack by kidnapping Ron because he expected Harry to come after him and rescue his best friend, because that is what his father would have done, the 3rd person narrative says, "The taunt about his father rang in Harry's ears as though Black had bellowed it." Of course, it wasn't a "taunt" at all, but JKR still chooses this word, even though she clearly wants us to go back and reappraise that remark later.

And nothing dictates that the "malice" Snape uses is aimed at Tonks - like the "hatred" and "revulsion" on his face when he kills Dumbledore, it is just possible that the "malice" at this point is self-inflicted, that he is remembering (as he did in the Occlumency lesson) how his own unrequited love made him "weak".

Well there are two important components to reappraisal of Snape's character, imo: words and context. JKR picks her words carefully, imo. Sirius didn’t speak “maliciously”, Harry simply understood the words as a taunt. If Snape did speak maliciously according to the text and his words were also a taunt. Furthermore, it was unraveled for us that Sirius was not taunting by subsequent revelations and Sirius’ behavior and treatment of Harry. Snape did not look remorseful, or call to Tonks to ‘wait’ or later speak to her at #12 G in a more conciliatory way – so there is no evidence that Snape hadn’t meant to hurt her with his words and was actually filled with concern. I don’t discount your interpretation altogether; I think his words could have very well been fueled by his similar situation. But to the extent that Snape meant to be helpful, I would have to respectfully disagree – as I see it, he would taunt himself about it, if he wasn’t him.

I didn't say he was attempting to help everyone, all the time. I have already accepted that some of the time it's pure malice. I just don't think it is all of the time.

Agreed, sometimes it is not pure malice, imo, also, because there are other factors involved. But it is indicated as well at times.

(a) Stopping him from making his father's mistakes and continuing to be as arrogant as him (I know he's not arrogant like his father, but there's canon that Snape genuinely - if wrongly and totally unfairly - thinks he is. I believe he's trying to snark the behaviour out of him)?

Actually, arrogance is one of Harry’s flaws; but as I said, it is not the same as attempted murder and does not warrant overt mistreatment. If Snape wanted to help, there was a proper means of going about it, imo.

Stopping Harry from making his own mistakes? I find it significant that the alleged trait of James/Harry that Snape most harps on - that he thought he was "special" and "important" - is the one which got Snape most into trouble as a young man, in that it was a desire to be "special" and "important" that led him to join the DE. I do feel that knowing how dangerous arrogance and an inflated view of himself proved in his own case, this makes him want to stamp them out in others.

This is why I said he wanted to be like both James and Harry in that regard. But he also knows that many people with these traits did not end up Death Eaters – some ended up Order members and others didn’t take sides. Additionally, Snape didn’t try to stamp it out of Draco, and he was a far worse case than either of the Potters and in a far more precarious situation – on the brink of truly emulating young Snape.

There are similarities between Harry and Snape, IMO. This is flagged up most clearly in HBP, when Harry identifies closely with the HBP of the Potions book and when Hermione says that Snape in DADA lessons sounds like Harry (ironically, that is the phenomenon I'm talking about in reverse - Harry sounds off about Snape most bitterly when he is actually behaving most like him!)

Well there are similarities in Snape and everyone in canon in that regard. But this is not a true similarity, imo. They may have said the same things, but their innate behavior is far different. Harry sounded like Lupin on the patrous – but he didn’t have Lupin’s innate insecurities.

And I don't think Harry and James are that similar at all, except in looks. Harry is horrified by James's behaviour in SWM, Sirius is disappointed that Harry won't take the kind of risks that James would, and in DH Dumbledore himself rejects Snape's accusation that Harry is like his father by saying "In looks, perhaps, but his deepest nature is much more like his mother's"

Harry wasn’t horrified by the behavior – he was only upset because he thought his father had picked on an innocent boy, something he’d never imagined he’d do. Harry said in his POV that if it were Draco Malfoy, he could understand. Why should it be okay to pick on Draco Malfoy when he was just sitting minding his own business? Because Harry “knows” him. Well James “knew” Snape and to him, he was not innocent, something Harry discovered down the line and assimilated. Further, the many times that Sirius did find James in Harry (not related to looks) certainly greatly outnumber the one time he didn't. But more importantly, that was likely a misjudgment on Sirius' part because we know that James was not willing to undertake risk and recklessness to the extent of Sirius (i.e., his saving Snape instead of seeing it as Sirius did and laughingly allowing fate to befall Snape as it may. He risked his own life to ensure that was not the case and that Sirius was unwilling to do.)

Equally impactual is the fact that I feel Dumbledore’s statement to Snape was clearly for Snape’s benefit, imo, to help him see Harry in a kinder light. But Dumbledore also told Harry that his father was alive in him, how else would he issue that particular patronus? I’d add: and keep producing it. He also said James would have spared Peter also, thinking just like Harry (not because they look a like); Hagrid also said Harry had behaved exactly as his father had and he couldn't give him a higher compliment (nothing to do with their looks in this case either); Lupin said Harry was trusting like his father (again, nothing to do with looks); Sirius said 'you fly just as well as your father did' - nothing to do with looks, but their shared athleticism; he also said 'you think James and I would have taken (Umbridge's ridiculous rules) lying down?' hence Harry had acted like James (and him) in Sirius' opinion, which was not related to looks. There are more quotes, but since it is the Snape thread, I will allow that to suffice as examples of how James and Harry were said to be similar in canon, numerous times, unassociated with looks. And if you add all the times Snape added, which was based solely on viewing them and not really knowing them (which is a poor way to go about it, but he was clearly seeing similarities in actions, words and behavior) then you have an even greater multitude of similarities unassociated with looks in canon.

While I agree Harry likely had some of his mother's characteristics; they were never pointed out to him as frequently. We know she saw the good in some people where others might not (based on the movie but JKR said that was accurate) – and Harry did also (Luna/Neville), but so did James (Remus/Peter). But we know she didn’t likely break as many rules as Harry and his father did; we know the men shared the fault of arrogance (James’ was greater only early on, per the canon), that Lily was not said to have had; I think Lily was as trusting of her friends as James – like Harry – but that is not a distinction. All three were popular (Harry not at times due to his dealings with Voldemort – but otherwise as Quidditch Seeker/captain and also at other times due to his dealings with Voldy he was). All three were leader types that had the ‘good side’ outlook from their youth. Harry was aggressive and perhaps more impetuous than his father – but we don’t hear or see Lily being impetuous, although she was likely aggressive as she was an Order member. In as far as compassion, Harry out did them both – well he outdid the whole wizard world – with his capacity for compassion :lol:, but both his parents had compassion and openly showed it to many people – and not to others (Lily with Snape; James with Lupin – Lily not with Mulciber; James not with Snape). But that last is qualified for James as he saved his enemy’s life showing him compassion – like his son did – we don’t have Lily doing this, but I feel she would have.

But keep in mind that Lily’s inner animal was a doe, similar to a stag, but with its own refining characteristics – where as James and Harry were Stags – similar to a doe with their own refinement. So one would expect some similarities between all of them and thus, Dumbledore's stament was not patently untrue, imo, it was merely partially true.

Anyway, I hope you see what I am getting at here. James and Harry were a lot alike – Lily and James were a lot alike, which is why they were the love of one another’s lives and, as such, both much like their son in ways. And I do think that Harry may have seemed more like his mum or dad at various times in various circumstances - but not to the exclusion or full extent of either.

All that to say: Snape was correct in his assessment that Harry was like James, not exactly, but enough to support his saying so. But Harry was also like Lily in ways and Lily was like James in ways and that part of it, Snape did not appear to acknowledge, imo.

James parents were not like the Dursleys. They were elderly and doted on their son, but they were good people, who unlike the Dursleys took Sirius in despite his belonging to the Black family and having a bit of their dangerous/reckless attitude. They showed him love and invited him over for dinner every Sunday even when he got his own place. This was the antithesis of the Dursleys who categorized Harry as a “freak” because he was of wizard birth and held disdain for him from the beginning for that reason alone.

James parents’ doted, and spoiled, but did not abuse James in overfeeding him and filling his head with nonsense about his birthright. After all, he teased Sirius out of his funk and continued to befriend him even after finding out about his ties to Slytherin house, merely because Sirius didn’t have an arrogant attitude about it, but rather a depressed one.

So while JKR’s comparative statement may have won sympathy for Snape for you, I don’t think we can conclude that was her purpose – I feel it was to explain. That is because it did not draw any sympathy for me and so it was not a foolproof means of doing that. JKR knew how to do that - she did it left and right with Harry after all. The distinction was that Harry behaved in a good hearted manner from the moment he stepped on the train. Snape on the other hand began with his “so what – she’d just a Muggle” statement to a crying Lily, which served to set my back up against him. So the comparison was more straight forward wealth, status and care oriented, imo.

I know that James is not much like Dudley, that's why I said it was "a weird kind of parallel" :lol: Obviously, Dudley's spoiling by his parents is much more abusive and grotesque.

They're both described as "pampered", and there's a curious echo between Harry's words to Dudley at the beginning of OotP "Whereas you just need four mates behind you before you can beat up a ten-year-old" and Snape's words about James at the end of HBP "Your father would never attack me unless it was four on one".

That, and the more unambiguously conscious verbal echo between James and Draco on the Hogwarts Express "I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?", suggests to me that in the James-Snape relationship, we are supposed to view James in the Dudley/Draco bully role and Snape as the victim, deserving of some sympathy, although I accept that Snape is far less innocent than most of Draco's and Dudley's victims. I also admit that this is not the whole story - James saves Snape's life (the bully saving the life of the bullied) while in the Draco/Harry and Dudley/Harry relationships, it's Harry (the bullied) who saves the life of the bully, so these relationships are not completely paralleled. James is clearly supposed to be viewed as a much nicer, much more sympathetic character than Draco or Dudley.

And I'm not arguing with you when you suggest that Harry is a nicer character than Snape, but I still feel that some sympathy is invited for Severus, and that JKR to a certain extent softens our views of him by revealing the truth about his treatment at the hands of James.

He was dead when the book began. That is a bit of a handicap, wouldn’t you say? :rotfl: But on the other hand, do you have a problem with Harry’s mum being a good person?

I don't have a problem with her being a good person, but I actually do still find Lily very difficult to warm to, as well, because she is an "offstage" character. My whole point here, anyway, was actually a concession to you that maybe you're right, maybe I am supposed to sympathise with James, not Snape, but I can't feel it, because James is dead and therefore "offstage".

But my one and only point is this: if it was young James that Snape was treating the way he did, it would still be wrongful, imo. No child deserves overt mistreatment. If they are attempting to murder, or engaging in other criminal adult activities – then you need to put them in an institution for help. Neither James nor Harry fell into that category, but even if they had, overt mistreatment of them would not be the correct way to deal with them, imo.[...]My only point was that you do not overtly mistreat children; not children like Draco, Tom Riddle, Harry, James, Snape or any kid. Professors must not do that because it is wrongful, imo.

I'd agree it wouldn't be correct, it's downright wrong, but I still find Snape's behaviour psychologically plausible and very human.

Well there are two important components to reappraisal of Snape's character, imo: words and context. JKR picks her words carefully, imo. Sirius didn’t speak “maliciously”, Harry simply understood the words as a taunt. If Snape did speak maliciously according to the text and his words were also a taunt. Furthermore, it was unraveled for us that Sirius was not taunting by subsequent revelations and Sirius’ behavior and treatment of Harry. Snape did not look remorseful, or call to Tonks to ‘wait’ or later speak to her at #12 G in a more conciliatory way – so there is no evidence that Snape hadn’t meant to hurt her with his words and was actually filled with concern. I don’t discount your interpretation altogether; I think his words could have very well been fueled by his similar situation. But to the extent that Snape meant to be helpful, I would have to respectfully disagree – as I see it, he would taunt himself about it, if he wasn’t him.

But it doesn't say that Harry understood the words as a taunt, the third person narrative says it was a taunt. This is one of a few examples where the narrative does not merely mislead us but actually lies to us, giving us Harry's mistaken perceptions as fact. They're rare, but they do happen. Similarly, I would argue that when the third-person narrative says there was "malice" in Snape's voice, it could just be Harry's perception.

And we are given information later that may give us cause to reappraise - the information that Snape, like Tonks, knows what its like to suffer from unrequited love (and we also know that he's warned Harry about feelings making you "weak" and "prey for the Dark Lord" - it's in that context that I interpret his words to Tonks as a warning, not the "malice" it seems)


Well there are similarities in Snape and everyone in canon in that regard. But this is not a true similarity, imo. They may have said the same things, but their innate behavior is far different. Harry sounded like Lupin on the patrous – but he didn’t have Lupin’s innate insecurities.

I see the parallels between Snape and Harry as being consciously flagged up by JKR in HBP, though. I'm going to leave this argument for now, though, because I have to go away and find more evidence to support it. Pre-DH there was a whole thread on Harry/snape parallels, and it was pretty full.

Harry wasn’t horrified by the behavior – he was only upset because he thought his father had picked on an innocent boy, something he’d never imagined he’d do. Harry said in his POV that if it were Draco Malfoy, he could understand. Why should it be okay to pick on Draco Malfoy when he was just sitting minding his own business? Because Harry “knows” him. Well James “knew” Snape and to him, he was not innocent, something Harry discovered down the line and assimilated.

I respect your view, but cannot share it. Harry says in his PoV that he can just about understand Fred and George dangling "Malfoy or someone who really deserved it" upside down , but even then it's qualified by an uncertain "perhaps". So even then, when searching for a hypothetical situation in which James's treatment of Snape in SWM might be just about OK, he has to compare James to the Weasley twins, not to himself. Therefore, I would argue that he is acknowledging that he would never have behaved like James here, even if Snape had been like Draco.

Furthermore, neither Sirius nor Lupin attempts to deny that prior to Year 6 James "hex[ed] [other] people just for the fun of it" - that is, innocent people. Therefore, even if Snape had deserved it (which I still don't think he did), it would not clear James of the general charge of picking on people who hadn't done anything to deserve it. So I still maintain that SWM is the moment at which Harry, irrevocably, realises he is not as much like his father as he had always imagined and hoped. (If I explore this further, I will do so on another thread, as it is getting very tangential to this one).

And I don't believe at all that Harry "assimilated" the idea that Snape was "not innocent" and deserved James's treatment. Actually, the discussion with Sirius and Lupin in Umbridge's office in my view merely confirms that Snape was innocent and didn't deserve it. Sirius describes their behaviour to Snape as that of "idiots", and says that he is "not proud of it" and that Lupin made them "ashamed of themselves" re their treatment of Snape. Lupin himself says their treatment of Snape was "out of order". How does any of this equal to James "knowing" Snape is not innocent?

James's behaviour to Snape in the sixth-form, when he stopped hexing innocent people and only carried on hexing Snape, does seem more justifiable, given that his treatment of Snape is described as retaliatory, but even here Harry doesn't seem to approve of or "assimilate" it, asking suspiciously "And my mum was OK with that?" and "looking unconvinced".

That's why I still feel sympathy with Snape after SWM, and I believe Harry does, too, right up until Sirius's death. It's the displacement of his own guilt over Sirius's death that turns him against Snape again, IMO, not any internal realisation that James was justified, after all.

I know that James is not much like Dudley, that's why I said it was "a weird kind of parallel" :lol: Obviously, Dudley's spoiling by his parents is much more abusive and grotesque.

They're both described as "pampered", and there's a curious echo between Harry's words to Dudley at the beginning of OotP "Whereas you just need four mates behind you before you can beat up a ten-year-old" and Snape's words about James at the end of HBP "Your father would never attack me unless it was four on one".

I agree James was pampered and spoiled, but Snape's comment was a lie, imo. First because we saw a two on one situation in SWM. Lupin had his head in a book and Peter didn't join in at all. If one tries to say that their "being there" is all that matters, then it was 25 to 1 or something because the crowd was "being there" also and did nothing to help, but cheered instead. Secondly, if Snape was hexing James at every opportunity, and he considered an "opportunity" when James was with his four friends, then he did not give James an opportunity to hex him 1 on 1 and so he would not know and it is a lie in the form of opinion stated as fact. If he did hex him alone and James retaliated, then he is lying. The problem with believing what Snape says is that he is speaking about his enemy. It is the same with Sirius - sure Snape might have known some spells when he arrived at Hogwarts, but Sirius said "more spells than some 7th years" - making it seem like he knew dozens or something. :lol:. You have to take those kind of comments with a grain of salt, though there is likely some truth to them.

There is likely some truth to what Snape said; technically, from his view, it was likely often 4 on 1 because he was following them around trying to get them in trouble when they were "in group". That, I imagine is when a lot of the hexing happened, and all 4 Marauders would not be happy about it. But even then, I'm hard pressed to imagine Remus joined in as he was so against it. But Snape's perception of 4 on 1 could be valid in that circumstance. But again, his statement must be taken with a grain of salt, imo.

That, and the more unambiguously conscious verbal echo between James and Draco on the Hogwarts Express "I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?", suggests to me that in the James-Snape relationship, we are supposed to view James in the Dudley/Draco bully role and Snape as the victim, deserving of some sympathy, although I accept that Snape is far less innocent than most of Draco's and Dudley's victims. I also admit that this is not the whole story - James saves Snape's life (the bully saving the life of the bullied) while in the Draco/Harry and Dudley/Harry relationships, it's Harry (the bullied) who saves the life of the bully, so these relationships are not completely paralleled. James is clearly supposed to be viewed as a much nicer, much more sympathetic character than Draco or Dudley.

That and Draco and Dudley would not struggle 3 years to be an animagi, imo; they would not take a friend in who ran away from home, imo; they would not befriend an outcast like Remus most likely, imo; they would not be generally popular in school (Draco was not, except among Slytherins); they would not be thought "wonderful" by everyone (Snape's words in DH); they would not be recalled fondly by professors and others who associated with them - spoken about fondly as pranksters instead of regular mean bullies.

So to me, there are too many distinctions to try and draw a conclusion that they are all alike - and thus, support Snape's overtly nasty comments, imo.

And I'm not arguing with you when you suggest that Harry is a nicer character than Snape, but I still feel that some sympathy is invited for Severus, and that JKR to a certain extent softens our views of him by revealing the truth about his treatment at the hands of James.

But you misunderstand. I did not ever say that Snape as a character should draw no sympathy. Even I have sympathy on some counts. I was speaking about the one phrase you brought up. Sure, his home life invites sympathy, but not in the circumstances where he is speaking to Lily with disregard and a terrible attitude moments before. That context sucks the sympathy out of the phrase you brought up because despite one's background, he or she is not given free reign to be nasty toward a friend when they are crying.

Another point I have stressed is that I agree that Snape had bad treatment at the hands of James and Sirius. But are we supposed to then absolutely ignore their bad treatment at Snape's hands? Do we ignore Sirius' background which is equally troubled on his behalf? Do we ignore James' background that affected the kid he was? So my point is that to me, JKR didn't make this a one-sided sympathy drawing exercise for the readers. She gave us information to help us understand why it was that the Marauders might have often had the upper hand (they attacked when Snape was alone; generally when he was following them about, but other times too, if possible.) But to ensure we understood that we were not dealing with Dudley and friends in the Marauders, she gave us reasons to sympathise with them also with respect to Snape: he created and used a dark curse against them frequently; the spells they used against him were more humiliating than harmful in nature; James saved his life even though he was his enemy; Snape would antagonize their belief systems by calling others mudblood in front of them and at least laugh, if not participate when his friends cast dark magic on others (and he did against them directly); plus the other things I noted above - the animagi struggles and all of that.

So I see JKR attempting to say that it was very much like Harry and Draco, except that Snape placed himself in the position for it to be unfair some of the time, and the Marauders, wrongfully, took advantage of that fact. But Snape was not always placing himself in that position as we saw in SWM - and James wasn't either as we heard about in 7th year. So I am the type of person who takes in all these facts before reaching a conclusion - I leave none of them out. That is because I am neither a James or Snape fan, per se, I am a "Harry's parents" fan I suppose, as I like the hero to have had parents distinct from Vernon and Petunia or the story makes no sense to me. So I find myself defending only when I feel people don't take the entire situation into account. "Snape the complete victim" does not work; victims don't create dark curses to use specifically on others; they don't bully kids by behaving in the manner of a bigot, they don't laugh when other kids are bullied with harmful curses; they don't place themselves in a position to be bullied (following the bullying kids around - on a consistent basis). I totally would have no problem with people saying that the Marauders often got the advantage - but that is as far as I can stretch the canon with respect to Snape.

Finally, back to where I started; in some respects I can have sympathy for Snape based on his background. But his choice to bully other kids and get his enemies in trouble; together with his dark interest manifestations prohibits me from drawing him as a completely sympathetic kid.

I don't have a problem with her being a good person, but I actually do still find Lily very difficult to warm to, as well, because she is an "offstage" character. My whole point here, anyway, was actually a concession to you that maybe you're right, maybe I am supposed to sympathise with James, not Snape, but I can't feel it, because James is dead and therefore "offstage".

I understand that. I agree that there is not enough info on his parents to garner much in the way of a real feel for them. That is precisely why I allow the majority of characters in canon and JKR's off page statements to guide me in that regard. It made sense of Harry not being so negatively affected by the Dursleys and his parent's willingness to continue helping him in the world of magic where that is possible. If they were selfish, self-centered people, I can't imagine that would be the case. They would simply be having a ball on the next great adventure and ignore Harry, :lol:.

I'd agree it wouldn't be correct, it's downright wrong, but I still find Snape's behaviour psychologically plausible and very human.

Well to be absolutely honest, I think JKR went overboard with him on a psychological level - to the point where I had to suspend my belief a little bit. It is not that there aren't people like Snape - there are - but I've never met one whose motivations and behavior were so crossed. I have seen it in literature before though, so in that light, it is a plausible psychology. But I kind of looked at Snape as one of JKR's brilliant depictions, not as anyone that would really exist in the world. Many of the characters felt that way to me though. :lol:. But that is the beauty of fiction.

But it doesn't say that Harry understood the words as a taunt, the third person narrative says it was a taunt. This is one of a few examples where the narrative does not merely mislead us but actually lies to us, giving us Harry's mistaken perceptions as fact. They're rare, but they do happen. Similarly, I would argue that when the third-person narrative says there was "malice" in Snape's voice, it could just be Harry's perception. And we are given information later that may give us cause to reappraise - the information that Snape, like Tonks, knows what its like to suffer from unrequited love (and we also know that he's warned Harry about feelings making you "weak" and "prey for the Dark Lord" - it's in that context that I interpret his words to Tonks as a warning, not the "malice" it seems)

I have to read it to see what you mean because Harry is never written in 1st person. His POV is entirely in 3rd person. But if you mean it was a non-Harry narrative, then I would count those as completely reliable. I'll have a look at it and get back to you on that point. :)

I respect your view, but cannot share it. Harry says in his PoV that he can just about understand Fred and George dangling "Malfoy or someone who really deserved it" upside down , but even then it's qualified by an uncertain "perhaps". So even then, when searching for a hypothetical situation in which James's treatment of Snape in SWM might be just about OK, he has to compare James to the Weasley twins, not to himself. Therefore, I would argue that he is acknowledging that he would never have behaved like James here, even if Snape had been like Draco. And I don't believe at all that Harry "assimilated" the idea that Snape was "not innocent" and deserved James's treatment. Actually, the discussion with Sirius and Lupin in Umbridge's office in my view merely confirms that Snape was innocent and didn't deserve it. Sirius describes their behaviour to Snape as that of "idiots", and says that he is "not proud of it" and that Lupin made them "ashamed of themselves" re their treatment of Snape. Lupin himself says their treatment of Snape was "out of order". How does any of this equal to James "knowing" Snape is not innocent?

I understand if Fred and George = I understand if my dad, imo. I didn't mean Harry assimilated it fully in OOTP. After the sectumsempra bathroom incident (where his own poor behavior is further misconstrued by Snape to be still worse - and self realization about choices) together with finding out that Snape helped to kill his parents; we see a whole new Harry when it comes to perspective. In other words, he comes to understand that Snape has secrets; very bad secrets concerning Harry himself that Harry was not aware of - and there may be more (which there were.) By DH we have Harry worrying over whether or not his actions are similar to what his father would have done - wanting to mimick his educated image of his dad. That is not the same kid we saw in OOTP who was trying to figure ways they were not alike. Harry knew more about his dad then, and more about Snape as well and by the end of the Prince's Tale, he was flogged with more information about Snape which reinforced what he was thinking - memories given by Snape himself. That allowed Harry to trust Snape's messages, but it also firmly planted in his mind that his father, like him, might make a judgment in anger or arrogance that was not right (Harry cursing Carrow, Sectumsempra, etc.) He realized Snape had been much less than an innocent kid (in the sense that he truly did nothing but sit on the grass alone, because Lily confirmed it all for him in the memories.) But JKR had Harry figuring that out on his own as we moved through the books - i.e., calling Remus "normal" and being told his dad saw Remus the same way - or seeing Sirius' reaction when Snape belittled James before him - well each little bit of information you and I may have overlooked, JKR would not have Harry overlook because it was his father. And he began to really see the kind of person Snape had been and why it might have antagonized his dad. It was the same as Draco antagonizing him - often just words which is why people call Draco cowardly - but words were enough to get Harry to whip out his wand. So he began to understand much about his father through himself and his own growth process, imo.

As I said, Snape lied in various ways, imo, and Harry learned more and more that was the case, especially throughout HBP. He too would look back (as we do) and recall the things Snape said and look at those things in light of new information. Snape didn't change, so he fostered this type of behavior in Harry and others - to me, it was that simple. It is taking major advantage to speak ill of the dead because they have no voice to explain themselves or declare anything a lie. So that is what I meant about Snape not being 'innocent' - not in the manner Harry had considered him in OOTP directly after the memory. He knew nothing about the kid Snape was at that time - and in that memory, Snape seemed very righteous - casting one dark curse and calling Lily Mudblood tainted him a little, but only a little in light of the tremendous unfairness of his father and Sirius' actions. But later, that too was reappraised by Harry and by readers that were willing to do so.

James's behaviour to Snape in the sixth-form, when he stopped hexing innocent people and only carried on hexing Snape, does seem more justifiable, given that his treatment of Snape is described as retaliatory, but even here Harry doesn't seem to approve of or "assimilate" it, asking suspiciously "And my mum was OK with that?" and "looking unconvinced".

I think that was very reasonable because at that juncture, Harry still knew nothing about Snape. Sirius and Remus did not badmouth Snape at all, unless one considers it so to say that James detested the dark arts and Snape was into them. They simply and quite properly addressed Harry's concerns. If they had spent the time telling all the negative stuff Snape had done (admitted to himself to us in TPT), then it would have looked like a justification. But they were not justifying - they were berks, idiots, arrogant and James hexed when molested cuz it was fun - or just for a fun prank. They didn't lie. But to conclude that meant Snape could do no wrong when we know he did, makes no sense to me - they were not trying to blacken Snape, only explain Harry's father to him. He was an arrogant berk, prone to hexing when young and then his head shrunk and he grew out of it - and no, he didn't force Lily to marry him :lol:. And that was their only point, imo.

That's why I still feel sympathy with Snape after SWM, and I believe Harry does, too, right up until Sirius's death. It's the displacement of his own guilt over Sirius's death that turns him against Snape again, IMO, not any internal realisation that James was justified, after all.

I would disagree. Nothing in SWM made Harry feel sympathy with Snape for shoving him to the floor, throwing cockroaches at his head and giving him a zero on his potion. That behavior turned Harry immediately against Snape. But Harry wasn't bothering to feel anything about Snape - all he wanted was to feel better about his father which he did somewhat after the chat - we got no more in his POV after that, whereas if was full of his worry over his father prior to that.

The reason this is important to Snape is not because of what Harry makes of it though, it is what the reader makes of Snape. I totally respect the fact that you continued to feel sympathy. But I lost sympathy instead; first because I was appalled that Snape cut Harry's dad's cheek open and Harry ignored it and also that he'd called Lily a Mudblood and he ignored that too (as well as his dad taking up for her - and never turning on her.) Second because of Snape's behavior with Harry when he discovered him which I felt was overboard as well as in the classroom; and finally because Snape continued to behave as always, saying nothing along about what Harry had seen in the pensieve. I know JKR wanted to do that on purpose, but as a reader, I could only look at it as the behavior of Snape's character when reading.

The reason this is important to Snape is not because of what Harry makes of it though, it is what the reader makes of Snape. I totally respect the fact that you continued to feel sympathy. But I lost sympathy instead; first because I was appalled that Snape cut Harry's dad's cheek open and Harry ignored it and also that he'd called Lily a Mudblood and he ignored that too (as well as his dad taking up for her - and never turning on her.) Second because of Snape's behavior with Harry when he discovered him which I felt was overboard as well as in the classroom; and finally because Snape continued to behave as always, saying nothing along about what Harry had seen in the pensieve. I know JKR wanted to do that on purpose, but as a reader, I could only look at it as the behavior of Snape's character when reading.

Snape slashing James across the cheek initially made so little impact on me that I'd pretty much forgotten he did that to James until I reread OotP last year. ;) And to be absolutely blunt, I thought that James deserved it. As he deserved his dressing-down by Lily, IMO. She told him a few important home truths that day.

James' public humiliation of Severus, however, has always stayed with me, as has the fact that it was two on one. It's a powerful scene, as of course it is meant to be.

Snape slashing James across the cheek initially made so little impact on me that I'd pretty much forgotten he did that to James until I reread OotP last year. ;)

Well that would be the distinction between us as readers.

And to be absolutely blunt, I thought that James deserved it. As he deserved his dressing-down by Lily, IMO. She told him a few important home truths that day.

He deserved dark magic practiced upon him? Is there no limit to that which Snape should do in response to a slew of humiliating spells? Some say he deserved to be hexed at every opportunity in 7th, based on the scene we saw (presuming James always had the advantage with his friends and repeatedly took it). That was two years later. Four years later Snape helped to kill James, I presume that wasn't deserved. 17 years later Snape began mistreating his son and disrespecting him before his son, when he had no voice - and continued to do so for 6.5 years. I don't think that was deserved either. In my judgment, Snape felt James diserved all of the above because he had no limit in as far as revenge went.

Snape did seem to have a limit when it came to Sirius, even though Sirius cast more debilitating curses at him than James did in SWM. Snape didn't attack Sirius at every opportunity in 7th; Snape didn't bother belittling him regularly before his godson or attempt him physical harm once he discovered he was innocent. Sirius was alive, so Snape could have readily made similar comparisons for Harry; Sirius adimtted to have been arrogant, we know he broke the same rules as James and he was also impertinent and a bit more reckless and dangerous than James - kind of like that which Harry was always getting into (the Chamber, the 2-headed monster, confronting murderers etc.) I wonder if that was because Sirius was alive and could actually defend himself if questioned by Harry. I wonder if Snape feared what Sirius might tell Harry in that regard.

It is funny how SWM always comes down to James - when Sirius was there and did as much if not more damage. Lily ignored Sirius, Snape ignored him as well - and so do the readers. Sirius got off scot free, not only in SWM, but throughout his life in that regard. Of course he paid by having to go to prison for 12 years as an innocent man - but then again, James paid too if we look at it that way, for being killed for innocently attempting to protect his family.

I would disagree that anyone deserves dark magic used against them, or disrespect when they have died - by the man who helped to kill them, or their son mistreated - for humiliating acts done as a child. I would also disagree that he is given fair treatment as I read it here, considering Sirius is left off the hook on a constant basis. Could it be because Snape only blames James that many readers do too? Wouldn't that be adopting his unfairness? And what of Snape creating a curse especially for the Marauders and using it enough for it to have become his specialty? And his following them around trying to get them in trouble and expose Lupin. And his autonomous decision to keep hexing only James in 7th year...shouldn't that mitigate the offenses of James (and Sirius if anyone cares) a little? Not to mention James saved his life back in that day too - and while Snape didn't feel grateful, I would imagine that most readers could find some value in the fact that James didn't allow Snape to die.

Anyway, that is just my opinion. I feel it was all quite balanced for them as children based on what JKR has given us in canon. :)

James' public humiliation of Severus, however, has always stayed with me, as has the fact that it was two on one. It's a powerful scene, as of course it is meant to be.

I would say that is because we were shown. But for me, I don't have a problem imagining Snape using his dark spell enough for it to become known to Lupin as his specialty. How many cuts did he make on the Marauders? When he sat on the grass innocently reading, was revenge on the minds of James and Sirius among other things? They didn't attack anyone else because they had nothing better to do; only Snape and to me that means they likely had a reason. I also don't have a problem imagining the powerful scene of Snape being rescued from the tunnel; or Snape hexing at every opportunity; or the Marauders doing the same. It seems to me that it would have gone down about how Draco and Harry's relationship went, so there I have something to based it on. :)

Well that would be the distinction between us as readers.

Or the way that it's written. :cool:

The first time I read SWM, in summer 2003, I didn't know anything about Sectumsempra. Nobody did. That wasn't something that arose until 2005, when HBP was published! Therefore Snape's use of the cutting spell on James simply didn't have the sinister overtones it now has.

On my first reading, I took it to be the magical equivalent of hitting somebody. Given the level of provocation in this scene, it seemed to me that Snape was reacting back in a very aggressive way, which would be an understandable reaction for a 15 year old boy being publicly taunted ... that's how I read the scene to begin with.

He deserved dark magic practiced upon him? Is there no limit to that which Snape should do in response to a slew of humiliating spells?

Do you think someone being bullied is wrong to fight back by hitting the person bullying them?

In principle I would not try to justify anyone using physical violence, which is what Snape's cutting spell basically is. Nor would I justify the use of Dark Magic. However, I can well understand the depth of this boy's fury, frustration, helplessness and anger in lashing out at James Potter physically. And, to be fair, we don't actually have any definite textual proof it was Sectumsempra ... although the circumstantial evidence is admittedly strong. :whistle:

It is funny how SWM always comes down to James - when Sirius was there and did as much if not more damage. Lily ignored Sirius, Snape ignored him as well - and so do the readers.

Actually, that is quite true. :lol: Although we shouldn't really be discussing Sirius here. :whistle: Or James, for that matter ... or SWM, as it's a constant irritant for so many readers. :whistle:

Sirius got off scot free, not only in SWM, but throughout his life in that regard. Of course he paid by having to go to prison for 12 years as an innocent man - but then again, James paid too if we look at it that way, for being killed for innocently attempting to protect his family.

Well, that would be a case of the punishment far outweighing the original 'crime', IMO. I realise that Snape saw it somewhat differently, but that was his problem. :whistle:

I would disagree that anyone deserves dark magic used against them, or disrespect when they have died - by the man who helped to kill them, or their son mistreated - for humiliating acts done as a child.

I totally agree with that. What I am discussing here is my own reaction to SWM ... not Snape's.

He deserved dark magic practiced upon him?

Where in canon is it said that Snape used dark magic against James? I don't think we have canon for this and nor do we have canon that the mild cut James received on his cheek was the sectumsempra IMO. :)

Do you think someone being bullied is wrong to fight back by hitting the person bullying them?

Nope, but I guess being male and having experienced these situations, I take note of cutting to draw blood (as opposed to say, a punch in the nose). That may be why I noticed. Hex wars are strange anyway; I mean a spell that washes your mouth out like a professor might do? One that makes it so you can barely move? And then once they have him immobilized they don't do anything like punch him or attack - they just...watch. :lol:. Other spells we saw were equally weird, like when kids in Harry's day broke out in bumps or flew over backward, or a snake came popping out at them. But strange as they might be, including Snape's famed levicorpus, they aren't harmful in the way dark magic is. I felt Snape's spell was dark magic when I first read it because of his fascination with the subject and the fact that Sirius had told us in GOF that he was hanging with future Death Eaters back then. But it was more personal for me because I saw it like cutting someone with a knife - he did know other spells - levicorpus would have actually been a great one to do, imo.

Actually, that is quite true. :lol: Although we shouldn't really be discussing Sirius here. :whistle: Or James, for that matter ... or SWM, as it's a constant irritant for so many readers. :whistle:

Well to be fair, he is often mentioned as the necessary, but always unnamed "advantage" that James had. :rotfl:

It has been generally speculated for many years now, that Sectumsempra was the spell Snape used on James Potter in that seen.

Snape invented it just as he invented the counter-curse for it. {I wonder if he'd done that before or after Lily died?}

We've certainly seen the effects of the spell when spoken verbally versus non-verbally. Verbally appears to totally be overpoweringly hurtful, as witnessed by the Harry/Draco duel. A lesser effect is seen when used non-verbally, witnessed by James's face and George's ear {there's not a lot of meat to keep the ear connected to the head, it's one of the easiest appendanges to rip off or rip in half}.

But if we're not allowed to speculate then what's the point? I mean, many people speculate that Sirius told James of his suspicions of Remus, but there's no direct canon evidence to support that.

The entire series is like that really.

IMO, the Sectumsempra was the spell Snape had used on James in that particular instance. And no, James did not deserve to have Dark Magic used against him in that moment any more than Draco Malfoy had {despite his trying to use the Cruciatus Curse on Harry}.

Nope, but I guess being male and having experienced these situations, I take note of cutting to draw blood (as opposed to say, a punch in the nose). That may be why I noticed. Hex wars are strange anyway; I mean a spell that washes your mouth out like a professor might do? One that makes it so you can barely move? And then once they have him immobilized they don't do anything like punch him or attack - they just...watch. :lol:.

No, none of those spells cause physical harm -- although I note that the use of the 'Scourgify' curse caused Snape to choke on the bubbles in his mouth :huh: -- but there are few things which make my soul shrivel more than public humiliation, which is precisely why SWM pushed buttons for me.

IMO, the Sectumsempra was the spell Snape had used on James in that particular instance. And no, James did not deserve to have Dark Magic used against him in that moment any more than Draco Malfoy had {despite his trying to use the Cruciatus Curse on Harry}.

Welcome, Kat_Suki! :wave:

You make an excellent point about Draco. :tu:

I can't resist pointing out that the effects of Sectumsempra on poor Draco were far, FAR worse than the brief spell that Snape flung at James. :whistle:

And now I'm going to totally shut up about the whole matter. :p

No, none of those spells cause physical harm -- although I note that the use of the 'Scourgify' curse caused Snape to choke on the bubbles in his mouth :huh: -- but there are few things which make my soul shrivel more than public humiliation, which is precisely why SWM pushed buttons for me.There are instances where soap used orally as a punishment {or what have you} caused the person to suffer anaphalaxis shock as a result, and sometimes this has been known to result in death. Yes, death by soap in the mouth. Totally not a joke.

I don't see this as harmless. It was malicious, even if it wasn't Dark Magic.
Welcome, Kat_Suki! :wave: :wave: Thanks!

You make an excellent point about Draco. :tu:

I can't resist pointing out that the effects of Sectumsempra on poor Draco were far, FAR worse than the brief spell that Snape flung at James. :whistle:

Well, I did specify the difference between verbal and nonverbal spells. Harry idiotically used a spell {several of them in fact :grumble: } without first knowing what the spell(s) did. Had he known what it did, I totally don't think he'd have used it.

But Snape did know what it did (having invented it) and still used it. Was he provoked? Crikey, yes!

Should he have retaliated? Well, I would have, right or wrong, so I can't fault him there.

Did he knowingly use a Dark Spell, when as an accomplished and talented wizard he could have chosen any other? Yes, he did, but it was nonverbal, so not as horrible as it truly could've been.

You know, I totally like the fact that we get to compare that scene of bullying and Snape's reaction and spellwork and then contrast it with the scene of him casting the spell in an attempt to save Remus Lupin's life. Well, he missed and got poor George's ear by mistake, but it still is a great contrast to how far he'd come as an individual.

Oops, I'm a bit late replying to this.

I agree James was pampered and spoiled, but Snape's comment was a lie, imo. First because we saw a two on one situation in SWM. Lupin had his head in a book and Peter didn't join in at all. If one tries to say that their "being there" is all that matters, then it was 25 to 1 or something because the crowd was "being there" also and did nothing to help, but cheered instead. Secondly, if Snape was hexing James at every opportunity, and he considered an "opportunity" when James was with his four friends, then he did not give James an opportunity to hex him 1 on 1 and so he would not know and it is a lie in the form of opinion stated as fact. If he did hex him alone and James retaliated, then he is lying. The problem with believing what Snape says is that he is speaking about his enemy. It is the same with Sirius - sure Snape might have known some spells when he arrived at Hogwarts, but Sirius said "more spells than some 7th years" - making it seem like he knew dozens or something. :lol:. You have to take those kind of comments with a grain of salt, though there is likely some truth to them.

There is likely some truth to what Snape said; technically, from his view, it was likely often 4 on 1 because he was following them around trying to get them in trouble when they were "in group". That, I imagine is when a lot of the hexing happened, and all 4 Marauders would not be happy about it. But even then, I'm hard pressed to imagine Remus joined in as he was so against it. But Snape's perception of 4 on 1 could be valid in that circumstance. But again, his statement must be taken with a grain of salt, imo.

I agree that, based on what we see in SWM and The Prince's Tale, the 4-on-1 comment is possibly an exaggeration. But I disagree with you when you say Snape was lying, and in particular when you say that "a lot of the hexing happened [...]because he was following them around trying to get them into trouble when they were 'in a group'." Evidence?

That and Draco and Dudley would not struggle 3 years to be an animagi, imo; they would not take a friend in who ran away from home, imo; they would not befriend an outcast like Remus most likely, imo; they would not be generally popular in school (Draco was not, except among Slytherins); they would not be thought "wonderful" by everyone (Snape's words in DH); they would not be recalled fondly by professors and others who associated with them - spoken about fondly as pranksters instead of regular mean bullies.

So to me, there are too many distinctions to try and draw a conclusion that they are all alike - and thus, support Snape's overtly nasty comments, imo.

I don't mean they are all exactly alike - that would be ludicrous. But my point is that one thing which I think SWM does is continue an idea that Sirius introduced when he told Harry that "the world isn't divided into good people and Death Eaters". In the early books, the morality of characters seems pretty clear cut - Snape, Draco and Dudley aren't very nice, the Trio and Harry's parents are. PoA questions this a bit, but not much. From about OotP onwards, though, things get a lot more complex. I would argue that JKR starts throwing in odd parallels between James/Dudley and James/Draco and includes SWM, where Snape seems to be the victim, not to make us totally reverse our view of James and Snape, not to depict Snape as the wholly innocent victim and James as the aggressor - that would just be continuing the childish black-and-white morality of the early books - but to make us see that real people are drawn in shades of grey, and that perhaps characters whom we'd always thought of as bad deserve some sympathy, too.

I agree that James is depicted as mostly a good guy, but IMO JKR uses these parallels to make it clear that he has a small touch of Draco and a small touch of Dudley in him, and to suggest, therefore, Snape who is on the receiving end of James's and Sirius's bullying, has a touch of Harry or Neville in him.

And I also don't think that one can conclude that just because a character is popular with both staff and students that by definition makes him good. Because another parallel suggests itself here, another former Head Boy of Hogwarts, who was well-liked by his peers and teachers and left the school with a glowing report....No, I'm not implying that James is like Voldemort, but if there is one thing that the books, I think, teach one, it is that popularity is no guarantee of moral rectitude, nor unpopularity a guarantee of the reverse.

But you misunderstand. I did not ever say that Snape as a character should draw no sympathy. Even I have sympathy on some counts. I was speaking about the one phrase you brought up. Sure, his home life invites sympathy, but not in the circumstances where he is speaking to Lily with disregard and a terrible attitude moments before. That context sucks the sympathy out of the phrase you brought up because despite one's background, he or she is not given free reign to be nasty toward a friend when they are crying.

I'd agree that Snape's attitude to Petunia detracts from sympathy, but it doesn't, IMO, totally negate it. And I don't agree that he's being "nasty" to Lily when she is crying. As I see it, he is trying, in his inept way, to cheer her up and he's certainly not deliberately trying to upset her. He does not realise that she does not, and will never, share his anti-Muggle attitude.

Another point I have stressed is that I agree that Snape had bad treatment at the hands of James and Sirius. But are we supposed to then absolutely ignore their bad treatment at Snape's hands? Do we ignore Sirius' background which is equally troubled on his behalf? Do we ignore James' background that affected the kid he was? So my point is that to me, JKR didn't make this a one-sided sympathy drawing exercise for the readers.

I never said she did, and if you think I am trying to argue that Snape was the good guy and the Marauders are the bad guys, I'm most definitely not. I have a lot of sympathy for Sirius and Lupin. I admit to having a bit of an empathic blind spot where James is concerned, but I've already conceded that that's probably just me. But I would argue vehemently against the reverse conclusion - that the Marauders are the good guys and Snape is the bad guy, that their treatment of Snape is totally justified and that the text presents Harry as realising this by the end of DH.

So I see JKR attempting to say that it was very much like Harry and Draco, except that Snape placed himself in the position for it to be unfair some of the time, and the Marauders, wrongfully, took advantage of that fact. But Snape was not always placing himself in that position as we saw in SWM - and James wasn't either as we heard about in 7th year. So I am the type of person who takes in all these facts before reaching a conclusion - I leave none of them out. That is because I am neither a James or Snape fan, per se, I am a "Harry's parents" fan I suppose, as I like the hero to have had parents distinct from Vernon and Petunia or the story makes no sense to me. So I find myself defending only when I feel people don't take the entire situation into account.

If you're implying that I'm a biased Snape fangirl who wilfully distorts the text and ignores evidence that doesn't fit with what I want to see, then I would respectfully suggest that you're wrong. And at no point did I suggest that Harry’s parents aren’t “distinct from Vernon and Petunia”, so I don’t see where you’re getting that.

Finally, back to where I started; in some respects I can have sympathy for Snape based on his background. But his choice to bully other kids and get his enemies in trouble; together with his dark interest manifestations prohibits me from drawing him as a completely sympathetic kid.

Similarly, I have plenty of sympathy for the Marauders, but Sirius’s choice to expose Snape to a werewolf and James’s choice to “hex anyone who annoys [him] just because [he] can” prohibits me from drawing them as completely sympathetic kids. It’s not an either/or here.

I understand that. I agree that there is not enough info on his parents to garner much in the way of a real feel for them. That is precisely why I allow the majority of characters in canon and JKR's off page statements to guide me in that regard. It made sense of Harry not being so negatively affected by the Dursleys and his parent's willingness to continue helping him in the world of magic where that is possible. If they were selfish, self-centered people, I can't imagine that would be the case. They would simply be having a ball on the next great adventure and ignore Harry, :lol:.

And I never said they were “selfish, self-centred people” – please stop putting words into my mouth which I neither said nor suggested.


I have to read it to see what you mean because Harry is never written in 1st person. His POV is entirely in 3rd person. But if you mean it was a non-Harry narrative, then I would count those as completely reliable. I'll have a look at it and get back to you on that point. :)

What I mean is that it doesn't say ' "Stop taunting me!" said Harry' or ' "Don't be malicious, professor!" cried Harry'. Nor does it say "It seemed to Harry that Black was taunting him" or "Harry thought he detected malice in Snape's voice". In both cases, it's an unqualified statement of fact:

"The taunt about hsi father rang in Harry's ears as though Black ahd bellowed it."

' "I think you were better of with the old one," said Snape, the malice in his voice unmistakeable.'


I understand if Fred and George = I understand if my dad, imo.

Yes, I agree that Harry means that if he can imagine Fred and George doing something, he would understand his father doing it. But that is not the same as saying that he could imagine doing it himself. You originally cited the parallel of Snape/Draco to support the point that Harry and James are alike and argued that it suggested that Harry could imagine treating Draco like James treats Snape. I still argue that Harry would never have treated Draco like James treats Snape, even if he could understand Fred and George treating Draco that way.

I didn't mean Harry assimilated it fully in OOTP. After the sectumsempra bathroom incident (where his own poor behavior is further misconstrued by Snape to be still worse - and self realization about choices) together with finding out that Snape helped to kill his parents; we see a whole new Harry when it comes to perspective. In other words, he comes to understand that Snape has secrets; very bad secrets concerning Harry himself that Harry was not aware of - and there may be more (which there were.) By DH we have Harry worrying over whether or not his actions are similar to what his father would have done - wanting to mimick his educated image of his dad. That is not the same kid we saw in OOTP who was trying to figure ways they were not alike. Harry knew more about his dad then, and more about Snape as well and by the end of the Prince's Tale, he was flogged with more information about Snape which reinforced what he was thinking - memories given by Snape himself.

I see no evidence that TPT reinforced Harry’s negative view of Snape or further justified his father’s conduct to him. Prior to TPT, “hatred boiled up in Harry at the sight of ” Snape. After TPT, his only direct comment on what he has seen in the Pensieve is his report to Voldemort that “Snape was Dumbledore’s, Dumbledore’s from the moment you started hunting down my mother” and that “Snape’s Patronus was a doe[…]the same as my mother’s, because he loved her for nearly all of his life, from the time when they were children”, and he subsequently describes Snape as “probably the bravest man I ever knew” and names his son after him. It seems to me that the text indicates that Harry has taken only positive impressions of Snape from TPT.

Yes, Harry gets over the initial poor impression of James he gained from SWM, but I would argue that it is because he realized that James later grew up and changed, not because he came to a conclusion that James had been in the right all along and that Snape had deserved it after all.

I accept that there’s a contrast between James, who does change and leave behind his bullying behaviour, and Snape who does not, and continues to hold onto “sad memories”, emotions and grudges. But it’s not all together a bad thing that Snape is like this – if he were the kind to let go of the past and move on, then he would probably have followed Voldemort’s advice, forgotten Lily and married a nice pureblood girl, and Harry would be toast.

That allowed Harry to trust Snape's messages, but it also firmly planted in his mind that his father, like him, might make a judgment in anger or arrogance that was not right (Harry cursing Carrow, Sectumsempra, etc.)

He realized Snape had been much less than an innocent kid (in the sense that he truly did nothing but sit on the grass alone, because Lily confirmed it all for him in the memories.)

Well, on that particular occasion he was just sitting innocently on the grass alone, and TPT doesn’t contradict that. Lily herself knew how he’d behaved prior to this, but she still didn’t feel that two wrongs made a right.

But JKR had Harry figuring that out on his own as we moved through the books - i.e., calling Remus "normal" and being told his dad saw Remus the same way - or seeing Sirius' reaction when Snape belittled James before him - well each little bit of information you and I may have overlooked, JKR would not have Harry overlook because it was his father. And he began to really see the kind of person Snape had been and why it might have antagonized his dad. It was the same as Draco antagonizing him - often just words which is why people call Draco cowardly - but words were enough to get Harry to whip out his wand. So he began to understand much about his father through himself and his own growth process, imo.

I respect your view, but I am yet to see any evidence that Harry totally exonerated his father and that, as you seem to be suggesting (correct me if I'm wrong), the text encourages the reader to perceive Snape as having deserved his treatment at the hands of James and Sirius.

As I said, Snape lied in various ways, imo, and Harry learned more and more that was the case, especially throughout HBP. He too would look back (as we do) and recall the things Snape said and look at those things in light of new information. Snape didn't change, so he fostered this type of behavior in Harry and others - to me, it was that simple. It is taking major advantage to speak ill of the dead because they have no voice to explain themselves or declare anything a lie. So that is what I meant about Snape not being 'innocent' - not in the manner Harry had considered him in OOTP directly after the memory. He knew nothing about the kid Snape was at that time - and in that memory, Snape seemed very righteous - casting one dark curse and calling Lily Mudblood tainted him a little, but only a little in light of the tremendous unfairness of his father and Sirius' actions. But later, that too was reappraised by Harry and by readers that were willing to do so.

Again, I respect your opinion, but would respectfully request that you respect mine and refrain from implying that yours is the obvious, right way of reading, and that I only do not see it because I am "unwilling" to.

I do not believe that Snape deliberately “lied” about James, any more than I believe that Sirius deliberately “lies” about Snape’s young involvement in the Dark Arts, or Harry deliberately “lies” on the numerous occasions when he tells Dumbledore and the Trio that Snape is a villain – I believe that all of them tell the truth as they see it, but that truth gets somewhat distorted by their emotions, biases and misperceptions.

And I don’t think the new information post-SWM really added much to what Harry – or we – already knew.

We find out that Snape was for a time a loyal DE – but we already knew that, since GoF.

We find out that he used some Dark Magic – but we already knew that, and both HBP and TPT suggest that he started using it later than Sirius suggests in OotP, so this is a case of later facts mitigating our bad impression of Snape.

We find out that he insulted Petunia for being a Muggle and regularly called other students Mudbloods - but SWM already suggested that he was a blood bigot, so this is, IMO, hardly shocking news. In fact, most of the new info we gain post-SWM again seems, if anything, to mitigate the negative impression of his calling Lily a Mudblood. We find out that he was a half-blood himself (and his private nickname suggests to me that, despite what he says to his Slytherin friends, he is deep down actually quite proud of that), we find out that he loved Lily and that his insult to her in SWM does not reflect his true feelings for her, and we find out that he totally rejected blood prejudice in later life and castigated Phineas Nigellus for using bloodist abuse.

We do find out that Snape betrayed the prophecy to Voldemort - this is probably the one, completely new and very bad piece of evidence against him - but we also find out that he genuinely repented, and Harry seems to have come to terms with that by the end of the series.

So while I respect your view that later events make us reappraise SWM and view Snape more negatively, in my reading of the text, if anything, the opposite is the case.

The reason this is important to Snape is not because of what Harry makes of it though, it is what the reader makes of Snape. I totally respect the fact that you continued to feel sympathy. But I lost sympathy instead; first because I was appalled that Snape cut Harry's dad's cheek open and Harry ignored it and also that he'd called Lily a Mudblood and he ignored that too (as well as his dad taking up for her - and never turning on her.) Second because of Snape's behavior with Harry when he discovered him which I felt was overboard as well as in the classroom; and finally because Snape continued to behave as always, saying nothing along about what Harry had seen in the pensieve. I know JKR wanted to do that on purpose, but as a reader, I could only look at it as the behavior of Snape's character when reading

I always suspected that the primary purpose of SWM was misdirection - JKR was trying too hard to make us think that Snape hated Lily, which immediately made me even more suspicious that there was actually something between him and Lily (and Harry's strange, IMo psychologically implausible silence on this, immediately diverting our attention away from Lily onto James, deepened the suspicion still further). To be honest, I was too busy looking for clues and red herrings for it to have much emotional impact.

But, although I can totally see why some people find Snape's treatment of Lily inexcusable here, I still think it's a reprehensible but ultimately forgiveable mistake, not a terrible crime. I think two possible motives for his behaviour are hinted at in HBP - (1) when Zabini calls Ginny a "filthy blood traitor" whe Pansy accuses him of fancying her, it's clear that he is using abuse to hide the truth of his feelings of attraction. This for me is a big Snape parallel. (2) we find out in HBP that Snape is a half-blood himself. His behaviour in SWM has always reminded me of teenage boys I've known who have made loud homophobic comments in public on numerous occasions, only to come out themselves a few years later. He is struggling to come to terms with hsi own blood identity and how he feels about it. (3) There's also the obvious one, that he's been humiliated enough by James and Sirius already, he doesn't want to add to the humiliation by having to be rescued by someone else and come across as someone incapable of fighting back for himself. None of these excuses him, but I can't see his behaviour as unforgiveable, when Lily herself sees it as no worse than James's behaviour "You're as bad as he is"

Re your question about why we all beat up on James and let Sirius off the hook...I've already said that my stumbling block with James is the lack of page time to make me warm to him. Logically, I know Sirius is much worse, and, actually, the thing that makes me most sympathetic to Snape is the Whomping Willow - if someone had played a potentially fatal trick on me like that, and got away without being punished by the school authorities, I'd be hopping mad, too! That doesn't excuse his ingratitude to James for saving his life, though.

There are instances where soap used orally as a punishment {or what have you} caused the person to suffer anaphalaxis shock as a result, and sometimes this has been known to result in death. Yes, death by soap in the mouth. Totally not a joke.

I don't see this as harmless. It was malicious, even if it wasn't Dark Magic.
:wave: Thanks!

No argument from me on that one! :)

You know, I totally like the fact that we get to compare that scene of bullying and Snape's reaction and spellwork and then contrast it with the scene of him casting the spell in an attempt to save Remus Lupin's life. Well, he missed and got poor George's ear by mistake, but it still is a great contrast to how far he'd come as an individual.

Yes, indeed. :cool:

Melaszka, that was a fantastic post. :tu: I agree so much with your perspective on Snape! I would like to respond to some of the points you've made.

I'd agree that Snape's attitude to Petunia detracts from sympathy, but it doesn't, IMO, totally negate it. And I don't agree that he's being "nasty" to Lily when she is crying. As I see it, he is trying, in his inept way, to cheer her up and he's certainly not deliberately trying to upset her. He does not realise that she does not, and will never, share his anti-Muggle attitude.

Agreed. Young Severus is crashingly insensitive to young Lily (not to mention young Petunia) and horribly unaware that young Lily can't ever, possibly, in a million years, understand or sympathise with an anti-Muggle view ... but I see social ineptness rather than malice (certainly to Lily). That is one of the things that makes me feel intense sympathy for young Severus ... he is just so tragically inept at expressing appropriate emotions. :sigh: He just doesn't have a clue. :(

I never said she did, and if you think I am trying to argue that Snape was the good guy and the Marauders are the bad guys, I'm most definitely not. I have a lot of sympathy for Sirius and Lupin. I admit to having a bit of an empathic blind spot where James is concerned, but I've already conceded that that's probably just me. But I would argue vehemently against the reverse conclusion - that the Marauders are the good guys and Snape is the bad guy, that their treatment of Snape is totally justified and that the text presents Harry as realising this by the end of DH.

Well said. :tu:

I see no evidence that TPT reinforced Harry’s negative view of Snape or further justified his father’s conduct to him.

I agree. Just as I think that Harry's obvious love (and very moving) love for his dead father throughout the series is beyond question.

Indeed, Harry seems perfectly capable, by the end of DH, of reconciling two apparently irreconcilable notions: his honouring of Severus Snape does not negate his natural, deep love for the father he never knew. :cool:

I would go even further and say that Harry's action in honouring Snape posthumously is the act that finally puts paid to that ancient and futile feud. Harry does what his father's generation could not. But that is a discussion for the Harry thread.

Prior to TPT, “hatred boiled up in Harry at the sight of ” Snape. After TPT, his only direct comment on what he has seen in the Pensieve is his report to Voldemort that “Snape was Dumbledore’s, Dumbledore’s from the moment you started hunting down my mother” and that “Snape’s Patronus was a doe[…]the same as my mother’s, because he loved her for nearly all of his life, from the time when they were children”, and he subsequently describes Snape as “probably the bravest man I ever knew” and names his son after him. It seems to me that the text indicates that Harry has taken only positive impressions of Snape from TPT.

I agree. And I don't think Harry suddenly converted to a view of Snape as some sort of shining saint. But I think he came to an honest reassessment of the man after viewing his most intimate memories -- Severus Snape, uncensored, as it were -- and was able to recognise and honour the good aspects of what he saw ... mainly Snape's courage (obvious, IMO, from his bleak and thankless years as double agent and the risks he took).

Yes, Harry gets over the initial poor impression of James he gained from SWM, but I would argue that it is because he realized that James later grew up and changed, not because he came to a conclusion that James had been in the right all along and that Snape had deserved it after all.

Totally agree.

Oops, I'm a bit late replying to this.

You are never late. I read and usually answer on study breaks and I will be in this situation for quite some time :lol:. So no worries at all, a week, two weeks, whenever you get around to it, I will see it. :)

I agree that, based on what we see in SWM and The Prince's Tale, the 4-on-1 comment is possibly an exaggeration. But I disagree with you when you say Snape was lying, and in particular when you say that "a lot of the hexing happened [...]because he was following them around trying to get them into trouble when they were 'in a group'." Evidence?

Actually that is not what I was referring to. I believe I said that I understood Snape could conceive it that way because the Marauders were often about the grounds together and Snape followed them around at times. We know James and Sirius were alone a lot - they had most of their detention cards together alone and visited Hogwarts without the others as well. But Snape might have that perception because when he was alone around them (which I assume is on the school grounds when he was following them and not when he was with his friends) it would appear like 4 on 1. But Remus was against the hexing (although not the pranking), so I take the comment with a grain of salt. The lying I explained a few pages back and it was only to say that he was not above doing so, imo. I will try to find the post if you like rather than re-write out the many examples I gave if you can't find it. :)

I don't mean they are all exactly alike - that would be ludicrous. But my point is that one thing which I think SWM does is continue an idea that Sirius introduced when he told Harry that "the world isn't divided into good people and Death Eaters". In the early books, the morality of characters seems pretty clear cut - Snape, Draco and Dudley aren't very nice, the Trio and Harry's parents are. PoA questions this a bit, but not much. From about OotP onwards, though, things get a lot more complex. I would argue that JKR starts throwing in odd parallels between James/Dudley and James/Draco and includes SWM, where Snape seems to be the victim, not to make us totally reverse our view of James and Snape, not to depict Snape as the wholly innocent victim and James as the aggressor - that would just be continuing the childish black-and-white morality of the early books - but to make us see that real people are drawn in shades of grey, and that perhaps characters whom we'd always thought of as bad deserve some sympathy, too.

I agree that James is depicted as mostly a good guy, but IMO JKR uses these parallels to make it clear that he has a small touch of Draco and a small touch of Dudley in him, and to suggest, therefore, Snape who is on the receiving end of James's and Sirius's bullying, has a touch of Harry or Neville in him.

This is what I have said all along. I specifically wrote out negative things about the Marauders to show you that I didn't consider them saints at all. My only point was that there was no 'saint' in the situation. ;) The reason there may have been confusion was because I said that these similar statements show only what you said - that at times, people may act a bit like this one or that one, but that doesn't mean they are totally like the person in every respect. For example, JKR had Snape belittle the dead and only Voldemort and Bella also did so in canon. So sure, we could conclude Snape had a touch of Voldemort and Bella in him in that regard, but he is not exactly like them, imo. I also am wary of your conclusion because I don't see that JKR was attempting to make us think that Voldemort and Bella, who many readers think of as bad, deserve a little sympathy merely because Snape ended up being on the good side. Similar things said by different people (or even the same people at different times an in different circumstances) are not always meant to line up with one another in a specific respect, imo. Like you said however, everyone has a touch of the characters of many other people - even Harry had a little Dudley in him when he decided to bully Draco sight unseen on an occassion; but I don't think it was done in order to draw sympathy, it is just that we are all human, have human emotions and many of our responses and behaviors will overlap depending on the circumstances, imo.

And I also don't think that one can conclude that just because a character is popular with both staff and students that by definition makes him good. Because another parallel suggests itself here, another former Head Boy of Hogwarts, who was well-liked by his peers and teachers and left the school with a glowing report....No, I'm not implying that James is like Voldemort, but if there is one thing that the books, I think, teach one, it is that popularity is no guarantee of moral rectitude, nor unpopularity a guarantee of the reverse.

Well that was not the conclusion I was trying to draw at all. I was discounting the notion that James was "mini Voldemort" as a teenager and nothing more. That was why I gave the examples of his good acts, including the fact that he was not only likeable as a teen (like Voldemort, Harry, Cedric and many others), but also likeable as an adult which is untrue for Voldemort.

I never said she did, and if you think I am trying to argue that Snape was the good guy and the Marauders are the bad guys, I'm most definitely not. I have a lot of sympathy for Sirius and Lupin. I admit to having a bit of an empathic blind spot where James is concerned, but I've already conceded that that's probably just me. But I would argue vehemently against the reverse conclusion - that the Marauders are the good guys and Snape is the bad guy, that their treatment of Snape is totally justified and that the text presents Harry as realising this by the end of DH.

:lol: - I've never said that either, so I think we are on the same page in that regard.

If you're implying that I'm a biased Snape fangirl who wilfully distorts the text and ignores evidence that doesn't fit with what I want to see, then I would respectfully suggest that you're wrong. And at no point did I suggest that Harry’s parents aren’t “distinct from Vernon and Petunia”, so I don’t see where you’re getting that.

Absolutely not. Mel, unless I state that I am interpreting your opinion, you can always assume I am merely speaking in terms of myself. I won't adjust the canon to fit what I want to see; but I am not assuming you feel that is an appropriate way to read the text either.

Similarly, I have plenty of sympathy for the Marauders, but Sirius’s choice to expose Snape to a werewolf and James’s choice to “hex anyone who annoys [him] just because [he] can” prohibits me from drawing them as completely sympathetic kids. It’s not an either/or here.

We are in agreement then. I see reason for sympathy and furrowed brows with respect to all of the kids. This includes Lily, which many people (not you, as you have not said) only see as a purely sympathetic character. I do see her as a good person, but with flaws like everyone else (that I can name, imo).

And I never said they were “selfish, self-centred people” – please stop putting words into my mouth which I neither said nor suggested.

Again, this was not directed at you at all - I was merely saying that I don't see them that way because it would ruin the overall storyline arc for me. In fact, I don't think you see them that way.

What I mean is that it doesn't say ' "Stop taunting me!" said Harry' or ' "Don't be malicious, professor!" cried Harry'. Nor does it say "It seemed to Harry that Black was taunting him" or "Harry thought he detected malice in Snape's voice". In both cases, it's an unqualified statement of fact:

Ah, yes, that is how Harry is written, I agree. I just didn't recall the text. Sometimes we get descriptive narrative "about Harry" which I hold as more reliable. Nonetheless, I take for granted Harry is correct unless JKR specifies otherwise, which she did in the case of Sirius, but not with Snape in this instance. For example, we never see or hear of him interacting with Tonks later at all and I feel if JKR wanted us to reinterpret what Harry thought on that occassion, she would have shown us that he truly had sympathy for her situation rather than considering her situation (which I agree was totally like his own) with malice. The thing is, he may have considered his own situation in that regard with malice as well. I find it highly likely that Snape would not be thrilled that his patronus was a doe, rather than reflecting himself. However, that is admittedly conjecture. :)

Yes, I agree that Harry means that if he can imagine Fred and George doing something, he would understand his father doing it. But that is not the same as saying that he could imagine doing it himself. You originally cited the parallel of Snape/Draco to support the point that Harry and James are alike and argued that it suggested that Harry could imagine treating Draco like James treats Snape. I still argue that Harry would never have treated Draco like James treats Snape, even if he could understand Fred and George treating Draco that way.

I agree with you in consideration of OOTP. What I was trying to say is that later, Harry found himself very capable of doing things that were wholly wrongful in nature and he realized it did not make him a bad person. That is the realization he had about his dad. For example, in hindsight, I am pretty certain that he would consider using a crucio on Carrow as wrongful because his intent was to cause pain out of anger and perhaps frustration - plus in revenge for McGonagall being dishonored. If he had it to do again, I feel he'd use a stunning spell or totalus petrificus which would have allowed for the same outcome. In another example, he found Draco crying in the bathroom, wailing his heart out to Myrtle - a clear situation for compassion. But he did not leave and spare Draco humiliation, instead, he remained put and when discovered and Draco drew his wand - he didn't leave then either, he simply drew his own wand. And thereafter the Sectumsempra incident occurred - another thing he didn't feel good about because he'd used an untested spell marked "for enemies" and nearly killed Draco. Of course I am not saying Draco is completely innocent, but if he had it to do over again, I figure Harry would leave the bathroom and if he did get into the hex war, he would not use an unknown curse marked "for enemies".

So that was my only point. Harry neither justified his own behavior or his father's. He didn't suddenly feel that his father was right and Snape deserved to be attacked when he was just sitting there reading his paper. What he came to understand was that good folk have flaws, can do damage, can act willfully, can seek revenge, do have reasons beyond what is "on the face" for what they are doing. Like his issuing the dark curse - he didn't know it was one - but "on the face", it appeared that he intended to use a harmful dark curse against Draco - that wasn't true. But it in no way justifies his behavior - and that is how he could view his dad - not perfect, but with flaws just like he had himself.

So in OOTP, Harry would NEVER imagine doing some of the things he later went on to do, but he'd have to reevaluate his belief in light of his subsequent actions. My point was that this allowed him to reappraise his father's actions in that light - but it had nothing to do with justifying his behavior - only understanding him better and able to reconcie that his dad was a good person, despite doing things that were wrongful.

In as far as Snape was concerned, Harry would do the same. I did not say that he'd look back at everything and find it negative. To the contrary; he'd look back and find things like Snape killing Dumbledore as less negative than when he first saw it. But other things he'd understand much better - like why Snape disliked his dad so much - well, Snape admitted his jealousy over Lily in the memory, so Harry could look back at situations and understand that had likely played a role in things he'd seen (for example).

I see no evidence that TPT reinforced Harry’s negative view of Snape or further justified his father’s conduct to him.

As I said, it wasn't about justification, it was about not believing his father to be despicable. But he learned that before TPT. TPT only helped explain that Snape had not been an innocent youth as he had appeared in SWM (simply sitting on the grass never doing anything wrong). I explained that Harry appeared to ignore Snape throwing the cutting curse and calling his mum a Mudblood - but later we find out he did notice those things; but you would never know it from his OOTP POV. So that was all I meant about Harry looking back in the light of new information. For example, finding out Snape had helped to kill his parents, he said that Snape hated his mum and he knew it because he'd called her a Mudblood.

I would have to respectfully disagree that TPT didn't reinforce Harry's negative view of Snape. The fact that Harry forgave Snape for his negative treatment does not mean he felt Snape had done no wrong in the past. Snape confirmed he was involved in the conspiracy to kill his parents as Trelawny and Dumbledore had informed Harry - that was not something "positive" - but reinforcing a negative belief. I also did not say that everything he found out was "negative" - he definitely found out Snape was on the "good side" and that was completely "positive". But with respect to Snape's behavior, there was nothing in TPT to change Harry's beliefs to a positive viewpoint, imo. Snape reinforced his feelings about Harry in a conversation with Dumbledore; he belittled his dad in the memory to Lily the same way he did to Harry after James had died. So these things, imo, Harry would see as reinforcing his negative view of Snape's behavior. But I was not saying everything he saw was negative, not by any means. :)

Prior to TPT, “hatred boiled up in Harry at the sight of ” Snape. After TPT, his only direct comment on what he has seen in the Pensieve is his report to Voldemort that “Snape was Dumbledore’s, Dumbledore’s from the moment you started hunting down my mother” and that “Snape’s Patronus was a doe[…]the same as my mother’s, because he loved her for nearly all of his life, from the time when they were children”, and he subsequently describes Snape as “probably the bravest man I ever knew” and names his son after him. It seems to me that the text indicates that Harry has taken only positive impressions of Snape from TPT.

I would disagree; as I pointed out, Snape confirmed some negative things as well. Harry wouldn't see it as positive that he tried to expose Lupin; nor that he was ungrateful for being rescued and belittled his dad after James had rescued him; nor that Snape had not been nice to his mum when she was crying; nor that he belittled both he and his dad before Dumbledore; nor that he had no intention of doing any work on behalf of Harry. Or that he ignored his mum and turned topics with her, attempting to compell her with respect to her decisions causing her to say "won't let me!", or that he admitted to giving the prophecy that killed his parents and didn't care about him or his dad when he first approached Dumbledore. Those things are all negative, imo. I respect your view if you think Harry simply disregarded all of those things and his parents were suddenly of no importance to him. But I would respectfully disagree. So to me, negative things were confirmed by Harry in the memories. In addition, as I pointed out, positive things were also pointed out - Snape was truly on the good side (and there were many pieces of evidence of this in TPT - delivery of the sword, attempting to save Lupin, his claim he no longer watched others die, his telling P Black not to call Hermione a Mudblood, and so forth). But in my opinion, Harry had not "taken only positive impressions of Snape from TPT" as you stated; rather he took it ALL in, the good, the bad, the pretty and the ugly, imo.

Yes, Harry gets over the initial poor impression of James he gained from SWM, but I would argue that it is because he realized that James later grew up and changed, not because he came to a conclusion that James had been in the right all along and that Snape had deserved it after all.
I accept that there’s a contrast between James, who does change and leave behind his bullying behaviour, and Snape who does not, and continues to hold onto “sad memories”, emotions and grudges. But it’s not all together a bad thing that Snape is like this – if he were the kind to let go of the past and move on, then he would probably have followed Voldemort’s advice, forgotten Lily and married a nice pureblood girl, and Harry would be toast.

Well I explained aboutthat it had nothing to do with justification or Snape deserving anything...hopefully what I was trying to say is clearer now. :)

Again, I respect your opinion, but would respectfully request that you respect mine and refrain from implying that yours is the obvious, right way of reading, and that I only do not see it because I am "unwilling" to.

I didn't mean that at all. I have no idea how you feel on particular topics we have not discussed. I would not presume how you feel because you tend to surprise me quite a bit (which is great :tu:). I sincerely am only speaking in terms of myself and my own unwillingness or willingness to do things as a reader. :)

I do not believe that Snape deliberately “lied” about James, any more than I believe that Sirius deliberately “lies” about Snape’s young involvement in the Dark Arts, or Harry deliberately “lies” on the numerous occasions when he tells Dumbledore and the Trio that Snape is a villain – I believe that all of them tell the truth as they see it, but that truth gets somewhat distorted by their emotions, biases and misperceptions.

And I don’t think the new information post-SWM really added much to what Harry – or we – already knew.

We find out that Snape was for a time a loyal DE – but we already knew that, since GoF.

We find out that he used some Dark Magic – but we already knew that, and both HBP and TPT suggest that he started using it later than Sirius suggests in OotP, so this is a case of later facts mitigating our bad impression of Snape.

We find out that he insulted Petunia for being a Muggle and regularly called other students Mudbloods - but SWM already suggested that he was a blood bigot, so this is, IMO, hardly shocking news. In fact, most of the new info we gain post-SWM again seems, if anything, to mitigate the negative impression of his calling Lily a Mudblood. We find out that he was a half-blood himself (and his private nickname suggests to me that, despite what he says to his Slytherin friends, he is deep down actually quite proud of that), we find out that he loved Lily and that his insult to her in SWM does not reflect his true feelings for her, and we find out that he totally rejected blood prejudice in later life and castigated Phineas Nigellus for using bloodist abuse.

We do find out that Snape betrayed the prophecy to Voldemort - this is probably the one, completely new and very bad piece of evidence against him - but we also find out that he genuinely repented, and Harry seems to have come to terms with that by the end of the series.

So while I respect your view that later events make us reappraise SWM and view Snape more negatively, in my reading of the text, if anything, the opposite is the case.

That was not my conclusion at all :lol:. I merely said "reappraise" Snape, not that it would all be negative. As for the lying, I explained above and as I stated, I'll try to find my old post if you want me to go into more detail. I was not talking about him calling James arrogant or breaking rules - those things are as true about James as they are about Harry. I was speaking of other things Snape said; many half-truths; lies by omission; stating his opinion as fact without disclosure, lying via exaggeration and in some cases flat out lies, imo.

But, although I can totally see why some people find Snape's treatment of Lily inexcusable here, I still think it's a reprehensible but ultimately forgiveable mistake, not a terrible crime.

To me the point was that Lily was no one special and that Snape should not have been behaving in a bigoted manner toward anyone - that is what is unforgiveable behavior (in the common sense of that phrase). What it meant to Lily, Snape, James, Sirius or anyone else present, including Harry via the pensieve, is a different matter of course. I have to put myself in their shoes and discuss it.

Re your question about why we all beat up on James and let Sirius off the hook...I've already said that my stumbling block with James is the lack of page time to make me warm to him. Logically, I know Sirius is much worse, and, actually, the thing that makes me most sympathetic to Snape is the Whomping Willow - if someone had played a potentially fatal trick on me like that, and got away without being punished by the school authorities, I'd be hopping mad, too! That doesn't excuse his ingratitude to James for saving his life, though.

I understand, but I don't have a similar issue when I read the series. So I feel the same about them both. I don't know what factors made you warm to Sirius, but for myself, the things that allowed for me to like his character were expressed about James and Lily in the series and that was enough for me. :)

I agree. And I don't think Harry suddenly converted to a view of Snape as some sort of shining saint. But I think he came to an honest reassessment of the man after viewing his most intimate memories -- Severus Snape, uncensored, as it were -- and was able to recognise and honour the good aspects of what he saw ... mainly Snape's courage (obvious, IMO, from his bleak and thankless years as double agent and the risks he took).

:agree: :tu: Yes indeed! The memories themselves, although mainly used to create sympathy for Snape, are not all positive. Recall the scene where he is complaining about Harry to Dumbledore, the part where he says that Mulciber hexing Mary was "just a laugh", or the part on the dark hilltop where a young Snape admits that Harry's and James' lives were only passing secondary concerns to him. Snape did not give these memories to Harry to boast and brag about all the good things he did. This is the admission of an honestly contrite individual who wants to be understood-- even if it's by a person he strongly dislikes. It doesn't mean all of Harry's other memories of Snape mysteriously disappear or are all suddenly good. They're just seen now from a different angle.

IMO, the Sectumsempra was the spell Snape had used on James in that particular instance. And no, James did not deserve to have Dark Magic used against him in that moment any more than Draco Malfoy had {despite his trying to use the Cruciatus Curse on Harry}.

Sectumsempra was a curse spell. Which needed its own counter to heal. I understood that from Draco (HBP) and George(DH), where Snape was able to heal Draco with the counter, but the Order was unable to do anything to George's ear, because they did not know the specific counter. That spell also leaves a scar; a curse scar which will not go away. George's ear remained a big gaping hole and would be so for the rest of his life IMO. And that seems to be the case for both verbal and non-verbal casting of the spell, because there isn't any mention that a non-verbal casting would make the spell different from a verbal casting IMO.

I don't think Snape cast the secumsempra for a couple of reasons.

1) Lily never accuses him of practising dark magic, while still in school, when she gives her reasons for breaking off with Snape (TPT).

2) Had it been the sectumsempra, James would have had a scar, which would have been a serious issue in School and something which Sirius would have never forgotten. He never accuses Snape of practising dark arts, never accuses Snape of attacking James with dark magic and never gives the reason that their enmity with Snape was because he used dark curses on them, citing the SWM as an example "that James even sported a curse scar on his cheek. How can we let that pass?" in OOTP to Harry (Career's Advice) IMO.

Had it been a curse scar, I don't think Sirius would have spared Snape to Harry, who was in OOTP, after viewing the SWM, desperate for some kind of assurance that Snape indeed deserved such treatment Harry saw in the pensieve.

The use of dark magic would have reassured him that the Marauders had reason to attack Snape because "he existed". But all Sirius and Remus tell Harry is that they were idiots or some such thing and that they grew up IMO.

I don't think there is canon to say sectumsempra was cast by Snape, while he was still a student, because of the nature of the curse, the person he is accused of casting it upon and the silence of those group of friends on the supposedly dark curse cast on one member of their group by a boy all of them hated and/or disliked to a very great extent all their lives IMO.

Sectumsempra was a curse spell. Which needed its own counter to heal.I agree, it is a curse, it is Dark Magic. We're told this in canon.

I understood that from Draco (HBP) and George(DH), where Snape was able to heal Draco with the counter, but the Order was unable to do anything to George's ear, because they did not know the specific counter.This is correct, there is a counter, because Snape invented both spell and counter, invented specifically as the Prince canon tells us: For Enemies.

That spell also leaves a scar; a curse scar which will not go away. George's ear remained a big gaping hole and would be so for the rest of his life IMO.The curse can leave a scar, yes. George's ear could not be reattached, the damage could not be undone because it was detached via Dark Magic and they didn't know the particular counter. They were able to get the wound to heal though, just not regrow an ear.

And that seems to be the case for both verbal and non-verbal casting of the spell, because there isn't any mention that a non-verbal casting would make the spell different from a verbal casting IMO.Well, this particular spell? I say that, if Snape did indeed use it on James then yes, between the Snape/James incident and the Harry/Draco incident we have seen in canon the differences that can occur between verbal and nonverbal spells. We saw it in the Ministry too, in the Phoenix. I just finished reading that book to my niece and clearly remember mention of Dolohov's curse. He'd been silenced by Hermione, but it was still a powerfully dangerous curse. He tried it on Harry, still unable to articulate it verbally, and Harry used the shield charm. He received little to no damage while Hermione was horribly injured internally.

Then too, remember, that just because Snape invented it doesn't mean that James/Sirius/Remus hadn't figured a way to counter its damaging effects or that Madam Pomfrey or whatever healer was at Hogwarts wouldn't have some extra knowledge to assist in healing cursed injuries. Mrs. Weasley served as nurse and injury healer for her children for the longest time, yet she was unable to remove Hermione's blackeye from the punching telescope. Presto chango, Gred and Forge had invented a new healing salve for stubborn bruises.

Lastly, neither you nor I know whether James bore a small scar from this incident or if it was ever truly healed. We don't know that it wasn't a source of enmity or continued hostilities between the Marauder's and Snape. Just because Lily didn't call Snape out for using a spell that she probably was unaware of, remember it was invented by Snape and he had cast it non-verbally, doesn't mean that her silence was proof the spell wasn't a Dark Curse.

I don't think there is canon to say sectumsempra was cast by Snape, while he was still a student, because of the nature of the curse, the person he is accused of casting it upon and the silence of those group of friends on the supposedly dark curse cast on one member of their group by a boy all of them hated and/or disliked to a very great extent all their lives IMO.Well, this spell was written in his school book which lends weight that it was very probably perfected at Hogwarts. How could it have been perfected at school without Snape never having cast it there? This curse does not have to be used on people. It could be used on animals or inanimate objects or even the walking dead.

This is correct, there is a counter, because Snape invented both spell and counter, invented specifically as the Prince canon tells us: For Enemies.

I am sorry, but the "Prince" canon tell us no such thing. Here is the actual "Prince" canon about that spell:

He has just found an incantation ("Sectumsempra!") scrawled in a margin above the intriguing words "For Enemies" and was itching to try it out, but thought it best not to in front of Hermione.

There is no mention of this being an invention, let alone being made for some specific purpose. And then we have:

"Will you stop harping about the book!" snapped Harry. "The Prince only copied it out! It's not like he was advising anyone to use it! For all we know he was making a note of something that had been used against him!"

We also have, in contrast, this:

Harry turned the book sideways so as to examine more closely the scribbled instructions for a spell that seemed to have caused the Prince some trouble. There were many crossings-out and alterations, but finally, crammed into a corner of the page, the scribble: Levicorpus (nvbl.)

Levicorpus is a spell I believe Snape invented, because we see the work he put into researching it. No such notations are mentioned regarding Sectumsempra, just the simple, two word description.

I personally draw from this the same conclusion that Harry drew - Snape was not the inventor of the Sectumsempra curse, he found it in a Dark Arts book or was told it by a practitioner and wrote it down, with a note on its use. I also think it makes more sense of Snape's question about it to Harry, and of the DH fact that Lupin knows the name of this spell, apparently. Harry is not all-knowing, and definitely has made what I view as other mistakes of this type, so you are entitled to disagree with his (and my) interpretation. However, you interpretation is just that, an interpretation, not a canon fact.

I don't think there is canon to say sectumsempra was cast by Snape, while he was still a student, because of the nature of the curse, the person he is accused of casting it upon and the silence of those group of friends on the supposedly dark curse cast on one member of their group by a boy all of them hated and/or disliked to a very great extent all their lives IMO.

I would respectfully disagree. Lupin knew Sectumsempra was Snape's specialty and the two of them had no relations at all based on canon, except at Hogwarts as children and later again at Hogwarts when they were both professors. I don't believe it became Snape's specialty while he was teaching at Hogwarts (at least I would hope not, :lol:.) Remus, like the other Marauders, was unsure Snape was a Death Eater, which would mean that they didn't knowingly associate with him while he was with Voldemort. So Remus could not have reasonably learned it at that time, imo.

Additionally, it was invented by Snape, specifically to use against his enemies and imo, what we saw him use in SWM was Sectumsempra, because there is no canon that Snape had an arsenol of 'cutting curses' that he regularly used - and while it is possible, it would only make his character even blacker imo, if that were true, so I concede Snape the more favorable interpretation that he only had the one he used against his enemies.

In my judgment, Snape was by no means a saintly child; he behaved in a bullying manner, belittling others in a bigoted manner and imo, both used dark magic against others (his dark curse marked for enemies at the least) and egged on his friends as they used dark magic against others, by his own admission, with laughter - as Peter did the Marauders in their delinquent hex war behavior, imo. To me, Snape's behavior in that light was tinged with cruelty because it was supported by an intent to do significant physical harm and injury to others, which is the basis for magic's dark nature.

But my opinion of young Snape is tempered by the fact that he was a child at the time; as such, he was still finding his way and to me, less culpable based on a lack of knowledge and experience in the ways of the world. While this is not true for all children, I give them all a break in this sense regardless because this is the period when they are supposed to learn and mature. I feel Snape was shown to lack average social skills for his age and I believe that is based on the negative homelife he endured. But despite all of the negativity he had to deal with and the negative influences he cultivated, imo, I feel that he was given the opportunity to 'see the light' by his friendship with Lily and the other good influences around him at Hogwarts. These types of things I feel did influence people like Regulus, who saw through to the evil that lay behind Voldemort's road to power as adults. However, Snape did not take advantage of this insight, imo, as he matured and remained steadfast along the dark path to power.

But JKR wrote all of her characters to have a seed of compassion in their hearts, with the sole exception of Voldemort. So Snape was able to reject evil eventually, and that to me is positive, because it shows that he allowed his compassion to rule his being, independent of the reason for it. But Snape never could shake off his non-evil negative behavior (meaning core personality and attitude and resultant acts), imo. In that sense, I feel that Snape could never become a person who was good at heart, but rather an individual who had a seed of compassion that he would not allow to grow, but which he continued to acknowledge. That kept Snape on the good side in my opinion because it was sufficient to allow him to recognize the basic distinction between good and evil.

I feel we have canon evidence that Snape did not recognize the difference when he was young; he insinuated to Lily that there was no difference between dark magic spells and light magic spells if both were issued with the intent to cause a negative result. That is one of the subtle distinctions between good and evil, though, imo, and often a deceptive ruse used by people like Voldemort to convince his minions that what they were doing was no different than anyone else; but a certain means to a powerful end. But it misses an important distinction: the cruelty associated with overt harm and injury that crosses the line of good and ventures into the realm of evil, imo. It crosses the line even used in minor form because it progresses into heavier use as the occassion calls for it along the route of the dark path. That is why it is dangerous and this I believe is what Snape was pointing out to Harry in 6th year when he said he hadn't believed that Harry would use such dark magic as Sectumsempra. To me, that was a canon indication that Snape truly had come to recognize the distinction he'd been unable to make when he was younger.

I am sorry, but the "Prince" canon tell us no such thing.
However, you interpretation is just that, an interpretation, not a canon fact.Sorry, but no. Canon shows that Snape tells Harry that they were "his" spells, when Harry attempts to use Sectumsempra on Snape. These spells, in the Prince's book, were his inventions, his spells. This particular one was invented for use upon "Enemies".
"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!"

Then too, remember, that just because Snape invented it doesn't mean that James/Sirius/Remus hadn't figured a way to counter its damaging effects or that Madam Pomfrey or whatever healer was at Hogwarts wouldn't have some extra knowledge to assist in healing cursed injuries.

If the Marauders had found a way to counter the curse, surely Remus would have applied that knowledge to heal George's ear and re-grow it?

Mrs. Weasley served as nurse and injury healer for her children for the longest time, yet she was unable to remove Hermione's blackeye from the punching telescope. Presto chango, Gred and Forge had invented a new healing salve for stubborn bruises.

Exactly. The specific counter was what would undo the curse. James did not know it, for Remus did not know it in DH. So he would ahve had dark magic being cast on him in the SWM. He would have made sure Snape was expelled for that IMO, considering the hatred he seemed to have for Snape.

Lastly, neither you nor I know whether James bore a small scar from this incident or if it was ever truly healed. We don't know that it wasn't a source of enmity or continued hostilities between the Marauder's and Snape. Just because Lily didn't call Snape out for using a spell that she probably was unaware of, remember it was invented by Snape and he had cast it non-verbally, doesn't mean that her silence was proof the spell wasn't a Dark Curse.

If it was a dark magic curse, it would not have stopped bleeding on its own. It would need specific treatment, even if the counter was not known. Had James continued to bleed, we would have seen that in the SWM itself. But we did not see it IMO.

Well, this spell was written in his school book which lends weight that it was very probably perfected at Hogwarts.

That need not be necessary. Snape could have as simple as practised it on dummies in Hogwarts, perhaps even with Lily's knowledge. While he may have used it while still in School, canon is silent on that. Not even Sirius and Remus talk about it in OOTP. I don't think Snape practised dark arts in School, simply because there is no canon for that.

How could it have been perfected at school without Snape never having cast it there? This curse does not have to be used on people. It could be used on animals or inanimate objects or even the walking dead.

If it was practised in Hogwarts, it could also be on conjured dummies in the Slytherin dungeons IMO.

I would respectfully disagree. Lupin knew Sectumsempra was Snape's specialty and the two of them had no relations at all based on canon, except at Hogwarts as children and later again at Hogwarts when they were both professors. I don't believe it became Snape's specialty while he was teaching at Hogwarts (at least I would hope not, :lol:.) Remus, like the other Marauders, was unsure Snape was a Death Eater, which would mean that they didn't knowingly associate with him while he was with Voldemort. So Remus could not have reasonably learned it at that time, imo.

Lupin says that in DH. Snape was at that time visibly working as the spy in the Order for sometime. He may have learned it before.

Additionally, it was invented by Snape, specifically to use against his enemies and imo, what we saw him use in SWM was Sectumsempra, because there is no canon that Snape had an arsenol of 'cutting curses' that he regularly used -

But there is also no canon Snape used dark magic while still in School or that he used it against james in the SWM. I cannot believe it was the sectumsempra, because of the person you are saying Snape cast it at. It was James Potter along with Sirius and Lily standing there. And the memory went on for some more time after Snape cast the curse. I don't remember James continously bleeding (because it was not treated as they were still hexing Snape) or being hurt by the curse, nor do we have tales of it later (in OOTP). Surely Sirius would have not left that detail out to Harry in OOTP. If it was dark magic, then that's all the reason the Marauders need to attack Snape and they would have been in the right every time. But they only call themselves idiots or arrogant, not that Snape used dark arts.

In my judgment, Snape was by no means a saintly child; he behaved in a bullying manner, belittling others in a bigoted manner and imo, both used dark magic against others (his dark curse marked for enemies at the least) and egged on his friends as they used dark magic against others,

While I think there is canon for Avery and Mulciber using dark magic, there is nothing to say Snape did. Lily who called attention to that prank, onmly spoke about Avery and Mulciber not Snape IMO.

Snape was certainly not a saintly child. He was an abused, deprived and starved for more than just good food, clothes and hygine IMO. And to give Snape great credit, he never talks down even his abusive father, let alone his mother to anyone. Even to Lily he is evasive, his tension shown rather than spoken about.

While I agree with you that Snape was not a saintly child, I respectfully disagree that he was bigoted, belittled and used dark magic in School. After School, I still agree only with the dark magic, I still disagree with the other 2. :)

That he was not bigoted is shown by his friendship with Lily. That he called everyone of Lily's birth mudblood is because he wanted to fit in with a group. Sure he was wrong, else he would not have been a DE in the first place, but he was wrong because he had no one to guide him like Harry did IMO.

That he never belitlled anyone is canon. I would actually say he was belittled by others, who probably laughed at him for his clothes, because he existed and his greasy hair. I really don't think Snape went around belittling anyone.

by his own admission, with laughter - as Peter did the Marauders in their delinquent hex war behavior, imo. To me, Snape's behavior in that light was tinged with cruelty because it was supported by an intent to do significant physical harm and injury to others, which is the basis for magic's dark nature.

He was not laughing when he was expalining to Lily. He was uneasily trying to do away with a topic where he knew his friends were oin the wrong and he did not want to fight Lily on that IMO.

I really don't think I can compare this to the Marauders attitudes in the SWM.

In that sense, I feel that Snape could never become a person who was good at heart,

I actually think Snape is all about heart. Though I would say he does not show it much, if at all.

Sorry, but no. Canon shows that Snape tells Harry that they were "his" spells, when Harry attempts to use Sectumsempra on Snape. These spells, in the Prince's book, were his inventions, his spells. This particular one was invented for use upon "Enemies".
"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!"

Even if Snape invented that spell, it is not proof he used it in Hogwarts or on James in the SWM IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

If the Marauders had found a way to counter the curse, surely Remus would have applied that knowledge to heal George's ear and re-grow it?

Exactly. The specific counter was what would undo the curse. James did not know it, for Remus did not know it in DH.Remus and James are two different characters. What one knows does not necessarily equate to what the other does as evidenced by the fact that James knew the Secret Keeper had changed and Remus and Dumbledore did not. The characters in the novels are not omniscient. They only know as much as has been shared.
So he would ahve had dark magic being cast on him in the SWM. He would have made sure Snape was expelled for that IMO, considering the hatred he seemed to have for Snape.Like Harry was expelled for the much worse maiming of Malfoy by using the Dark Magic spell invented by Snape, do you mean? Further, it would be absolutely ridiculous for James to go running off to the Head's or the Headmaster with the 'he used Dark Magic on me' complaint, especially while he was dangling, humiliating, and attempting to de-pants Severus in front of a gang of people when Severus managed to retaliate.

If it was a dark magic curse, it would not have stopped bleeding on its own. It would need specific treatment, even if the counter was not known. Had James continued to bleed, we would have seen that in the SWM itself.Do you mean that George's ear continued to bleed forever, then? No, that's not what happened according to Deathly Hallows. Mrs. Weasley managed to stop the bleeding and the wound itself did heal. The only lasting effects was that they were unable to make George's ear regrow because it had been cursed off by Dark Magic.

As for continued bleeding, how were we to see what did or did not occur after that specific memory was interrupted by the inventor of the Sectumsempra curse? Do we know that James didn't get the wound tended? Do we know that Snape wasn't punished for it? Do we know if Snape had ever confided his inventions to Lily? Do we know that James wasn't permanently scarred on his face from that incident? That he bore no enmity toward Snape for it if there was a remaining scar? Like Harry bore enmity toward Umbridge every time he viewed his scar on his right hand?

That need not be necessary. Snape could have as simple as practised it on dummies in Hogwarts, perhaps even with Lily's knowledge. While he may have used it while still in School, canon is silent on that. Not even Sirius and Remus talk about it in OOTP. I don't think Snape practised dark arts in School, simply because there is no canon for that.Just casting the spell is performing Dark Arts, whether it injures someone or animal or insect or destroys an inanimate object. Practicing the spell is performing it at school.

We saw this distinction in GoF, when the fake Mad Eye performed the Unforgivables in front of the whole class. We saw Draco throw the Cruciatus Curse at Harry. It never hit its mark, yet he still 'performed' the act. Harry in turn threw Sectumsempra, the curse we're told in canon was invented by Snape and the one which Snape tells Harry specifically is "Dark Magic". As the inventor he should know whether it was or wasn't Dark Magic, surely?

Lupin says that in DH. Snape was at that time visibly working as the spy in the Order for sometime. He may have learned it before.What Remus says was: "Sectumsempra was always a specialty of Snape's."

Past tense. To our knowledge, Lupin and Snape had zero contact up until Prisoner of Azkaban. We see and hear of no other interaction between them until Order of the Phoenix. They're both members. At no time to we see, hear, learn of Snape using this spell during that time. Yet we know because canon tells us that this "was always" a specialty of his. Not "is a specialty" but "was always a specialty". When did we reasonably see it used within the context of the story?

Have you ever heard of Chekhov's Rifle?
Chekhov's gun is the literary technique whereby an element is introduced early in the story, but whose significance does not become clear until later on. For example, a character may find a mysterious object that eventually becomes crucial to the plot, but at the time of finding the object, does not seem to be important.Rowling did this time and time and time again through out the stories. She'd put the "gun" in plain site and then "fire" it sometime later in the story. IMO, Snape's Sectumsempra is one of the "guns" cleverly planted in the story.

Exactly. The specific counter was what would undo the curse. James did not know it, for Remus did not know it in DH. So he would ahve had dark magic being cast on him in the SWM. He would have made sure Snape was expelled for that IMO, considering the hatred he seemed to have for Snape.

As Kat_Suki says, James himself was no angel in that scene, so I seriously doubt he'd want to advertise his own behaviour there.

That need not be necessary. Snape could have as simple as practised it on dummies in Hogwarts, perhaps even with Lily's knowledge. While he may have used it while still in School, canon is silent on that. Not even Sirius and Remus talk about it in OOTP. I don't think Snape practised dark arts in School, simply because there is no canon for that.

But there is canon for that. :huh: Sirius says that Snape came to school knowing more Dark Arts curses than most people of his age. Now, I know that his view of Snape is pretty jaundiced -- just as Snape's view of him was jaundiced -- but are we supposed to think that Sirius is lying? Or even exaggerating?

These little clues and details are part of the narrative for a reason.

Snape was certainly not a saintly child. He was an abused, deprived and starved for more than just good food, clothes and hygine IMO. And to give Snape great credit, he never talks down even his abusive father, let alone his mother to anyone. Even to Lily he is evasive, his tension shown rather than spoken about.

No argument from me on this.

He is, however, a child with a certain chip on his shoulder. Hardly surprising, given his background. But a chip he has ... which gets bigger.

While I agree with you that Snape was not a saintly child, I respectfully disagree that he was bigoted, belittled and used dark magic in School. After School, I still agree only with the dark magic, I still disagree with the other 2. :)

Young Snape's anti-Muggle statements are right there in the text. It could not be plainer. That is part of his tragedy: that wherever, as a kid, he got these beliefs from (we aren't told, and can only speculate), and however lightly or deeply he held them, they formed a tragically misguided outlook that influenced the disastrous choices he made in his youth.

Like you, I believe that Canon Severus eventually outgrew those beliefs and we have evidence in DH of that.

And you'll get no argument from me on how he was belittled, TGW.

But he did his fair share of belittling too ... as damaged and insecure people often do. He belittles Petunia because "she's only a Muggle", and he belittles Harry, the son of the woman he loved and the man he hated.

He belittles Harry whilst protecting him. We have it there in canon. Why is it so difficult to reconcile these two conflicting things? It's all part of the ambiguity of Snape. :)

That he was not bigoted is shown by his friendship with Lily. That he called everyone of Lily's birth mudblood is because he wanted to fit in with a group. Sure he was wrong, else he would not have been a DE in the first place, but he was wrong because he had no one to guide him like Harry did IMO.

I do find that a plausible theory, and I certainly agree that young Snape seemed to have no wise mentor to guide him.

But he did have choices ... he wasn't just a passive victim of everybody else being mean to him. Whether his anti-Muggle feelings were simply learned behaviour or a more deeply ingrained prejudice, he still had a choice about whether to become a Death Eater or not.

That he never belittled anyone is canon.

There is ample evidence in canon to prove the opposite. He belittles Petunia. It doesn't matter why he does it (Petunia herself is no saint, and he might have felt very threatened by her), but he does do it. As for Harry ... :whistle: ... well, I think that speaks for itself. :whistle:

I don't need Severus to be a saint. :) I actually like the canon character as he is presented: an immensely troubled, bitter, difficult, misunderstood, prickly man with a chip on his shoulder the size of Manhattan. :whistle: :D

Remus and James are two different characters. What one knows does not necessarily equate to what the other does as evidenced by the fact that James knew the Secret Keeper had changed and Remus and Dumbledore did not. The characters in the novels are not omniscient. They only know as much as has been shared.

I posted in response to your post, where you had specified the 3 names.

Like Harry was expelled for the much worse maiming of Malfoy by using the Dark Magic spell invented by Snape, do you mean?

Of course not. I mean like Snape was shut up by Dumbledore when he voiced concerns about the werewolf prank at the ned of POA, calling Black a murderer. Dumbledore loved Harry and Harry was also the BWL. Had Snape cast that sectumsempra, he would have had his wand broken and expelled IMO. Harry would have been in great trouble too, had any professor other than Snape caught him, IMO. He got away because it was Snape IMO.

Further, it would be absolutely ridiculous for James to go running off to the Head's or the Headmaster with the 'he used Dark Magic on me' complaint, especially while he was dangling, humiliating, and attempting to de-pants Severus in front of a gang of people when Severus managed to retaliate.

Against dark magic? Dark magic vs levicorpus? I am sure James would have got a couple of detentions. Dark Magic would get a student expelled, while hanging them upside down would have got them loss of points and a detention, if they were really unlucky IMO.

Do you mean that George's ear continued to bleed forever, then?

Of course it did, until they got him down and stopped the blood flow. George was almost dying of the blood loss IMO.

No, that's not what happened according to Deathly Hallows. Mrs. Weasley managed to stop the bleeding and the wound itself did heal. The only lasting effects was that they were unable to make George's ear regrow because it had been cursed off by Dark Magic.

This was after George touched down. The wound bled as long as it was not treated. Had James been hit with the sectumsempra then, that wound would have bled too, since it was dark magic. It would have needed to be stopped IMO.

As for continued bleeding, how were we to see what did or did not occur after that specific memory was interrupted by the inventor of the Sectumsempra curse? Do we know that James didn't get the wound tended? Do we know that Snape wasn't punished for it? Do we know if Snape had ever confided his inventions to Lily? Do we know that James wasn't permanently scarred on his face from that incident? That he bore no enmity toward Snape for it if there was a remaining scar? Like Harry bore enmity toward Umbridge every time he viewed his scar on his right hand?

We go by what is in canon. There is no reference to Snape casting dark magic/sectumsempra in the school/at James in canon. James may have tended to his wound, but that wound until tended would have bled continously.

Just casting the spell is performing Dark Arts, whether it injures someone or animal or insect or destroys an inanimate object. Practicing the spell is performing it at school.

Sure! I agree. If Snape was practising it on dummies, then he was practising dark arts in School. (it is only speculation and has no canon backing IMO) But I would still disagree that he practised dark arts on students, which was what we were discussing.

What Remus says was: "Sectumsempra was always a specialty of Snape's."

Past tense. To our knowledge, Lupin and Snape had zero contact up until Prisoner of Azkaban. We see and hear of no other interaction between them until Order of the Phoenix. They're both members. At no time to we see, hear, learn of Snape using this spell during that time. Yet we know because canon tells us that this "was always" a specialty of his. Not "is a specialty" but "was always a specialty". When did we reasonably see it used within the context of the story?

From the end of GOF to the end of HBP there were 2 years when Snape and Remus worked together. I do not find it unreasonable to suppose that Remus could have heard it then.
Have you ever heard of Chekhov's Rifle?

Chekhov's gun is the literary technique whereby an element is introduced early in the story, but whose significance does not become clear until later on. For example, a character may find a mysterious object that eventually becomes crucial to the plot, but at the time of finding the object, does not seem to be important.Rowling did this time and time and time again through out the stories. She'd put the "gun" in plain site and then "fire" it sometime later in the story. IMO, Snape's Sectumsempra is one of the "guns" cleverly planted in the story.

No. I have not heard of this literary technique. But for JKR to plant this 'gun' she would also need to give the characteristics of the spell for it to be recognised as dark magic IMO. Which I feel she has not. She has made the gun only a spell, not a particualr one IMO.

I have a question about this curse. If it was the sectumsempra, why did not Sirius and Remus tell Harry about it in OOTP?

Why did not Lily tell Snape when she broke off with him?

I would like to know if anyone likes to answer. :)

The entire post is my opinion only.

posted by Pearl_TookBut there is canon for that. Sirius says that Snape came to school knowing more Dark Arts curses than most people of his age. Now, I know that his view of Snape is pretty jaundiced -- just as Snape's view of him was jaundiced -- but are we supposed to think that Sirius is lying? Or even exaggerating?

These little clues and details are part of the narrative for a reason.

No. :) I don't think Sirius was lying. But even Sirius said Snape came "Knowing more curses than half the 7th year kids" not practising the dark arts. They are 2 different things. I may read some 10 books on creating vampires. But that does not make me guilty of creating one, unless I pratise the art I have read IMO. I agree Snape knew the dark arts. I think Lily knew that Snape knew the dark arts as well. I also think she may have read along with Snape. What I don't agree is that he practised it in School, because there isn't any evidence IMO.

Of course not. I mean like Snape was shut up by Dumbledore when he voiced concerns about the werewolf prank at the ned of POA, calling Black a murderer. Dumbledore loved Harry and Harry was also the BWL. Had Snape cast that sectumsempra, he would have had his wand broken and expelled IMO. Harry would have been in great trouble too, had any professor other than Snape caught him, IMO. He got away because it was Snape IMO.

Mulciber wasn't expelled for practising dark magic on Mary. It is most likely that the professors didn't know about it. But I don't figure they expelled for it in any case (unless you did an unforgivable AK curse :lol:) You would just get hard labor for it and a lot of lectures.

This was after George touched down. The wound bled as long as it was not treated. Had James been hit with the sectumsempra then, that wound would have bled too, since it was dark magic. It would have needed to be stopped IMO.

Blood splattered down from the cut all the way onto his robes. It was a controlled strike of Sectumsempra, and for all we know it continued bleeding until James took care of it. Actually, for it to splatter, it had to have been pretty deep, so it wouldn't have likely stopped bleeding even if Snape hadn't used a dark curse - but imo, he did.

We go by what is in canon. There is no reference to Snape casting dark magic/sectumsempra in the school/at James in canon. James may have tended to his wound, but that wound until tended would have bled continously.

I'm sure it did - that is the consequence of a deep cut even in real life; so imo, that is a given.

Sure! I agree. If Snape was practising it on dummies, then he was practising dark arts in School. (it is only speculation and has no canon backing IMO) But I would still disagree that he practised dark arts on students, which was what we were discussing.

Snape's enemies were dummies? He specified who he invented Sectumsempra for: his enemies; and his enemies at that time were the Marauders. One of his enemies, Remus, recalled it was his specialty. I think those two bits of canon indicate Snape used it quite frequently on his enemies at school. Clearly he was able to control its use better than Harry though. :lol:.

I have a question about this curse. If it was the sectumsempra, why did not Sirius and Remus tell Harry about it in OOTP?

Why would they? They didn't speak about what spells anyone used.

Why did not Lily tell Snape when she broke off with him?

Imo, Lily didn't run off a laundry list of Snape's wrongs when she ended the friendship. She didn't bring up his calling her a Mudblood, he did. All she said was he was a budding Death Eater and she wasn't going down that path. So I would think that was the reason. She didn't wish to stand there naming his sins and have him justify them one by one - for example, she didn't talk about his friendships then, which she also detested, other than to say Snape was like them (and we know how they were.) :)

No. :) I don't think Sirius was lying. But even Sirius said Snape came "Knowing more curses than half the 7th year kids" not practising the dark arts. They are 2 different things. I may read some 10 books on creating vampires. But that does not make me guilty of creating one, unless I pratise the art I have read IMO. I agree Snape knew the dark arts. I think Lily knew that Snape knew the dark arts as well. I also think she may have read along with Snape. What I don't agree is that he practised it in School, because there isn't any evidence IMO.

But how would Sirius know?

I know this is kind of off topic from the discussions going on at the moment, but I've really been wondering about this question.

How would Snape (or his portrait) treat Harry now that he knows Harry knows everything that happened to him? Snape was quite horrible to Harry, even though he loved his mother, and his relationship with him was very complicated. Harry is a mix of one person Snape loved above everything else, while he's also the person Snape hated above everything else. So his treatment of Harry was fairly complicated.

What I'm wondering is, would Snape treat Harry any differently now? Would he try to be nicer, or would it be too hard for him to throw away all those years of bitterness and guarded anger and show Harry some kindness?

I personally don't see Snape pulling a complete 360 personality change and being very pleasant to Harry, I'm not sure if he'd change at all. The nicest I can see him being is kind of a "House" relationship, similar to how House treats Wilson in "House."

Or, I could see Snape having one moment of revelation if you will, admitting everything to Harry, then going back to being his normal unpleasant self.

What do you guys think?

No. :) I don't think Sirius was lying. But even Sirius said Snape came "Knowing more curses than half the 7th year kids" not practising the dark arts. They are 2 different things. I may read some 10 books on creating vampires. But that does not make me guilty of creating one, unless I pratise the art I have read IMO. I agree Snape knew the dark arts. I think Lily knew that Snape knew the dark arts as well.

Well, I'm sure she knew he knew. :whistle: :D

I also think she may have read along with Snape.

What do you base that on? :huh: There's absolutely nothing mentioned anywhere in the books about Lily doing any such thing.

What I don't agree is that he practised it in School, because there isn't any evidence IMO.

I think the author has dropped enough literary clues for us to build a very plausible theory that he did. And personally I think Sectumsempra is pretty solid evidence.

I know this is kind of off topic from the discussions going on at the moment, but I've really been wondering about this question.

How would Snape (or his portrait) treat Harry now that he knows Harry knows everything that happened to him? Snape was quite horrible to Harry, even though he loved his mother, and his relationship with him was very complicated. Harry is a mix of one person Snape loved above everything else, while he's also the person Snape hated above everything else. So his treatment of Harry was fairly complicated.

What I'm wondering is, would Snape treat Harry any differently now? Would he try to be nicer, or would it be too hard for him to throw away all those years of bitterness and guarded anger and show Harry some kindness?

I personally don't see Snape pulling a complete 360 personality change and being very pleasant to Harry, I'm not sure if he'd change at all. The nicest I can see him being is kind of a "House" relationship, similar to how House treats Wilson in "House."

Or, I could see Snape having one moment of revelation if you will, admitting everything to Harry, then going back to being his normal unpleasant self.

What do you guys think?

According to an interview given by JKr, Harry never visited Snape's portrait. His one act of reconcilaition to him was the second name of his youngest son in honour of Snape's bravery,

Had Snape cast that sectumsempra, he would have had his wand broken and expelled IMO. Harry would have been in great trouble too, had any professor other than Snape caught him, IMO. He got away because it was Snape IMO.

Against dark magic? Dark magic vs levicorpus? I am sure James would have got a couple of detentions. Dark Magic would get a student expelled, while hanging them upside down would have got them loss of points and a detention, if they were really unlucky IMO.Imo, he did cast the spell. Yet he was not expelled for it, nor was his wand snapped in two and then carted off to Azkaban. There is no canon to say that either James or Severus were punished regards to that incident. We can assume that someone got punished, but that's all it is, assumption.

Both Malfoy and Harry used Dark Magic, neither were expelled, neither had their wands snapped in two, neither went to Azkaban for it.

Of course it did, until they got him down and stopped the blood flow. George was almost dying of the blood loss IMO. This was after George touched down. The wound bled as long as it was not treated. Had James been hit with the sectumsempra then, that wound would have bled too, since it was dark magic. It would have needed to be stopped IMO.So, because we didn't see James stopp bleeding in that very brief memory are we to assume that he never stopped bleeding period? No, we speculate that he took care of the problem, got the bleeding stopped.

Remember too, that this injury and the ending of the memory occurred literally within moments of that spell being cast. With Lupin and George however, they were on a broom, evading Death Eaters, trying to make it to their Portkey. Ages of time passed between the injury and the reunion at the Burrow. I speculate that George lost lots more blood due to the delay of treatment.

We go by what is in canon.:lol: Yeah, we do. So show me where it says that James was/wasn't permanently scarred from that spell. Show me where it says he did/didn't quit bleeding. Show me where it says Lily knew/didn't know what the spell was Snape used on James. Show me where it says James/Sirius/Severus/Giant Squid was/wasn't punished by members of the teaching staff for that incident. No canon = speculation, that's why everyone peppers their comments with 'in my opinion's' while using whatever canon is available to back up their speculation.

Sure! I agree. If Snape was practising it on dummies, then he was practising dark arts in School. (it is only speculation and has no canon backing IMO) But I would still disagree that he practised dark arts on students, which was what we were discussing.I'm sorry to disagree here, but we were actually discussing both of these things. You said: "Even if Snape invented that spell, it is not proof he used it in Hogwarts or on James in the SWM IMO.

Canon says Snape invented the Sectumsempra spell, that it is Dark Magic, that it "was always" his specialty, that the spell was scribbled in his Hogwarts schoolbook and captioned "For enemies", that the Marauder's were Snape's enemies while at Hogwarts, that it is a slicing curse that makes one bleed {Harry/Draco & George/Severus}, that Snape knew the countercurse, that he knew how to block the spell when it was being cast at him {Harry/Severus}. So, IMO, based upon all of that canon I believe that Snape did use it at Hogwarts during his school years and that he did use it on James in retaliation for the public humiliation which he'd been forced to endure.

No. I have not heard of this literary technique. But for JKR to plant this 'gun' she would also need to give the characteristics of the spell for it to be recognised as dark magic IMO. Which I feel she has not. She has made the gun only a spell, not a particualr one IMO.Well, the technique only requires a "showing" of the object/subject, not a complete revelation of it. The purpose is to show and then later explain. If you don't "show" the gun and suddenly spring it on the reader and "fires" it at the last moment, that's a reader cheater, it comes out of nowhere.

Take Harry's having Lily's eyes. Mentioned in the first book yet no explanation about why it's significant until the final book, when Dumbledore tells Snape that Harry has "Lily's eyes" and later when Snape says "Look at me." Another example is Harry's scar. We also see it from the very first book. Know it causes a connection to Voldemort, yet we don't know what or how. Later on it allows Harry to see and feel what Voldemort is seeing and feeling at certain times when he's losing control. It's not until the very last book, near the very last chapter, that this scar and it's significance is explained to the reader fully. Jo showed us the "gun" and later "fired" it. Hope that helps explain it better. :)

I have a question about this curse. If it was the sectumsempra, why did not Sirius and Remus tell Harry about it in OOTP?Why assume that Harry even asked that question? IMO, I think Harry was totally beyond upset with his father's being a berk and the bullying behavior, also feeling sorry for Snape and the humiliation he'd received, and more than anything else confused and anxious over his mother's reaction to this incident.

Why did not Lily tell Snape when she broke off with him?Why assume she even knew what the spell was or that it was Dark Magic? It was nonverbal, wasn't it?

According to an interview given by JKr, Harry never visited Snape's portrait. His one act of reconcilaition to him was the second name of his youngest son in honour of Snape's bravery,

That's fairly anti-climatic. Somehow I can't see Harry never visiting Snape, he' always been fairly curious in nature, I would have thought he would have at least wanted to confront Snape about why he acted the way he did towards Harry all those years. I'm disappointed JKR chose to go that way. Do you know where the interview she says that in is? Just curious.

Any who, that still doesn't stop us from thinking about it. How do you think Snape would have reacted.

I know this is kind of off topic from the discussions going on at the moment, but I've really been wondering about this question.

How would Snape (or his portrait) treat Harry now that he knows Harry knows everything that happened to him? Snape was quite horrible to Harry, even though he loved his mother, and his relationship with him was very complicated. Harry is a mix of one person Snape loved above everything else, while he's also the person Snape hated above everything else. So his treatment of Harry was fairly complicated.

What I'm wondering is, would Snape treat Harry any differently now? Would he try to be nicer, or would it be too hard for him to throw away all those years of bitterness and guarded anger and show Harry some kindness?

I personally don't see Snape pulling a complete 360 personality change and being very pleasant to Harry, I'm not sure if he'd change at all. The nicest I can see him being is kind of a "House" relationship, similar to how House treats Wilson in "House."

Or, I could see Snape having one moment of revelation if you will, admitting everything to Harry, then going back to being his normal unpleasant self.

What do you guys think?

Good question. :D

I for one think it's silly of JKR to think that Harry would never visit Snape's portrait. Harry's a pretty inquisitive person. Naturally he'd want to see more of Snape now that he has all this information. :rolleyes:

As a portrait, Snape wouldn't necessarily be his real self, but judging from what we know of him and what a portrait might try to duplicate, I don't think portrait!Severus would be any nicer to Harry in the short term. The mere fact that Harry knows his deepest personal secrets might, in fact, be an incentive for Severus to be even more rude than usual, in order to drive Harry away or avoid painful questions.

On the other hand, this deepened mutual understanding could sow the seeds for at least civility in the long run. It really depends on whether or not either or them would bother trying to cultivate a better relationship.

Sorry, but no. Canon shows that Snape tells Harry that they were "his" spells, when Harry attempts to use Sectumsempra on Snape. These spells, in the Prince's book, were his inventions, his spells. This particular one was invented for use upon "Enemies".
"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!"

He makes this statement right after Hary uses Levicorpus. So he could mean that spell, which we have additional reasons to believe was invented by him. This especially makes sense to me because of the second part you cited..."Like your filthy father". I don't think James used Sectumsempra.

Good question. :D

I for one think it's silly of JKR to think that Harry would never visit Snape's portrait. Harry's a pretty inquisitive person. Naturally he'd want to see more of Snape now that he has all this information. :rolleyes:

As a portrait, Snape wouldn't necessarily be his real self, but judging from what we know of him and what a portrait might try to duplicate, I don't think portrait!Severus would be any nicer to Harry in the short term. The mere fact that Harry knows his deepest personal secrets might, in fact, be an incentive for Severus to be even more rude than usual, in order to drive Harry away or avoid painful questions.

On the other hand, this deepened mutual understanding could sow the seeds for at least civility in the long run. It really depends on whether or not either or them would bother trying to cultivate a better relationship.

I could see that, I think if Harry was willing to try to work at it a bit (and he's more open to I imagine after seeing Snape's memories) I think Snape might warm up to him a bit.

I would love to read the conversation that happens between them though, I really think it would be interesting. Especially Snape's initial reaction when Harry confronts him about Snape's past behavior towards him.

I would love to read the conversation that happens between them though, I really think it would be interesting. Especially Snape's initial reaction when Harry confronts him about Snape's past behavior towards him.

My own guess at the approximate content... "My teaching?! Did you skip the memory on the hill or something, Potter? If it were not for me your parents might still be alive."

My own guess at the approximate content... "My teaching?! Did you skip the memory on the hill or something, Potter? If it were not for me your parents might still be alive."

:rotfl:, great capture of Snape's character. But I would disagree that Snape would react that way.

First, Harry would never go because he is not a small man. Independent of what readers may have believed, JKR's version is that Snape loathed Harry when he died. So that is the man that Harry had to forgive; not someone who had come to like him and wished to answer for his past behavior, imo. How small of a person would Harry be to try and force the portrait of a man to admit its owner had been wrong in the past, apologize and tell Harry he was actually a great guy deserving of Snape's liking and warmth? Very small, imo, which is why I feel JKR said that he would not go. Harry doesn't require understanding and affection or compassion from every being just because he happens to be a great guy - his arrogance was a minor fault, that he likely grew out of, rather than into. Harry understands everything about Snape that he needs to know; and he honored him for his attempt to make his mother's sacrifice worthwhile, imo. But he neither came to like Snape nor continued to dislike him, just like Lupin, imo.

So that part of my view explained; if Harry did for some reason go to the portrait, he would be met with loathing (which Harry knows.) Snape would not concede that Harry was doing something wonderful by talking to the man who had helped kill his parents. I feel to the contrray, Snape would imagine Harry as vain as he'd always called him for coming along and trying to gain understanding, because Snape would ask: "to what end? I will still loathe you" :lol:. Harry himself doesn't loathe Snape; he learned the lesson of not holding a grudge well because he saw both in Sirius and especially in Snape that it did nothing but make one bitter, imo. Remus expressed that view to Harry in HBP and I feel that he eventually took it to heart. If someone is too small to forgive, it only hurts them in the end.

He makes this statement right after Hary uses Levicorpus. So he could mean that spell, which we have additional reasons to believe was invented by him. This especially makes sense to me because of the second part you cited..."Like your filthy father". I don't think James used Sectumsempra.

Snape says 'spells; and 'them'. Snape's command of English is excellent and I'm sure that he meant spells in the plural because that is what is said.

Snape was the repentant sinner, to be repentant you must at one time have sinned pretty badly. This is basic Christian dogma, so IMO Snape did create and use dark magic spells. He was a fully fledged, practising DE with all that entails. To me denying that, is denying his repentance and it's importance to his charactor. JKR is a Christian and to me the books are full of Christian symbolism, of which repenting your sins and being forgiven is very important and prominent because of what Snape does. He also demonstrates that repentance does not change your personality and if you have a sharp, nasty personality before repenting you will have one after as well. You repent your sins, you dont have a personality transplant.

But he neither came to like Snape nor continued to dislike him, just like Lupin, imo.

We have no canon on which to draw that conclusion, Wicked. :) JKR doesn't tell us in the narrative what his feelings towards Snape were, after the revelations of the Prince's Tale. I agree with you on Harry's motives for honouring Snape.

So that part of my view explained; if Harry did for some reason go to the portrait, he would be met with loathing (which Harry knows.) Snape would not concede that Harry was doing something wonderful by talking to the man who had helped kill his parents. I feel to the contrray, Snape would imagine Harry as vain as he'd always called him for coming along and trying to gain understanding, because Snape would ask: "to what end? I will still loathe you" :lol:. Harry himself doesn't loathe Snape; he learned the lesson of not holding a grudge well because he saw both in Sirius and especially in Snape that it did nothing but make one bitter, imo. Remus expressed that view to Harry in HBP and I feel that he eventually took it to heart. If someone is too small to forgive, it only hurts them in the end.

Well, this is all speculation only. :) And a rich area for fanfiction. ;)

I think you know that I don't regard JKR's statements post-canon with quite the same authority as I regard her written text. :cool: Statements given in interviews are more fluid ... and, frankly, can be changed. And have been. :whistle:

I agree with you, again, on why Harry forgave Snape in the end.

Good question. :D

I for one think it's silly of JKR to think that Harry would never visit Snape's portrait. Harry's a pretty inquisitive person. Naturally he'd want to see more of Snape now that he has all this information. :rolleyes:

As a portrait, Snape wouldn't necessarily be his real self, but judging from what we know of him and what a portrait might try to duplicate, I don't think portrait!Severus would be any nicer to Harry in the short term. The mere fact that Harry knows his deepest personal secrets might, in fact, be an incentive for Severus to be even more rude than usual, in order to drive Harry away or avoid painful questions.

On the other hand, this deepened mutual understanding could sow the seeds for at least civility in the long run. It really depends on whether or not either or them would bother trying to cultivate a better relationship.

I'm right with you on this one, Iggy. :tu:

]Blood splattered down from the cut all the way onto his robes. It was a controlled strike of Sectumsempra, and for all we know it continued bleeding until James took care of it.

Do we have canon that 1) the sectumsempra can be controlled and 2) this was because of the sectumsempra and not the cutting spell?

Actually, for it to splatter, it had to have been pretty deep, so it wouldn't have likely stopped bleeding even if Snape hadn't used a dark curse - but imo, he did.

In the SWM, Harry would have noticed if it had been bleeding continously as it would have been if it was the sectumsempra IMO.

Snape's enemies were dummies?

If you could point out where I have said Snape's enemies are dummies, I'll edit it out and also apologise for the mistake. :)

He specified who he invented Sectumsempra for: his enemies; and his enemies at that time were the Marauders. One of his enemies, Remus, recalled it was his specialty. I think those two bits of canon indicate Snape used it quite frequently on his enemies at school. Clearly he was able to control its use better than Harry though. :lol:.

There is no canon to say he practised it on the Marauders. I just cannot see Sirius not mention that fact to Harry in OOTP. Sirius and Remus were apologizing for what they considered a not very nice thing they did in their youth, instead of telling Harry that Snape was attacking them with Dark Magic.

Neither did they say anything about James being attacked with dark magic. I cannot see any reason why they should spare Snape to Harry, especially when Harry was hurting at that time and would have grasped this whole heartedly.

Why would they? They didn't speak about what spells anyone used.

Not normally, perhaps. But surely they would have defended themselves by saying that Snape attacked them with dark magic had Snape used dark magic on them? Why should they hide that from Harry, when Harry was sitting there struggling to make the memory he had seen of his father fit into all that he had heard about James until then IMO.

Imo, Lily didn't run off a laundry list of Snape's wrongs when she ended the friendship. She didn't bring up his calling her a Mudblood, he did. All she said was he was a budding Death Eater and she wasn't going down that path. So I would think that was the reason. She didn't wish to stand there naming his sins and have him justify them one by one - for example, she didn't talk about his friendships then, which she also detested, other than to say Snape was like them (and we know how they were.) :)

Perhaps; but she also never accused Snape of joining with Avery/Mulciber or casting dark magic on muggleborns in School, when she spoke to him about Avery and Mulciber's attack on Mary IMO.

But how would Sirius know?

About the fact Snape knew more curses than half the seventh years? Sirius does not say Snape was using dark magic; simply that he was an oddball who knew a lot of curses IMO.

I think he would have found out that Snape knew more curses than half the seveth year kids first hand when the Marauders attacked Snape 4 on 1.

How would Snape (or his portrait) treat Harry now that he knows Harry knows everything that happened to him? What I'm wondering is, would Snape treat Harry any differently now? Would he try to be nicer, or would it be too hard for him to throw away all those years of bitterness and guarded anger and show Harry some kindness?

I personally don't see Snape pulling a complete 360 personality change and being very pleasant to Harry, I'm not sure if he'd change at all. The nicest I can see him being is kind of a "House" relationship, similar to how House treats Wilson in "House."

Or, I could see Snape having one moment of revelation if you will, admitting everything to Harry, then going back to being his normal unpleasant self.

What do you guys think?

I also don't think Snape would do the about turn. I think he would remain as he was, except that now he would have no need to be intentionally rude to Harry. So I think he would simply refrain from that.

And personally how Snape would be to Harry, would depend on how Harry behaves with Snape. Snape rarely takes the initiative and here too, I think he'll wait for Harry to approach him and depending upon how Harry talks to him, I think Snape will respond, in the same manner.

Of course if Harry gets all mushy with Snape, Snape'll probably show him his genuine gift of sarcasm. Otherwise I think Snape will let Harry lead, mainly because of their interaction in the past.

Snape had to be tough, harsh and rude to Harry and so I think he would accept if Harry was not able to see past that, though I think he'd be disapoointed too.

But if Harry came to talk with him, I think Snape will talk back. :)

:lol: Yeah, we do. So show me where it says that James was/wasn't permanently scarred from that spell. Show me where it says he did/didn't quit bleeding. Show me where it says Lily knew/didn't know what the spell was Snape used on James. Show me where it says James/Sirius/Severus/Giant Squid was/wasn't punished by members of the teaching staff for that incident. No canon = speculation, that's why everyone peppers their comments with 'in my opinion's' while using whatever canon is available to back up their speculation.

For all this I use the canon where Sirius and Remus are struggling to tell Harry why they hexed Snape because he exists. Sirius and Remus I am sure would have known all that you have asked, for they were with James at the time.

And had it been dark magic, had it been the sectumsempra, had James a scar, I am sure they would have told that to Harry, who would have been relieved that his Hero father had reason to attack Snape because he existed. Snape had used dark magic, which was forbidden. Snape was in the wrong. It was not James's fault. It was Snape's. Because he used dark magic and so his father attacked him, whenever he saw him IMO.

But Sirius never tells that. So it is canon by ommission IMO.

But I would like to hear your reasons for why it was canon, when we don't have the nature of the curse specified, when we don't have anyone telling us Snape practised DA in school and when the SWM records that as a gash and not a dark magic spell.

I'm sorry to disagree here, but we were actually discussing both of these things. You said: "Even if Snape invented that spell, it is not proof he used it in Hogwarts or on James in the SWM IMO.

My mistake. :) I meant using the spell on students. But even if Snape invented the spell, it is still not proof that he used it on everyone in Hogwarts IMO. And I am sure by what I understand from canon that Snape did not use it on James in the SWM, either.

The entire post is my opinion only.

We have no canon on which to draw that conclusion, Wicked. :)

I respect your view, but I feel that I have canon (although I don't expect anyone else to regard it as such). Basically, what was there for Harry to like? Their entire acquaintance was full of hatred and Snape never showed Harry the least bit of regard or compassion face to face, imo. So based on that, in my judgment, anyone with the least bit of self-respect wouldn't suddenly start liking Snape for his charcter, personality or behavior. Imo, one doesn't develop liking for a person based on the fact that they are brave - Voldemort was brave, but distinguished because he was brave in doing the wrong thing.

I think you know that I don't regard JKR's statements post-canon with quite the same authority as I regard her written text. :cool: Statements given in interviews are more fluid ... and, frankly, can be changed. And have been. :whistle:

Well while I see the convenience in that viewpoint as for example, it would allow me to reach what I feel is a more sensible conclusion about certain parts of the story; JKR did not wish for me to reach those conclusions because all things are not logical or sensible when it comes to human nature. So I just trust whatever she says about everyone is what is supposed to be. I would love to disregard her final development of Harry's character, but I've just come to accept it.

Do we have canon that 1) the sectumsempra can be controlled and 2) this was because of the sectumsempra and not the cutting spell?

I feel we do. Draco's near death injuries were much more drastic than George's. If Harry's curse had hit George in the ear, I fear his entire head would have blown off.

In the SWM, Harry would have noticed if it had been bleeding continously as it would have been if it was the sectumsempra IMO.

He may have. What color clothing was Lily wearing? Was it a dress? A bikini from the lake? A pair of jeans and a t-shirt? Harry absolutely saw her clothing, but he didn't mention it. There were 100's of little details I am sure he noted that he didn't describe for us. Remus was looking a little shabby in his poor-man's robes, but he didn't describe those either. Were they torn? Blue? Faded? Too Short? We don't know. Some details he simply did not give us.

If you could point out where I have said Snape's enemies are dummies, I'll edit it out and also apologise for the mistake. :)

You seemed agreeable to the notion that Snape pratised dark arts at school if he practised on dummies. I was just pointing out that I didn't believe that, or anything like that (spiders, or other living creatures) were the recipients of his curse because it was marked "for enemies" and we know who his enemies were. :)

There is no canon to say he practised it on the Marauders. I just cannot see Sirius not mention that fact to Harry in OOTP. Sirius and Remus were apologizing for what they considered a not very nice thing they did in their youth, instead of telling Harry that Snape was attacking them with Dark Magic.

Neither did they say anything about James being attacked with dark magic. I cannot see any reason why they should spare Snape to Harry, especially when Harry was hurting at that time and would have grasped this whole heartedly.

They were merely being adult about the situation. They were not going to say that James was a saint because Snape was a horrible kid; that would be a lie because James was no saint. If you took Snape out of the picture, James was still hexing when molested and that was addressing Harry's real concern whether the child realized it or not. He wanted to know if his father remained like he saw him in SWM and the answer was no. That had nothing to do with Snape or Snape's actions - except in 7th year. They did mention that.


Not normally, perhaps. But surely they would have defended themselves by saying that Snape attacked them with dark magic had Snape used dark magic on them? Why should they hide that from Harry, when Harry was sitting there struggling to make the memory he had seen of his father fit into all that he had heard about James until then IMO.

Because if you have any maturity at all, you do not respond to the question of why you behaved the way you did by blaming someone else for your actions. It doesn't matter what the other guy did or how bad he was, your response is what is important and that is what James learned, and that is what they told Harry. His dad grew up, his head shrunk, he quit all the careless hexing at mere molestation and likely pranking hexes too - and just did mega pranks, less silly and more flat out fun for all, like locking all the doors to the classrooms just before NEWTS started. :lol:. The exception was Snape, because he started up attacking again in 7th - I assume because James and Lily began dating and he was jealous.

Perhaps; but she also never accused Snape of joining with Avery/Mulciber or casting dark magic on muggleborns in School, when she spoke to him about Avery and Mulciber's attack on Mary IMO.

We only heard one conversation between Lily and Snape at Hogwarts. I am unsure why you feel you can know what Lily said to him during all of the time they were friends. Snape didn't attack Mary, so Lily wouldn't accuse him of that - Mulciber did.

I think he would have found out that Snape knew more curses than half the seveth year kids first hand when the Marauders attacked Snape 4 on 1.

Exactly - that is when Snape would use the dark curses in my opinion as well.

He makes this statement right after Hary uses Levicorpus. So he could mean that spell, which we have additional reasons to believe was invented by him. This especially makes sense to me because of the second part you cited..."Like your filthy father". I don't think James used Sectumsempra.Yes, but also Harry'd used a series of the Prince's spells that Snape had blocked. To me, your point would be valid if Snape had said "It was I who invented that spell and you would use it on me like your filthy father did". But his statement, in a moment of rage, did not make that distinction at all. Instead we have Severus admitting he was the Prince and that it was he who'd invented the "spells" to which Harry'd been casting at him. Spells, as in plural and not spell as in singular format.

Whether James ever turned more than one of Snape's spells back on him {even one of Dark Magic} we never find out, so IMO this shouldn't be used as a solid disqualifier. James was certainly no saint, he was an idiotic berk who hexed indiscriminately, took particular pleasure in bullying Severus, and didn't deflate his head until 7th year, according to canon. Even then, Severus was still a "special exception" to him.

For all this I use the canon where Sirius and Remus are struggling to tell Harry why they hexed Snape because he exists. Sirius and Remus I am sure would have known all that you have asked, for they were with James at the time.

For all this I use the canon where Sirius and Remus are struggling to tell Harry why they hexed Snape because he exists. Sirius and Remus I am sure would have known all that you have asked, for they were with James at the time.

And had it been dark magic, had it been the sectumsempra, had James a scar, I am sure they would have told that to Harry, who would have been relieved that his Hero father had reason to attack Snape because he existed. Snape had used dark magic, which was forbidden. Snape was in the wrong. It was not James's fault. It was Snape's. Because he used dark magic and so his father attacked him, whenever he saw him IMO.



But I would like to hear your reasons for why it was canon, when we don't have the nature of the curse specified, when we don't have anyone telling us Snape practised DA in school and when the SWM records that as a gash and not a dark magic spell.
The point being is that you posted "we use canon here" and we do, but not to the exclusion of speculation. Your question was why didn't Harry ask them about that particular spell and then you speculate that Sirius and Remus would have known what it was and been able to tell Harry all about that part in the incident.

I respect that speculation, I disagree with it. However without any actual solid canon to show us and disallowing speculation then there's nothing to base the question on IMO. Something that does not appear in canon shouldn't be used to solidly disqualify a differing point of view.

I too, used tons of canon to back up my speculation as to what exactly that spell was that Severus used on James. Canon says Snape:

Invented the Sectumsempra spell {Prince};
That Sectumsempra is Dark Magic {Prince};
That Sectumsempra "was always" his specialty {Hallows};
That Sectumsempra was scribbled in his Hogwarts schoolbook and captioned "For Enemies" {Prince};
That the Marauder's {James/Sirius/Remus/Peter} were Snape's enemies while at Hogwarts {Phoenix};
That Sectumsempra is a slicing curse that makes one bleed {Harry/Draco in Prince & George/Severus in Hallows};
That Snape knew the countercurse for Sectumsempra {Prince};
That he knew how to block Sectumsempra when it was being cast at him {Harry/Severus in Prince}.


Again based on all of the above canon, IMO Severus used the Sectumsempra on James during that incident in Snape's Worst Memory.
But Sirius never tells that. So it is canon by ommission IMO.If something is not in canon even "by omission" then it is not canon, it is speculation.

Moving on, in regards to the Snape portrait, didn't Jo say that Harry'd finally understood exactly why Snape had hated him, why he had/would always treat(ed) him unfairly, but that Harry had forgiven him for it? Maybe I'm disremembering that, but I'm sure I read in one of Jo's interviews. IF Harry did forgive Snape, as evidence from other interviews seem to indicate: Made sure Snape's portrait made it to the Headmaster's office, made sure Snape's heroics were known, named his middle son after "one of the bravest men I knew".

VO: [clip of Snape from 'Order of the Phoenix'] Meanwhile, the seemingly villainous Severus Snape -- the wizard who killed Dumbledore before Harry's eyes -- shows a somewhat more heroic side in the final book.

JKR: I knew from the beginning what Snape was. Do I think he's a hero? To a point, I do, but he's not an unequivocally good character. Snape is a complicated man. He's bitter. He's ... spiteful. He's a bully. All these things are still true of Snape, even at the end of this book. But was he brave? Yes, immensely. Was he capable of love? Very definitely. So he's-- he's a very-- he was a flawed human being, like all of us. Harry forgives him--- as we know, from the epilogue, Harry-- 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.



Well, what reason would there be for Harry to ever seek out Snape's portrait? Harry'd already forgiven.

I also don't think Snape would do the about turn. I think he would remain as he was, except that now he would have no need to be intentionally rude to Harry. So I think he would simply refrain from that.

And personally how Snape would be to Harry, would depend on how Harry behaves with Snape. Snape rarely takes the initiative and here too, I think he'll wait for Harry to approach him and depending upon how Harry talks to him, I think Snape will respond, in the same manner.

Of course if Harry gets all mushy with Snape, Snape'll probably show him his genuine gift of sarcasm. Otherwise I think Snape will let Harry lead, mainly because of their interaction in the past.

I can certainly go along with all of that. I find that a perfectly reasonable speculation. :agree: (And :lol: on Harry getting mushy and Snape's likely reaction. :lol: ) But I don't think Harry would get mushy. :)

Snape had to be tough, harsh and rude to Harry and so I think he would accept if Harry was not able to see past that, though I think he'd be disapoointed too.

There we must disagree. :) Severus has no cause to feel disappointed with Harry. :no: Even if all of his nastiness to Harry was only an act (which I very strongly dispute, because we have plenty of evidence in the text that it was not), did he expect Harry to be a mind reader? I think the apologies should go both ways. :whistle: Of course this is Fanon, not Canon, but I can imagine Harry offering Severus a sincere, heartfelt (if slightly cautious) apology for having thought he was one of the bad guys. Severus, however, also owes Harry a pretty big apology, for taking out his own ancient grudge against James on Harry.

But if Harry came to talk with him, I think Snape will talk back. :)

Oh, definitely. :D (I'd love to be a fly on the wall. :evil: )

I respect your view, but I feel that I have canon (although I don't expect anyone else to regard it as such). Basically, what was there for Harry to like? Their entire acquaintance was full of hatred and Snape never showed Harry the least bit of regard or compassion face to face, imo. So based on that, in my judgment, anyone with the least bit of self-respect wouldn't suddenly start liking Snape for his charcter, personality or behavior. Imo, one doesn't develop liking for a person based on the fact that they are brave - Voldemort was brave, but distinguished because he was brave in doing the wrong thing.

You misunderstood me. :) I wasn't saying I found your theory (that Harry neither liked nor disliked Snape after Snape's death) implausible, I was just saying that the canon doesn't really give us much to go on. Neither was I querying why Harry disliked and even hated Snape throughout the series, it was pretty obvious why that would be the case! What I query is the assumption that Harry would have gone on disliking Snape after Snape's death, otherwise why name his son after him? But I think we're on a hiding to nothing here, so I see little point in pressing this matter further.

(I disagree on Voldemort being brave, by the way. :D It seems to me he always got a whole bunch of other people to run around doing his dirty work for him. :rotfl: Bellatrix, perhaps, counts as a villain who is brave ... she was a fearless warrior.)

Well while I see the convenience in that viewpoint as for example, it would allow me to reach what I feel is a more sensible conclusion about certain parts of the story; JKR did not wish for me to reach those conclusions because all things are not logical or sensible when it comes to human nature. So I just trust whatever she says about everyone is what is supposed to be. I would love to disregard her final development of Harry's character, but I've just come to accept it.

And I would love to disregard her final development of Snape's. :lol: No, not really. :) I think it works, in the end. For me, at any rate.

I have no quarrel with what she did with Harry. :)

Speaking only for myself, I am not reliant on JKR's statements to throw light on her text. I don't listen to Pottercast, I don't check out JKR's website, I haven't read all her post-DH interviews. It's not like I don't find what she says interesting: far from it, I am always interested to know what an author has to say about their characters and their stories and it does often throw helpful illumination on how and why they wrote as they did. But I think the story should be good enough to speak for itself. :)

Yes, but also Harry'd used a series of the Prince's spells that Snape had blocked.

You are using your own conclusion as a premise of the argument you give to extablish it. :)

First, Harry used Sectumsempra, which he found written in the Prince's book. And we know Snapew knows this, because of the incident in the bathroom with Draco, in which Snape sawan image of the Prince's text in Harry's mind. Then Harry used Levicorpus, which he also found there, and we both agree Snape invented.

There are two different ways I could be right, that are consistent with what Snape said.

1) By "my spells" Snape could mean "spells you found in my book".
2) The use of the plural in this type of construction does not have to denote actual uses of multiple spells. If it did, it would be incorrect for Snape to add the bit about James unless James, too, stole more than one spell he invented. It is not; nor is it incorrect for Snape to use the plural talking to Harry after Levicorpus has been cast by him.

Consider this standard sort of exchange between me and my son Josh, 5.

Josh: Nathan is a poopy-head!
Me: Josh, it is not nice to use mean words.

Note Josh only used one "mean word", but it was entirely normal anmd correct for me to make my statement in the plural. Likewise, Harry's use of a single spell (the same spell James used) shows he is generally willing to use Snape's spells against him, as Snape says.

To me, your point would be valid if Snape had said "It was I who invented that spell and you would use it on me like your filthy father did".

To me, you could only claim factual rightness (as you do) with which I and every other logical being must agree, if Snape had said, "It is I who invented those spells." He did not. What he did say, is open to interpretation. And there is other evidence (the lack of mention of any development work next to that spell, and the fact that Harry's conclusion matches mine) which also supports my view.

Your view is also consistent with the text, but it is not the only possible view. I would appreciate the reciprocal courtesy of your recognition of this.

Well, what reason would there be for Harry to ever seek out Snape's portrait? Harry'd already forgiven.

You think if he hadn't, that would be the reason? Harry should only go see the portrait if he wants to gripe at it? I can see other reasons. One is that no one lives who might be willing to talk to Harry about his mother (only Petunia remains, and she is not talking). The portrait was her best friend when she was a girl, and Snape's last action was to share some of Lily's history, whcih suggests that unlike Petunia, he might.

The other big one, is that Snape was a big figure, for good or ill, in Harry's life, and their entire relationship consisted of a huge mutual misunderstanding. Supposing Snape had lived...would you expect Harry never to speak with him? To me, Snape's final act was very much a reaching out to Harry. He did not have to share his most personal, painful, and embarassing memories with Harry, that was his choice. (He did have to share that he saved Dumbledore's life and then agreed to kill him, and the scene about the soul bit, including the fact that the Doe Patronus that helped Harry was his, but those two scenes establish his bona fides.) Some sort of acknowledgment of that seems in order, for me.

You are using your own conclusion as a premise of the argument you give to extablish it. :)I respectfully disagree,zgirnius. I am using direct canon, I do not recall ever altering the printed word to fit my opinion. :)

No, I simply took the sentences in the context given. Snape was enraged. He blocked the spells Harry flung at him. "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!"Plural: spells, them, inventions.

To me, you could only claim factual rightness (as you do) with which I and every other logical being must agree, if Snape had said, "It is I who invented those spells." He did not.:huh: I do not "claim" factual rightness. I showed the canon and said IMO you'd have a valid point were it not for the use of "pluralism" through out Snape's revelation.

What he did say, is open to interpretation.I agree, canon, any canon, is open to interpretation.And there is other evidence (the lack of mention of any development work next to that spell, and the fact that Harry's conclusion matches mine) which also supports my view.I agree, Harry did draw a conclusion that matches yours. But I also believe that this view stops short of the fact and doesn't take into account Snape's revelation later in the story. My opinion.

Your view is also consistent with the text, but it is not the only possible view. I would appreciate the reciprocal courtesy of your recognition of this.I have never said that people aren't entitled to their own opinions and I really do not appreciate the insinuation that I have.

Your initial post (http://cosforums.com/showpost.php?p=5159098&postcount=526) disputing the spells being Snape's inventions said "there is no canon" to support that and that I had been speculating. I simply posted the correct canon showing where Snape claims the spells as his inventions.

You think if he hadn't, that would be the reason? Harry should only go see the portrait if he wants to gripe at it? I can see other reasons. One is that no one lives who might be willing to talk to Harry about his mother (only Petunia remains, and she is not talking). The portrait was her best friend when she was a girl, and Snape's last action was to share some of Lily's history, whcih suggests that unlike Petunia, he might.Why would Harry "gripe" at Snape's portrait? Harry forgave Snape. There'd be no reason for him to seek out the portrait and revile Snape over something that Harry'd already accepted, forgave, and moved beyond, that was my entire point. I did find the quote about Harry forgiving Snape, BTW.

Harry forgives him--- as we know, from the epilogue, Harry-- 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.

Seeking info on his mother is a good idea. IMO he'd not seek Severus out for that and that is simply based upon the lack of canon to show that Harry ever sought out info on his mum or dad from any of their friends {excepting the bullying incident viewed in the Pensieve}. Harry did have plenty of time to ask Dumbledore, Hagrid, Sirius, Remus, McGonagall, Slughorn...other surviving members of the original Order who may have been on very friendly terms with them. Yet we never see Harry seeking extra info on either of his parents excepting that one incident. Doesn't mean it didn't occur off page, but we never see/hear of it.
The other big one, is that Snape was a big figure, for good or ill, in Harry's life, and their entire relationship consisted of a huge mutual misunderstanding. Supposing Snape had lived...would you expect Harry never to speak with him? To me, Snape's final act was very much a reaching out to Harry. He did not have to share his most personal, painful, and embarassing memories with Harry, that was his choice. (He did have to share that he saved Dumbledore's life and then agreed to kill him, and the scene about the soul bit, including the fact that the Doe Patronus that helped Harry was his, but those two scenes establish his bona fides.) Some sort of acknowledgment of that seems in order, for me.I'd expect had Snape lived, that IF they'd bumped into each other, it would have been similar to how Harry reacted when bumping into Draco.

I feel we do. Draco's near death injuries were much more drastic than George's. If Harry's curse had hit George in the ear, I fear his entire head would have blown off.

That could be because of the proximity of Harry and that Snape was casting the curse while flying. But even then George almost collapsed, so Snape may have got a strong enough hit.

You seemed agreeable to the notion that Snape pratised dark arts at school if he practised on dummies. I was just pointing out that I didn't believe that, or anything like that (spiders, or other living creatures) were the recipients of his curse because it was marked "for enemies" and we know who his enemies were. :)

LOL. I meant if Snape had invented the spell and if he needed to practise it in Hogwarts, then he need not use living creatures or students. He could have just as well praqctised it on dummies.

They were merely being adult about the situation. They were not going to say that James was a saint because Snape was a horrible kid; that would be a lie because James was no saint. If you took Snape out of the picture, James was still hexing when molested and that was addressing Harry's real concern whether the child realized it or not. He wanted to know if his father remained like he saw him in SWM and the answer was no. That had nothing to do with Snape or Snape's actions - except in 7th year. They did mention that.

Had it been dark magic, it would not have been overlooked by both Sirius and James IMO. Sirius was okay to say Snape deserved to die or deserved it (something to that effect) in POA about the werewolf incident. And he did defend James to say that in 7th year Snape hexed him, so James had to defend himself. So they were defending themselves where they could. They just could not find an excuse for the SWM IMO. And if Snape had been using dark magic, Sirius would have used that as their defence IMO.

We only heard one conversation between Lily and Snape at Hogwarts. I am unsure why you feel you can know what Lily said to him during all of the time they were friends. Snape didn't attack Mary, so Lily wouldn't accuse him of that - Mulciber did.

That was a pretty important one, where she says Avery and Mulciber are "evil Sev" because they practised dark magic. Had Snape practised too, I think she would have said so.

Exactly - that is when Snape would use the dark curses in my opinion as well.

Then with the regularity of their interactions, I think not only Sirius and Remus and James, but a lot of people including Lily would have known.

The problem for me in saying this was the sectumsempra or that Snape practised dark magic is the absence of any mention about it anywhere in canon.

There we must disagree. :) Severus has no cause to feel disappointed with Harry. :no: Even if all of his nastiness to Harry was only an act (which I very strongly dispute, because we have plenty of evidence in the text that it was not), did he expect Harry to be a mind reader? I think the apologies should go both ways. :whistle: Of course this is Fanon, not Canon, but I can imagine Harry offering Severus a sincere, heartfelt (if slightly cautious) apology for having thought he was one of the bad guys. Severus, however, also owes Harry a pretty big apology, for taking out his own ancient grudge against James on Harry.

I felt that Snape giving those memories to Hary was to show that he not only trusted Harry with the innermost secrets of his soul, but that he also thought Harry would understand him. Like for example, Snape was telling Harry that he loved Lily in that memory. He was telling Harry that he asked only for Lily's life. He was also telling Harry that he sent Harry's parents to their deaths by handing over the Prophecy. He was also showing Harry that he did not say anything nice about Harry to Dumbeldore in Harry's first year. And most of all Harry knew Snape hated his father.

And yet Snape had chosen to show Harry so much. I think it was because he expected Harry to understand why. Why he could not be pleasant to Harry, why he became DE and why he turned.

The memories were an apology to Harry for all the classroom slights, a request for understanding, a confidence in Harry that he would do the right thing, a message that Snape's true opinion of Harry and his spoken words were very different. And above all that he cared; cared enough about Harry to show him his soul. That he wanted Harry to know, even if Harry would take every single memory wrongly.

I think he was trusting Harry as much as Dumbeldore did at the end of HBP. "I am not worried Harry. I am with you." he said. (Perhaps not the exact words)

Snape I felt was saying the same thing. "I am not worried that I am showing my soul to you Harry. I trust you."

Oh, definitely. :D (I'd love to be a fly on the wall. :evil: )

Or another portrait, looking the other way and listening hard. :D

Invented the Sectumsempra spell {Prince};

It could go either way and I really don't mind whether he invented that spell or not.

That Sectumsempra is Dark Magic {Prince};

I agree.

That Sectumsempra "was always" his specialty {Hallows};

Lupin says that. yes.

That Sectumsempra was scribbled in his Hogwarts schoolbook and captioned "For Enemies" {Prince};

I agree.

That the Marauder's {James/Sirius/Remus/Peter} were Snape's enemies while at Hogwarts {Phoenix};

I agree.

That Sectumsempra is a slicing curse that makes one bleed {Harry/Draco in Prince & George/Severus in Hallows};

Added to that it leaves a scar and also need the specific counter to heal. Else the bleeding can be stoped as George's ear was, but the ear in his case cannot be re-grown and probably in other cases, possibly leaves a scar.

That Snape knew the countercurse for Sectumsempra {Prince};

I agree.

That he knew how to block Sectumsempra when it was being cast at him {Harry/Severus in Prince}.

I agree.

If something is not in canon even "by omission as you put it, then it is not canon, it is speculation.

I agree with this as well, only omissions taken into consideration by me, personally, would be based upon canon as well. Like for the sectumsempra. I take the omission of Sirius and Remus to tell Harry that Snape used dark magic against James as canon. But I will not take the omission that just because no one said anything about James, Sirius and Remus using dark magic, need not necessarily mean that they didn't. And that even the Marauders could have also used dark magic in their hex wars. That is also speculation IMO but that would be wrong, because there is no canon to support that omission. Which was what I had written in my previous posts.

As far as Snape is concerned, he was fascinated by the dark arts, he had the spell invented/copied in his potions book and stuff like that to show that he had the potential to use dark magic. But that need not necessarily mean that he used it every time or inside the School.

To say Snape used the sectumsempra on James I , would need canon in some manner to either specify directly (from Sirius, Remus, Lily or somebody who knew) or indirectly (by the book stating that James was left a scar, that never went away, or that Snape was practising dark magic while still in school). I find nothing like that in canon, and so I do not agree with others who say it was the sectumsempra.

The entire post is my opinion only.

posted by zgTo me, Snape's final act was very much a reaching out to Harry. He did not have to share his most personal, painful, and embarassing memories with Harry, that was his choice. (He did have to share that he saved Dumbledore's life and then agreed to kill him, and the scene about the soul bit, including the fact that the Doe Patronus that helped Harry was his, but those two scenes establish his bona fides.) Some sort of acknowledgment of that seems in order, for me.

Oh excellently said! :tu:

I agree with this as well, only omissions taken into consideration by me, personally, would be based upon canon as well. Like for the sectumsempra. I take the omission of Sirius and Remus to tell Harry that Snape used dark magic against James as canon. But I will not take the omission that just because no one said anything about James, Sirius and Remus using dark magic, need not necessarily mean that they didn't. And that even the Marauders could have also used dark magic in their hex wars. That is also speculation IMO but that would be wrong, because there is no canon to support that omission. Which was what I had written in my previous posts.I guess I'm being thick, because I'm not understanding what you're saying.

You can take an "omission of canon" and use it to speculate your opinion and that makes it valid, but when others do the same it's not valid??? :huh: That doesn't make sense to me.

As far as Snape is concerned, he was fascinated by the dark arts, he had the spell invented/copied in his potions book and stuff like that to show that he had the potential to use dark magic. But that need not necessarily mean that he used it every time or inside the School. I agree, it does not need to mean that he used it "every time" OR "inside the school". I simply disagree with regards to him not using it on James during that particular bullying episode.

I understand I was not clear, but I really do not know how else to express it. I gave the example in my post itself. I'll try again.

Speculation

1) Snape could have cast the sectumsempra.

the reason :: Because he knew the dark arts, he was fascinated with them and all that.

2) Snape did not cast the sectumsempra.

Because

a) Sirius, Remus and Lily don't mention it and to them dark magic was a very serious offence. Lily never does, even when she is calling Avery evil for the very same. Sirius, Remus and James all were very against the DA.

So in my opinion had Snape cast the sectumsempra, which was a dark curse, I would need something to show either the nature of the curse whoich was different from a cutting curse or someone mentioning directly about it. There is nothing about it, even though everyone knew Snape was attracted to the DA and was friends with the guys who used it in School. This omission for me is canon and so I say Snape did not cast the sectumsempra.

This is just my opinion.

Speculation.

1) Of course Sirius cursed Snape everytime with dark magic. So did Remus and James. Yes they are not mentioned in canon, but it can be speculated.

Now if I had said something like this, I would be very wrong. It is still speculation, but if I said they may have, for we don't know what they did every day, I would still be wrong, because there is no canon directly or indirectly to support my claim.

And I am not saying that others should/should not do it. For me this works. That's all.

I felt that Snape giving those memories to Hary was to show that he not only trusted Harry with the innermost secrets of his soul, but that he also thought Harry would understand him. Like for example, Snape was telling Harry that he loved Lily in that memory. He was telling Harry that he asked only for Lily's life. He was also telling Harry that he sent Harry's parents to their deaths by handing over the Prophecy. He was also showing Harry that he did not say anything nice about Harry to Dumbeldore in Harry's first year. And most of all Harry knew Snape hated his father.

And yet Snape had chosen to show Harry so much. I think it was because he expected Harry to understand why. Why he could not be pleasant to Harry, why he became DE and why he turned.

The memories were an apology to Harry for all the classroom slights, a request for understanding, a confidence in Harry that he would do the right thing, a message that Snape's true opinion of Harry and his spoken words were very different. And above all that he cared; cared enough about Harry to show him his soul. That he wanted Harry to know, even if Harry would take every single memory wrongly.

I think he was trusting Harry as much as Dumbeldore did at the end of HBP. "I am not worried Harry. I am with you." he said. (Perhaps not the exact words)

Snape I felt was saying the same thing. "I am not worried that I am showing my soul to you Harry. I trust you

I think this is a perfect idea of what that act was supposed to mean. Snape is a very complex character, and also a very broken character, which is why I often compare him to House.

I don't think Snape is a really a bad person, but he's not a good person either. He was just dealt a horrible hand from life, his parents (father at least) were abusive, he never had much money, the girl he loved ended up marrying the man he hated, and he accidentally caused her death, and then he had to teach a boy for six years who resembled the very man that Snape loathed, and yet had the eyes and demeanor of the woman he loved.

He's emotionally broken essentially, and I don't think he would ever be able to convey normal emotions, especially showing concern or care for another person, the way most people do (which is very like House). I think Snape does care for Harry in a way, but it's would be very hard for him to actually say it, and I really don't know if he would ever be able to say it to Harry, if Harry did confront his portrait.

Also wickedwickedboy, I disagree that Harry would be a small person to go to Snape's portrait, because I don't think Harry would go there in anger. I think he would go there for closure, the same way he went to DD's portrait at the end of DH. I know if I was Harry, I'd want to discuss some things with Snape, maybe even try to talk to him about my mother.

First, Harry used Sectumsempra, which he found written in the Prince's book. And we know Snapew knows this, because of the incident in the bathroom with Draco, in which Snape sawan image of the Prince's text in Harry's mind. Then Harry used Levicorpus, which he also found there, and we both agree Snape invented.

There are two different ways I could be right, that are consistent with what Snape said.

1) By "my spells" Snape could mean "spells you found in my book".
2) The use of the plural in this type of construction does not have to denote actual uses of multiple spells. If it did, it would be incorrect for Snape to add the bit about James unless James, too, stole more than one spell he invented. It is not; nor is it incorrect for Snape to use the plural talking to Harry after Levicorpus has been cast by him.

I respect your view, but I would disagree with the notion that James "stole" Snape's spell - Snape never accused him or anyone else of doing so. The entire school was using his spell which to me indicates he began using it and it was emulated (Levicorpus). Other light spells that Snape invented and used against the Marauders were likely used against him as well; didn't he invent the jelly leg jinx? That type of thing I assume would be thrown back at him by the intelligent James and Sirius who could easily his invention.

Canon provides that James hated the dark arts, so I agree with you that it would be illogical to conclude Snape was referring to that particular spell when he mentioned James. However, he was speaking to Harry at the time, and Harry did use two of the spells in the book against Snape and imo, that is what Snape was referring to in regard to Harry. Snape was the inventor of Sectumsempra and Levicorpus by my understanding and he was merely making the comparison of the son throwing spells at thim (whichever ones) that he'd invented as his father had - not necessarily the same spells.

As for Sectumsempra having been invented by Snape; he either did so, or claimed it under false pretenses because Harry only threw two spells from the book and if Snape told him he was using his "inventions" in plural against him, he was claiming Sectumsempra as his invention by default - nevermind James. I totally understand your point; that the plural could be understood in a general sense; but I feel that since Snape did not disclaim the spell, and arrogantly proclaimed himself the Half Blood Prince - the inventor of the spells (insinuating those in the book); if he didn't invent Sectumsempra, then we have yet another lie via omission by Snape, imo.

In my judgment, Snape lied regularly either directly, via omission or by stating his opinion as fact, so I would not be surprised if Snape found the spell and lied and said it was his own. However, within the context of HBP and his revelation that he was the author of the book, I feel we are supposed to believe that he invented it. In any case, the more important fact is that he used it, regularly, so that it became known as his specialty.

I feel these little details darken Snape's youthful character and were presented for us to understand the depth of his fall - hence the depth of his rise from the dark path. What sub plot does Snape have if he was an innocent kid sucked into the dark arts, did little and then changed sides? His emotions for Lily playing a role in that would be minimal because obviously it would not take much at all for him to turn his back on the dark side.

You think if he hadn't, that would be the reason? Harry should only go see the portrait if he wants to gripe at it? I can see other reasons. One is that no one lives who might be willing to talk to Harry about his mother (only Petunia remains, and she is not talking). The portrait was her best friend when she was a girl, and Snape's last action was to share some of Lily's history, whcih suggests that unlike Petunia, he might.

I would have to respectfully disagree. Lily was very popular and I feel she likely had a host of friends who knew her much better than Snape - especially since Snape, imo, didn't 'get' Lily during their friendship, something I think Harry understood. I am certain that Harry would encounter many in the wizard world who knew both of his parents and could speak of them. Kingsley and other unnamed Order members knew them as adults, for instance. Harry would much rather hear the viewpoint of someone who did not see his parents through jealous and hateful eyes as a teenager, imo. I feel that includes Lily, which was indicated in SWM when Snape turned on her; he was correct that she was interested in James, but his view of her as a result of that belief was deeply flawed, imo. In other words, from Snape's view, he should not have called Lily a Mudblood, but - and it is the "but" where Snape's viewpoint enters the picture and his view is not something Lily's orphan son needs or wants to hear, imo.

The other big one, is that Snape was a big figure, for good or ill, in Harry's life, and their entire relationship consisted of a huge mutual misunderstanding. Supposing Snape had lived...would you expect Harry never to speak with him? To me, Snape's final act was very much a reaching out to Harry. He did not have to share his most personal, painful, and embarassing memories with Harry, that was his choice. (He did have to share that he saved Dumbledore's life and then agreed to kill him, and the scene about the soul bit, including the fact that the Doe Patronus that helped Harry was his, but those two scenes establish his bona fides.) Some sort of acknowledgment of that seems in order, for me.

I respectfully disagree with this as well. I don't feel Snape reached out at all except in terms of gaining Harry's trust. As you pointed out earlier, Snape helped to kill his parents and Harry assumed Snape hated them both. Snape was wise enough to realize this. The details you feel are relevant to make him 'bonafide' in Harry's eyes, would not do so in my view. That is because his arrangement to kill Dumbledore and the fact that he had a doe patronus could have all been achieved via Voldemort's instructions. What Snape had to show Harry was that he and Lily truly had been friends as children and that there was a basis for his emotions for her and his patronus. This was for Harry's sake, not the readers - Snape didn't help kill our parents - he helped kill Harry's, so that was a huge roadblock to overcome - mainly because Harry had already seen SWM and Snape calling his mother a Mudblood - and nothing in that scene to indicate Snape and Lily were friends at all - it simply looked like she was defending someone because she never spoke one word to Snape throughout the encounter until she yelled at him when he made his bigoted statement toward her.

[QUOTE=wickedwickedboy;5160727}
I feel these little details darken Snape's youthful character and were presented for us to understand the depth of his fall - hence the depth of his rise from the dark path. What sub plot does Snape have if he was an innocent kid sucked into the dark arts, did little and then changed sides? His emotions for Lily playing a role in that would be minimal because obviously it would not take much at all for him to turn his back on the dark side. [/QUOTE]

I have to agree with this point of view. To deny that Snape fell in to the dark, is IMO to deny his long hard struggle to climb to the light. As I said in an earlier post, to me Snape is the repentant sinner. To be repentant there HAS to be sins. That he sinned, for lack of a better word, to me cannot be denied. He was a DE, he used Dark Magic, he created and used Dark Magic curses and he helped kill the woman he loved. But, and here is where I think the heart of his story lies, he repented. He did his best in his own way to make amends, he served as a spy when LV returned at the risk of his own life. He did his best to carry out Dumbledore's plans, whether they were good palns or not he followed Dumbledore's orders. I don't think he cared for Harry on a personal level. I've said it before he was a lonely, bitter man. But he was sorry for what he did and he came so far at great personal cost. He was not a kind man but a brave one. It's a pity about the personal hygiene.

I have to agree with this point of view. To deny that Snape fell in to the dark, is IMO to deny his long hard struggle to climb to the light.

I strongly agree. One has to do wrong in order to repent, after all. Without his inclusion into the DE circle and the wrongs he did or saw done, his redemptive story arc would be a flat, unenjoyable story, and Snape would not be the hero he became.

However, I strongly disagree with the implication that Snape was not an innocent sucked into the DE circle. At worst, Snape-the-child disliked Muggles apparently because they had ostracized him. Many children of HP were much worse when they were 11 (think of Draco and his friends), and yet even they were innocents in some way or other. Snape is no exception.

IMO, Snape's fall had less to do with some "innate evil" or similar nonsense that attracted him to the DE circle, and more to do with a once-innocent young man who, through bitterness at being rejected and fear of his own perceived weaknesses, decided to take his rage out on others by joining the DEs in torturing and killing people.

I strongly agree. One has to do wrong in order to repent, after all. Without his inclusion into the DE circle and the wrongs he did or saw done, his redemptive story arc would be a flat, unenjoyable story, and Snape would not be the hero he became.

However, I strongly disagree with the implication that Snape was not an innocent sucked into the DE circle. At worst, Snape-the-child disliked Muggles apparently because they had ostracized him. Many children of HP were much worse when they were 11 (think of Draco and his friends), and yet even they were innocents in some way or other. Snape is no exception.

IMO, Snape's fall had less to do with some "innate evil" or similar nonsense that attracted him to the DE circle, and more to do with a once-innocent young man who, through bitterness at being rejected and fear of his own perceived weaknesses, decided to take his rage out on others by joining the DEs in torturing and killing people.
I don't think the child who boarded the Hogwarts Express with Lily was evil. I do think he had problems. I think those problems came from growing up in a family that was disfuncional at best. Nobody is born evil, (I don't know about LV, the exception that proves the rule?) I think Snape was introduced to influences in Slytherin House that appealed to him. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Lucius and Bella were there, they were older and I can certainly see them as possesing charisma and charm. In opossition we have James and Sirius, who he had trouble with on the train. Who is a child most likely to emulate, the beautiful, charmers who tell him he is special and they understand and appreciate him or the two charactors who laughed at him when he was with a girl he was desperate to have admire him? To my mind Snape probably never stood a chance against them up till the moment when the scales fell from his eyes and he realised that he had given LV the information that could/would lead to Lily's death. Even then I think he had a long road back, not made any easier by the fact he did have a problem with his personality. He really was a nasty git at times.

I respectfully disagree with this as well. I don't feel Snape reached out at all except in terms of gaining Harry's trust. As you pointed out earlier, Snape helped to kill his parents and Harry assumed Snape hated them both. Snape was wise enough to realize this. The details you feel are relevant to make him 'bonafide' in Harry's eyes, would not do so in my view. That is because his arrangement to kill Dumbledore and the fact that he had a doe patronus could have all been achieved via Voldemort's instructions. What Snape had to show Harry was that he and Lily truly had been friends as children and that there was a basis for his emotions for her and his patronus. This was for Harry's sake, not the readers - Snape didn't help kill our parents - he helped kill Harry's, so that was a huge roadblock to overcome - mainly because Harry had already seen SWM and Snape calling his mother a Mudblood - and nothing in that scene to indicate Snape and Lily were friends at all - it simply looked like she was defending someone because she never spoke one word to Snape throughout the encounter until she yelled at him when he made his bigoted statement toward her.

I disagree, had Snape only wanted to gain Harry's trust, he didn't need to show him all his memories of himself and Lily. He could have shown him memories of his conversations with Dumbledore, of him spying on Voldermort then going back and telling Dumbledore everything, of him trying to stop George from getting cursed in the seven Potters scenario, him giving Mundungus the idea for the seven Potters.

I think the conversations with Dumbledore and the other memories would have more then sufficed had Snape only wanted to gain Harry's trust. They explained everything, and made it clear what Harry had to do.


Snape gave Harry the memories because he himself wanted Harry to understand where Snape was coming from, and why he had been the way he had to Harry. Snape giving Harry the memories of Lily was something Snape wanted to do, not that he felt he must do.

I don't think the child who boarded the Hogwarts Express with Lily was evil. I do think he had problems. I think those problems came from growing up in a family that was disfuncional at best. Nobody is born evil, (I don't know about LV, the exception that proves the rule?) I think Snape was introduced to influences in Slytherin House that appealed to him. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Lucius and Bella were there, they were older and I can certainly see them as possesing charisma and charm. In opossition we have James and Sirius, who he had trouble with on the train. Who is a child most likely to emulate, the beautiful, charmers who tell him he is special and they understand and appreciate him or the two charactors who laughed at him when he was with a girl he was desperate to have admire him? To my mind Snape probably never stood a chance against them up till the moment when the scales fell from his eyes and he realised that he had given LV the information that could/would lead to Lily's death. Even then I think he had a long road back, not made any easier by the fact he did have a problem with his personality. He really was a nasty git at times.

I agree with you, actually. The second part of my post was directed more at wwb's remarks than yours. In my view, you've been fairly spot-on so far. :lol:

Snape gave Harry the memories because he himself wanted Harry to understand where Snape was coming from, and why he had been the way he had to Harry. Snape giving Harry the memories of Lily was something Snape wanted to do, not that he felt he must do.

:agree: This really also opens up a whole new interpretation of Snape's last words too: "Look...at...me..."

There are all sorts of memories in TPT that don't pertain either to Snape's final message to Harry nor prove that Snape was working for Dumbledore the whole time. He could have easily stuck with just a memory of Lily, the hilltop scene, and the memory of Dumbledore telling him that Harry must die.

Instead, we have a whole chapter of these memories, including the first meeting with JameSirius, an argument with Dumbledore where Snape feels kept out of the loop, and a memory of Snape crying over Lily's picture. For a man who in book 5 preached to Harry about wearing one's heart on their sleeve, this is rather extraordinary.

I disagree, had Snape only wanted to gain Harry's trust, he didn't need to show him all his memories of himself and Lily. He could have shown him memories of his conversations with Dumbledore, of him spying on Voldermort then going back and telling Dumbledore everything, of him trying to stop George from getting cursed in the seven Potters scenario, him giving Mundungus the idea for the seven Potters.

I think the conversations with Dumbledore and the other memories would have more then sufficed had Snape only wanted to gain Harry's trust. They explained everything, and made it clear what Harry had to do.


Snape gave Harry the memories because he himself wanted Harry to understand where Snape was coming from, and why he had been the way he had to Harry. Snape giving Harry the memories of Lily was something Snape wanted to do, not that he felt he must do.

Well I respect your view, however, considering Snape loathed Harry at his death, I find it highly improbable myself that Snape wished to help Harry understand anything about him, least of all his treatment of Harry.

Further, the memories didn't tell us where Snape was coming from or reveal one single solitary element of his thinking other than to inform that Snape hated his dad due to jealousy and tender feelings for his mum and the fact that he and Harry's dad had been childhood enemies and Snape held grudges, imo. We learn nothing about what being nasty and cruel to Harry did for Snape from his point of view; why he felt the necessity to do it or why he couldn't "get over it", imo. We only learn the basic root of the problem: jealousy and hatred - pure facts - which Snape "for some reason" had the inability to overcome, imo.

In my judgment, there was no remorse or repentance expressed in the memories; only more of the same - Snape complaining to Dumbledore about Harry and James, belittling them to others in addition to Harry. There was no excuse for his behavior, attitude or negative actions toward Harry, imo. I felt like Snape couldn't care less what Harry thought of him, he simply wanted him to understand that he and Lily had been friends, that friendship ended, but he retained feelings for her. That he and James had been enemies and he held a grudge against him fueled by irrational jealousy and dislike. These were certainly admissions, but garnered trust because Harry thought Snape hated them both for no other reason than Snape was evil - but after the memories, he understood there was more to it. You see, Snape disliked Sirius too, but he never belittled the man as he had James before Harry - his sole statement against Sirius was that he tried to murder him at 16, which he stated twice in POA and neither time for Harry's benefit. His only other taunt was made in person (that Sirius was stuck at home).

So Harry could see all the good stuff Snape did; plan with Dumbledore to kill him, issue the patronus to deliver the sword, the missed curse that hit George, his going to the hill to meet Dumbledore - and Harry would see it all as a farce if there was no basis for it. Voldemort and Snape could have planned all of that to fool Dumbledore (recall, Harry and all the Order members believed that is what Snape had done.) And the agreement to kill him would have been Voldemort's desire, so agreeing to it would be 'nothing' for Snape. What Harry needed was a fundamental understanding of what truly made Snape change sides - that had to do with Lily which is why we got the background, in my judgment.

I believe if Snape wanted understanding from Harry, he would have included a personal memory that had nothing to do with Lily, James or Dumbledore and Voldemort - and everything to do with Harry himself - unambiguously. I feel he would have included some scene wherein he showed remorse for his behavior or a need to be understood. But Snape did not do that because there was no such scene to show, imo, he hated Harry and his entire relationship with the boy - and all those he discussed that relationship with - were entirely negative in nature, imo. Snape simply was not kind at heart; but he was on the good side and that is what he wanted Harry to understand, imo. Otherwise he would have never included the memory of his belittling Harry before Dumbledore - it was a clear message: I still hate you and your dad and I always will - so don't be mistaken about that. He also made that message clear before issuing his doe. "care for Harry???" he insinuated, "no way, I only care for Lily". That was my impression.

Speculation

1) Snape could have cast the sectumsempra.

the reason :: Because he knew the dark arts, he was fascinated with them and all that.Okay, so I"m assuming this is speculation specific to just that one memory. Overall canon from the seven novels shows us that Snape can cast the Sectumsempra totally evidenced by the fact that George lost his 'bleedin' ear. :lol:

One could speculate that Remus didn't know exactly what spell was cast and just assumed it was Sectumsempra. 'Course that would totally be rebutted by the fact that Harry saw and heard Severus cast the spell at George (while viewing Severus's memories following his murder). I speculate again that this spell's force is affected by whether it is used verbally vs nonverbally.

Now, sticking to the memory itself as shown to us in Phoenxi with use of no other canon from the stories we have no idea what spell James used on Severus or what spell Severus cast at James. We have no idea if the entire school knew what those spells were, how to cast them, or if they were Dark Magic or simple hexes/jinxes. So, without further canon to base speculation on I could totally agree with your point #2) Snape did not cast the sectumsempra. However, we do have further canon to base speculation on.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, THE FLIGHT OF THE PRINCE:

"You would dare use my own spells against me, Potter? It was I who who invented them---I, the Half-Blood Prince! And you'd turn my inventions back on me, like your filthy father, would you? I don't think so...no!"Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, SECTUMSEMPRA:

But Snape ignored this. "Apprarently I underestimate you, Potter," he said quietly. "Who would have thought you knew such Dark Magic? Who taught you that spell?"
"I---read it somewhere."
"Where?"
"It was---a library book," Harry invented wildly. "I can't remember what it was call---"
"Liar," said Snape.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, FALLEN WARRIOR:

Mrs. Weasley looked around and said, "I can't make it grow back, not when it's been removed by Dark Magic."
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, FALLEN WARRIOR:

"Sectumsempra was always a specialty of Snape's."
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, THE UNKNOWABLE ROOM:

He has just found an incantation ("Sectumsempra!") scrawled in a margin above the intriguing words "For Enemies" and was itching to try it out, but thought it best not to in front of Hermione.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, SECTUMSEMPRA:

Harry was about to put his book away when he noticed the corner of a page folded down; turning it, he saw the Sectumsempra spell, captioned "For Enemies," that he had marked a few weeks previously.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, THE MAN WITH TWO FACES:

"But Snape always seemed to hate me so much."
"Oh, he does," said Quirrell casually, "heavens, yes. He was at Hogwarts with your father, didn't you know? They loathed each other."
*snip*
"Yes, him---Quirrell said he hates me because he hated my father. Is that true?
"Well, they did rather detest one another. Not unlike yourself and Mr. Malfoy."


Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, MOONY, WORMTAIL, PADFOOT, AND PRONGS:

"We were in the same year, you know, and we---er---didn't like each other very much. He especially disliked James."

*I'm just gonna cite the bullying incident of Snape's Worst Memory in Phoenix rather than type the whole thing out.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, CAREER ADVICE:

"James and Sirius hated each other from the moment they set eyes on each other, it was just one of those things, you can understand that can't you?"

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince: FLIGHT OF THE PRINCE:

"Your father would never attack me unless it was four on one, what would you call him, I wonder?"
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, SECTUMSEMPRA:

"SECTUMSEMPRA!" bellowed Harry from the floor, waving his wand wildly.

Blood spurted from Malfoy's face and chest as though he had been slashed with an Invisible sword. He staggered backwar and collapsed onto the waterlogged floor with a great splash, his wand falling from his limp right hand.
"No---" gasped Harry.
Slipping and staggering, Harry got to his feet and plunged toward Malfoy, whose face was now shining scarlet, his white hands scrabbling at his blood-soaked chest.

THE CAVE:

"Sectumsempra! SECTUMSEMPRA!"
But though gashes appeared in their sodden rags and their icy skin, they had no blood to spill.

FALLEN WARRIOR:

Lupin was supporting George, who was unconcious and whose face was covered in blood. *snip* The side of his head and neck were drenched in wet, shockingly scarlet blood.
*snip*
"Where's George?"
"He lost an ear," said Lupin.
"Lost an ---?" repeated Hermione in a high voice.
"Snape's work," said Lupin.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, SECTUMSEMPRA:

Pushing Harry roughly aside, he knelt over Malfoy, drew his wand, and traced it over the deep wounds Harry's curse had made, muttering an incantation that sounded almost like a song. The flow of blood seemed to ease; Snape wiped the residue from Malfoy's face and repeated his spell. Now the wounds were knitting.
Harry was still watching, horrified by what he had done, barely aware that he too was soaked in blood and water. Moaning Myrtle was still sobbing and wailing overhead. When Snape had performed his countercurse for the third time, he half-lifted Malfoy into a standing position.
"You need the hospital wing. There may be a certain amount of scarring, but if you take dittany immediately we might avoid even that...Come..."
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, THE FLIGHT OF THE PRINCE:

"Sectum---!"
Snape flicked his wand and the curse was repelled yet again;Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, PADFOOT RETURNS:

"Snape's always been fascinated by the Dark Arts, he was famous for it at school."


Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, CAREER ADVICE:

"And Snape was just this little oddball who was up to his eyes in the Dark Arts and James---whatever else he may have appeared to you---always hated the Dark Arts."

***Both of the above quotes were from Sirius, so of course they need to be taken with at the very least a few spoonfuls of salts***

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, THE SORTING HAT:

"He teaches Potions, but he doesn't want to---everyone knows he's after Quirrell's job. Knows an awful lot about the Dark Arts, Snape."


Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, SPINNER'S END:

"He wouldn't give me the Defense Against the Dark Arts job, you know. Seemed to think it might, ah, bring about a relapse...tempt me into my old ways."

***This too needs to be taken with a few spoonfuls of salt, as Snape is speaking to Death Eaters and laying a "false" trail of info.***


Webchat with J.K. Rowling, 30 July 2007:

Jaclyn: Did Lily ever have feelings back for Snape?

J.K. Rowling: Yes. She might even have grown to love him romantically (she certainly loved him as a friend) if he had not loved Dark Magic so much, and been drawn to such loathesome people and acts.


Nithya: Lily detested Mulciber Avery. If snape really loved her,why didn't he sacrifice their company for her sake?

J.K. Rowling: Well, that is Snape’s tragedy. Given his time over again he would not have become a Death Eater, but like many insecure, vulnerable people (like Wormtail) he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive. He wanted Lily and he wanted Mulciber too. He never really understood Lily’s aversion; 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.

Phew, that was a lot of typing! :lol:

So, according to all of the above canon:

The spell is Snape's invention, scribbled in his schoolbook and marked "for enemies", and it is Dark Magic; he also knew the countercurse to it and how to block it. He was attracted to the dark side and loved Dark Magic, and he was famous for Dark Arts at school. The spell "gashes and causes one to bleed".

The spell used on James in Snape's Worst Memory does show: "a gash appeared on the side of James's face, and spattering his robes with blood".

In the case with Snape's Worst Memory in Phoenix and The Prince's Tale in Hallows, both of these memories are interrupted. The first memory is interrupted by Snape before we see James receive any type of treatment for his gashed face, whether he truly did hatefully remove Snape's graying underpants, and if anyone received punishment for that incident. The second memory is seen only after the conversation with he and Lily had begun, we have no idea what was discussed from the point of her stepping out of the portrait hole and Snape apologizing. Then too, the conversation Harry had with Sirius and Lupin in Phoenix is "compressed" for time, that occurance beginning with the sentence "He therefore plunged immediately into the story of what he had seen in the Pensieve. When he had finished..." We don't know exactly what Harry did or didn't say regards to James's gashed face during that time, or if it was even a concern to him.

Canon: Snape was into the Dark Arts, he created the Sectumsempra spell, it is Dark Magic, it was written in his schoolbook and was to be used on his enemies, and that James and Marauders were his school enemies.

IMO, based entirely on the above canon, Snape did use the spell at school and on James Potter during that memory.

a) Sirius, Remus and Lily don't mention it and to them dark magic was a very serious offence. Lily never does, even when she is calling Avery evil for the very same. Sirius, Remus and James all were very against the DA.We don't know that Lily was aware that the spell was Dark Magic, if she knew who'd invented it, and we don't know what she did or didn't say prior to this because the memory of her conversation was 'in medias res' (into the middle of things), it did not begin with her stepping out of the portrait and his immediately proferring an apology. We don't know what did/didn't happen prior to his apology as that prior bit is entirely off-page.

I agree with you, actually. The second part of my post was directed more at wwb's remarks than yours. In my view, you've been fairly spot-on so far. :lol:

I have never said Snape was innately evil. I said he never developed into a man with a kind heart which is entirely different, imo. Perhaps you can point to an assertion by me that lead you to believe I felt that way so I can clear it up. :)

Well I respect your view, however, considering Snape loathed Harry at his death, I find it highly improbable myself that Snape wished to help Harry understand anything about him, least of all his treatment of Harry.

Further, the memories didn't tell us where Snape was coming from or reveal one single solitary element of his thinking other than to inform that Snape hated his dad due to jealousy and tender feelings for his mum and the fact that he and Harry's dad had been childhood enemies and Snape held grudges, imo. We learn nothing about what being nasty and cruel to Harry did for Snape from his point of view; why he felt the necessity to do it or why he couldn't "get over it", imo. We only learn the basic root of the problem: jealousy and hatred - pure facts - which Snape "for some reason" had the inability to overcome, imo.

In my judgment, there was no remorse or repentance expressed in the memories; only more of the same - Snape complaining to Dumbledore about Harry and James, belittling them to others in addition to Harry. There was no excuse for his behavior, attitude or negative actions toward Harry, imo. I felt like Snape couldn't care less what Harry thought of him, he simply wanted him to understand that he and Lily had been friends, that friendship ended, but he retained feelings for her. That he and James had been enemies and he held a grudge against him fueled by irrational jealousy and dislike. These were certainly admissions, but garnered trust because Harry thought Snape hated them both for no other reason than Snape was evil - but after the memories, he understood there was more to it. You see, Snape disliked Sirius too, but he never belittled the man as he had James before Harry - his sole statement against Sirius was that he tried to murder him at 16, which he stated twice in POA and neither time for Harry's benefit. His only other taunt was made in person (that Sirius was stuck at home).

So Harry could see all the good stuff Snape did; plan with Dumbledore to kill him, issue the patronus to deliver the sword, the missed curse that hit George, his going to the hill to meet Dumbledore - and Harry would see it all as a farce if there was no basis for it. Voldemort and Snape could have planned all of that to fool Dumbledore (recall, Harry and all the Order members believed that is what Snape had done.) And the agreement to kill him would have been Voldemort's desire, so agreeing to it would be 'nothing' for Snape. What Harry needed was a fundamental understanding of what truly made Snape change sides - that had to do with Lily which is why we got the background, in my judgment.

I believe if Snape wanted understanding from Harry, he would have included a personal memory that had nothing to do with Lily, James or Dumbledore and Voldemort - and everything to do with Harry himself - unambiguously. I feel he would have included some scene wherein he showed remorse for his behavior or a need to be understood. But Snape did not do that because there was no such scene to show, imo, he hated Harry and his entire relationship with the boy - and all those he discussed that relationship with - were entirely negative in nature, imo. Snape simply was not kind at heart; but he was on the good side and that is what he wanted Harry to understand, imo. Otherwise he would have never included the memory of his belittling Harry before Dumbledore - it was a clear message: I still hate you and your dad and I always will - so don't be mistaken about that. He also made that message clear before issuing his doe. "care for Harry???" he insinuated, "no way, I only care for Lily". That was my impression.

See, I disagree that Snape loathed Harry when he died, JKR said that Snape loathed Harry "until" the end. When I read that I took it that at the end, he was showing some of his true feelings.

I personally never though Snape truly hated Harry, in the sense that he did hate him, but that he hated Harry because Harry had parts of the woman that Snape loved in him. I believe that Snape did secretly have feelings for the boy, but he also could never get over the fact that Harry was also the incarnation of a person that he completely hated. So he hated Harry, but Harry had the personality of Lily in him, something Snape liked, and because Harry had parts of him that Snape liked, it caused him to hate Harry, and probably himself, even more. A very complicated kind of love-hate relationship really.

Also, I disagree that the memories don't show us anything. It's Snape's way of showing Harry why he could never be pleasant to him, and it's for the very reason I explained above.

The memories were to show Harry this, show Harry that Snape did truly hate his father, but also deeply love his mother, and I think Harry would have realized why, when he first came to school, that Snape would react negatively to him, how would any of us handle it really, if we saw a person who was a combination of a person we deeply hated and deeply loved? We would hate them, but at the same time care for them, and this would cause us to hate them more because deep down we know we won't be able to not care for them.

That really is what I think sums up the Snape/Harry relationship. Also, I think Snape's last word's shows us this even more. "Look at me," was a very loaded statement. Snape wanted to see Harry's eyes one last time, because they were Lily's eyes, and Snape loved Lily, but Snape knows that Harry isn't Lily. The fact that he wanted to be looking at Harry when he died proves my point further I believe, because it shows us that Snape didn't truly loathe Harry. If he did, he wouldn't want to be looking at him, he'd want to be looking away, perhaps closing his eyes and envisioning Lily. Instead he chose to look at Harry, seeing both Harry, and the piece of Lily inside him.

Also, I don't think that if Snape had just showed Harry all the memories of Dumbledore, and the others I mentioned, that Harry would think it was a ruse by Voldermort. The memories explain everything perfectly, why Snape killed DD, what Harry has to do, who had been helping him in the forest, and to add to that Harry had just seen Snape repeatedly asking to find Harry, and seen Snape murdered by Voldermort. I don't think Harry would have disbelieved the memories, which is why I think Snape added the memories about Lily purely for Harry's benefit, and his.

And also, if Snape really thought it was instrumental to show Harry that he had a relationship with his mother, why show such personal ones? Why not just show Harry memories of them playing together as kids, talking at Hogwarts, and then Snape being upset over her death.

Snape, chose to show Harry memories that made it obvious he loved lily, and not only that, he included his worst memory, in full this time. Which shows us that Snape felt a need to explain that entire situation to Harry. Snape wanted Harry to understand him.

See, I disagree that Snape loathed Harry when he died, JKR said that Snape loathed Harry "until" the end. When I read that I took it that at the end, he was showing some of his true feelings.

I personally never though Snape truly hated Harry, in the sense that he did hate him, but that he hated Harry because Harry had parts of the woman that Snape loved in him. I believe that Snape did secretly have feelings for the boy, but he also could never get over the fact that Harry was also the incarnation of a person that he completely hated. So he hated Harry, but Harry had the personality of Lily in him, something Snape liked, and because Harry had parts of him that Snape liked, it caused him to hate Harry, and probably himself, even more. A very complicated kind of love-hate relationship really.

Also, I disagree that the memories don't show us anything. It's Snape's way of showing Harry why he could never be pleasant to him, and it's for the very reason I explained above.

The memories were to show Harry this, show Harry that Snape did truly hate his father, but also deeply love his mother, and I think Harry would have realized why, when he first came to school, that Snape would react negatively to him, how would any of us handle it really, if we saw a person who was a combination of a person we deeply hated and deeply loved? We would hate them, but at the same time care for them, and this would cause us to hate them more because deep down we know we won't be able to not care for them.

I respect your view, but I think that you have pointed out the major distinction between us which guides our viewpoints. I could never hate anyone the way that Snape did, especially not for the, imo, ridiculous reasons he did, or for the length of time he did. That is incomprehensible to me. So I cannot imagine the scenario you describe. Further, I would never be unkind to a child in the way that Snape was with children. Children are our gifts.

That really is what I think sums up the Snape/Harry relationship. Also, I think Snape's last word's shows us this even more. "Look at me," was a very loaded statement. Snape wanted to see Harry's eyes one last time, because they were Lily's eyes, and Snape loved Lily, but Snape knows that Harry isn't Lily. The fact that he wanted to be looking at Harry when he died proves my point further I believe, because it shows us that Snape didn't truly loathe Harry. If he did, he wouldn't want to be looking at him, he'd want to be looking away, perhaps closing his eyes and envisioning Lily. Instead he chose to look at Harry, seeing both Harry, and the piece of Lily inside him.

And James...it's inescapable. Which is why it was clear to me that he made enough peace with the situation in his dying struggle to look into James Potter's face to see Lily Potter's eyes (and all that meant, Lily loved James and Harry was the fruit of their love). And Snape could do that...for a second. That is how long he looked.

Also, I don't think that if Snape had just showed Harry all the memories of Dumbledore, and the others I mentioned, that Harry would think it was a ruse by Voldermort. The memories explain everything perfectly, why Snape killed DD, what Harry has to do, who had been helping him in the forest, and to add to that Harry had just seen Snape repeatedly asking to find Harry, and seen Snape murdered by Voldermort. I don't think Harry would have disbelieved the memories, which is why I think Snape added the memories about Lily purely for Harry's benefit, and his.

Snape didn't know that Harry had seen Voldemort sick Nagini on him or that he'd overheard the conversation; Harry went in after Voldemort left. Snape had a lot of work to do, in my judgment, to get a boy who utterly hated him and thought him a murderer, assistant killer of his parents, loyal death eater and tormentor of his school days to trust him enough to know that Snape had not been fooling Dumbledore all along and was really working for Voldemort. That is what all of the Order members believed and Harry and the trio. Thus, I would have to respectfully disagree that those few memories would have done the job.

And also, if Snape really thought it was instrumental to show Harry that he had a relationship with his mother, why show such personal ones? Why not just show Harry memories of them playing together as kids, talking at Hogwarts, and then Snape being upset over her death.

They weren't anymore personal than SWM, imo. He had to show that he and Lily were friends; she tried to help; he thwarted her; she ended the relationship. He had to show he'd been highly jealous of James even back then to explain his ongoing hatred. That is all we got on that front, so I am not sure why you say they are deeply personal. We learned nothing at all personal about Snape, imo. He admitted not one single thing in the memories; he either agreed with others or disagreed with them - that was it.

Snape, chose to show Harry memories that made it obvious he loved lily, and not only that, he included his worst memory, in full this time. Which shows us that Snape felt a need to explain that entire situation to Harry. Snape wanted Harry to understand him.

Well I respect your view; however, I believe that everything Snape showed had to be shown to gain Harry's trust. I feel he absolutely had to show Lily ending the relationship. He can't just show the childhood and leave it at that because Harry had already seen SWM. So Harry would be, at best, confused. At worst, Harry would figure Snape was lying that they were ever friends after the train. So Snape showed the friendship and then its end; that it was not him that ended it due to his dark arts interests and thus, he could still have feelings for her after she ended it. That was my interpretation. :)

I am not certain that we are speaking about the same issue. I do feel that Snape wanted Harry to understand why he hated him and his father, in order to gain his trust. Basically, Snape hated anything stamped "Potter" with the exception of Lily, and he was struggling to keep her separate from her family in his mind, imo (signified by the ripping up of the photo and throwing the part with the male members of the family onto the floor.) Although JKR intended to show that Harry was a big man, who forgave and attempted to see the good in people; she showed the twisted side to her humor which I love when it came to naming his son Albus Severus Potter, because in my view, Snape would be in the afterworld fuming. Independent of the fact that one can disassociate the names in their head if they like, Snape would not be able to do that and having his name attached to James' would be an anathema to him, imo. So while from Harry's view, it was an honor for Snape's attempt to honor his mum's sacrifice, despite loathing his father and him, it was like a slap in the face to Snape after Harry had viewed the memories which clearly informed him that Snape wanted nothing whatsoever to do with anything Potter.

I believe if Snape wanted understanding from Harry, he would have included a personal memory that had nothing to do with Lily, James or Dumbledore and Voldemort - and everything to do with Harry himself - unambiguously. I feel he would have included some scene wherein he showed remorse for his behavior or a need to be understood. But Snape did not do that because there was no such scene to show, imo, he hated Harry and his entire relationship with the boy - and all those he discussed that relationship with - were entirely negative in nature, imo. Snape simply was not kind at heart; but he was on the good side and that is what he wanted Harry to understand, imo.

Otherwise he would have never included the memory of his belittling Harry before Dumbledore - it was a clear message: I still hate you and your dad and I always will - so don't be mistaken about that. He also made that message clear before issuing his doe. "care for Harry???" he insinuated, "no way, I only care for Lily". That was my impression.

I think, Wicked, that this really overlooks the fact that Snape is dying and hardly has any time to sort these memories.

The fact that he was able to release so many memories to Harry, as his life-blood literally drains away, with all the information Harry needed, was some kind of miracle in itself. To me, that proves that Snape was a very powerful wizard, able to release and control his memories at the very point of death. That is some considerable magical power.

Also, I don't believe he released those memories with those bitter things he said about Harry and James merely to mock Harry: "ha, I've been doing all this for your mother but I still hate you, boy," kind of thing.

Not at all. For one thing, he doesn't have time to muck about in that petty way. He's DYING.

The memories are what they are. They show Severus Snape, uncensored. No, he doesn't apologise to Harry. But he doesn't offer any excuses either. There is no spin placed on his behaviour at all. In fact, I would say that his continued bitterness at James and Harry is yet another proof of how genuine these memories are. Snape has not attempted to doctor or edit them in any way!!!

See, I disagree that Snape loathed Harry when he died, JKR said that Snape loathed Harry "until" the end. When I read that I took it that at the end, he was showing some of his true feelings.

That's certainly the way I read it on first reading. Does JKR really mean that he literally hated the boy as he lay dying? :sigh:

I personally never though Snape truly hated Harry, in the sense that he did hate him, but that he hated Harry because Harry had parts of the woman that Snape loved in him. I believe that Snape did secretly have feelings for the boy, but he also could never get over the fact that Harry was also the incarnation of a person that he completely hated. So he hated Harry, but Harry had the personality of Lily in him, something Snape liked, and because Harry had parts of him that Snape liked, it caused him to hate Harry, and probably himself, even more. A very complicated kind of love-hate relationship really.

I think that's a very good assessment. I think that Snape's hatred for Harry was genuine, I am not persuaded it was only for show in front of the Slytherins. But it's a very complex set of emotions here, even the negative ones. I don't excuse or justify Snape for it, but I think he wrestled with violent emotions re: Harry.

The memories were to show Harry this, show Harry that Snape did truly hate his father, but also deeply love his mother, and I think Harry would have realized why, when he first came to school, that Snape would react negatively to him, how would any of us handle it really, if we saw a person who was a combination of a person we deeply hated and deeply loved? We would hate them, but at the same time care for them, and this would cause us to hate them more because deep down we know we won't be able to not care for them.

I have to agree with Wicked on this. I could never hate a child for the fault (or perceived fault) of its parent. Such an attitude is foreign to me. As an adopted person, I have very, VERY strong feelings about this and how children should be treated. :)

Only a very immature and very insecure person punishes a child for looking like its dead parent or causing the death of its parent ... and that is what Severus is. Alongside his great qualities (his intelligence and courage), he has great and deep flaws. That is precisely why I think he is one of Rowling's greatest creations. If not, indeed, the greatest.

I will defend him to the hilt on many things :D but I don't have a need to dilute his nastiness. I don't need him to be a saint. I like the character as he is, with his thwarted nature and life, even if I certainly don't always like what he does.

Also, I think Snape's last word's shows us this even more. "Look at me," was a very loaded statement. Snape wanted to see Harry's eyes one last time, because they were Lily's eyes, and Snape loved Lily, but Snape knows that Harry isn't Lily. The fact that he wanted to be looking at Harry when he died proves my point further I believe, because it shows us that Snape didn't truly loathe Harry. If he did, he wouldn't want to be looking at him, he'd want to be looking away, perhaps closing his eyes and envisioning Lily. Instead he chose to look at Harry, seeing both Harry, and the piece of Lily inside him.

I find that a perfectly reasonable interpretation. It's always been mine.

I guess we'll just have to wait for JKR to shut down that particular theory completely. :rolleyes: (No, he really did hate Harry to his very last dying breath. :grumble: )

Bitter, much? Nah, not me. :lol:

I think, Wicked, that this really overlooks the fact that Snape is dying and hardly has any time to sort these memories.

The fact that he was able to release so many memories to Harry, as his life-blood literally drains away, with all the information Harry needed, was some kind of miracle in itself. To me, that proves that Snape was a very powerful wizard, able to release and control his memories at the very point of death. That is some considerable magical power.

Also, I don't believe he released those memories with those bitter things he said about Harry and James merely to mock Harry: "ha, I've been doing all this for your mother but I still hate you, boy," kind of thing.

I didn't say this.

The memories are what they are. They show Severus Snape, uncensored. No, he doesn't apologise to Harry. But he doesn't offer any excuses either. There is no spin placed on his behaviour at all. In fact, I would say that his continued bitterness at James and Harry is yet another proof of how genuine these memories are. Snape has not attempted to doctor or edit them in any way!!!

That is exactly what I said. Snape flat out said that he was doing it for Lily and he still hated Harry and James - and he wished for Harry to know it because it was a fact and true - and necessary for him to explain his ongoing behavior and actions toward Harry in light of the other revelations, imo.

I didn't say this.

Sorry. :blush: It drives me nuts when other posters put words in my mouth, so sorry to do the same thing to you. :blush: I got carried away with my theory. :lol:

That is exactly what I said. Snape flat out said that he was doing it for Lily and he still hated Harry and James - and he wished for Harry to know it because it was a fact and true - and necessary for him to explain his ongoing behavior and actions toward Harry in light of the other revelations, imo.

OK. :tu:

...how would any of us handle it really, if we saw a person who was a combination of a person we deeply hated and deeply loved? We would hate them, but at the same time care for them, and this would cause us to hate them more because deep down we know we won't be able to not care for them.By hating and shabbily treating an inncocent person in the manner that Snape treated Harry? Some people, IMO would totally do just that. However, I sincerely don't believe that everyone would be a yo-yo of love/resentment/hatred for an individual.

Snape, chose to show Harry memories that made it obvious he loved lily, and not only that, he included his worst memory, in full this time. Which shows us that Snape felt a need to explain that entire situation to Harry. Snape wanted Harry to understand him.
Well I respect your view; however, I believe that everything Snape showed had to be shown to gain Harry's trust. I feel he absolutely had to show Lily ending the relationship. He can't just show the childhood and leave it at that because Harry had already seen SWM. So Harry would be, at best, confused. At worst, Harry would figure Snape was lying that they were ever friends after the train. So Snape showed the friendship and then its end; that it was not him that ended it due to his dark arts interests and thus, he could still have feelings for her after she ended it. That was my interpretation. :) I too respect your view, but agree with wickedwickedboy.

IMO, Shape had to lay that foundation of friendship found/lost, of the unrequited love for Lily, in order to show why Dumbledore fully trusted Snape and never truly waivered in that trust. To me it would take a powerful amount of explanation as to why in the world Harry should trust Snape after having witness him seemingly betray and kill Dumbledore. Harry was quite adamant about what he'd do (or at least try to do :rolleyes:) to Snape given the chance, so there had to be some way to get around that rage, bitterness, and unwillingness to "listen" to reason; IMO we saw Snape do this once in canon already when he used his Patronus to lead Potter. To me, he allowed 'Lily' to be the bridge between himself and garnering Harry's trust.
"Now, Severus, the sword." *snip* "And he must not know you give it." *snip* "And Severus, be very careful, they may not take kindly to your appearance after George Weasley's mishap---"
Snape turned to the door.
"Don't worry, Dumbledore," he said cooly. "I have a plan..."
And then the source of the light stepped out from behind an oak. It was a silver-white doe, moon-bright and dazzling, picking her way over the ground, still silent, and leaving no hoofprints in the fine powdering of snow. She stepped toward him, her beautiful head with its wide, long-lashed eyes held high.
Harry stared at the creature, filled with wonder, not at her strangeness, but at her inexplicable familiarity. He felt that he had been waiting for her to come, but that he had forgotten, until this very moment, that they had arranged to meet.
*snip*
...and Harry walked quickly, sure that when she stopped, she would allow him to approach her properly. And then she would speak and the voice would tell him all he needed to know.
*snip*
Her presence had meant safety.To me, on an instinctual level Harry recognized his mum in that Patronus, the same us he'd done with his own Patronus (a reflection of his dad). It spoke to him in a manner that, IMO, nothing else would have done and he trusted it (Patronus, not caster of the spell) without question, instinctively knowing it wasn't a trap or a type of Dark Magic.

So, would Harry believe a simple memory in which it's intimated that Lily knew and liked Severus, or would it be more believable to "show" that friendship between them, establish Severus's love for her, his loss of her friendship and his subsequent detesting of the slur 'mudblood'; how he'd gone to both Voldemort and Dumbledore (both instances which were taking great personal risks) in order to save "Lily"; how he came to be Dumbledore's spy, why he continued to work for the protection of "Lily's son", not for the son, but for "Lily"?!

This is also one of the reasons I believe Jo when she said that Snape hated Harry until the end, as in until his final breath. We never see his actions result out of care for Harry, instead canon shows us clearly that it was all via determination to do it for "Lily".
"Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?"
"I have---I have asked him---"
*snip*
"Hide them all, then," he croaked. "Keep her --- them --- safe. Please."
*snip*
"I thought....you were going...to keep her...safe?"
*snip*
"Her boy survives," said Dumbledore.
With a tiny jerk of the head, Snape seemed to flick off an irksome fly.
"Her son lives. He has her eyes, precisely her eyes. You remember the shape and color of Lily Evans's eyes, I am sure?"
*snip*
"If you loved Lily Evans, if you truly loved her, then your way forward is clear...*snip*...you know how and why she died. Make sure it was not in vain. Help me protect Lily's son."
"He does not need protection."
*snip*
"So the boy...the boy must die?" asked Snape quite calmly...*snip*...I thought...all these years...that we were protecting him for her. For Lily.
*snip*
"You have kept him alive so that he can die at the right moment?"
*snip*
"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. Now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter---"
"But this is touching, Severus," said Dumbledore seriously. "Have you grown to care for the boy, after all?"
"For him?" shouted Snape. "Expecto Patronum!"
From the tip of his wand burst the silver doe: She landed on the office floor, bounded once across the office, and soared out of the window. Dumbledore watched her fly away, and as her silvery glow faded he turned back to Snape, and his eyes were full of tears.
"After all this time?"
"Always," said Snape.To me this clearly shows Snape's motives and actions and that they weren't for Harry at all, though there is totally no doubt that he absolutely benefited from them; Snape's motives and actions were "Always" for Lily, the love of Severus's life.

Regarding the memories too, and what Snape showed Harry, I'm just remembering that Dumbledore had cautioned Snape to be ready to reveal the truth to Harry once Voldemort had shown signs of "specially protecting Nagini". From that point forward IMO Snape had the time to think hard, knowing he had yet to kill Dumbledore, as to how best to tell Harry anything and garner his trust that what was being revealed to him was truthful and sincere.

He was good at Occlumency, and IMO at compartmentalizing his emotions (much as Draco Malfoy was) and evidenced, IMO, by the fact that he didn't wear his heart on his sleeve. I wonder how he picked and chose the memories he'd share? Or if he'd done that at all? Was it all simply spontaneous while in the throws of death? To me, the fact that we see no other 'frivolous' memories but only those that are Snape-centric loyalty to Dumbledore, tells me that Snape had at least 'pre-planned' what he'd show Harry if the opportunity arose. (By frivolous I mean we don't see a series of totally unrelated memories that tell the saga of the life and times of Severus Snape which are more akin to the memories Harry accidentally viewed after using 'Protego' during an Occlumency lesson with Snape.)

WHile Jo may have said that Snape loathed Harry until the end, she at no time said that this was the only emotion he felt towards Harry. Jo actually set a very clear precedent in the books (and pretty much labelled it as such) that her characters are able to feel more than one emotion. This precedent is of course when Hermione explains to Harry how Cho is feeling and why she is crying all the time. Cho has been through a pretty rough time having had her boyfriend murdered, but compared to the rollercoaster that was Severus Snape's life it was an emotional picnic. As such I think it is fair to say that Snape's emotions towards Harry were considerably more complicated than Cho's towards Harry, given
1) Snape's relationship with Harry's father
2) Snape's relationship with Harry's mother
3) Snape's part in the Death of Harry's mother
4) Harry's survival of the attack that killed his mother

So while "Snape loathed Harrry until the end" is a statement of fact about characters she created by the author it is not the whole story, nor do I beleive that it was meant to be taken as such. Snape was positively a seething cauldron of emotions when it came to Harry, and amongst those emotions was the knowledge that Harry was Lily's son, and that Lily loved him and had died to save him. Severus had dedicated his life to ensuring that this sacrifice was not in vain - he had done it all for Lily, but that was only necessary because Lily loved Harry. By honouring her death Severus is actually honouring her love for her son, and to me that final "Look .. at ... me" was an expression of his acknowledgement that Lily loved Harry and that she was a common bond between them.

WHile Jo may have said that Snape loathed Harry until the end, she at no time said that this was the only emotion he felt towards Harry. Jo actually set a very clear precedent in the books (and pretty much labelled it as such) that her characters are able to feel more than one emotion. This precedent is of course when Hermione explains to Harry how Cho is feeling and why she is crying all the time. Cho has been through a pretty rough time having had her boyfriend murdered, but compared to the rollercoaster that was Severus Snape's life it was an emotional picnic. As such I think it is fair to say that Snape's emotions towards Harry were considerably more complicated than Cho's towards Harry, given
1) Snape's relationship with Harry's father
2) Snape's relationship with Harry's mother
3) Snape's part in the Death of Harry's mother
4) Harry's survival of the attack that killed his mother

So while "Snape loathed Harrry until the end" is a statement of fact about characters she created by the author it is not the whole story, nor do I beleive that it was meant to be taken as such. Snape was positively a seething cauldron of emotions when it came to Harry, and amongst those emotions was the knowledge that Harry was Lily's son, and that Lily loved him and had died to save him. Severus had dedicated his life to ensuring that this sacrifice was not in vain - he had done it all for Lily, but that was only necessary because Lily loved Harry. By honouring her death Severus is actually honouring her love for her son, and to me that final "Look .. at ... me" was an expression of his acknowledgement that Lily loved Harry and that she was a common bond between them.

I agree; although I would include #5. Snape's part in the Death of Lily's husband. And I am not sure we'd agree on the various emotions Snape had for Harry, but I feel it would include loathing, jealousy, and vindictiveness. Nonetheless, I totally agree that Snape was honoring Lily's love for her son when he made his promise - as well as James' love for his son - whether he liked it or not. But Snape did verbally disclaim that honor on the part of both in canon (James, immediately after his death at the time Snape took the promise; and Lily later when Dumbledore told Snape that Harry had to die.) I feel Snape held Harry in contempt due to the love his parents had for one another and the fact that Harry represented that love.

I agree that Lily could have served as a common bond between Snape and Harry - and Snape and James - and Snape and Sirius. However, I feel Snape, upon admitting his emotions for Lily in the memories, was very careful to also show that he rejected that commonality. That is, I believe he indicated that it meant nothing to him that they all shared love for Lily. This is why I feel he included the scene where he was belittling Harry and his father before Dumbledore - a totally unncessary addition in as far as describing either Snape's emotions for Lily or his turn to the good side; but necessary to have Harry's trust in light of the fact that Snape needed to explain why he loathed the son of the woman he claimed to have emotions for, imo. Further, he added the scene where he ripped the family photo in two, which indicated the same thing, but included Sirius as well because it was part of Harry's inheritance from his godfather. Imo, Snape showed disrespect for Sirius (breaking into his room and stealing his personal and valuable legacy) as well as Harry and James (throwing the ripped 1/2 of the photo to the ground) and Sirius/Harry again (in stealing 1/2 of his valuable treasure in the form of his mum's photo from the picture and her 1/2 letter with her love for Sirius on it.) This particular scene, however, also verified that Snape's feelings for Lily were ongoing - unlike the other memory I highlighted. But I feel both memories carried the same message; Snape had emotions for Lily - but rejected the bond that all of these people loving Lily could have formed between Snape and them.

Dumbledore told Snape that Harry's nature was like his mother's - but that was only 1/2 true and Snape knew it, imo. I mean, the most obvious example is that, Lily was not a Quidditch player, nor a noted athlete with her name in the trophy room. So that competitve, aggressive part of Harry's nature that allowed for his prowess in that regard, was clearly akin to his father's nature and not his mother's. And in some respects, James and Lily had a very similar nature (seeing good in some people that others would not - Remus/Snape.) And there were other indications of both these truths as well, which I feel Snape was aware of, and so half true statements like that from Dumbledore would only make matters worse, in my opinion. I feel that way because from Snape's point of view, it was as if the elder wizard was either lying to try to cause some type of bond to form between him and Harry on account of Lily - or Dumbledore was simply blind. Indeed what would have truly been helpful, imo, was for Dumbledore to be explicit, because there were aspects of Harry that were likely more like Lily.

Recently, I have had to re-watch all of the movies for a project I'm involved in here on CoS and my focus was on Harry for the most part. While I don't consider the movies canon in relation to the books, I found that in watching Harry "acted out" before my eyes visually, the different sides of his character were more evident - and were actually stated in the book as well. I mean to say; I felt the glimpses and statements of other's about Harry's father (including the prequel) showed him to be a piston of energy. For example, James might pet his owl, but I think Lily would be the one that would sit staring reflectively from a window while doing so (as Harry did in the book). There is patience and lack of energy in that type of thing which reflects more Lily than James to me (not to say James couldn't be patient, as taking 3 years to become an animagi shows he was - but it is more of an active type of patience - which Harry had as well). And I say all of that to try to show that the ways in which Harry was like Lily may have not been at all evident to Snape because, sticking with this example, when would Snape see Harry having a quiet moment of reflection all to himself like Lily may have? To me, he wouldn't see many of these aspects of Harry and so Dumbledore's words would fall upon deaf ears. What Snape did see were Harry's moments of impetuousness, rule-breaking, impertience and arrogance - outwardly like his dad (and also a part of his nature), but there was more to Harry (and actually to James as well) that Snape did not know and apparently assumed were non-existent.

But to cop Snape a break - even when he found things out that may have been helpful in that regard, as I mentioned, James and Lily were alike in ways, so Snape would still not be legitimately convinced. For example when he overheard that James had become an animagi for Lupin - a kind gesture he may not have ascribed to James, but rather to Lily - and something that Harry might do as well - he didn't have to ascribe it to Lily, because James had done it. So to his mind, Harry remained just like his dad. Same with James saving his life and Harry saving Ginny's in the CoS - Snape would see them the same, villainizing the acts by assigning them negative motivations - whereas with Lily, he could allow for pure benevolence in motive, imo. But to me, it completely disregards a multitude of canon to claim that Harry and James were not alike - in addition to the fact that we never saw James to be able to make a decent comparison; too many people claimed they were alike in a multitude of ways (having nothing to do with looks) to deny it is true. Lupin - Harry's wont to get into trouble, like his father, Hagrid's statement that Harry's done just what his father would have in said situation; Sirius after his rescue from the tower, 'you truly are your father's son', Dumbledore telling Harry that he'd found his father in himself as they had the same stag patronus (which is of all the canon, the most outstanding evidence) and Lupin - Harry was too trusting like his dad. Even Lucius remarked on their similarity in acts contrary to Voldemort. All of that cannot be tossed on account of Dumbledore's one comment to Snape which was true, but not in total, imo. So I agree with Snape on this one (imagine that?) - he definitely had a basis for believing that Harry was 'just like his father' in nature and behavior - the only thing he left out was that he was like his mum in ways too - but as I said, it would likely be rare for Snape to see what no one else seemed to see either - everyone said his 'nature' was like his dad's, not his mum's - and I feel it is because his nature similar to his mums came out in his more introspective moments, when he was taking things in - whereas merely based on the little we know, James would be more outwardly investigative, questioning, expressing all those thoughts that Harry kept to himself in his POV - but as we didn't see James, it is impossible to know if even that is completely accurate. But if it is, Dumbledore would see that side - thus, his comment, but "more like" was for Snape's benefit, imo, because that simply was not true most of the time - and again, Harry's parents had much in common when it came to their nature. One's behavior and actions are motivated in part by their nature, so Snape wasn't wrong - he was only incomplete in his conclusion, imo.

So all of that is to say that while there was potential for a common bond with Snape and Harry, I feel Snape rejected it soundly, unwilling to acknowledge anything in common, let alone Lily, with the boy who represented Lily's preference for another man.

So while "Snape loathed Harrry until the end" is a statement of fact about characters she created by the author it is not the whole story, nor do I beleive that it was meant to be taken as such. Snape was positively a seething cauldron of emotions when it came to Harry, and amongst those emotions was the knowledge that Harry was Lily's son, and that Lily loved him and had died to save him. Severus had dedicated his life to ensuring that this sacrifice was not in vain - he had done it all for Lily, but that was only necessary because Lily loved Harry. By honouring her death Severus is actually honouring her love for her son, and to me that final "Look .. at ... me" was an expression of his acknowledgement that Lily loved Harry and that she was a common bond between them.There is no doubt that Snape is a very ambiguous character throughout the series. He was capable of deep love {Lily}, he was capable of equally deep hatred {James}. He was fascinated with the Dark Arts, yet turned to the other side and worked for the Order. An excellent and talented Potions Master, he also bullied and shabbily treated students. He was capable of enormous courage to play double-double-triple to the enth degree spy, but also cowardly acts such as not caring about the potential deaths of Lily's husband and child {that they could die as long as he had what he wanted - Lily} IMO, that's deeply cold and cowardly. (And yes, I know this is Dumbledore's accusation but it's only after this verbal assualt that Snape begs Dumbledore to hide them all, but always with the emphasis of keeping 'Lily safe'..."Keep her---them---safe"). He was capable of selfishness and IMO of complete selflessness {easing the suffering of a friend, protecting children like Harry/Draco, cursing a fellow Death Eater to save an Order member's life at the potential cost of being exposed to Voldemort as being on the Order's side}.
was Snape a good guy or not? In many ways he really wasn't. SoI haven't been deliberately misleading everyone all this time, when I say that he's a good guy. Because even though he did love and he loved very deeply and he was very brave, both qualities that I admire above anything else. He was bitter and he was vindictive... but right at the very very end, he did, as your question acknowledges, acheive a kind of peace together and I tried to show that in the epilogue.IMO, Jo misspoke when she said "In many ways he really wasn't a 'good' guy." Good does not necessarily equate to nice. I don't think that Snape, to me anyway, that Snape ever really came away as a 'nice' guy. Well, written as he was, it would be terribly hard to do that without giving everything away. But he was good, ultimately he was good, and he did do "what was right, rather than what was easy" and that his reason for doing so was for the most mysterious magical force, "love".

To me, when Jo says that Snape "unjustifiably" "loathed" Harry "until the end" this has nothing at all to do with the depths of his character or if he were capable of other emotions, towards Harry or anyone else. To me, this is just saying that he unfairly treated Harry right up to the end, but then, he finally at the end of his life found his own peace and his own strength to let it go...which is why he gave Harry "all" of those memories. IMO. To me that's a powerful act of redemption, important only to Severus.

We already know that he was capable of deep love {Lily} and of deep friendship, there's no other way to explain that closeness shared between he and Dumbledore, when he's chiding Dumbledore, quipping about epitaphs -- almost clucking like a mother hen.

When Rowling divulged information to Alan Rickman to explain the ambiguity of the character, she says: Rickman was Rowling's personal choice to portray the character. He had conversations with Rowling about his character and is one of the few Harry Potter actors that she spoke to prior to the completion of the book series about the future direction of the character. "He knew very early on that he'd been in love with Lily. He needed to understand […] where this bitterness towards this boy who's the living example of her preference for another man came from."IMO, the bitterness in which Snape took up the task to protecting Harry and his subsequent treatment is comparable to that of Petunia's bitterness in taking in her "dratted sister's brat" and providing him protection that kept him alive of all of this time. A sense of duty to Lily. There are times, in fact, when Harry rather matter of factly compares his treatment by the Dursleys to that of Snape's treatment of him. Snape didn't have to love Harry, be nice to him, treat him deferentially, be leader of the 'We Love Harry' fanclub, in order to help protect him and keep him alive.

Snape's character is definitely ambiguous; his motives and actions are always open to many differing interpretations. I personally like it that way, it's what makes him so interesting to discuss.

Great post Kat Suki! :tu: I agree with pretty much everything you say. I think you muight be right about what Jo meant regarding Snape being "good" . He was definitely one of the "good guys" in terms of whose side he was, but he wasn't a nice person (and to be honest I like him that way!)The debate about whether or not he is "good" as in a "good person" will go on forever, because it is dependent of individual perceptions of good and evil. As it is, I love the redemptive nature his story arc.

Great post Kat Suki! :tu: I agree with pretty much everything you say. I think you muight be right about what Jo meant regarding Snape being "good" . He was definitely one of the "good guys" in terms of whose side he was, but he wasn't a nice person (and to be honest I like him that way!)The debate about whether or not he is "good" as in a "good person" will go on forever, because it is dependent of individual perceptions of good and evil. As it is, I love the redemptive nature his story arc.

Actually as of late, I have not really heard anyone try to argue that Snape was not on the good side. I agree that Jo misspoke, because she also contrasts good and evil, so her saying "good" can be confusing. But I feel she meant he wasn't good in ways that were not associated with "evil", because it was pretty clear that he was not on the evil side by the end of DH.

I have always said that Snape had to come to grips with his whirling emotions in that last moment. He had to in order to look in James Potter's face and see Lily Potter's eyes - and to do so, he had to look at Harry, the representation of his parent's love (and Lily's preference for another man).

There is no way under the sun to me that Snape could look at Harry to find Lily without dropping some of his unfair and irrational jealousy and hatred for James - at least for the minute it took to look at Harry - and that was the very last second of his life, literally, so even though in a sense it would not be that hard to do (he's dying and never has to answer for it or even think about it) to me, it was Snape's greatest moment of bravery in the book - beyond spying, and his greatest personal triumph as well - beyond his loyalty to his love for Lily and beyond his promise to protect Harry. Because think about it - none of those things, not a one, was as difficult for Snape as it would be for him to let down his negative emotional guard against James Potter - even for a second - at least in my estimation. This is why I agreed with Ignisia, nearly a year ago now, that deep in Snape's soul, he actually did have respect for James (and Harry) - because in that last second of his life, he dug it out in order to die looking at Lily's eyes. His motivation for digging it out is unimportant, imo, in comparison to the fact that he could dig it out at all. Unfortunately, respect is not equivalent to remorse or regret, so I cannot go on to conclude from this that Snape felt either for the two male Potters for what he'd done to them (helped to kill one and mistreated the other.) But as I believe Ignisia pointed out, there is some validity in the idea that having respect for a person, includes the idea that one could regret acts of disrespect and feel remorse for them, even if they couldn't admit it. So that is a possibility - although it is not an absolute truth and we simply have no direct canon to support Snape did feel that way, imo.

He was definitely one of the "good guys" in terms of whose side he was, but he wasn't a nice person (and to be honest I like him that way!)

Me too. :agree: I like Snape just as he is, surly and bitter and all the rest of it. Of course I don't always like what he does or says. :huh: Liking a character is not the same as always approving of what they do! :lol:

No, I don't need Snape to be noble or nice or sanitised. JKR created such a memorable, vivid character in Snape and I regard him as one of her greatest (if indeed not her greatest) creations.

And that was a great post, Kat_Suki, very perceptive. :tu:

Actually as of late, I have not really heard anyone try to argue that Snape was not on the good side.

Perhaps they've given up. :evil:

Um, just ignore me. :relax: :p

There is no way under the sun to me that Snape could look at Harry to find Lily without dropping some of his unfair and irrational jealousy and hatred for James - at least for the minute it took to look at Harry - and that was the very last second of his life, literally, so even though in a sense it would not be that hard to do (he's dying and never has to answer for it or even think about it) to me, it was Snape's greatest moment of bravery in the book - beyond spying, and his greatest personal triumph as well - beyond his loyalty to his love for Lily and beyond his promise to protect Harry. Because think about it - none of those things, not a one, was as difficult for Snape as it would be for him to let down his negative emotional guard against James Potter - even for a second - at least in my estimation. This is why I agreed with Ignisia, nearly a year ago now, that deep in Snape's soul, he actually did have respect for James (and Harry) - because in that last second of his life, he dug it out in order to die looking at Lily's eyes. His motivation for digging it out is unimportant, imo, in comparison to the fact that he could dig it out at all. Unfortunately, respect is not equivalent to remorse or regret, so I cannot go on to conclude from this that Snape felt either for the two male Potters for what he'd done to them (helped to kill one and mistreated the other.) But as I believe Ignisia pointed out, there is some validity in the idea that having respect for a person, includes the idea that one could regret acts of disrespect and feel remorse for them, even if they couldn't admit it. So that is a possibility - although it is not an absolute truth and we simply have no direct canon to support Snape did feel that way, imo.

Very interesting thoughts, Wicked, I think that is all very plausible Snape psychology. :)

Oh, and going back to Kat_Suki's post ... I knew about JKR briefing Rickman on the Lily angle very early on in the film franchise but I didn't realise he was her first choice for the part. How fascinating. :) (I have to say, I was thrilled when I heard Rickman would be playing Snape. I've admired his work for years and nobody can snark like he can. :D )

He's not a bad charector, he is one of my favorits. I highly dout that Lily ever liked him back though.

He's not a bad charector, he is one of my favorits. I highly dout that Lily ever liked him back though.Well, Jo has told us that Lily did indeed like Severus and that had he reformed she could have even loved him romantically.

Well, Jo has told us that Lily did indeed like Severus and that had he reformed she could have even loved him romantically.

This is true. From Snape's point of view, however, I don't think that he ever really understood that.

Can a man be happy in a total fiction he creates? It is but a memory, something to cherish, not to live in. It is part of our life cycle that we accept the death of those we have emotions for. Snape need come to terms with grief because his time in the universe was finite; one of the truths all wizards had to learn. He would move on to a new and different place - a place where he'd sent Lily off with her true love. That is not a place of happiness for him either if his mentality did not change (or was not changed by death.)

It is a tribute to his unhappy and miserable existence that he was unable to see his reformation, at an earlier time, would not only have made Lily regard him distinctly, but would have completely transformed his life in an astonishing way, imo. Indeed, I feel that opportunity remained available to him throughout his life, but he never grasped the mantle and made it a reality. In the end, I feel this is in line with Snape's character being portrayed as a horrible person according to the author. That is how I saw it and what she intended, so I feel it is a perfectly valid interpretation. Everyone doesn't have to see it that way, I totally respect that, but if we see what we were meant to see, I can't find a problem in that.

I used to not believe in "innate" anything - that is, I didn't believe one could be born innately cruel, bullying or mean. However, having read an ungodly amount of literature over the last few months, and the commentary, I have found that literary authors do include this idea in their works. Perhaps that is what JKR was doing here with Snape as well; it would lend to the understanding of why it was so difficult for him to change on a personal level - indeed, why he never did even though he rejected evil and moved to the good side.

Wow, that's a lot of questions! Maybe I will write about them later.

Snape is my favorite character. He has this great dark humor, like when Dumbledore asks him to kill him, that was great.

Why would anyone think he is horrible? He tried so hard to make up. And he was so brave. He died because he went back to spy on Voldemort. I could understand why people would think this after he killed Dumbledore. Now it seems weird.

Wow, that's a lot of questions! Maybe I will write about them later.

Snape is my favorite character. He has this great dark humor, like when Dumbledore asks him to kill him, that was great.

Why would anyone think he is horrible? He tried so hard to make up. And he was so brave. He died because he went back to spy on Voldemort. I could understand why people would think this after he killed Dumbledore. Now it seems weird.

Well I cannot speak for others, or for JKR as to what she meant by that. But to me Snape was a horrible person because of his personal behavior in bullying the children, pinpointing Harry to spew his loathing upon and his general treatment of his peers (like his treatment of Tonks in HBP and neglecting to even greet the 'just returned to life' Arthur Weasley in OOTP). However, I felt the child abuse he enacted went beyond the range of 'horrible' and moved into 'evil' behavior.

I always thought Snape was on the good side; so the fact that he actually was didn't change my perception of Snape. JKR said he died the same man he'd always been; cruel, bullying, vindictive and small in character and to me that is not only why I would describe him as a horrible person, but also why I found Snape's character disappointing in the end. I respect that some feel Snape tried to make up for his wrongs, but one of his wrongs was helping to leave Harry an Orphan (killing his parents) and in my judgment, treating the child in a torturous manner could not be construed as trying very hard to make up for his wrongs. Another of his wrongs was all of the evils he enacted as a Death Eater in aiding and abetting that cause, imo. His spying and other deeds for Dumbledore, worked toward balancing that equation, imo, but Snape spent more time behaving in an evil manner on a personal level toward those around him, imo, which hindered me from fully appreciating his efforts for Dumbledore's cause - and I feel in certain cases, caused his efforts to backfire.

JKR created a funny character in Snape - but also in Voldemort. I was cracking up at Snape's dark humor and at Voldemort's as well in the graveyard. However, from an in story point of view, both of these characters behaved in a horrible manner to me. Snape's physical abuse of a child in HBP was not funny and I don't believe that JKR intended for that part to be funny. I feel that was an overt indication that Snape behaved in an overtly cruel and malicious manner at times. I feel that she had Buckbeak rescue Harry for several reasons, among them, the idea that he required it in order to be saved from a beating that would have killed Harry. This was very similar to Voldemort's torture of Charity Burbage; not funny and indicative of his behaving in a cruel and malicious manner at times.

This is behavior that Snape never rectified and as such it is very difficult to see him as a redeemed individual except that he was on the 'good side' while practising this behavior. For me, child abuse sans remorse is not only unforgivable, but evil in nature - as evil as anything Voldemort ever did. I feel Harry felt Snape was mentally deficient in this regard (prohibiting Snape from recognizing his own behavior as evil in nature) and made allowances for that when forgiving him. I would opine that Harry forgave Voldemort for the same reason, but the distinction was that Voldemort had not tried to make up for what he'd done in honor of either of his parents. Snape did, with respect to one of his parents and while I feel he did so extremely poorly, I feel that too was to be seen as a mental deficiency in Snape which prevented him from doing any better. JKR indicated Snape was a small man - which means that one is small minded and petty, unforgiving and bitter, imo.

Rowling said she delighted in the fact that, even after "Deathly Hallows," there was still some speculation as to the true leanings of the erstwhile Potions Master. "Snape is vindictive, he's cruel. He's not a big man," she insisted. "But he loves. I like him, but I'd also like to slap him hard." 2007 ~ MTV.com, 15 October

JKR: "It's very hard to choose. It's fun to write about Snape because he's a deeply horrible person. (Family Education Summer 1999 Harry Potter Author Works Her Magic Katy Abel)

JKR: "I knew from the beginning what Snape was. Do I think he's a hero? To a point, I do, but he's not an unequivocally good character. Snape is a complicated man. He's bitter. He's ... spiteful. He's a bully. All these things are still true of Snape, even at the end of this book. But was he brave? Yes, immensely. Was he capable of love? Very definitely..." (2007 ~ (NBC) The Final Chapter - interview with Viera)


So I feel his cruelty and vindictiveness, his need to bully, his grudge holding and desire to exert power over others was a consequence of that. I don't think it reaches the level of a disability, but simply a deficiency that could have been overcome by a stronger and more capable individual. And it did not hinder his capabilities in other areas like excelling in some magic and performing the spying which required skill and bravery, imo. ;)

Wow. Didn't somebody say evil is a big word, or something, in the books?

I have to run, so I can't reply to all this long answer now. But why do you say J. K. Rowling said all those bad things about Snape? I find it hard to believe. The way she wrote a whole chapter about him in the last book, and what Harry says about him in the end - he was a good guy.

Wow. Didn't somebody say evil is a big word, or something, in the books?

I have to run, so I can't reply to all this long answer now. But why do you say J. K. Rowling said all those bad things about Snape? I find it hard to believe. The way she wrote a whole chapter about him in the last book, and what Harry says about him in the end - he was a good guy.

I added quotes from JKR to my above post. :)

I feel that she had Buckbeak rescue Harry for several reasons, among them, the idea that he required it in order to be saved from a beating that would have killed Harry.

I respectfully disagree. I really don't think Snape would have killed Harry. That would defeat the purpose of his years of spying and his work for the Light IMO.

I think JKR got Buckbeak for Harry, because Harry was not planning to let go of Snape; Harry's rage was so much that he would have gone after Snape pursuing Snape even outside Hogwarts. It was to stop that and turn Harry back inside, I think Buckbeak came IMO.

I respectfully disagree. I really don't think Snape would have killed Harry. That would defeat the purpose of his years of spying and his work for the Light IMO.

I think JKR got Buckbeak for Harry, because Harry was not planning to let go of Snape; Harry's rage was so much that he would have gone after Snape pursuing Snape even outside Hogwarts. It was to stop that and turn Harry back inside, I think Buckbeak came IMO.

I respect your view, but that was my personal reading of the canon. Harry was in no condition to chase anyone, even after Snape was chased from the scene, in my judgment. Harry was struggling to rise and stumbling when he began to walk, so much so, Hagrid upon sighting his condition lifted him up from the ground to save him from attempting to walk - and that was after only one strike (HBP, Flight of the Prince). However, I would add that in saving Harry, Buckbeak saved Snape also. Not only from killing Harry, imo, but also because Dumbledore specfically told Snape that Harry had to die at Voldemort's hand (DH TPT). The mistake was that Dumbledore didn't tell him why, and on account of that, Snape wouldn't have had the knowledge of what the consequences would be if he killed Harry instead of Voldemort. From Snape's perspective, he would merely be destroying the horcrux that was keeping Voldemort alive, imo.

I don't believe Snape planned to kill Harry when he ran into him while escaping; the canon provides otherwise, imo; Snape was actually trying to keep Harry alive at first (HBP, ibid). But then Snape lost it and in my view, loathing the boy, his natural tendencies came out. I feel he did not (or could not) restrain himself due to his emotional state, and would have killed Harry in his wrath fueled by his duress. Otherwise there would have been no reason for Buckbeak to step in, in my opinion. JKR could have had Snape stop himself and run away after that first strike; Harry was incapacitated and wandless as well. Because she did not do that, I felt she was attempting to show the depth of Snape's duress and how far it would have taken him without intervention.

However, I would add that in saving Harry, Buckbeak saved Snape also. Not only from killing Harry, imo, but also because Dumbledore specfically told Snape that Harry had to die at Voldemort's hand (DH TPT)

... don't believe Snape planned to kill Harry when he ran into him while escaping; the canon provides otherwise, imo; Snape was actually trying to keep Harry alive at first (HBP, ibid). But then Snape lost it and in my view, loathing the boy, his natural tendencies came out. I feel he did not (or could not) restrain himself due to his emotional state, and would have killed Harry in his wrath fueled by his duress. Otherwise there would have been no reason for Buckbeak to step in, in my opinion. JKR could have had Snape stop himself and run away after that first strike; Harry was incapacitated and wandless as well. Because she did not do that, I felt she was attempting to show the depth of Snape's duress and how far it would have taken him without intervention.
The reason Buckbeak has to step in is not to save Harry, but to save Snape, imo. Snape has to "flee" in order to live - hence, "flight" of the Prince. (Of course that's also a pun because we find out in DH that Snape really can fly, as could Lily).

Harry is more dangerous to Snape at that moment, than Snape is to Harry.

Why on earth would Snape want to kill Harry? He just saved Harry from the Death Eaters and their Crucio. Harry misperceives that Snape is hurting him - it's really one of the Death Eaters, and Snape stops that by shouting "No!"

This is similar to the reason that Snape couldn't have really been Dumbledore's killer in HBP. Harry (and many readers) thought the look on Snape's face was loathing for Dumbledore, but it was really emotional grief.

Why would he want to kill him after he saved Dumbleodre from the ring-crux? And the answer is, Snape wanted Dumbledore to live, just as he wants Harry to live.

Snape's "natural tendency" as you call it is to defend himself from Harry - he knows Harry can be dangerous. Heck, he probably knows that Harry crucio'd Bellatrix the year before for killing Sirius! And this time he knows that Harry thinks he's a murderer, right? Therefore, Snape thinks Harry is going to kill him or hurt him so badly he can't get away, and how would that help anything?

Snape still has to finish his mission of getting Draco to safety (one of his promises in the Unbreakable Vow).

If Snape hates Harry so much, why did he send the Silver Doe to him in the forest? Yet he doesn't seem to resent doing that for Harry at all.

Doesn't Snape like Harry better than he likes Draco? Snape tells Dumbledore that he wouldn't mind if Draco killed him instead of himself. But he tells Harry, "No Unforgivables for you." Therefore, Snape is trying to keep Harry from breaking one of the main laws of the Wizarding World, and may see Draco as a lost cause. (Of course Harry does do the Crucio without consequences more than once, which is a flaw in the plot in my opinion).

But then Snape lost it and in my view, loathing the boy, his natural tendencies came out. I feel he did not (or could not) restrain himself due to his emotional state, and would have killed Harry in his wrath fueled by his duress.

I felt that the natural tendency of Snape was to save Harry at all cost. That was why he was angry with Dumbledore when Dumbledore told Snape Harry had to die. But having Voldemort's soul inside him, silenced Snape, else I think Snape would have stopped working for Dumbledore and the Light from that moment IMO.

Another thing I think is that while Snape may have become angry enough to shout and bellow at times, I really don't think that Snape is shown as a character who becomes angry enough to kill or beat anyone to death in the books.

I felt that the natural tendency of Snape was to save Harry at all cost. That was why he was angry with Dumbledore when Dumbledore told Snape Harry had to die. But having Voldemort's soul inside him, silenced Snape, else I think Snape would have stopped working for Dumbledore and the Light from that moment IMO.

Another thing I think is that while Snape may have become too angry to shout at times, I really don't think that Snape is shown as a character who becomes angry enough in the books to kill or beat anyone to death.

You know - these books are full of angry characters, including Harry himself who sometimes frightens Hermione when he blows up.

Snape is no more scarey than anyone else when they are unders extreme stress - which is often the case with him.

But beating Harry to death? That's too much hyperbole for me. He could have hurt him alot worse by poisoning him years before - as Lupin points out about himself. But Snape isn't like that, in my opinion. He's into "defense" not violence.

You know - these books are full of angry characters, including Harry himself who sometimes frightens Hermione when he blows up.

:agree:

Snape is no more scarey than anyone else when they are unders extreme stress - which is often the case with him.

I agree. And that stress would have increased after Voldmeort came back and would have become unbearable after Dumbledore's injury and after Snape came to know of the message he needed to pass on to Harry IMO.
---------------

While we have the author's words on how she sees Snape and indeed the other characters, I think for everyone to see those characters as she did, she should have portrayed them properly.

Like everyone sees Harry as the good guy; Voldemort as the evil guy, no one says Bellatrix could have been part of the light; in that respect she has portrayed those characters as she has wanted them to be.

But I think in Snape's case, she did not do a good job to show that Snape was the small, mean, deeply horrible person, who unjustifyably loathes Harry until the end, who was a cruel man.

While she may say that is what she intended, she IMO has obviously not been successful, because there are so many like me, who see Snape differently.

And for that I think she herself is responsible, because while she says all this, the man she has presented in the books does something else, completely contary to what a coward, a small, mean, deeply horrible person would IMO.

She has given a man Dumbeldore trusted and thought himself fortunate to have on his side; a man, who, Harry said was the bravest man he ever knew and whose son was named after him IMO.

Such men do not kill or beat others to death IMO.

The reason Buckbeak has to step in is not to save Harry, but to save Snape, imo. Snape has to "flee" in order to live - hence, "flight" of the Prince. (Of course that's also a pun because we find out in DH that Snape really can fly, as could Lily).

I am sorry, but I do not understand what you mean. Snape was not under attack in the part I was speaking of; he was attacking Harry. I was only speaking of the end of their confrontation. I agree that Snape had to go though.

Lily couldn't fly - she used magic to bouy her fall in DH TPT, like Arthur and the Misters Diggory did in GoF, imo. Snape could literally fly like Voldemort; both could take flight across the skies to a completely different location. :)

Harry is more dangerous to Snape at that moment, than Snape is to Harry.

I am afraid I am not sure which moment you are referring to. I was referring to the moment when Snape was a danger to Harry, when he whipped him in the face with his spell (HBP-Flight of the Prince)

Why on earth would Snape want to kill Harry? He just saved Harry from the Death Eaters and their Crucio. Harry misperceives that Snape is hurting him - it's really one of the Death Eaters, and Snape stops that by shouting "No!"

Well I did point that out in my post. At first, I feel Snape was trying to stick to the plan he made with Dumbledore (not to allow anyone to kill Harry except Voldemort) However, the text reads that subsequently Snape had worked himself up into such a state that he looked 'demented'. It is then his emotions overtook his reason, imo, and that is when he knocked Harry down and then sent his wand flying away. It was then he commenced his whipping spell and Buckbeak had to come and chase him away (HBP Flight of the Prince)

This is similar to the reason that Snape couldn't have really been Dumbledore's killer in HBP. Harry (and many readers) thought the look on Snape's face was loathing for Dumbledore, but it was really emotional grief.

I don't understand. Snape was Dumbledore's killer. Do you mean why readers could have figured that it was pre-planned? I figured it out as a reader, but due to Dumbledore's behavior, not Snape's look. However, I did interpret Snape's look correctly in light of Dumbledore's behavior. :tu:

Why would he want to kill him after he saved Dumbleodre from the ring-crux? And the answer is, Snape wanted Dumbledore to live, just as he wants Harry to live.

Snape didn't loathe Dumbledore, imo. I felt that he respected him and held him in some liking. Thus, I am unsure what your reasoning here was meant to convery. As I indicated, it was not Snape's initial plan to kill Harry, in my judgment. I feel that it was a natural consequence for Snape to do so later due to the extreme duress he was under. Note that I do not feel it was merely the duress of killing Dumbledore, but I believe that Snape continued to work himself up in his confrontation with Harry. I think Harry saying "kill me like you killed him" which could have referred to Dumbledore and his father was what sent Snape over the brink. He had conspired to kill both and that very night, Dumbledore had died by his hand. And recall that the initial conspiracy he was involved in, also resulted in Lily's death. Psychologically, I think it was simply too much for him in that moment and that is why he temporarily lost it, imo.

Snape's "natural tendency" as you call it is to defend himself from Harry - he knows Harry can be dangerous. Heck, he probably knows that Harry crucio'd Bellatrix the year before for killing Sirius! And this time he knows that Harry thinks he's a murderer, right? Therefore, Snape thinks Harry is going to kill him or hurt him so badly he can't get away, and how would that help anything?

Harry couldn't kill Snape, imo, he had no wand to cast Crucio or anything else at Snape. Snape had sent Harry's wand sailing away and the child was disarmed and completely at Snape's mercy at the point in the scene I was referring to. Harry told Snape to kill him, just like he'd killed him. So it was clear that Snape had open season on Harry at that point, the child no longer had any fight left in him. (HBP -FoTP) - that was also in Harry's POV. From his point of view - Snape had helped to kill his parents and he'd just seen him kill Dumbledore; plus he still held doubts about Snape's connection with the killing of Sirius, imo. So Harry felt he was confronting the man who'd killed all of these people he dearly loved. So Harry was completely deflated at that point - his POV says he was ready to die. As for Snape, my impression was that Snape was never worried; he stood flicking Harry's spells aside one after the other throughout their confrontation wihtout any trouble (ibid). Snape claimed he could read Harry's mind and knew what he would try to throw before he threw it. (HBP ibid)

As it turned out, it was Harry's compassion that saved him (the compassion he'd shown Buckbeak that caused the Hippogriff to feel loyalty and wish to protect him). It saved Harry in this situation just as it did against Voldemort in the MOM when he ejected the dark lord from his body, imo. So Snape didn't have a real chance against Harry and if you meant that Snape fled for his life when Buckbeak attacked him with his claws, in fear of being killed, I would agree. However, that all occurred after Snape had commenced whipping Harry (HBP ibid)

Snape still has to finish his mission of getting Draco to safety (one of his promises in the Unbreakable Vow).

I think that would make for a bit of a plot hole because Draco would be long gone by the time Snape finally made it out of the gates. He told Draco to run when he started in with Harry. (HBP ibid)

If Snape hates Harry so much, why did he send the Silver Doe to him in the forest? Yet he doesn't seem to resent doing that for Harry at all.

Well that was in a completely different book with Snape in a calm state. I don't think Snape wanted to kill Harry when he was calm. When he was calm, he wished to complete Dumbledore's plan as he'd promised, imo. However, the doe scene does not exactly cure the point, imo, because Snape's effort resulted in Harry nearly drowning and it was Ron's effort that saved him.

Doesn't Snape like Harry better than he likes Draco?

In my opinion, Snape liked Draco far better than Harry. Draco was the son of Lucius and Narcissa and I feel that Snape had some liking for them.

Snape tells Dumbledore that he wouldn't mind if Draco killed him instead of himself.

In my judgment that showed that Snape liked himself better than Draco - but it had nothing to do with Harry, imo.

But he tells Harry, "No Unforgivables for you." Therefore, Snape is trying to keep Harry from breaking one of the main laws of the Wizarding World, and may see Draco as a lost cause. (Of course Harry does do the Crucio without consequences more than once, which is a flaw in the plot in my opinion).

I respect your view, but you and I interpret this distinctly. I feel Snape was taunting Harry or he would have simply stunned him with totalus petrificus - a completely light spell - and left the scene when the last of the Death Eaters did. The point when the Death Eaters left is noted in the canon (HBP FoTP) and Snape remained afterward. In my view, there was no reason for Snape to remain at that point and he should have left. However, I believe he was feeling vindictive toward Harry as a result of killing Dumbledore (which I feel Snape understood was somehow connected with his overall plan for Harry's sake) and Snape simply got carried away in the midst of his taunting and lost it, imo. Snape seemed in control of himself in the initial portion of their confrontation - he had the upper hand all the way through, imo. However, Harry's attempt at Levicorpus recalled to Snape's mind his worst memory I believe and that sent him into a state. Following that, I feel Harry's command that Snape kill him as he had Dumbledore and his father, increased Snape's wrath and finally being called a coward caused him to totally lose it. Otherwise, I think Snape would have been able to stay more in control of himself and in that circumstance, I don't believe he would have begun whipping Harry. But Snape did in the end, imo, because he became lost in emotion and fury to the point where intervention was required before Harry was killed. However, that was because Snape "lost it" in my view, not because he wished to kill Harry otherwise.

As I indicated, it was not Snape's initial plan to kill Harry, in my judgment. I feel that it was a natural consequence for Snape to do so later due to the extreme duress he was under.
I disagree. I don't think Snape would ever have killed "Lily's Boy," whether under duress or not. I see nothing in the canon that would prove that to me.

As to JKR's opinion of Snape - that is outside the books as they are written. Obviously, half the world has a different opinion of Snape than she has, which is more unfortunate for her than it is for us. I realize she may not have intended him to be as sympathetic as he is, except that she also named one of Harry's children for him and Harry also called him "the bravest man he ever knew." Maybe JKR regrets that now, but the books are what they are.

We are free to interpret these books our own way. Most authors don't follow people around telling them what to think, but we are in a weird situation in which her words have been taken as gospel for too many years, imo.

I feel that Snape is consistantly non-violent except in extreme circumstances, such as the Shrieking Shack (in which everyone is violent) and the Pensieve Dive during Occlumency (which didn't keep Harry from feeling sorry for Snape!).

I disagree. I don't think Snape would ever have killed "Lily's Boy," whether under duress or not. I see nothing in the canon that would prove that to me.

I respect your view. Snape considered Harry "Potter's son", period, imo. So that is why you and I likely see it distinctly.

As to JKR's opinion of Snape - that is outside the books as they are written. Obviously, half the world has a different opinion of Snape than she has, which is more unfortunate for her than it is for us. I realize she may not have intended him to be as sympathetic as he is, except that she also named one of Harry's children for him and Harry also called him "the bravest man he ever knew." Maybe JKR regrets that now, but the books are what they are.

I was giving my opinion, not JKR's opinion. I am not sure why you felt I was. I did not find Snape sympathetic and I felt he loathed Harry and his dad to his death, however, I respect your right to hold a different view. :)

My interpretation of why Harry named his son Albus Severus completely matches my view of the books and is not a sympathetic gesture, but one honoring Snape for the brave acts he did in his attempt to honor Lily. I feel Harry forgave those acts which Snape did that he felt had not honored her and concentrated on the good there was in Snape - his bravery. The quote you gave, actually says "Probably the bravest man he knew" - which contains a qualifier and I feel that was inserted to help us understand that he was speaking mainly to help his son feel better about Slytherin. If Snape was the bravest to Harry's mind hands down, he would not have added 'probably' in my opinion. So we simply interpret this distinctly. I am unsure how JKR interprets it as she has not addressed that particular issue to my knowledge.

We are free to interpret these books our own way. Most authors don't follow people around telling them what to think, but we are in a weird situation in which her words have been taken as gospel for so many years, imo.

I personally formed my opinion prior to JKR saying anything as my posts on the day the book was released evidence. :lol: But I agree that we do have the benefit of extra knowledge from JKR that many authors do not give to their fans.

Here was my pre-book release wish for Snape:

I LOVE the thought of Snape being evil. I hope he is. I KNOW 100 percent for certian he killed Dumbledore at the old wizard's request. But there is still a chance that he could go evil. I hope so! And I hope he would meet a ghastly, exciting, end that would leave us all turning our pages backward to re-read. It would be very very exciting if true. I think it would fit his character up to now in the books if he were to become evil and a true full-fledged death eater. July 5, 2007 - Snape the Villian thread.

Well I didn't get my wish :lol:, but you can see by what I wrote, exactly how I felt about his character even before DH was released (underlined portion).

I respect your view. Snape considered Harry "Potter's son", period, imo. So that is why you and I likely see it distinctly.

And even if we take it that way, it was to Potter's son, Snape bared his heart and soul IMO. Both Lily's Boy and Potter's son were the same to Snape; Harry IMO!

And even if we take it that way, it was to Potter's son, Snape bared his heart and soul IMO. Both Lily's Boy and Potter's son were the same to Snape; Harry IMO!

Well I totally respect your view, but as we have previously discussed, I don't feel Snape bared his heart and soul to Harry at all. I believe he told him just enough to gain his trust: why he disliked his father and him and that he still had emotions for Lily. His point was that he was on the good side, but Harry would question that, imo, without a lot of questions answered. So Snape answered them, in my judgment.

ps. SIP: I added my old quote to my above post.

Well I totally respect your view, but as we have previously discussed, I don't feel Snape bared his heart and soul to Harry at all. I believe he told him just enough to gain his trust: why he disliked his father and him and that he still had emotions for Lily.

What I meant was if Snape thought Harry was Potter's son only and if he had passed on the hate he had for James on to Harry, then I don't think he would have told a boy he hated, loathed and throughly disliked, that the girl he loved he lost to James, his worst enemy. That he was rejected. That Lily rejected him for James; that Lily chose James over him. Such things one does not tell to a boy one hates or if one passes on the hate one has for the father to the son IMO.

All he would have done was to show memories of his work with Dumbledore to convince Harry and if he was like JKR said a person who loathed Harry and if he was a small, mean and vindictive man, he would have perhaps shown a few more instances where James and co, fought him 4 on 1 and hurt Harry IMO.

Instead Snape shows his imperfections and his wrongs, more than anything else IMO.

I LOVE the thought of Snape being evil. I hope he is. I KNOW 100 percent for certian he killed Dumbledore at the old wizard's request. But there is still a chance that he could go evil. I hope so! And I hope he would meet a ghastly, exciting, end that would leave us all turning our pages backward to re-read. It would be very very exciting if true. I think it would fit his character up to now in the books if he were to become evil and a true full-fledged death eater. July 5, 2007 - Snape the Villian thread.

Well I didn't get my wish , but you can see by what I wrote, exactly how I felt about his character even before DH was released (underlined portion).

Obviously your opinion has stayed fixed in one position, WWB. But that doesn't change the fact that in DH Snape was vindicated as a character in more than one way. Whatever JKR said, the book is clear, in my opinion.

The reason I never thought it would be exciting if Snape was evil (besides the fact that there was much foreshadowing to the contrary) is that we didn't really need another villain. We already had Voldemort as a super-villain, and his army of Death Eaters. Another villain wouldn't have been very special at all. It would have been a big yawn, imo.

That Lily rejected him for James; that Lily chose James over him.
I don't remember reading where Lily rejected him for James. Or that Lily chose him over James. Lily rejected him for his bigotry, Dark Magic, his nasty DE friends, and his desire to join Voldemort. The book couldn't have been more clear about it. And just in case we didn't get that from the book, JKR told us in interviews.

Lily rejected him because of the dark path he was going down. She rejected him for his bad choices. Snape was also aware of that, which was why he showed Harry the memory with them arguing about Avery and Mulciber. He showed his jealousy over James, but Lily was oblivious to that. This was two friends arguing, not a romantic couple arguing.

I meant from Snape's point of view. As far as Snape was concerned, he was rejected by Lily for James, because Snape loved her too IMO.

Obviously your opinion has stayed fixed in one position, WWB. But that doesn't change the fact that in DH Snape was vindicated as a character in more than one way. Whatever JKR said, the book is clear, in my opinion.

I agree, but of course we all interpret canon distinctly. As you can see from my post, I always thought Snape was on the good side - so there was nothing to vindicate in that regard for me. I did not really believe that JKR would change his character to that of a good-sider and I was hoping she'd move him back to Voldemort's side because I felt it fit his character in the books. To me, his character never changed on a personal/behavioral level.

But I appreciate the fact that if you saw him as being on Voldemort's side, you would feel he was vindicated from evil to good. :tu:

The reason I never thought it would be exciting if Snape was evil (besides the fact that there was much foreshadowing to the contrary) is that we didn't really need another villain. We already had Voldemort as a super-villain, and his army of Death Eaters. Another villain wouldn't have been very special at all. It would have been a big yawn, imo.

:lol: - well we had even more good siders. But we didn't have anyone in the book flying from side to side before our eyes which I thought would be cool. Nonetheless, he was among a very few persons, to me, in that although he was on the good side, I did not feel he had a good heart. Off hand, I can only think of one other character like that: Mundungus (although with an appreciably smaller role). In truth, I would place Kreacher in that category too, but I do realize we are not supposed to.

I meant from Snape's point of view. As far as Snape was concerned, he was rejected by Lily for James, because Snape loved her too IMO.

Do you mean that you don't feel Snape realized that Lily rejected him because he was on a dark path? She told him in DH. If he refused to admit it, and refused to admit his wrongs, then he wouldn't even be on the good side. He would actually be on the bad side, and only posing to be on the good side, merely for Lily, imo.

:rolleyes: If Snape always saw Harry as simply James' son, then Harry would probably be dead and Snape unredeemed. A young Snape, fresh from the DE ranks and still a little morally confused, would not, IMO, have protected Harry unless he had a compelling reason to do so-- like the fact that Harry is Lily's child.


As for pre-DH theories..
You know, I used to like the idea of Snape being on his own side ages ago. But I was always open to new ideas and gradually the idea of good!Snape seemed both far more likely and more interesting. I still think Obscure!Snape could have been pulled off, but JKR did a fantastic job showing us this flawed yet highly sympathetic character.
It's OK to have been a little off from the truth. I know I was. :lol: I didn't suspect, for instance, that Lily would have as much of a role in bringing Snape from the Dark Side. But she did, and I had to reevaluate my opinion of Snape in some ways because of it.