Severus Snape: Character Analysis v.9

I don't agree with this at all. From the time between the opening feast when Snape looks at Harry and their first potions lesson, I don't think Harry spares a single thought towards Snape. He doesn't ever once blames the pain on his scar on Snape. Harry also never thinks about this opening feast scene once. Harry fully realizes by the end of SS/PS that Voldemort is the cause of the pain, and he never blamed it on Snape.

I think it was meant he 'subconsciously' blamed it on Snape. But as I pointed out, even if that was the case, I feel Snape's subsequent behavior was the cause, not Harry making any firm determination at that first meeting.

I don't agree with this at all. From the time between the opening feast when Snape looks at Harry and their first potions lesson, I don't think Harry spares a single thought towards Snape. He doesn't ever once blames the pain on his scar on Snape. Harry also never thinks about this opening feast scene once. Harry fully realizes by the end of SS/PS that Voldemort is the cause of the pain, and he never blamed it on Snape.

He was certainly in his subsconcious, as Snape appears in a nightmare Harry had during his first night at Hogwarts.

- then Malfoy turned into the hook-nosed teacher, Snape, whose laugh became high and cold - there was a green light and Harry woke, sweating and shaking.

ETA: Also, the day after.

At the start of term banquet, Harry had got the idea that Professor Snape disliked him.

And as this is the Snape thread, not the Harry thread, how did Harry's reaction to the pain during thier first meeting effect Snape? Did he see Harry's pained look and take it personaly? Did it give a kick to his idea that Harry was just like his father?

I truly doubt that Snape could understand Harry's look to mean he was like his father - only because a good majority of the students likely looked at the professor with curtains of greasy hair, dark tunnels for eyes, a grand hooked nose, and a sneering expression with the same type of regard. In other words, they likely all regarded him in the way most students did back when he was at Hogwarts.

Snape was looking at Harry and "seeing" James' son of course; they looked alike. What that may have made him feel is a mystery - but I would opine the sensations would not be pleasant based on his subsequent behavior. Nonetheless, one cannot forget the relevance and importance of Harry having "Lily's eyes". Snape was not swooning at this, seeing it as a reminder of his emotions for Lily in some sort of pleasant and dreamy fashion; I believe the canon made it clear that the significance of those eyes were that they reminded Snape that Harry was Lily's son because she preferred and loved another man over him. That is why at the end of his life, when he finally looked at them to see Lily's eyes, he had to have come to some sort of peace with that idea and accept her love for James and Harry the product of that love on a level outside of jealousy - that is, on the level of facts. It is like: "Okay, Lily loved James and visa versa, and together they had this kid who represents that love. However I want to see Lily's eyes more than I care about any of that at the moment.

But remember too that Snape had already explained how he felt about James' son some 11 years previously in Dumbledore's office. So sighting Harry was unnessesray to kick start his dislike of the child - that had been predetermined. That was the entire basis of Snape not revealing what Dumbledore thought to be the best of Snape. Which is pretty pitiful if his emotions for Lily was the best of him; I rather see it as the spying.

Snape was looking at Harry and "seeing" James' son of course; they looked alike. What that may have made him feel is a mystery - but I would opine the sensations would not be pleasant based on his subsequent behavior. Nonetheless, one cannot forget the relevance and importance of Harry having "Lily's eyes". Snape was not swooning at this, seeing it as a reminder of his emotions for Lily in some sort of pleasant and dreamy fashion; I believe the canon made it clear that the significance of those eyes were that they reminded Snape that Harry was Lily's son because she preferred and loved another man over him. That is why at the end of his life, when he finally looked at them to see Lily's eyes, he had to have come to some sort of peace with that idea and accept her love for James and Harry the product of that love on a level outside of jealousy - that is, on the level of facts. It is like: "Okay, Lily loved James and visa versa, and together they had this kid who represents that love. However I want to see Lily's eyes more than I care about any of that at the moment.
:agree: And there is the fact that Harry was the reason Lily died.
Woderful Lily had given her life to safe that little yerk who was revered by everyone for something not he but Lily had done and he didn't show any of her brillance etc... In my oppinion Snape couldn't look at him without being reminded what his being alive had cost and he wasn't sure Harry was worth it.
We can't be sure Snape knew about the sacrifice, though I'm convinced he does, but even if he did not - it was Harry not Lily Voldemort had gone after, without Harry - and himself, who told Voldemort about the prophecy, something he was IMO constantly reminded of by Harrys existance - without them Lily could still be around.

:agree: And there is the fact that Harry was the reason Lily died.
Woderful Lily had given her life to safe that little yerk who was revered by everyone for something not he but Lily had done and he didn't show any of her brillance etc... In my oppinion Snape couldn't look at him without being reminded what his being alive had cost and he wasn't sure Harry was worth it.
We can't be sure Snape knew about the sacrifice, though I'm convinced he does, but even if he did not - it was Harry not Lily Voldemort had gone after, without Harry - and himself, who told Voldemort about the prophecy, something he was IMO constantly reminded of by Harrys existance - without them Lily could still be around.

Love your signature Murzim, :rotfl:.

Yeah, I know Lily had died, but I hold only disdain for Snape's emotions for Lily because he should have been thinking about Harry representing the one chosen by Voldemort - with the possibility of killing the Dark Lord when he returned (he knew the prophecy, he delivered it). Voldemort had not just killed Lily, but James and was responsible for millions having been killed by his hand or by commanding their deaths - and Snape helped with that.

In that light, even if Snape didn't feel Harry was worth Lily's sacrifice; when you add James' direct sacrifice, together with the indirect sacrifice of all of the others killed and harmed during the first war ~ and Harry the one designated to right those millions of wrongs Snape helped cause...well that should have made Harry worth it to Snape. I feel that should have made the child invaluable to Snape.

That was the principle reason I was disappointed when JKR elected to use the unrequited love idea for Snape; it rendered him as behaving in a very petty, small, narrow-minded, singularly focused fashion, and eradicated the idea that he was a man of ideals and principles. Some suggest he grew into being such a man near the end of his life, but Snape begs do differ - he stated on canon page that his efforts were all for Lily (DH TPT). It is also suggested that it cannot be true because in the end he was sending her son to his death, something she would not want. But what Lily would want was never important for Snape, imo, it was what Snape wanted that mattered. Otherwise I firmly believe he would not have mistreated her son for 6.5 years and been able to send him to his death. So to me, Snape agreed to help protect Harry in order to ensure Lily's sacrifice was not in vain and agreed with sending Harry to his death for the same reason. But that was all based on his own feelings associated with having helped to kill her and his emotions for her, imo, and had nothing to do with what Lily might think about it all. In other words, his actions went toward mitigating his guilt and making himself feel better with respect to his emotions for her; but had nothing to do with her love for her husband and son or the fact that Lily would wish for their sacrifices to be honored. Nor did they have anything to do with all those others who'd been sacrificed as a result of the first war, who Lily would also wish to be honored. Snape was a singularly selfish man, imo, because his actions were entirely self-serving at the foundation of things from his point of view.

I don't agree with this at all. From the time between the opening feast when Snape looks at Harry and their first potions lesson, I don't think Harry spares a single thought towards Snape. He doesn't ever once blames the pain on his scar on Snape. Harry also never thinks about this opening feast scene once. Harry fully realizes by the end of SS/PS that Voldemort is the cause of the pain, and he never blamed it on Snape.

The night they first see one another (and Harry feels the pain) Harry has a dream:

Perhaps Harry had eaten a bit too much, because he had a very strange dream. He was wearing Professor Quirrell's turban, which kept talking to him, telling him he must transfer to Slytherin at once, because it was his destiny. Harry told the turban he didn't want to be in Slytherin; it got heavier and heavier; he tried to pull it off but it tightened painfully -- and there was Malfoy, laughing at him as he struggled with it -then Malfoy turned into the hook-nosed teacher, Snape, whose laugh became high and cold -- there was a burst of green light and Harry woke, sweating and shaking.

In this dream, Harry sees Snape, who laughs like Voldemort and then there is a burst of green light. To me, this seems very explicit. At the very least on a subconscious level, Harry is already associating Snape with Voldemort and expecting Snape to try and kill him.

We can't be sure Snape knew about the sacrifice, though I'm convinced he does, but even if he did not - it was Harry not Lily Voldemort had gone after, without Harry - and himself, who told Voldemort about the prophecy, something he was IMO constantly reminded of by Harrys existance - without them Lily could still be around.

I think you are right. :) We can be pretty sure Snape does know. In "The Prince's Tale" Dumbledore states (in the scene shortly after her death) that Snape knows how Lily died, and Snape does not disagree. Further, he agrees to protect Harry so that Lily's death would not have been in vain. I don't see another reasonable way to intrepret this, other than to conclude Snape knows Voldemort killed Lily, and she died trying to protect Harry.

From the Snape's Death V2 in the Stone Forum

I don't give that much weight because I feel it was done by Harry 'all for Lily', just as Snape had done his bit 'all for Lily' as well.

I don't understand this, could you clarify? Why should Harry name his son after Snape for Lily? It was Snape who was holding a torch for her; Harry never got it from his mother that she wanted something to be done for Snape; there isn't any information to say that she valued everything Snape had done for Harry and wished to repay it so IMO.

I felt Harry had named his son after Snape because he wanted to name his son after his two great protectors for whom he had some affection, caring, respect and wished to honour them and their sacrifice, just like he named his first son after his father and Sirius who had sacrificed their lives for him and his daughter after Lily who died to protect him. These five people died for his sake and I think this was Harry's way of honouring that sacrifice.

Even if he did not know his parents, he may have loved them, but I think he did not name his kids after them because they were dead, he named them after those people all of them who sacrificed their lives for him in one way or another.

In Snape's and Dumbledore's case I think Harry also realised that they not only sacrificed their lives for him, but did many, many things to help him win the war.

I also think Harry may have been aware that Lily was able to make her death a sacrifice because of Snape's requests, because he saw into Voldemort's mind the scene of his parents' deaths which must have told him that Voldemort was intending to spare Lily before he went upstairs and Harry may very well have connected it to Snape's plea to Voldemort to spare Lily IMO.

From the Snape's Death V2 in the Stone Forum



I don't understand this, could you clarify? Why should Harry name his son after Snape for Lily? It was Snape who was holding a torch for her; Harry never got it from his mother that she wanted something to be done for Snape; there isn't any information to say that she valued everything Snape had done for Harry and wished to repay it so IMO.

I felt Harry had named his son after Snape because he wanted to name his son after his two great protectors for whom he had some affection, caring, respect and wished to honour them and their sacrifice, just like he named his first son after his father and Sirius who had sacrificed their lives for him and his daughter after Lily who died to protect him. These five people died for his sake and I think this was Harry's way of honouring that sacrifice.

Even if he did not know his parents, he may have loved them, but I think he did not name his kids after them because they were dead, he named them after those people all of them who sacrificed their lives for him in one way or another.

In Snape's and Dumbledore's case I think Harry also realised that they not only sacrificed their lives for him, but did many, many things to help him win the war.

I also think Harry may have been aware that Lily was able to make her death a sacrifice because of Snape's requests, because he saw into Voldemort's mind the scene of his parents' deaths which must have told him that Voldemort was intending to spare Lily before he went upstairs and Harry may very well have connected it to Snape's plea to Voldemort to spare Lily IMO.

Because, imo, I feel he found his mother within himself, just as he had his dad, which is possible in the world of magic and something Dumbledore was attempting to help him understand early on. As a result, he knew them on a more intimate basis than what we think of in terms of knowing people who die when we (muggles in general) are babies and we don't recall them or remember them very well. As we saw, there were means of connection albeit they could never return to him physically. He loved them very much as the people he came to know, via the connections, but mostly through himself - despite his lack of memory and time with them. That deep love is what I was referring to.

I'll try to explain better. :lol:. I agree that Harry was aware his mother would not appreciate the way that Snape mistreated him and belittled his dad comparatively before him. However, Harry's love for his parents and his deep appreciation for their sacrifice, was something special to him. As such, Harry wished to honor the fact that Snape had the intent to honor Lily's sacrifice so that it would not be in vain. That he did it despite hating Harry and his dad with his dying breath was immaterial, because Harry wasn't basing the honor on Snape's mistreatment, or his behaving in a cruel, disrespectful and bullying manner toward him. I would respectfully disagree that Harry held any affection for Snape in that their relationship from beginning to end was based on hate and deep dislike. I believe Harry matured, let go of his own grudge, forgave Snape for all the negative stuff and as a result neither had feelings of dislike or like for Snape, similar to Lupin. What was left for Harry to consider at that point, was that Snape had bravely spied and was brutally killed doing so in the line of duty, all of which he had done so that Lily's sacrifice would not be not in vain.

Harry also forgave Snape showing imo, dishonor for Lily's sacrifice in his above-described mistreatment of Harry - because I feel he understood Snape was a small man and was incapable of properly honoring his mothers sacrifice in that regard. I see no comparison whatsoever between that honor to Snape and Harry naming his children for his loved ones. There is no comparison, for example, between the deep love and care he felt for Sirius, which was returned in full and the relationship they were able to enjoy on account of that. Readers may vary on the amount of emotion, devotion and importance they feel relative to their families, but Harry was shown to have felt a very deep emotional tie to his mum, dad, and through godfatherships with Sirius and Lupin; his own family in his head. I feel he also had affection for Dumbledore, but not in a family way; more as a mentor. With Snape, the naming was merely to honor Lily, imo.

Imo, Harry did not believe Snape died for his sake; he understood that Snape had been placed in a precarious position due to the Elder Wand, imo, and did not wish to die at the time (he wished to finish his mission). He did not willingly sacrifice himself, but was killed (TEW). While Voldemort was fooled by the Elder Wand plan, Harry disclosed the truth before their battle, rendering the whole Elder Wand plot and Snape being killed for it, pointless, imo.

In any case, I agree that Harry was aware his mother would not appreciate the way that Snape mistreated him and belittled his dad comparatively before him.

Well, it speaks of Lily very poorly if she could not appreciate the work Snape did so that her and James's son could live. I think Lily would appreciate the work Snape did and the way he never spoke of Harry's memories or even the fact he returned Harry's father and Godfather's Map to Harry via Lupin IMO. And she would appreciate the memories Snape gave Harry. I believe she would be more than thankful and hold out her hand in friendship. That would be more like the Lily JKR has been wanting to portray IMO.

...in that their relationship from beginning to end was based on hate and deep dislike.

Yes; their relationship was from begining to end based on deep dislike which was started by Snape and was returned with interest by Harry, but when snape showed his memories, I think Harry realised what Snape's actions were towards him over the years; just like Harry was extremely resentful of Dumbledore all through his fifth year, because of Dumbledore's actions when he was avoiding Harry and when Harry went to the Forest feeling betrayed by Dumbledore; Harry understood, both at the end of his fifth year and after the war, that Dumbledore had reasons to do what he did. In the same way, I think Harry understood Snape after he saw those memories and I think he thought of Snape as he did about Dumbledore, James and Sirius and Lily. Of course Harry loved his parents and Sirius because they were his parents and Godfather, but I think he came to care for Snape as he did for Dumbledore.

Well, it speaks of Lily very poorly if she could not appreciate the work Snape did so that her and James's son could live.

I don't know. Lily herself didn't want to be an exception who was treated like dirt, so I don't think she would want that treatment for her son. I think for Snape it was more about what would make Snape feel better. I don't see him really honoring Lily, until, ironically, he sends her son off to die. Because Lily had things which were important to her, beyond simply reproducing. Parents also teach their children morals, which is something beyond just contributing DNA. Lily's morals were part of herself, too, and until those were honored, I don't think Snape was doing it for Lily herself, but rather for himself and "his" Lily.

I don't agree with this at all. From the time between the opening feast when Snape looks at Harry and their first potions lesson, I don't think Harry spares a single thought towards Snape. He doesn't ever once blames the pain on his scar on Snape. Harry also never thinks about this opening feast scene once. Harry fully realizes by the end of SS/PS that Voldemort is the cause of the pain, and he never blamed it on Snape.
That's not true, exactly. Harry does think of Snape - in fact, he dreams about him on the night of the feast and connects the pain to him, as well as Voldemort's laugh, which is a memory from when his parents died. It's all jumbled up in his mind:

Perhaps Harry had eaten a bit too much, because he had a very strange dream. He was wearing Professor Quirrell's turban, which kept talking to him, telling him he must transfer to Slytherin at once, because it was his destiny. Harry told the turban he didn't want to be in Slytherin; it got heavier and heavier; he tried to pull it off but it tightened painfully -- and there was Malfoy, laughing at him as he struggled with it -then Malfoy turned into the hook-nosed teacher, Snape, whose laugh became high and cold -- there was a burst of green light and Harry woke, sweating and shaking.

Also, there is a running theme of Harry blaming Snape for things throughout that book, as well as others. If you recall, he believes that Snape tried to kill him during the Quidditch match, when really he is trying to save him. And the biggie is that he thinks Snape is stealing the Philosopher's Stone, when really it is Quirrell.

So for one thing after another, Harry blames Snape for things that either Voldemort or Quirrell are doing. In OotP, he blames Snape because his scar hurts worse after Occlumency, and Ron has him convinced that Snape is "softening up his brain," or some nonsense. But obviously the scar hurt worse because of the connection to Voldemort and the visions of the DOM.

It's just part of the running theme that Snape is not Harry's enemy, but Harry lets his prejudice cloud his thoughts about it. Lupin tells him so in HBP, and then backtracks when Snape is thought to be Dumbledore's killer, which he wasn't.

That's not true, exactly. Harry does think of Snape - in fact, he dreams about him on the night of the feast and connects the pain to him, as well as Voldemort's laugh, which is a memory from when his parents died. It's all jumbled up in his mind:

Perhaps Harry had eaten a bit too much, because he had a very strange dream. He was wearing Professor Quirrell's turban, which kept talking to him, telling him he must transfer to Slytherin at once, because it was his destiny. Harry told the turban he didn't want to be in Slytherin; it got heavier and heavier; he tried to pull it off but it tightened painfully -- and there was Malfoy, laughing at him as he struggled with it -then Malfoy turned into the hook-nosed teacher, Snape, whose laugh became high and cold -- there was a burst of green light and Harry woke, sweating and shaking.

Also, there is a running theme of Harry blaming Snape for things throughout that book, as well as others. If you recall, he believes that Snape tried to kill him during the Quidditch match, when really he is trying to save him. And the biggie is that he thinks Snape is stealing the Philosopher's Stone, when really it is Quirrell.

So for one thing after another, Harry blames Snape for things that either Voldemort or Quirrell are doing. In OotP, he blames Snape because his scar hurts worse after Occlumency, and Ron has him convinced that Snape is "softening up his brain," or some nonsense. But obviously the scar hurt worse because of the connection to Voldemort and the visions of the DOM.

It's just part of the running theme that Snape is not Harry's enemy, but Harry lets his prejudice cloud his thoughts about it. Lupin tells him so in HBP, and then backtracks when Snape is thought to be Dumbledore's killer, which he wasn't.

Yes.

There is also the moment in the beginning of HBP when Harry is blaming Snape for Sirius' death- even though he knows it's not entirely logical. All of these examples point back to that very first moment- which was clouded by the presence of Voldemort. None of this is to say- again- that Snape was completely with out his own prejudice and issues in re Harry / James etc. But Harry had prejudice as well- in that first moment- which was amplified by Snape's behavior- that he carried on throughout his school years.

IMO there was a definite two ways street here. Harry's vision of Snape was clouded from the start- and Snape's behavior -every time he went off on someone in class- or snipped at Harry- amplified those prejudices.
Snape had a prejudice against Harry from the start- and every time Harry did something similar to James- broke a rule (threw a firecracker) - lied to him- etc- Harry amplified Snape's predjudices.

JKR did this to make a point. There is a symmetry here. To deny it dismisses a great element in this story.

There is also the moment in the beginning of HBP when Harry is blaming Snape for Sirius' death- even though he knows it's not entirely logical. All of these examples point back to that very first moment- which was clouded by the presence of Voldemort. None of this is to say- again- that Snape was completely with out his own prejudice and issues in re Harry / James etc. But Harry had prejudice as well- in that first moment- which was amplified by Snape's behavior- that he carried on throughout his school years.
Yes, exactly. I'm not saying that Snape didn't expect to see Harry a certain way, and to be just like James, because he did. But on the other hand, Harry lives up to his father's reputation with the Troll episode, the prowling around at night, and then going after the Stone. And that's just Book One! :)

Snape had a prejudice against Harry from the start- and every time Harry did something similar to James- broke a rule (threw a firecracker) - lied to him- etc- Harry amplified Snape's predjudices.


I would respectfully disagree that it was when Harry did something similar to James. Harry looked like his father no matter what he was doing; not just playing Quidditch having a laugh, or participated in a hex war with Draco, Crabbe or Goyle, but also when Harry talked, walked, smiled, looked longingly at Cho, or Ginny, Joked with his friends, etc...

Such was Snap'e dementia, imo. That first day set the stage of how Snape was going to behave and nothing changed for 6.5 years, imo.

For Harry, Snape was always sneering, being snide and malicious, cruel, bullying, disrepectful, demeaning, etc., especially with him, but with the other children as well. There is no canon that Snape held grudges with respect to all of them - Snape behaved in this negative fashion because that was his character as written (CoS - The Whomping Willow). He was just worse with Harry because the lad always reminded him of James and Lily's preference for James and that caused his behavior to be fueled with jealousy in addition to dislike, imo.

But the distinction of course was that we are talking a 30 some odd year old man, who is a professor versus a child of 11-16. Snape's responses and actions/behavior were immature, unreasonable and generally irrational for a man his age - worse toward Harry, but also toward all of the children and generally his peers as well, imo.

I would respectfully disagree that it was when Harry did something similar to James.

Such was Snap'e dementia, imo.

For Harry, Snape was always sneering, being snide and malicious, cruel, bullying, disrepectful, demeaning, etc., especially with him, but with the other children as well. There is no canon that Snape held grudges with respect to all of them - Snape behaved in this negative fashion because that was his character as written (CoS - The Whomping Willow). He was just worse with Harry because the lad always reminded him of James and Lily's preference for James and that caused his behavior to be fueled with jealousy in addition to dislike, imo.

But the distinction of course was that we are talking a 30 some odd year old man, who is a professor versus a child of 11-16. Snape's responses and actions/behavior were immature, unreasonable and generally irrational for a man his age - worse toward Harry, but also toward all of the children and generally his peers as well, imo.

So the argument- if I understand you correctly is that Harry's 11 year old observations were more objective? And Snape's observations were - just "dementia". If that is so- I disagree. For one example of how Harry's behavior was objectively categorized as risky by others beside Snape- consider how Lupin chided Harry for sneaking out of the castle in POA while everyone was working overtime to protect Harry. This applies to Snape's perception because this is the first time that Snape brought up Harry's father- in context of this behavior -and Lupin essentially agreed with Snape's assessment.

In respect to how Snape behaved as an adult- I agree that he was at times petulant and I can see how someone argues an adult should know better, but there are also examples of times wherein Snape showed great restraint . For the most part he was all hot air, critical, catty, whatever- but Snape behaved in the best way to serve the interests of his role while still keeping Harry safe.

I do think Snape was heroic; I can think of a few noble things he did; he stepped away from Lily and respected her wishes to be with James and marry him. That was noble; he did not try to break their relationship. Snape was noble in keeping to himself what he saw in Harry's memories IMO.
TGW.

I copied this from the Snape's death thread, because this is something I think should be answered. Between the conversation between Lily and Snape where Lily ends her friendship with Snape and the scene where Snape approaches Dumbledore on the hillside we have no real idea what occurred between Lily and Snape. We have Sirius and Lupin talking about how Snape hexed James at every opportunity in 7th year, the year James and Lily started dating but they do not mention Lily at all except to say she would not date Jame till his head shrunk. Now it could be that Snape bowed out gracefully or it could be he hung around Lily like the spectre at the feast, we don't know either way and that is that, IMO. I also think that Harry's memories would have been hard for him to broadcast. What was he going to tell LV, he seen them when he was teaching Harry how to close his mind to said LV? Impractical, I think.

So the argument- if I understand you correctly is that Harry's 11 year old observations were more objective? And Snape's observations were - just "dementia". If that is so- I disagree. For one example of how Harry's behavior was objectively categorized as risky by others beside Snape- consider how Lupin chided Harry for sneaking out of the castle in POA while everyone was working overtime to protect Harry. This applies to Snape's perception because this is the first time that Snape brought up Harry's father- in context of this behavior -and Lupin essentially agreed with Snape's assessment.

I was speaking solely in terms of Snape's seeing Harry looking like James and allowing his dislike and jealousy bubble up to fuel his behavior, actions and words when he interacted with Harry. It did not matter what Harry was doing, imo, hence the dementia.

I never said that Snape's perception of Harry's actions was always incorrect, although it was at times. The very same applies to James though; sometimes his perceptions of his old enemy were correct, sometimes he was wrong. But Snape behaved and spoke as if he was always right, whether he was speaking about facts, perceptions, guesses, opinions or estimations. In addition, he knew when he spoke that his words would be either truthful, half truthful or out and out lies, depending on which of those previous factors he was using to base his statements on. But he did not qualify anything - for Harry anyway, he spoke as if everything he said was a truthful fact.

I don't feel Harry's viewpoints were objective. However his reporting was, it has to be or we would have no story. To ensure we understood this, JKR generally backed up his reporting by others making similar "reporting" remarks to him or the world at large. This includes Snape. For example, did he have curtains of Greasy hair as Harry observed? Well Sirius remarked about his greasy hair, Ron remarked about it, the Twins remarked about it on public radio. A second example; was Harry correct in that Snape bullied the children? Well, Snape was Neville's greatest fear, the twins remarked about hating his treatment, Ron did, etc. So we have observations or reports, that are verified and that we know are correct.

In respect to how Snape behaved as an adult- I agree that he was at times petulant and I can see how someone argues an adult should know better, but there are also examples of times wherein Snape showed great restraint . For the most part he was all hot air, critical, catty, whatever- but Snape behaved in the best way to serve the interests of his role while still keeping Harry safe.

Well I was not referring to his petulance. I was referring to his behaving in a cruel, malicious, bullying and ill-timed sarcastic manner, and his comments spoken in a humiliating, belittling and derogatory/demeaning manner to Harry and the children. I feel speaking to, and behaving toward innocent children in that way is an unreasonable, irrational and wrongful. I believe it is also inappropriate to speak that way to your peers, but it doesn't carry the same weight because they are adults as well and Snape had no authority over them. So for example, his words to Tonks which sent her running away crying in HBP were horrible, imo - but his doing the same to Hermione was not only horrible, but also inappropriate and something he should have been gravely sanctioned for, in my judgment. I felt Snape got away with murder in cases of that sort - with no sanction of any type. The only return he got was the hatred of 3/4 of the student body and that was small and insignificant because Snape could not care less about that, imo.

I feel Snape behaved gleefully, setting out to hurt those children in the worst way possible - because I feel he picked out their sore spots and rubbed salt in their wounds; and the canon recounts him sneering, smiling maliciously and behaving in other ways I felt indicated he was thoroughly enjoying himself while doing it. I don't feel Snape's 'unrequited love' that supported his spying, excused his behaving that way toward the children, because to me, there was no material, legitimate relation between his efforts for Dumbledore and his treatment of the children. His showing restraint here or there also does absolutely nothing for me because 90% of the time, he showed none at all, imo (and I feel that is a very conservative estimate.)

I don't feel we can hold Snape to the standard of a child; he was in his mid to late thirties while behaving in this manner. Harry on the other hand can be held to the standard of a child; a very young one for the first several years, imo.

In respect to how Snape behaved as an adult- I agree that he was at times petulant and I can see how someone argues an adult should know better, but there are also examples of times wherein Snape showed great restraint . For the most part he was all hot air, critical, catty, whatever- but Snape behaved in the best way to serve the interests of his role while still keeping Harry safe.

I disagree that Snape behaved in the best way to serve his role of keeping Harry safe. Snape didn't have to make his role of keeping Harry safe an emotional one, but he did anyways. Before we knew why he was keeping Harry safe, before we even knew he was keeping Harry safe, he was snide, judgemental, and unfair to Harry, which most people credit his dislike of James being the reason for this. But did this help Snape keep Harry safe in any way? I fail to see how. I am not here to say the bad things Snape has done to Harry outweigh the good things he has done for Harry. I am just pointing out the unnecesarry things Snape has done that don't make Harry's life any better, but only serve to make Snape feel better.

Snape's constant docking of points and biasism towards Slytherin and taunting of Harry's (and other students, such as Ron and Neville) academic preformance is horrible as a teacher. But as is, he is being a teacher, albeit, a really bad one. But where does Snape come off delivering malicious comments to Harry as a person, and to other people as well? All it seems to do is give Harry a reason to dislike him. Is Harry disliking Snape make Snape's job to keep Harry safe easier? It seems to do quite the opposite. Harry seemed to land in more trouble because of his dislike of Snape because it made Harry never take Snape into consideration.

Brave, though, is different than heroic. Heroism usually is connected with noble qualities as well, and personally I don't see any noble qualities in Snape.

Well, being willing to sacrifice everything for love is generally considered a noble quality.

I respect your view, I would disagree because that contention includes people like Bella, Merope and Snape and I don't think their loyalty to their emotions showed a noble quality. I think it is applicable at times, just not always.

Look. Snape is not a nice guy. He hates Harry - because Harry reminds him of James Potter, his bitter enemy, who tormented Snape for seven years and who took the woman Snape loved. But Snape is willing to do anything for Lily Evans - including forgo the rest of his life, spending it instead protecting her son (the son of Snape's bitterest enemy, with most of the blame going on James Potter) and fighting to defeat the most evil dark wizard in history. And he does so knowing that everybody on the side of the good except Dumbledore hates him. And even then - knowing that Dumbledore is dying, he very reluctantly agrees to spare Albus an even worse fate, and agrees to get even deeper into Voldemort's clutches.

I believe you are speaking from Snape's point of view (based on your post in the other thread). I think he did think along those terms, but I would disagree that his viewpoint served as a justification or excuse for his behavior, words or actions because, imo, he had 20 + years to think these issues out clearly and frame them correctly in his mind.

That is, I feel during that time he could recall his personally behaving in a tormenting manner in his youthful battles; acknowledge that no one took Lily from him because she was never his; acknowledge Dumbledore spared him a life in Azkaban and find gratefulness in the fact that he was allowed him to remain a free man and finally, accept that he had a real choice in agreeing to kill Dumbledore - that was something he could not be forced to do. Once he'd agreed to do the killing, he should have accepted it as a truly good thing and not something he should later feel so overcome about that it could lead to emotions of anger and vindictiveness.

To me, it is a matter of excepting the 'big picture' (greater good) or not and living up to one's conclusions in that regard which I felt Snape was not able to do. Because I feel the greater good does not justify criminal behavior or manipulation, I think it was good that Snape could not fully accept it on Dumbledore's terms, but I think he struggled to do so, which was the problem. I feel he should have lived up to his own beliefs in that regard rather than trying to model his beliefs after Dumbledore relative to the greater good, because it caused him further trauma to do so, something I don't think he was ever able to come to terms with.

He was not a good human being, given his wounds. But he was heroic anyway, because despite his many flaws, he gave his life to fight evil. And there was no character who sacrificed more.

Well I feel that is something personal everyone has to reach a conclusion about and I respect your view. I didn't feel Snape behaved in a manner that supported his being deemed a hero. But as I mentioned, I feel dying in the line of duty is admirable.

In Snape's and Dumbledore's case I think Harry also realised that they not only sacrificed their lives for him, but did many, many things to help him win the war. I disagree that either sacrificed their live for Harry. That would mean that they could have lived but for him (as Lily could), they both fought Voldemort, they were on Harry's side and died in the fight but not directly for Harry. Dumbledore was dieing because he put on the ring, and was killed by Snape to protect Draco and the Elder Wand. Snape was killed by Voldemort because of the wand. But for Lily and Harry Snape would probably never have changed sides but that hardly qualifies as sacrificing himself for Harry IMO.

IMO Harry didn't name his son Severus for Lily's sake. Harry had finally understood Snape, 'how brave he had been, how much he had suffered' (I know that's a quote about Sirius ;) ), and it didn't matter anymore how much he had mistreated Harry. He hadn't done any lasting harm to Harry (though his treatment may well have done and I think there are probably other students who did recive lasting psychological damag by Snape), and it didn't matter any more who had started their feud. IMO Harry would never love Snape as he did his parents, Sirius, Lupin and Dumbledore, but he felt a deep respect for him.

I copied this from the Snape's death thread, because this is something I think should be answered. Between the conversation between Lily and Snape where Lily ends her friendship with Snape and the scene where Snape approaches Dumbledore on the hillside we have no real idea what occurred between Lily and Snape.

I don't think anything happened, if Snape had been trying to patch up with Lily; I think we would have known about it through Dumbledore in KC or at least had a hint in TPT chapter. I don't think Snape and Lily interacted after the SWM.

We have Sirius and Lupin talking about how Snape hexed James at every opportunity in 7th year, the year James and Lily started dating but they do not mention Lily at all except to say she would not date Jame till his head shrunk.

They also say that Lily never knew about it IMO.

We have Snape saying that the Marauders always attacked 4 on 1 and we have Sirius and Remus say that in 7th year Snape used to hex James and that he had to defend himself IMO.

I think Snape probably hexed James in 7th year, because he probably got James alone on his Head Boy duties. This is only my guess and I have no canon for this. But that was not a good idea for Snape IMO, because James and his friends may have attacked back later, apart from the fight with James IMO.

Snape is too bitter about the battles he fought and lost with the marauders. If he had won any hex war, I feel he would not have felt so bitter and may have felt vindicated. I think the bitterness came because he lost, always.

What was he going to tell LV, he seen them when he was teaching Harry how to close his mind to said LV? Impractical, I think.

I think he would not have told anything then; but would have claimed credit later, perhaps after Sirius's death that he was asked to teach Occlumency and he did not do his job properly, thus helping Voldemort, just like he told Bellatrix that he was responsible for Sirius's and Vance's deaths IMO.

But he could have also told Voldemort that Dumbledore had asked him to teach harry Occlumency, and branch off into saying that 1) Harry was incompetent and he would never learn and all that 2) He was trying to see into Harry's head for any information Dumbledore may have told Harry, but there was nothing IMO.

What Snape had to do was to make Voldemort believe he was not helping Harry and that his loyalties were only with Voldemort. To that effect, I think Snape would have said something.

I disagree that either sacrificed their live for Harry. That would mean that they could have lived but for him (as Lily could), they both fought Voldemort, they were on Harry's side and died in the fight but not directly for Harry.

I thought so because of the way they died. Dumbledore was dying, but he chose to die in such a way that he would give Voldemort his wand to fight against Harry in the Final Battle. That result, though would come in steps and would also involve the death of another man, Snape IMO.

The EW was the ineffective weapon Dumbledore wanted Voldemort to wield and for that both his death and Snape's were planned IMO.

If Dumbledore was not dying already, though, he may have enacted a "death scene"; but even then Snape would have died IMO.

Dumbledore and Snape died for the Light in war, no doubt, but they also died specifically for Harry; for a particular purpose IMO.

That was why I said both died for Harry.

But for Lily and Harry Snape would probably never have changed sides but that hardly qualifies as sacrificing himself for Harry IMO.

But he changed sides. Which means that Snape had the potential to do so. So even if it had not been Lily, Snape could have still changed sides; perhaps not then, but we can't say that he would have never changed sides IMO.

IMO Harry didn't name his son Severus for Lily's sake. Harry had finally understood Snape, 'how brave he had been, how much he had suffered' (I know that's a quote about Sirius ;) ), and it didn't matter anymore how much he had mistreated Harry.

I completely agree. I also think Harry never named his son for Lily.

They also say that Lily never knew about it IMO.

Actually, 'Much about it' were the exact words. But I think that says more about James that Snape because James likely kept it from her so that she would not be depressed over the fact that her old friend was attacking her new boyfriend. So Lily only found out about those attacks she saw or heard about through the grapevine, imo.

Snape is too bitter about the battles he fought and lost with the marauders. If he had won any hex war, I feel he would not have felt so bitter and may have felt vindicated. I think the bitterness came because he lost, always.

I don't feel that could be true or Sirius wouldn't have had old emotional scars that never healed with respect to Snape. I think it was just a bitter hex fued from childhood that neither Sirius nor Snape could let go of. Sirius because he'd been in Azkaban and had no life to embrace otherwise, and Snape because his character was such that he held tightly onto grudges, imo.

What Snape had to do was to make Voldemort believe he was not helping Harry and that his loyalties were only with Voldemort. To that effect, I think Snape would have said something.

I agree, or perhaps he took that memory out of his head also - at least then it would be hard for Voldemort to see like the other sensitive ones. I am sure that many of his talks with Dumbledore also had to be removed for that reason.

I thought so because of the way they died. Dumbledore was dying, but he chose to die in such a way that he would give Voldemort his wand to fight against Harry in the Final Battle. That result, though would come in steps and would also involve the death of another man, Snape IMO.

I respect your view; but I think Dumbledore's main purpose in choosing to die the way he did was to best foil Voldmort's plans, whatever they ended up being (with Dumbledore gone, Voldemort's greatest fear was also gone as he feared only Dumbledore). I agree with you though, that he knew Snape would be a part of that if and when Voldemort located the Elder Wand. But I don't feel that was for Harry, but rather to defeat Voldemort, because even if Harry died (which Dumbledore was pretty sure he wouldn't, but there was a chance he would), Voldemort would still be defeatable with a defunct wand.

The EW was the ineffective weapon Dumbledore wanted Voldemort to wield and for that both his death and Snape's were planned IMO.

I used to toy with that idea; but I think it was more of a contingency plan rather than an out and out plan in which he was 100% certain Snape would die. Snape didn't know anything about all of that until right before he died, but I do think Snape could appreciate that his death might enable Voldemort to falsely believe he could not be defeated (once Harry had died). But since Snape thought 100% Harry would die, I don't feel his decisions or thinking could rest on the idea that he felt he was doing it for Harry. I think that like Dumbledore, Snape believed he was doing it to ensure Voldemort's death.

Dumbledore and Snape died for the Light in war, no doubt, but they also died specifically for Harry; for a particular purpose IMO.

I don't understand what you mean specifically for Harry. Snape thought Harry was going to die - be killed by Voldemort. How could he also believe that his death would help Harry in any way?

But he changed sides. Which means that Snape had the potential to do so. So even if it had not been Lily, Snape could have still changed sides; perhaps not then, but we can't say that he would have never changed sides IMO.

Well JKR said that he would have remained a Death Eater if Lily had not been threatened. But more importantly, what incentive would Snape have had to change sides? Voldemort was winning the war and it looked like he was going to prevail. Snape would have gotten all the power he had wanted (the reason he joined in the first place). So it seems to me that if Lily had not been threatened, Snape would have remained a Death Eater because he had no incentive to join the losing side, imo. Also because the Death Eater mentality was more in line with his character and thinking at that time. Even when he went to the hill, he was ready to allow James and Harry to die if Lily could just be saved, so there was no sudden change in Snape, imo, it was simply that he wished to save Lily if possible, imo.

I completely agree. I also think Harry never named his son for Lily.

I will answer in Harry's thread, which really needs dusting off anyway. ;)

Well JKR said that he would have remained a Death Eater if Lily had not been threatened.

While I confess that I may be wrong I believe she said something more akin to Snape probably would not have left the DE - which is not really the same thing :)

But more importantly, what incentive would Snape have had to change sides? Voldemort was winning the war and it looked like he was going to prevail. Snape would have gotten all the power he had wanted (the reason he joined in the first place).

Well power wasn't the only reason he joined but it was one of the major reasons I grant you. :)

I will also conceed that there don't seem to be many reasons for anyone to leave the DE at that time but in the end we have no conclucive answers on this, even JKR hasn't given any on this point as I recall. In the end though people don't always stay in a group just because its winning - if they did history would be very different wouldn't it? :)

Even when he went to the hill, he was ready to allow James and Harry to die if Lily could just be saved, so there was no sudden change in Snape, imo, it was simply that he wished to save Lily if possible, imo.

I've always had a problem with the way Snape is looked down on (even by Dumbledore) because he din't care about a stranger and someone with whom he had a mutual dislike/hatred. Now I'm not saying that it makes him a fluffy person but if a wagon load of people are being taken away to die who would you be cheading tears about or trying to save - a complete stranger, someone who made your life misserable or a friend who had been kind to you when you most needed it?

Even now we can look back on massive loss of life that has happened in the past (recent or otherwise) and if we have a personal conection to it, if someone who touched out lives was involved we often feel more strongly about it, and normally about how that particular person was affected by it. I don't think that is strange or ever wrong - just human nature.

[QUOTE=The_Green_Woods;5194124]I don't think anything happened, if Snape had been trying to patch up with Lily; I think we would have known about it through Dumbledore in KC or at least had a hint in TPT chapter. I don't think Snape and Lily interacted after the SWM.

We have Snape saying that the Marauders always attacked 4 on 1 and we have Sirius and Remus say that in 7th year Snape used to hex James and that he had to defend himself IMO. QUOTE]

I appreciate what you are saying here, but I don't think Snape's behaviour, as you describe above could be called 'heroic'. It could be argued that Snape simply did not have the moral courage to approach Lily again after she told him to sling his hook and as time went by it just got harder for him to see her. Hardly bowing out gracefully because in 7th year when she does start to go out with James he starts hexing James every chance he got. Maybe James deserved it, maybe he didn't, but two wrongs never made one right in the whole history of the world. I believe Snape did act bravely during the second war, but I also believe when he was 15 - 17 he was a nasty piece of work. There was nothing noble about him, that's what makes his redemption and his juorney to the light work.

Let's keep in mind that the only statement that Snape was hexing James "every chance he got" was from Sirius Black - who is hardly unbiased and he said this at a time that he was defending James bullying during SWM to Harry. IMO This statement always sounded like an childish exaggeration to me from a bitter rival who was trying to put his old friend's own bullying behavior in a better light.

While I confess that I may be wrong I believe she said something more akin to Snape probably would not have left the DE - which is not really the same thing :)

Not at all. It is one thing to decide being a DE was a mistake, and another to actually leave what has been (pretty darned accurately) described as a lifetime of servitude or death in the books. Lily was reason enough for Snape to take this second step.

I think it would be enormously helpful if people who want to discuss Snape in light of Rowling's interview comments, posted them verbatim and or posted links to the relevant comments. I have often found that such comments mean different things to me than to others (who naturally, when paraphrasing, paraphrase them in ways that match THEIR understanding).

I will also conceed that there don't seem to be many reasons for anyone to leave the DE at that time but in the end we have no conclucive answers on this, even JKR hasn't given any on this point as I recall.

She just gives examples. Snape leaves because of Lily, Regulus because of Voldemort's callousness to Kreacher, Draco would like to leave (my interpretation) because he is not a murderer at heart buit his parents are hostages, Karkaroff turned as a result of his capture by the Ministry, etc.

Let's keep in mind that the only statement that Snape was hexing James "every chance he got" was from Sirius Black - who is hardly unbiased and he said this at a time that he was defending James bullying during SWM to Harry. IMO This statement always sounded like an childish exaggeration to me from a bitter rival who was trying to put his old friend's own bullying behavior in a better light.

Yes, in particular, Lily does not criticize Sev for such behavior even when he brings James up. And James fails to use this as a defense for his (in Lily's view) inexcusable behavior. I suspect Sirius was at best exaggerating, or else describing a state of affairs that developed in their NEWT years.

While I confess that I may be wrong I believe she said something more akin to Snape probably would not have left the DE - which is not really the same thing :)

I would interpret "Snape would not have left" the same way. :)

I will also conceed that there don't seem to be many reasons for anyone to leave the DE at that time but in the end we have no conclucive answers on this, even JKR hasn't given any on this point as I recall. In the end though people don't always stay in a group just because its winning - if they did history would be very different wouldn't it? :)

Agreed and I respect your view, I was simply providing two reasons to support my view.

I've always had a problem with the way Snape is looked down on (even by Dumbledore) because he din't care about a stranger and someone with whom he had a mutual dislike/hatred. Now I'm not saying that it makes him a fluffy person but if a wagon load of people are being taken away to die who would you be cheading tears about or trying to save - a complete stranger, someone who made your life misserable or a friend who had been kind to you when you most needed it?

Even now we can look back on massive loss of life that has happened in the past (recent or otherwise) and if we have a personal conection to it, if someone who touched out lives was involved we often feel more strongly about it, and normally about how that particular person was affected by it. I don't think that is strange or ever wrong - just human nature.

Well we would have to agree to disagree on that point. I simply would not react in the way Snape did or in the way you indicate that "we" would. I am not sure who you mean by "we", but it does not include me because I would never ask for the life of only my relative or friend to be saved and disregard the possible death of someone I disliked or called an enemy when I was 15 (and then being 21).

To be honest, while I agree everyone can interpret the text distinctly, my interpretation of this particular part (Snape being told by Dumbledore that he disgusted him and Snape's subsequent silence followed by, imo, a reluctant consession to include the male Potters) was that Snape was not negligently disregarding them, but rather doing so willfully. So I don't feel your example covers Snape in any case (per my interpretation).

Let's keep in mind that the only statement that Snape was hexing James "every chance he got" was from Sirius Black - who is hardly unbiased and he said this at a time that he was defending James bullying during SWM to Harry. IMO This statement always sounded like an childish exaggeration to me from a bitter rival who was trying to put his old friend's own bullying behavior in a better light.

Actually it was from Remus Lupin, who was speaking in an unbiased manner, imo, and I felt he was the one to say it so that it would be more credible (considering he was the one who admitted he'd been wrong not to intervene and had not been doing any defending to that point.) I interpreted it not only as entirely true, based on the source, but also as part of the evidence that Snape continued to have emotions for Lily.

I respect your interpretation of Black's comments; but how was his calling James (and himself) arrogant berks and idiots and admitting that Harry's dad made a fool of himself whenever Lily was about, a defense?

I think it would be enormously helpful if people who want to discuss Snape in light of Rowling's interview comments, posted them verbatim and or posted links to the relevant comments. I have often found that such comments mean different things to me than to others (who naturally, when paraphrasing, paraphrase them in ways that match THEIR understanding).

Perhaps in addition to quoting JKR we should take to quoting the books...

Yes, in particular, Lily does not criticize Sev for such behavior even when he brings James up.

Lily and Snape spoke two years prior to Snape's hexing at every opportunity, so that is why she would not bring it up. I feel Prior to that they were all doing it and Lupin was attempting to distinguish. That is because by 7th, James' head shrunk, which he'd just stated, but in continuing honesty admitted that James didn't take it lying down when Snape hexed him at every opportunity. That was my interpretation anyway.

Let's keep in mind that the only statement that Snape was hexing James "every chance he got" was from Sirius Black - who is hardly unbiased and he said this at a time that he was defending James bullying during SWM to Harry. IMO This statement always sounded like an childish exaggeration to me from a bitter rival who was trying to put his old friend's own bullying behavior in a better light.

The statement is canon, taken from the books, therefore I feel it is directed to me the reader by JKR the author. If information is in a book and not contradicted by later information then that information must be read as fact. Sirius is JKR's cfeation, he speaks what she has written, she has written those words for a purpose. As Comic Book Worm said in an earlier post Sirius tells no one anything, the author is telling the reader. The reader can interpret the text, but cannot change it.

But by that logic, Snape really did find Sectumsempra elsewhere and copied it down. Even though when Harry suggested it, he was obviously desperate for an excuse. Context behind a quote matters.

But I'm still confused. Sirius does say Severus "never lost an opportunity" to hex James in 7th year (one of the few things from him re Snape I can buy :lol:), but he doesn't say anything about him hexing James "every chance he got". Sirius doesn't really allude to any mutual hexing before 7th year. :huh: Are we talking about 7th year? Or have I forgotten something? :hmm:

But by that logic, Snape really did find Sectumsempra elsewhere and copied it down. Even though when Harry suggested it, he was obviously desperate for an excuse. Context behind a quote matters.

I don't understand your argument, sorry. Harry is speculating about events he doesn't have full knowledge of, trying to come up with a scenario that fits, but Lupin and Sirius are talking about things they have full knowledge of. Or is that your point, that Lupin and Sirius do know what they are talking about? The way the post is worded really confuses me to what you are stating :hmm:.

I don't understand your argument, sorry. Harry is speculating about events he doesn't have full knowledge of, trying to come up with a scenario that fits, but Lupin and Sirius are talking about things they have full knowledge of. Or is that your point, that Lupin and Sirius do know what they are talking about? The way the post is worded really confuses me to what you are stating :hmm:.

Sorry about that. :blush:
I suppose the situations aren't as comparable. I was basically pointing out that it's not wise to take what Sirius, Snape, Lupin, Harry, etc. say at face value unless there's something to back it up-- especially if it's something they're emotional about in one way or another. JKR claims to use a couple characters to get information across, but Sirius isn't one. He won't lie to Harry (he loves the kid) but JKR has used his biases before for some misdirection, as she did in GoF.


Since I don't know what quote we're talking about, though, I can't exactly give my evaluation of it. >_<
If we are talking about 7th year, we have the fact that Lily went out with James that year to back up Sirius' statement...even if he doesn't know why it backs it up. :p But if we're talking about something else, I'm lost. Context....:yuhup:

Sorry about that. :blush:
I suppose the situations aren't as comparable. I was basically pointing out that it's not wise to take what Sirius, Snape, Lupin, Harry, etc. say at face value unless there's something to back it up-- especially if it's something they're emotional about in one way or another. JKR claims to use a couple characters to get information across, but Sirius isn't one. He won't lie to Harry (he loves the kid) but JKR has used his biases before for some misdirection, as she did in GoF.

Okay :) Thank you for clarifying!

Personally, I don't think I can assume everything a character says is a lie (okay, I know that sounds like a hyperbolic exaggeration of your position, for which I appologize. I could probably think of a better way to phrase this but my mind is going blank sorry) unless backed up by collaborating evidence. Rather I think the character is telling the truth unless there is evidence that suggests what they are saying is not quite fitting with reality.

I think eliza101's point is a good one. If something isn't true, there will be evidence to contradict the statement.

Okay :) Thank you for clarifying!

Personally, I don't think I can assume everything a character says is a lie (okay, I know that sounds like a hyperbolic exaggeration of your position, for which I appologize. I could probably think of a better way to phrase this but my mind is going blank sorry) unless backed up by collaborating evidence. Rather I think the character is telling the truth unless there is evidence that suggests what they are saying is not quite fitting with reality.

I think eliza101's point is a good one. If something isn't true, there will be evidence to contradict the statement.


I also, like ignisia, have no idea what quote people are talking about.

The evidence that Snape did not always attack James abounds. We have three scenes in the books where they conflict as schoolboys, and in all three cases a Marauder is the aggressor. (The train, the "prank", the "worst memory"). Lupin's expression of regret to Harry after Harry sees the worst memopry in OotP also supports my view, as I see it. It is clear from DH that he has no problem advocating forceful methods for defense (see his lecture to Harry after 7 Potters). So if he has regrets about his and his friends behavior in school, it must be because he lacks this justification for it.

Sorry about the mis-quote- I was quoting another user- Who was paraphrasing - I thought. So well - Yeah, we should consult the text. I should not have used quotation marks.

I stand by my general point that we can not assume that a single character's comments are necessarily absolute truth. JKR did a good job of misdirecting readers by using the character's own biases. We see a point of misdirection from almost every single character in the book .

Snape, IMO, is one of the most misunderstood characters in the series -he was meant to be. It follows that anything and everything Snape says in the series if often doubted or perceived in a negative light. JKR intentionally wrote him to be misunderstood by the community of Harry's world and judgments made about him by the characters of that community need to be taken with a grain of salt.

I always thought it was interesting to hear the accusations made against Snape in context of Sirius Black- a man whom the community wrongfully labeled a mad man and a murderer for 13 years. It seems to me JKR was setting up a point of comparison and contrast between these two that says something about community Judgments and double standards.

Yes, Snape was a DeathEater and yes he did bad things- but this does not meant that everything ever said about him in a negative light is true.

I stand by my general point that we can not assume that a single character's comments are necessarily absolute truth. JKR did a good job of misdirecting readers by using the character's own biases. We see a point of misdirection from almost every single character in the book .

I don't think I agree with this, but I can only speak for my own experiences. If the character wears their bias on their sleeve, I'm not misdirected at all. Their assumptions are not mine. If the character is speaking of something of which they have direct knowledge, like saying "I saw Johny buying milk," then its probably the truth. If they say that "Johny wanted the milk so he could drown the cat in it", then that obviously is an opinion. Take the assignment of motive with a grain of salt, but not the actions, unless you have evidence that the actions they report aren't really what happened.

I, personally, am not feeling misdirected about Snape.

I also, like ignisia, have no idea what quote people are talking about.

The evidence that Snape did not always attack James abounds. We have three scenes in the books where they conflict as schoolboys, and in all three cases a Marauder is the aggressor. (The train, the "prank", the "worst memory"). Lupin's expression of regret to Harry after Harry sees the worst memopry in OotP also supports my view, as I see it. It is clear from DH that he has no problem advocating forceful methods for defense (see his lecture to Harry after 7 Potters). So if he has regrets about his and his friends behavior in school, it must be because he lacks this justification for it.

It was the quote where Lupin indicated that Snape hexed James at every opportunity and James didn't take it lying down (OOTP, Careers Advice - paraphrase). The original contention was just the opposite, that Snape never attacked - so that was used to prove he actually had (in case anyone missed his in canon attack in SWM - absolutely provoked, but an attack nonetheless). Too, we have canon Snape labeled the Sectumsempra curse 'for enemies' and we know who they were and we know the only living one reported that it was known to him to have been Snape's specialty.

So that together with the evidence you provided, however anyone wants to interpret it, shows they were all enemies and had hex wars. :rotfl:. I agree Lupin felt that some of his and his friends were unjustified, not all, but some and I feel he was being pretty even handed when discussing it. So I think I agree.

We have three scenes in the books where they conflict as schoolboys, and in all three cases a Marauder is the aggressor. (The train, the "prank", the "worst memory").On the train to Hogwarts that first time none of the boys were 'the Marauder's, as that's a designation for their latter friendship {from 5th year onward}. Too, on the train, Snape offered the first deliberate insult -- not James -- and things progressed from there.

Sorry about the mis-quote- I was quoting another user- Who was paraphrasing - I thought. So well - Yeah, we should consult the text. I should not have used quotation marks.

No big deal. ;)

I stand by my general point that we can not assume that a single character's comments are necessarily absolute truth. JKR did a good job of misdirecting readers by using the character's own biases. We see a point of misdirection from almost every single character in the book .

I agree and I feel JKR was careful, especially with these three people, to show us the basic truth in the end. We know Snape was biased and that James wasn't the cookie monster, but had good traits Snape wasn't going to mention. We know Sirius was biased and Snape wasn't a death droid at school, but also had some good traits and we know little about Sirius because no one seemed to care to elaborate - except Sirius, who called himself a berk and an idiot. :lol:. Kidding, we have reports that he was intelligent and also had a number of good traits. So I don't think that most would overestimate the biases, although some may.

Snape, IMO, is one of the most misunderstood characters in the series -he was meant to be. It follows that anything and everything Snape says in the series if often doubted or perceived in a negative light. JKR intentionally wrote him to be misunderstood by the community of Harry's world and judgments made about him by the characters of that community need to be taken with a grain of salt.

Right, but you don't have to be a very savvy reader to understand the truth about Snape, because JKR was careful to clear up all evidence that he was actually loyal to Voldemort and ensure the readers understood he was loyal to Dumbledore. And perhaps not 100%, but who was? Not even Harry was, but that Snape was on the good side, I felt was made very clear.

I always thought it was interesting to hear the accusations made against Snape in context of Sirius Black- a man whom the community wrongfully labeled a mad man and a murderer for 13 years. It seems to me JKR was setting up a point of comparison and contrast between these two that says something about community Judgments and double standards.

Like Sirius, the community all thought Snape was a loyal Death Eater after he killed Dumbledore, but that was cleared up. It was for both parties actually for the readers, but not necessarily for the public community in the wizard world.

Yes, Snape was a DeathEater and yes he did bad things- but this does not meant that everything ever said about him in a negative light is true.

Correct, in fact, almost everything said in as far as his being evil was incorrect (the exception being when he was actually a Death Eater). But if you are referring to his personal behavior, words and actions outside of the big "evil versus good" scenario, then I feel Snape's character was presented for us on page to make a judgment about that. I can't call all of the children liars about his treatment of them, because we were shown Snape doing things like behaving in a humiliating and bullying manner with Neville, Hermione, Harry, Ron, etc., directly. It matters not what Harry's opinion was of Snape telling Hermione he saw no difference in her teeth being down to her shoulders and her normal teeth - I can form an opinion of what I think about that myself based solely on the words. So in terms of Snape's personal character, I feel I had more than enough evidence presented to form an opinion of him - just as I had enough evidence to convince me he was on the good side (prior to the revelations in DH).

On the train to Hogwarts that first time none of the boys were 'the Marauder's, as that's a designation for their latter friendship {from 5th year onward}. Too, on the train, Snape offered the first deliberate insult -- not James -- and things progressed from there.

While I agree, I felt like the point of all of those incidents was merely to show they had all been enemies, not to be accusatory, which was why JKR kept trying to provide both sides of the situation, imo. They were all kids and who starts it is unimportant because the other will finish it anyway. :lol:. The exception was James in relation to the werewolf prank; he was uninvolved and his only role was to save Snape's life. So again, the point of these tales was not always to issue blame, but to show they were all enemies and at the same time help us understand a little bit about where they were all at, imo.

And it is important to remember that Harry was learning about these things with us. For instance, his dad's example of saving his enemy may have helped to form his own morality in that regard as he did the same thing in DH. His own experiences taught him he could act hasty and regret it (Sectumsempra) and from there he could better understand his Dad or Sirius having done the same thing which is what he'd heard, but not altogether understood in OOTP - well he understood in HBP! :lol:.

Snape's character was the same to me. I agree with the idea that despite his negative treatment of the kids, they could learn something from it, even if that lesson was 'back-end' - meaning, how not to treat children. But other lessons too, like how to deal with a person like Snape who has power of authority over you and behaves as he did. Snape, I truly feel, came into some of his later beliefs in life, merely from being around and associating as a professor with the other professors and Dumbledore. Lessons by association (demonstration) are invaluable, but often hard to pinpoint, imo.

Too, on the train, Snape offered the first deliberate insult -- not James -- and things progressed from there.I'm sorry but "Who would want to be in SLytherin" (paraphrased) is surely an insult and is certainly meant as one. Not only that but it is directed at someone that James doesn't even know and as such shows that he is already prejudice agaionst Slytherin house. I have said it before and I will say it again: If a child of mine behaved as James did on the Hogwart's Express I would be heartily ashamed of him.

I'm sorry but "Who would want to be in SLytherin" (paraphrased) is surely an insult and is certainly meant as one. Not only that but it is directed at someone that James doesn't even know and as such shows that he is already prejudice agaionst Slytherin house. I have said it before and I will say it again: If a child of mine behaved as James did on the Hogwart's Express I would be heartily ashamed of him.

You are not a parent in the wizard world though and there, the parents who were against Voldemort and knew that many Slytherins (including the dark lord) called it home, taught their children that. The Weasley household held that same philosophy and many of the kids Harry spoke with also. So it wasn't like the kids just decided to hold prejudice sight unseen, that is something they were taught. Snape made a similar remark about Gryffindor, recall, and I would presume he brought that from home as well.

Notwithstanding that, I am not sure if you are insinuating there was any child in that scene you would be proud of, but I would not have been proud of any of them. Since it is Snape's thread, I would make an example by his treatment of Lily and his prejudice view in reference to her sister, the first thing said at all. I would not be proud of that, but based on his background, that type of comment was expected, imo. All of the kids in their own way were pretty much the same, imo.

Whether wizard world parents would take pride in their children adopting their views in that way is unknown, but I don't think we can transfer our non-wizard world view on them legitimately. We don't really have anything applicable in our world (a school with a house that has many from it associated with a gang out committing genocide and their parents recommending it to them and others advising them against being in it.)

[QUOTE=zgirnius;5194869]I also, like ignisia, have no idea what quote people are talking about.


As Wicked says the quote in question is from OOTP, Careers Advice. My point was that what is written in the books is information the author wants us to have. If it is not contradicted in any way ie, misdirection, then it should be taken as fact. That information was never contradicted by the author in any way, therefore it must stand as fact. Snape hexed James during 7th year and the attacks were unprovoked so James retaliated.

When I was checking the books for my facts I reread SWM. Something I have to confess I have not really done in a while. Something caught my eye and I wondered if anyone else had noticed. The scene is OOTP, SWM, Pages 566-569 in the British hardcover edition. The Maurauders are under the tree, Harry is watching them and Snape is on the grass, a little distance from them. The first thing I noticed is that Snape just seems to be ambling along in the same direction as his sworn enemies and that struck me as strange. Why would he just drift along in the same direction as boys who everyone seems to agree bully him? Wouldn't it make more sense to go in the other direction? The next thing that struck me was JKR's phrasing of Snape's reaction to James calling out

'All right, Sivellus?' said James loudly.
Snape reacted so fast it was as though he had been expecting an attack: dropping his bag, he plunged his hand inside his robes and his wand was halfway into the air when James shouted 'expelliarmus!'.

Two thoughts occurred to me. Sirius and Lupin both say that Snape followed them around and this passage could be construed as confirmation of that fact, and the other thing was, was Snape hoping/expecting to provoke an attack? His quick reaction does suggest such a thing. If he did not expect an attack, why did he go in that direction? The text states that he seemed engrossed in his exam paper. I have to ask if that seems really feasible as he had to walk quite a ways and James was playing with the Snitch for quite a while. Could he have been that engrossed all that time? I confess that I think Snape at this time in his life was a DE in the making and I do not think that his reasons for hanging around in the same vicinity as James & company was to wish them well in their exams. I think there is a good chance he was up to no good and got more than he bargained for maybe. The passage did make me think deeply about cause and effect. The first time I read it I was caught up in the behaviour of James and his quite brutal attack on Severus, it was only when I reread it I began to think that perhaps Snape's presence so close to the Maurauders was not quite as random as it first appears.

[QUOTE]


As Wicked says the quote in question is from OOTP, Careers Advice. My point was that what is written in the books is information the author wants us to have. If it is not contradicted in any way ie, misdirection, then it should be taken as fact. That information was never contradicted by the author in any way, therefore it must stand as fact. Snape hexed James during 7th year and the attacks were unprovoked so James retaliated.

When I was checking the books for my facts I reread SWM. Something I have to confess I have not really done in a while. Something caught my eye and I wondered if anyone else had noticed. The scene is OOTP, SWM, Pages 566-569 in the British hardcover edition. The Maurauders are under the tree, Harry is watching them and Snape is on the grass, a little distance from them. The first thing I noticed is that Snape just seems to be ambling along in the same direction as his sworn enemies and that struck me as strange. Why would he just drift along in the same direction as boys who everyone seems to agree bully him? Wouldn't it make more sense to go in the other direction? The next thing that struck me was JKR's phrasing of Snape's reaction to James calling out



Two thoughts occurred to me. Sirius and Lupin both say that Snape followed them around and this passage could be construed as confirmation of that fact, and the other thing was, was Snape hoping/expecting to provoke an attack? His quick reaction does suggest such a thing. If he did not expect an attack, why did he go in that direction? The text states that he seemed engrossed in his exam paper. I have to ask if that seems really feasible as he had to walk quite a ways and James was playing with the Snitch for quite a while. Could he have been that engrossed all that time? I confess that I think Snape at this time in his life was a DE in the making and I do not think that his reasons for hanging around in the same vicinity as James & company was to wish them well in their exams. I think there is a good chance he was up to no good and got more than he bargained for maybe. The passage did make me think deeply about cause and effect. The first time I read it I was caught up in the behaviour of James and his quite brutal attack on Severus, it was only when I reread it I began to think that perhaps Snape's presence so close to the Maurauders was not quite as random as it first appears.

I would have to agree with your interpretation. I wouldn't really call James washing Snape's mouth out a brutal attack (or what would we call Harry's attacking Draco with Sectumsempra? or the twins shoving that kid off in the magical cabinet where he went missing for days? :lol:) But I agree with your reading here and it supports what I have always thought. Snape likely followed with the intent of continue to follow and see if they 'got up to something' he could get them expelled for. He admitted that was his plan, but he was never able to pull it off apparently.

I also agree that unless JKR indicates the last thing we read is incorrect, then it is the correct thing to believe. Snape does have dark eyes, no one ever denied this and it is these kinds of things that are facts. I could assume that was misdirection (Harry saw them as dark for some odd reason when they were actually a startling blue), but that is not how stories are told, imo.

When I was checking the books for my facts I reread SWM. Something I have to confess I have not really done in a while. Something caught my eye and I wondered if anyone else had noticed. The scene is OOTP, SWM, Pages 566-569 in the British hardcover edition. The Maurauders are under the tree, Harry is watching them and Snape is on the grass, a little distance from them. The first thing I noticed is that Snape just seems to be ambling along in the same direction as his sworn enemies and that struck me as strange. Why would he just drift along in the same direction as boys who everyone seems to agree bully him? Wouldn't it make more sense to go in the other direction? The next thing that struck me was JKR's phrasing of Snape's reaction to James calling out

Um... He was walking ahead of them out to the grass. There is nothing in canon to suggest he even saw the boys behind him.



Two thoughts occurred to me. Sirius and Lupin both say that Snape followed them around and this passage could be construed as confirmation of that fact, and the other thing was, was Snape hoping/expecting to provoke an attack? His quick reaction does suggest such a thing. If he did not expect an attack, why did he go in that direction? The text states that he seemed engrossed in his exam paper. I have to ask if that seems really feasible as he had to walk quite a ways and James was playing with the Snitch for quite a while. Could he have been that engrossed all that time?

Even if he kept an eye on the gang there is still nothing to suggest he did anything at all to instigate the attack. Period.

Perhaps Snape was so quick on the draw because by that age he was well wary from being picked on. Anyone who has been part of a minority crowd- knows what it's like to be a target almost 24/7- you stay aware. You are (rightfully) paranoid. Snape is a street smart type of kid. He's quick on the draw because he's been harassed by James from day one (on the train.)

Your argument is a classic case of blaming the victim for being "in the wrong place at the wrong time." It doesn't matter where Snape was or why he went there- it could be that he and James both knew that Lily liked to hang out on the lawn- it could be that was his favorite tree- WHY he was there doesn't matter. He did not provoke the attack- period.

Um... He was walking ahead of them out to the grass. There is nothing in canon to suggest he even saw the boys behind him.

Even if he kept an eye on the gang there is still nothing to suggest he did anything at all to instigate the attack. Period.

Perhaps Snape was so quick on the draw because by that age he was well wary from being picked on. Anyone who has been part of a minority crowd- knows what it's like to be a target almost 24/7- you stay aware. You are (rightfully) paranoid. Snape is a street smart type of kid. He's quick on the draw because he's been harassed by James from day one (on the train.)

Your argument is a classic case of blaming the victim for being "in the wrong place at the wrong time." It doesn't matter where Snape was or why he went there- it could be that he and James both knew that Lily liked to hang out on the lawn- it could be that was his favorite tree- WHY he was there doesn't matter. He did not provoke the attack- period.

I don't think that Snape provoked the attack, we heard in canon that James and Sirius provoked it for themselves. :lol:. But I think it is logical that Snape was keeping an eye on them with a mind to following them around to get them in trouble. Plus you make a good point, he may have been watching Lily down by the lake also - which makes SWM even more interesting since Lily was looking at James (we know she saw him playing with his snitch as he'd just gotten it and she mentioned it. And as an aside, am I the only one to note how that makes Lily's final speech to James rather irrational and wholly obvious :lol:) So maybe that started Snape's jealousy out and when later she was speaking primarily and then entirely with James, it just fueled his emotions. That may have likely added to his all around anger at Lily that bubbled up there near the end.

I don't think that Snape provoked the attack, we heard in canon that James and Sirius provoked it for themselves. :lol:. But I think it is logical that Snape was keeping an eye on them with a mind to following them around to get them in trouble. Plus you make a good point, he may have been watching Lily down by the lake also - which makes SWM even more interesting since Lily was looking at James (we know she saw him playing with his snitch as he'd just gotten it and she mentioned it. And as an aside, am I the only one to note how that makes Lily's final speech to James rather irrational and wholly obvious :lol:) So maybe that started Snape's jealousy out and when later she was speaking primarily and then entirely with James, it just fueled his emotions. That may have likely added to his all around anger at Lily that bubbled up there near the end.

Yes - I would agree with this :) The Lily/James thing is another thread, but yeah. I always thought Severus had an idea of where Lily would be - as did James. It was a sad little triangle of jealousy there. Snape would inevitably end up on the losing end. I felt that he knew this to some extent- and that fueled his over-reaction to Lily.

I don't know if this kind of boy could ever verbalize the feelings he had for her but underneath all of his issues, I think he couldn't stand being pitied when he wanted to be loved and respected by her.

I'm sorry but "Who would want to be in SLytherin" (paraphrased) is surely an insult and is certainly meant as one. Not only that but it is directed at someone that James doesn't even know and as such shows that he is already prejudice agaionst Slytherin house. I have said it before and I will say it again: If a child of mine behaved as James did on the Hogwart's Express I would be heartily ashamed of him.I did specify "deliberate" insult. Talking to Sirius in front of Snape regarding one of the four houses is not a personal or deliberate insult, IMO. The bad rep Slytherin had attained had been there for many, many years, and was not without reason. James Potter would have learned of its dark reputation from his parents. Surely Snape, being a half-blood, also knew of the dark reputation and yet rather than being repulsed, he was attracted to the thought. IMO.

I don't consider Albus Severus to be prejudiced, yet he openly fears being placed in Slytherin and loudly argues with his older brother where anyone who cared to listen could hear his denials of ever being placed in Slytherin, many years after the Dark Lord was defeated. Anyone could have overheard, would they have been insulted? His dad reassures him that he'll be able to choose just as he, Harry, had chosen "anything but Slytherin."

James says to Sirius:
"Slytherin? Who wants to be in Slytherin? I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?" James asked the boy lounging on the seats opposite him, and with a jolt, Harry realized that it was Sirius.
...
"Blimey," said James, "and I thought you seemed all right!"
Sirius grinned.

However, Snape directed his sneering comments to James, comments that were deliberately insulting:

Snape made a small, disparaging noise. James turned on him.
"Got a problem with that?"
"No," said Snape, though his slight sneer said otherwise. "If you'd rather be brawny than brainy---"

After which Sirius insults Snape and let the bullying begin.

Did Lily take James's comment about Slytherin House as deliberately and personally insulting? There is no evidence that she did so. Did Harry take it as a deliberate and personal insult when Malfoy made comments about Hufflepuff? No. Could that be because Lily was Muggleborn and Harry was raised by Muggles? Sure, but the point is Snape had not declared which House he preferred, just that he suggested Lily by in Slytherin. If James had said to Snape "Slytherin are lowlifes, they align themselves with the Dark Lord, they're all scum, they love the Dark Arts, they have no scruples, they'll do anything to get what they want, they're all wanna be Death Eaters and you want to by a Slytherin?"...yeah, that would be a deliberate personal insult. That's not what we see in canon though.

IMO, Snape began the insults on the train and that set the tempo for their interactions from that moment forward. Did he deserved to be bullied and picked on and humiliated, for years? Nope, no way, no one deserves that type of treatment. Just as no one deserves to be hexed everytime someone got the chance.

Yes - I would agree with this :) The Lily/James thing is another thread, but yeah. I always thought Severus had an idea of where Lily would be - as did James. It was a sad little triangle of jealousy there. Snape would inevitably end up on the losing end. I felt that he knew this to some extent- and that fueled his over-reaction to Lily.

I don't know if this kind of boy could ever verbalize the feelings he had for her but underneath all of his issues, I think he couldn't stand being pitied when he wanted to be loved and respected by her.

Oh yeah, that was totally obvious to me way back from his youth when Lily asked how things were at home and Snape gave a 'wave of your hand' type answer. I totally think he wanted no pity - but not to be confused with wanting her to be in sympathy with him, which I think he did want. He wished for her to share his viewpoint and opinions, in my judgment. But that kind of goes along with wanting respect instead of pity.

Two thoughts occurred to me. Sirius and Lupin both say that Snape followed them around and this passage could be construed as confirmation of that fact, and the other thing was, was Snape hoping/expecting to provoke an attack?

You know, Snape's done some dumb stuff...but I gotta say, picking a fight alone with four wanded peers requires Crabbe-and-Goyle level stupidity, something the Half-Blood Prince probably could never attain.

You know, Snape's done some dumb stuff...but I gotta say, picking a fight alone with four wanded peers requires Crabbe-and-Goyle level stupidity, something the Half-Blood Prince probably could never attain.

He admitted to doing that in canon though; he admitted that he followed them around and Lily called him obsessed with them for doing it, which to me means he did it quite a lot. If that is not asking for trouble, I don't know what is...that is tantamount to picking a fight because he knew good and well what would happen if they saw him following them again...if you know what I mean - they knew what he was up to, Sirius told us that. And no, it is not okay to follow people around trying to get them in trouble and/or expelled. Try to imagine someone doing that to you - now imagine it is your enemy doing it. Personally, when I was 15, that would have been "fighting words" to me via expressive conduct (sending a message through your conduct).

Ye gods. Please. No. I just convinced mexicant to help mod this area and now we're doing the Snape/James Deathmatch again. Let's drop the who was more evil and focus on the facts of each character. Otherwise you'll scare away my poor ickle auror on her first day!

I was thinking about something else the other day that leads to what I think is a new topic. That is, what do you guys think Snape's relationship with Mulciber and Avery was? Generally they get mentioned in terms of being rather horrible villains that served only as a poor influence on those around them. But Snape befriended them and he liked them, so I was thinking that they must have done more than walk around like little Voldemort mimicking robots. Do you figure they too were into creating curses and enjoyed learning about the dark arts? We don't hear of either them or Snape being into sports - but they must have done other things as well - something to build a friendship on I'd imagine. What do you guys think?

That is, what do you guys think Snape's relationship with Mulciber and Avery was?

I think iniitially the relationship was one of Snape trying to hang around with them and find out from them what being a DE was all about. A friendship of wanting to know about a particular organisation, Snape was interested in joining.

Later once Snape became a DE, I don't think there would have been any relation of a specifically friendly nature. They would all be DEs and that was that I suppose.

I think Snape had a closer relationship with lucius more than Avery and Mulciber. It is this for the "old friend's sake" that Narcissa pleads with Snape for saving Draco IMO.

So I think there was something of deeper nature than just being DEs together between Snape and Lucius, more than Snape, Avery and Mulciber.

Even while at school, Lucius never troubles/suspects Snape; the silent backing which we see in Draco's remarks in COS after Dumbledore goes is always there from Lucius for Snape IMO.

Perhaps Lucius was one DE who believed Snape was always a spy for Voldemort and Snape and Lucius continued to meet even after Voldemort went, with Snape offering occassional titbits of carefully prepared informtion (prepared between Snape and Dumbledore) about Dumbledore to Lucius Malfoy, which would help him when he went back to Voldmeort at the end of GOF.

Everyone knew what Voldemort was up to, so Snape shouldn't have been all that surprised at what DEs did.

Everyone knew what Voldemort was up to, so Snape shouldn't have been all that surprised at what DEs did.To be fair, though, even Regulus and Draco Malfoy thought they knew what they were getting into and found out more than they ever wanted to know. We don't have evidence that Snape ever had that moment, we know he was drawn to the Dark Arts and had the ambition of becoming a Death Eater; the only reason he turned was because Voldemort targetted Lily.

I was thinking about something else the other day that leads to what I think is a new topic. That is, what do you guys think Snape's relationship with Mulciber and Avery was?

We know very little about that relationship, but I suspect Lucius either introduced them to Severus, or they were his dorm-mates. That they for some reason saw fit to welcome him into their social circle, I'm sure made Severus very grateful.

I believe there is a reference in HBP to what could possibly be the elder Mulciber, so perhaps he taught his son Voldemort's ways and his son in turn adopted those ideas and spread them to other students. The same could be true for Avery.

We know very little about that relationship, but I suspect Lucius either introduced them to Severus, or they were his dorm-mates. That they for some reason saw fit to welcome him into their social circle, I'm sure made Severus very grateful.

I believe there is a reference in HBP to what could possibly be the elder Mulciber, so perhaps he taught his son Voldemort's ways and his son in turn adopted those ideas and spread them to other students. The same could be true for Avery.

I remember that - I think, something about a confession or something? In any case I would agree that most of those Snape was hanging around brought their beliefs with them from home.

What I was wondering though, was what Snape saw in them. I was thinking more on a social level. I got to thinking that they perhaps they had other things in common, because if all they did was wake up, issue a few dark curses, sling a few slurs and eat breakfast, they themselves would be bored. But it is the social aspect that to my memory we have not discussed and if you think about it, that is what usually what draws people together. Like book clubs and chess clubs, Quidditch, the school newspaper, art clubs, spell clubs or whatever. So that made me think that perhaps Snape found that Mulciber and Avery, separately or together, also enjoyed some of the social things Snape liked. That would in turn make Snape feel more compatible with them, and there was more than a mere shared viewpoint between them.

I mean one has to figure that there is something more because like Harry and Ron became best mates - and I think Dean and Seamus did - and yet they all had the same viewpoint, but something else made them pair off into best buddies in that configuration rather than another. The thing is, we don't know what else Snape liked to do, although perhaps he liked gobstones like his mum and they were all into that together. I dunno...just a thought I had.

I remember that - I think, something about a confession or something?

That was Karkaroff in GoF saying that Mulciber Jr. was an expert in the Imperius Curse. In HBP, when Voldemort asks for the DADA job, Dumbledore says that he thinks some DEs are waiting in Hogsmeade for the answer. He includes (what could be) Mulciber Sr.'s name.

That was Karkaroff in GoF saying that Mulciber Jr. was an expert in the Imperius Curse.

:rotfl: Ah...yeah I get the DEs mixed at times.

In HBP, when Voldemort asks for the DADA job, Dumbledore says that he thinks some DEs are waiting in Hogsmeade for the answer. He includes (what could be) Mulciber Sr.'s name.

Ah...that is likely correct - it would probably have been Mulcibers father. Still, I think these boys must have had other interests that Snape shared with them. It seems like Snape didn't take to the idea of group hang much. But he must have participated in more with them than merely extolling Voldemort. Of course it could be as simple as they all hung out and went swimming or hiking and stuff from time to time. Perhaps they were not interested in the traditional activities around the school.

That is, what do you guys think Snape's relationship with Mulciber and Avery was? Generally they get mentioned in terms of being rather horrible villains that served only as a poor influence on those around them. But Snape befriended them and he liked them, so I was thinking that they must have done more than walk around like little Voldemort mimicking robots.

I agree that there must have been something else to Avery and Mulciber. Just because they were going to swear allegiance to Voldemort doesn't mean they were incapable of genuine affection for someone. It's very possible that the Dark Arts weren't the only thing on their minds, and Snape connected to them on a deeper level... Perhaps, there was genuine friendship between them. There's also a possibility that Snape spent time with Avery and Mulciber because they were more tolerant of his half-blood status compared to other Slytherins. And they, in their turn, valued his intelligence, his ability to invent new "amusing" hexes. They probably saw his potential and preferred to have him on their side.
Given that Slytherin seems to be the home for all the dark-arts loving, Muggle-hating "purebloods", I doubt there were many people whom Snape could could consider potential friends. He was a "Mudblood" and as poor as a church mouse to boot. :shrug:

I agree that there must have been something else to Avery and Mulciber. Just because they were going to swear allegiance to Voldemort doesn't mean they were incapable of genuine affection for someone. It's very possible that the Dark Arts weren't the only thing on their minds, and Snape connected to them on a deeper level... Perhaps, there was genuine friendship between them. There's also a possibility that Snape spent time with Avery and Mulciber because they were more tolerant of his half-blood status compared to other Slytherins. And they, in their turn, valued his intelligence, his ability to invent new "amusing" hexes. They probably saw his potential and preferred to have him on their side.

Yes, it would be odd to single out friends from a lot and all you had in common was Voldemort when everyone had that in common that was in his circle of Slytherin friends. I was thinking also that they may too have been into inventing and stuff, perhaps that is what they had in common.

Given that Slytherin seems to be the home for all the dark-arts loving, Muggle-hating "purebloods", I doubt there were many people whom Snape could could consider potential friends. He was a "Mudblood" and as poor as a church mouse to boot. :shrug:

Huh? Snape was a half-blood, not a Mudblood. The purebloods distinguished between halfbloods and mudbloods. There was a world of difference - they intended to kill the Mudbloods, the halfbloods were cool. Voldemort was a halfblood too. The blood purists had no prejudice term for halfbloods - they simply called those halfbloods who did not hold their views 'dirty or filthy' halfbloods :lol:. Even the purebloods that did not hold their views got a term "blood traitor" - but halfbloods didn't even fit that mold and were not called that. But those that accepted their views didn't have a problem - which I am sure was Voldemort's doing because he could hardly go full bore into half blood hating when some were aware his father had been a Muggle (first because Riddle was not an old pureblood family name and they'd check and second because even the less than fully trusted Peter was allowed to know, so I don't think Voldemort was attempting to keep it a secret).

So Snape's poverty may have been problematic for some, but I don't assume that all purebloods were rich simply because the Potters, Blacks and Malfoys were. There were tons of other purebloods, like the Weasleys that were not rich and one can't assume lack of money kept them all from attaining to join Voldemort, imo. So I don't believe either of those factors (halfblood or poor) would cause Snape significant problems except among the snootiest of purebloods. That didn't include Voldemort though, for as we know, eventually he made Snape his right hand man. I think that snooty attitude was merely from people like Bella. But Lucius didn't seem to feel that way toward Snape - so it seems that it varied simply based on some people thinking themselves better for what ever reason they could grasp a hold of. Bella may have thought herself better than Lucius, merely because she was a female - but whatever her reason, she showed Lucius little respect and he was a pureblood and rich.

I seem to remember a discussion elsewhere about the difference between "mudbloods" and "halfbloods". I think that Harry once said something about the Death Eaters not knowing about Voldemort being a "halfblood". I think that he was getting at the fact that their leader didn't have the blood supremacy that they thought he did. This doesn't truly argue on either side, but I think that the definitely did make the difference between halfbloods and purebloods. Obviously, purebloods were the top of the rank. However I am going to quote this:

"The expressions 'pure-blood', 'half-blood' and 'Muggle-born' have been coined by people to whom these distinctions matter, and express their originators' prejudices. As far as somebody like Lucius Malfoy is concerned, for instance, a Muggle-born is as 'bad' as a Muggle. Therefore Harry would be considered only 'half' wizard, because of his mother's grandparents.

If you think this is far-fetched, look at some of the real charts the Nazis used to show what constituted 'Aryan' or 'Jewish' blood. I saw one in the Holocaust Museum in Washington when I had already devised the 'pure-blood', 'half-blood' and 'Muggle-born' definitions, and was chilled to see that the Nazis used precisely the same warped logic as the Death Eaters. A single Jewish grandparent 'polluted' the blood, according to their propaganda."

Just for a little bit of clarification :)

I also think that although his poverty did affect some people, it didn't affect them all. I think that the main reason that Snape was not trusted by Bellatrix was more due to his poverty than his lack of heritage. That, and the fact that he'd been employed by Dumbledore for the past however many years...

I seem to remember a discussion elsewhere about the difference between "mudbloods" and "halfbloods". I think that Harry once said something about the Death Eaters not knowing about Voldemort being a "halfblood". I think that he was getting at the fact that their leader didn't have the blood supremacy that they thought he did. This doesn't truly argue on either side, but I think that the definitely did make the difference between halfbloods and purebloods. Obviously, purebloods were the top of the rank. However I am going to quote this:

Well Peter knew for certain because he was in the graveyard. But I would imagine that a few others knew as well - because people like Bella and Lucius would check. :lol:. But I would agree that *** 100's of low level dudes didn't likely have a clue.

I also think that although his poverty did affect some people, it didn't affect them all. I think that the main reason that Snape was not trusted by Bellatrix was more due to his poverty than his lack of heritage. That, and the fact that he'd been employed by Dumbledore for the past however many years...


I would agree. JKR could have made a name of prejudice for halfbloods like she did for the others, but she didn't. They could go either way and if they went evil, they were accepted, imo. Also, JKR said there were Muggleborn DEs as well. So in reality, the DEs did have to accept some Muggleborns being among them. So I don't think Snape's half blood status mattered at all. His lack of wealth would matter to some - but that doesn't have anything to do with being a DE. All DEs were not rich, and Bella probably looked down on them all equally for lack of money. But other DEs probably didn't give two twigs about money - figuring one day they would all be rich.

In reality, I think Snape had no problems in the main being a DE. He wouldn't have likely felt so strongly about joining up if everyone in his budding Death Eater circle of friends looked down on him and held him in disdain. So I think he was fine by them.

I did specify "deliberate" insult. Talking to Sirius in front of Snape regarding one of the four houses is not a personal or deliberate insult, IMO. The bad rep Slytherin had attained had been there for many, many years, and was not without reason. James Potter would have learned of its dark reputation from his parents. Surely Snape, being a half-blood, also knew of the dark reputation and yet rather than being repulsed, he was attracted to the thought. IMO.
James may well have learned that Slytherin had a reputation for producing "dark wizards" in which case it is a learnt prejudice - but a prejudice none the less. The sorting hat refers to Slytherin as a house for those who are cunning (street smart or savvy as opposed to booksmart) and ambitious and Salazar Slytherin we know preferred to teach pure-blood wizards. However none of this means that Slytherin is a "bad" house or a house for "Dark wizards". James wants to be in Gryffindor because that was the house his father was in. Slytherin is Gryfindors rival so James has undoubtedly inherited this rivalry. But no matter what James thinks there was absolutely no call for him to make any comment on Snape's house preferrence. It was very rude to make a derogatory comment about something mentioned in someone else's conversation.



I don't consider Albus Severus to be prejudiced, yet he openly fears being placed in Slytherin and loudly argues with his older brother where anyone who cared to listen could hear his denials of ever being placed in Slytherin, many years after the Dark Lord was defeated. Anyone could have overheard, would they have been insulted? His dad reassures him that he'll be able to choose just as he, Harry, had chosen "anything but Slytherin."

Albus Severus isn't showing the kind of prejudice that James shows. His brother is teasing him because Al naturally wants to go into Gryffindor as his parents had. His brother who is still a child is teasing him by reinforcing the old prejudice against Slytherin, but the very fact that he is teasing him about it shows that it isn't really a big deal - he's just winding his brother up. What is really important about this scene is what Harry says. Hwe doesn't just tell Al that he can choose - he tells him that it doesn't matter if he is sorted into Slytherin - that Slytherin would have gained an excelent (?) student and that one of the bravest men he ever knew was a Slytherin. This is making it quite clear that there is nothing wrong with being in Slytherin house. As Harry is the hero and as such is the voice of all that is good and right in the Potter universe, I think we can say that the general prejudice against Slytherin house as demonstrated by so many of the other "good" characters is not to be seen as a good or admirable thing.

James says to Sirius:
"Slytherin? Who wants to be in Slytherin? I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?" James asked the boy lounging on the seats opposite him, and with a jolt, Harry realized that it was Sirius.
...
"Blimey," said James, "and I thought you seemed all right!"
Sirius grinned.

Exactly! Snape was talking to Lily, not James. James's comment was extremely rude. As I said I would not like my children to behave in this manner. (And If someone did something similar to me I would be inclined to ask "Who asked your opinion?")

However, Snape directed his sneering comments to James, comments that were deliberately insulting:

Snape made a small, disparaging noise. James turned on him.
"Got a problem with that?"
"No," said Snape, though his slight sneer said otherwise. "If you'd rather be brawny than brainy---"

So Snape saying James's choice is for those who are brawny rather than brainy is more insulting that James saying that he would go home rather than bein Snape's house of choice? I just don't agree with that.

Did Lily take James's comment about Slytherin House as deliberately and personally insulting? There is no evidence that she did so.
No but then Lily didn't really have a preference as Snape did.

Did Harry take it as a deliberate and personal insult when Malfoy made comments about Hufflepuff? No. Could that be because Lily was Muggleborn and Harry was raised by Muggles?
That is preceisely why. Neither had much knowledge of the house system and so had no preference based on Family loyalties. And incidently Harry has decided that he doesn't really like Draco before he leave Madame Malkins

Sure, but the point is Snape had not declared which House he preferred, just that he suggested Lily by in Slytherin. Which is exactly the same as stating his own preference!

If you say to a friend on a train
"I hope you can get your copy of Beedle the Bard today" and someone you don't know says to their friend
"Harry Potter books? Who'd want to read Harry Potter books? I'd rather never read anything ever again!"
how would you feel? You would certainly know that they were having a dig at you and your preference of reading material even though you hadn't actually said you like reading Harry Potter books yourself.


IMO, Snape began the insults on the train and that set the tempo for their interactions from that moment forward. Did he deserved to be bullied and picked on and humiliated, for years? Nope, no way, no one deserves that type of treatment. Just as no one deserves to be hexed everytime someone got the chance.

I disagree. James expressed a prejudice. It is interesting that you make the comparison between James and Draco Malfoy - they are both spoilt pure-bloods who express prejudice against specific houses and I do not beleive that this is a coincidence. When Harry gets on board the Hogwart's express he has more in common with Snape than he does with his father - just as Draco has more in common with James Potter than he does with Snape.

Everyone knew what Voldemort was up to, so Snape shouldn't have been all that surprised at what DEs did.Actually I thought Sirius said when talking about Regulus that while many of the families agreed with Voldemort's principles they didn't realise how far he would go, but once you were in there was no way out; it was a lifetime of service or death. As such I think that canon implies that not everyone knew what Voldemort was doing. It is certainly implied that Regulus was surprised by what went on in DE ranks, so why couldn't Snape be surprised too?
Of course you would have to have a certain level of prejudice to want to be a Death Eater, but that doesn't mean that you necessarily wanted to go around killing muggles and muggleborns or that you were aware that that was what Voldemort was doing/was heading towards.

Two thoughts occurred to me. Sirius and Lupin both say that Snape followed them around and this passage could be construed as confirmation of that fact, and the other thing was, was Snape hoping/expecting to provoke an attack? His quick reaction does suggest such a thing. If he did not expect an attack, why did he go in that direction? The text states that he seemed engrossed in his exam paper. I have to ask if that seems really feasible as he had to walk quite a ways and James was playing with the Snitch for quite a while. Could he have been that engrossed all that time? I confess that I think Snape at this time in his life was a DE in the making and I do not think that his reasons for hanging around in the same vicinity as James & company was to wish them well in their exams. I think there is a good chance he was up to no good and got more than he bargained for maybe. The passage did make me think deeply about cause and effect. The first time I read it I was caught up in the behaviour of James and his quite brutal attack on Severus, it was only when I reread it I began to think that perhaps Snape's presence so close to the Maurauders was not quite as random as it first appears.
This idea was bounced around quite a lot prior to Deathly Hallows that somehow Snape was "up to something" being near the marauders. IMO this makes the situation perfectly clear
Harry watched again, as Snape left from the Great Hall, after sitting his O.W.L. in Defence Against the Dark Arts, watched as he wandered away from the castle and strayed, inadvertently, close to the place beneath the beech tree where James Sirius LUpin and Pettigrew sat together.
I think the use of the word "inadvertently" makes it clear that Snape did not mean to be that close to the marauders.

When Harry gets on board the Hogwart's express he has more in common with Snape than he does with his father - just as Draco has more in common with James Potter than he does with Snape.

Perhaps in your opinion, although you stated it as fact. But I would disagree. My view: Harry didn't behave rudely to his own friend as Snape did; he didn't have a house preference like Snape did; he didn't hold muggles in prejudice, as Snape did; he didn't put down Gryffindor house, as Snape did; he was an orphan, unlike Snape; he didn't know anyone at all, Snape did; he had very little knowledge of the wizard world, unlike Snape; he hadn't learned curses, like Snape and he wasn't into the dark arts, which there is some canon Snape was. Finally, Harry was treated poorly, but he didn't come from a poor household.

I see nothing in common between Harry and Snape.

Edit: Deleted because
a) Drusilla is right it didn't really belong here
b) looking for a thread where it would fit better I came across your theory (http://www.cosforums.com/showpost.php?p=5194933&postcount=577) TGW, It makes perfect sense :tu: even though I don't agree with your interpretation.

People, we're drifting off topic here- if you want to discuss the behaviour of James, Harry or anyone else, please take it to their respective character analysis threads- thank you.

I wrote a story once where Snape got a krup, the dog in Fantastic Beasts that dislikes Muggles. His reason, however, was that Hagrid came to him for a potion for a sick puppy. Snape decided he would be more reliable for giving it the treatment it needed. Of course, he only meant to keep it till it was well enough to dump it back on Hagrid, but things didn't work out that way (the other four puppies in the litter, who he began to identify with the Marauders, also seemed to pick on this one).

Then, during spring break in Order of the Phoenix, he decided to see how bad the Dursleys really were. Privet Drive was too risky, but no one, Death Eater or other wizards, would be watching Aunt Marge. Snape reasoned that a man walking his dog can always get into a conversation with someone else walking a dog.

Aunt Marge being Aunt Marge, he had to modify that plan. His dog wound up running off with a bulldog chasing it, and he got to know Marge while hearing her opinions on him as a dog owner.

However, later that year, one of Marge's bulldogs had puppies that were not actually Purebred . . . .

Anyhow, I just like the idea of Snape with a dog that has the personality of a hyper two year old who's been given an extra dose of caffeine.

Edit: Deleted because
a) Drusilla is right it didn't really belong here
b) looking for a thread where it would fit better I came across your theory (http://www.cosforums.com/showpost.php?p=5194933&postcount=577) TGW, It makes perfect sense :tu: even though I don't agree with your interpretation.

Thank you. :) You can answer in the Snape/Dumbledore thread, if you wish to. I think that will be allowed. :)

Anyhow, I just like the idea of Snape with a dog that has the personality of a hyper two year old who's been given an extra dose of caffeine.

He'd probably dose it up with Temezepam.....

From the Dark Arts and the Good Arts Thread.

If Snape had lived, I think Harry would have made sure he didnt go to Azkaban for his work. Snape was unbelievable brave, and should have been in Gryffindor.

I agree with Snape being incredibly brave; he was the bravest man Harry ever knew and he had an amazing mind, so strong and an unbelievably pure heart IMO.

But I don't know if he ashould have been in Gryffindor. I think he was great in Slytherin. :D

From the Dark Arts and the Good Arts Thread.



I agree with Snape being incredibly brave; he was the bravest man Harry ever knew and he had an amazing mind, so strong and an unbelievably pure heart IMO.

But I don't know if he ashould have been in Gryffindor. I think he was great in Slytherin. :D



You might belong in Gryffindor,
Where dwell the brave at heart,
Their daring, nerve, and chivalry
Set Gryffindors apart;

Or perhaps in Slytherin
You'll make your real friends,
Those cunning folks use any means
To achieve their ends.

I think he should have been in Gryffindor, which would have changed the wizarding world in major ways. He was brave, and everything he did was for Lily Potter after he saw the error in his ways. I agree that he was sly, and manipulative, but only towards Voldemort.
I just think that had he been in Gryffindor, it would have made dramatic differences in the world of HP, and Im all for Lily and James Potter being alive.

I think Snape could have fit anywhere. He was incredibly brave, a hard worker and loyal friend, a genius, and, yes, very cunning.

I think Slytherin was actually a pretty good fit for him, however. "Those cunning folk use any means to achieve their ends", and he certainly was willing to do quite a lot to make up for his misdeeds and to make sure Lily's sacrifice was not in vain.

His mindset during the time he was sorted is also worth considering. He was an impoverished half-blood who saw Hogwarts as a place of hope. We get a few little hints throughout the first few memories of TPT that young Snape wants very badly to escape his home life and make something of himself. Not only that, but he seems to have gotten the idea from somewhere (Eileen, perhaps) that Slytherin was the House for people with brains. Naturally, he'd prefer that over brawn.

There is also another factor: his happiness once in each house. Sadly, Hermione is one of the very few Gryffindors we see with her nose constantly in a book. Most of the others seem to talk Quidditch or prank. Like Percy, Severus would have stuck out like a sore thumb, especially with the Marauders and their attitude toward life dominating the Common Room.

All in all, Slytherin was a good House for him. Ravenclaw may have been better in the long run, as it was both a more cerebral House and didn't have future DEs swarming all through it, but in comparison to Gryffindor, Slytherin was definitely a better fit.

I think Snape could have fit anywhere. He was incredibly brave, a hard worker and loyal friend, a genius, and, yes, very cunning.

I think Slytherin was actually a pretty good fit for him, however. "Those cunning folk use any means to achieve their ends", and he certainly was willing to do quite a lot to make up for his misdeeds and to make sure Lily's sacrifice was not in vain.


All in all, Slytherin was a good House for him. Ravenclaw may have been better in the long run, as it was both a more cerebral House and didn't have future DEs swarming all through it, but in comparison to Gryffindor, Slytherin was definitely a better fit.

I agree that he would have fit into those three houses. He is very cunning, very swift, very sly. I just feel that his bravery seems to be the most dominant factor in his role of HP, and his personality. He risked his life every day for Lily Potters son. Every day. I dont see that sort of braveness in other Slytherins. They save their own necks before anything, and Snape did just the opposite. He killed the only man that really knew him, per request. That was unbelievably brave.

There is also another factor: his happiness once in each house. Sadly, Hermione is one of the very few Gryffindors we see with her nose constantly in a book. Most of the others seem to talk Quidditch or prank. Like Percy, Severus would have stuck out like a sore thumb, especially with the Marauders and their attitude toward life dominating the Common Room.
I think that had he been in Gryffindor, Lily would have stood up to James and Sirius and Snape would have kept his only friend he ever had. I think that would have made all the difference in Snapes life, and he would have had a better life at Hogwarts and after. I think he was easily influenced when he was young, and very eager to have friends accept him for what he was, so he found that in fellow Slytherins.

His mindset during the time he was sorted is also worth considering. He was an impoverished half-blood who saw Hogwarts as a place of hope. Not only that, but he seems to have gotten the idea from somewhere (Eileen, perhaps) that Slytherin was the House for people with brains. Naturally, he'd prefer that over brawn.
I agree. I think the sorting hat may have seen the courage and bravery in him, and considered putting him in Gryffindor, but he wanted to go in Slytherin. And...."It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities."
I think that made all the difference.

I agree that he would have fit into those three houses. He is very cunning, very swift, very sly. I just feel that his bravery seems to be the most dominant factor in his role of HP, and his personality. He risked his life every day for Lily Potters son. Every day. I dont see that sort of braveness in other Slytherins. They save their own necks before anything, and Snape did just the opposite. He killed the only man that really knew him, per request. That was unbelievably brave. [...] I think that had he been in Gryffindor, Lily would have stood up to James and Sirius and Snape would have kept his only friend he ever had. I think that would have made all the difference in Snapes life, and he would have had a better life at Hogwarts and after. I think he was easily influenced when he was young, and very eager to have friends accept him for what he was, so he found that in fellow Slytherins.

But the sorting hat did not take into consideration that Snape might one day spy on Voldemort. It based the sorting on 11 year old Snape. The one who was fascinated with the dark arts, wanted to be in Slytherin, was already behaving cunningly (encouraging Lily to sneak into Petunia's room) and he already disliked Muggles, again shown in his continued derrogatory bullying behavior toward Petunia. He was all set to be placed with others like him in Slytherin, imo. Just like Regulus, who later rejected the Voldemort big picture scenario - but at 11 he too sorted well. Snape didn't require protection at Hogwarts, others required protection from Snape who was cooking up dark curses in his private laboratory, honing his spying skills, laughing it up at the use of dark magic on others and tossing out demeaning and prejudice statements.

In my judgment, Snape kept his promise to help protect Harry from Voldemort, but with his innate slyness, realized he hadn't promised to protect Harry from himself. He went on to treat Harry in a bullying, cruel and abusive manner, together with the other children except those in Slytherin, and that together with his sly, cunning behavior as an adult, kept him securely fastened to Slytherin house despite any bravery he may have shown. Slughorn, Regulus, Bella and Voldemort too showed extreme bravery, so it is clear and evident that Slytherins can be brave (evid. all 7 books).

There is also another factor: his happiness once in each house. Sadly, Hermione is one of the very few Gryffindors we see with her nose constantly in a book. Most of the others seem to talk Quidditch or prank. Like Percy, Severus would have stuck out like a sore thumb, especially with the Marauders and their attitude toward life dominating the Common Room.

His levicorpus and Jelly leg jinx supports the idea that he was not merely a bookworm above pranking. Additionally, his behavior in slinking around obsessively attempting to expose wrongs in others and have them expelled shows his concentration was not purely academic. Nor was Snape noted as being anywhere near the intelligence of Hermione, who was the best in her year. In Snape's year, we know that others were cited as being more intelligent (POA - Cat, Rat, etc.). I agree Snape was well suited to Slytherin house, and he would have stuck out as a sore thumb in other houses based on his character, imo, but having nothing to do with his academic performance.

But the sorting hat did not take into consideration that Snape might one day spy on Voldemort. It based the sorting on 11 year old Snape. The one who was fascinated with the dark arts, wanted to be in Slytherin, was already behaving cunningly (encouraging Lily to sneak into Petunia's room) and he already disliked Muggles, again shown in his continued derrogatory bullying behavior toward Petunia. He was all set to be placed with others like him in Slytherin, imo. Just like Regulus, who later rejected the Voldemort big picture scenario - but at 11 he too sorted well. Snape didn't require protection at Hogwarts, others required protection from Snape who was cooking up dark curses in his private laboratory, honing his spying skills, laughing it up at the use of dark magic on others and tossing out demeaning and prejudice statements.

In my judgment, Snape kept his promise to help protect Harry from Voldemort, but with his innate slyness, realized he hadn't promised to protect Harry from himself. He went on to treat Harry in a bullying, cruel and abusive manner, together with the other children except those in Slytherin, and that together with his sly, cunning behavior as an adult, kept him securely fastened to Slytherin house despite any bravery he may have shown. Slughorn, Regulus, Bella and Voldemort too showed extreme bravery, so it is clear and evident that Slytherins can be brave (evid. all 7 books).



Youre right. He was set up for Slytherin from the beginning. He did fit in very nicely.
I think his bravery is a selfless kind though. Something very few characters have. Voldemort has never performed a selfless act in his life, Sluggy was very selfish, Regulus was brave for changing his mind, and Bella is a complete psychopath. Severus' bravery was the kind that I honor above most other values. Also one thing I do see Sev achieving that we do not see from the Slytherins too often is love. I am having trouble thinking of another Slytherin who loved the way Snape loved Lily. Or loved anyone, for that matter.

Youre right. He was set up for Slytherin from the beginning. He did fit in very nicely.
I think his bravery is a selfless kind though. Something very few characters have. Voldemort has never performed a selfless act in his life, Sluggy was very selfish, Regulus was brave for changing his mind, and Bella is a complete psychopath.

:lol: Poor Bella. Why do you feel Slughorn was being selfish in his final battle efforts? I don't understand what you mean by selfless bravery - that is, how you are differentiating it from anyone else's bravery.

Severus' bravery was the kind that I honor above most other values. Also one thing I do see Sev achieving that we do not see from the Slytherins too often is love. I am having trouble thinking of another Slytherin who loved the way Snape loved Lily. Or loved anyone, for that matter.

I think Snape's bravery in spying was admirable. But to me it was gravely counteracted by his behaving in a cowardly manner toward Harry and the other non-Slytherin children. He was in a position of power over them and took complete advantage of that fact, imo, abusing his power. Negating the latter and focusing solely on Snape's bravery in spying, is to me, impossible to do. I happen to value appropriate treatment of innocent children and Snape's failure in this regard is not overcome by his otherwise showing bravery in spying. JKR really should have rectified this, imo, in order to make Snape a redeemable individual. However, her efforts were concentrated on redeeming him from "evil" to "Good" - rather than on a personal level. She was happy enough to declare him a small man (incapable of being a better person) - but that really doesn't cut it for me as I am not forgiving of small men who behave like Snape. But I realize many, like Harry, are able to forgive this type of person for grievous abuses.

I would respectfully disagree that Slytherins (Death Eaters) did not love as Snape did. Regulus was shown to have done so. Bella loved with an obsession and possessiveness that was very close to, if not equalling Snape's. That the object of her love was someone we might see as a "bad" person (compared to Lily who we might see as "good") has no bearing on her emotions in and of themselves, imo. I think she loved Voldemort in a very similar way to that in which Snape loved Lily. Both were extremely jealous over a love that was unreturned and took it out, unfairly on others. Both were very loyal to their emotions to the other persons. Bella and Snape did brave acts on account of their emotions for Voldemort and Lily, respectively. Snape did things that would injure Lily though (like mistreat Harry), but Bella didn't really do that to my knowledge. Bella in fact was more willing to literally do "anything" based on her emotions than Snape was - for instance his unwillingness to treat Harry civily which is something Lily would have wanted.

Lucius also showed a great amount of love for his family. JKR said Voldemort was the only one without love and I believe she did a good job showing that the Death Eaters other than Voldemort were capable of love and/or compassion. It wasn't of the greatest sort, perhaps, but it was a form of love nonetheless. I assume you meant Death Eaters - because if you truly meant Slytherins, I would completely disagree. Some of them were not Death Eaters and likely loved as much as the next fellow. And Draco showed an immense amount of love for his family - Andromeda was another Slytherin that showed a lot of compassion to Harry and later to others as well.

Why do you feel Slughorn was being selfish in his final battle efforts?
Slughorn was selfish in many ways, not necessarily in his final battle, but throughout the story. In HBP, he only went down to bury Aragog to take whatever he could find of value. He didnt care about Hagrid or the spider.

I assume you meant Death Eaters - because if you truly meant Slytherins, I would completely disagree. Some of them were not Death Eaters and likely loved as much as the next fellow. And Draco showed an immense amount of love for his family - Andromeda was another Slytherin that showed a lot of compassion to Harry and later to others as well

I apologize, I meant love in a romantic way from the main Death Eaters. Lucius did love his wife, Im sure, but we did not get to see the extent of his love for her. We saw Pansy Parkinson fawning over Draco, but that is it.
I wouldnt call Bellas love for Voldemort romantic, I wouldnt even call it sane. I discredit her obsession, or "love", based on reason of mental disease or defect. :lol: However, we are digressing from the topic at hand :)

I don't really see how Snape's bravery was selfless. He did it based on his emotions for Lily - because it made him feel good to do it. It was not a benevolent gesture that had no impact on him whatsoever.

.
I see what he did as selfless because I highly doubt he wanted to protect Harry. He did it because Lily would have wanted it, which yes, would make him feel good. (But if you trace the trail back that far, are any deeds really selfless?) I think he would have wanted deeply to go on with his sad life and hate James and love Lily in peace. But instead he had to protect the spawn of the man he hated and was madly, crazily jealous of. I think his love for Lily probably infuriated himself beyond belief because he agreed to protect Harry.

I apologize, I meant love in a romantic way from the main Death Eaters. Lucius did love his wife, Im sure, but we did not get to see the extent of his love for her. I wouldnt call Bellas love for Voldemort romantic, I wouldnt even call it sane. I discredit her obsession, or "love", based on reason of mental disease or defect. :lol: However, we are digressing from the topic at hand :)

I wouldn't call Snape's love romantic either - there was no romance involved, ever. So I guess I still don't understand.

I see what he did as selfless because I highly doubt he wanted to protect Harry. He did it because Lily would have wanted it, which yes, would make him feel good. (But if you trace the trail back that far, are any deeds really selfless?) I think he would have wanted deeply to go on with his sad life and hate James and love Lily in peace. But instead he had to protect the spawn of the man he hated and was madly, crazily jealous of. I think his love for Lily probably infuriated himself beyond belief because he agreed to protect Harry.

Ah, I see what you mean. It was selfless because he was doing it against his will and just because it is what Lily - and here is the rub: AND James - would have wanted. But don't you feel that he took away a bit of that selflessness by and through his own actions? His abusing and mistreating Harry was very selfish in nature and cowardly, imo, so his "acts" on the whole were neither brave or selfless.

Thus, I have a hard time accepting the idea that Snape's overall form of "bravery" - which includes all I have indicated - is honorable above other forms. For example, those which were done out of love for many persons and where they treated those persons and all others with respect, honor and generous kindness. If Snape had been civil (not nice, just civil) to Harry - I could agree, because then his spying, as well as his personal actions, would all be entirely selfless, imo. It is as if "spying" helps protect Harry - but how Harry himself is treated does not fall under the category of protection. I would fervently disagree. There is no point in Snape protecting Harry from Voldemort while abusing him himself - that just doesn't gel to me.

I wouldn't call Snape's love romantic either - there was no romance involved, ever. So I guess I still don't understand.


He had a romantic love for Lily. She may not have loved him back, but he loved her. it was unrequited, but romantic love nonetheless.


Ah, I see what you mean. It was selfless because he was doing it against his will and just because it is what Lily - and here is the rub: AND James - would have wanted. But don't you feel that he took away a bit of that selflessness by and through his own actions? His abusing and mistreating Harry was very selfish in nature and cowardly, imo, so his "acts" on the whole were neither brave or selfless.

Thus, I have a hard time accepting the idea that Snape's overall form of "bravery" - which includes all I have indicated - is honorable above other forms. For example, those which were done out of love for many persons and where they treated those persons and all others with respect, honor and generous kindness. If Snape had been civil (not nice, just civil) to Harry - I could agree, because then his spying, as well as his personal actions, would all be entirely selfless, imo. It is as if "spying" helps protect Harry - but how Harry himself is treated does not fall under the category of protection. I would fervently disagree. There is no point in Snape protecting Harry from Voldemort while abusing him himself - that just doesn't gel to me.

Im not talking about his actions towards Harry though. The spying, the manipulating, the risks he took made him extremely brave. Spying for DD was a selfless act. How he acted towards Harry and most of the students not in his house were wrong. But IMO, that doesnt make him any less brave. It makes him mean. And cruel. But he is still brave for going to Voldemort when everyday he could have been killed.

He had a romantic love for Lily. She may not have loved him back, but he loved her. it was unrequited, but romantic love nonetheless.

I see - I see Bella's the same way. I think both had 'romantic' rather than 'platonic' emotions and both were unrequited as the person they had emotions for never had returned their romantic feelings.

Im not talking about his actions towards Harry though. The spying, the manipulating, the risks he took made him extremely brave. Spying for DD was a selfless act. How he acted towards Harry and most of the students not in his house were wrong. But IMO, that doesnt make him any less brave. It makes him mean. And cruel. But he is still brave for going to Voldemort when everyday he could have been killed.

I understand. I guess I just don't see his bravery as anything different in calibur than anyone else's. They were all taking risks and being manipulated by Dumbledore (or Voldemort, depending what side they were on). So everyone in the story was brave.

What I was confused about was the term you used: 'selfless bravery'. You connected it to Snape's actions toward Harry (protecting him) - that is why I brought up the other aspect of Snape's actions toward Harry - all of them were not selfless, imo.

What I was confused about was the term you used: 'selfless bravery'. You connected it to Snape's actions toward Harry (protecting him) - that is why I brought up the other aspect of Snape's actions toward Harry - all of them were not selfless, imo.

I see. My apologies, and yes, I agree that his other actions may not have been very brave. Letting go of the past would have been much braver than being so mean to Harry, IMO.

I see. My apologies, and yes, I agree that his other actions may not have been very brave. Letting go of the past would have been much braver than being so mean to Harry, IMO.

I agree with you, but that is the other thing. It didn't have to be that difficult. He could have held onto the past and still been civil to Harry, just as Sirius did.

But Snape's problem was bigger than that because we are just referring to his personal deal with Harry. In addition, he had a real problem as a professor in behaving in a cruel and bullying manner with all of the kids except the Slytherins. So part of Snape's problem was a behavioral/personality defect that affected everyone around him, imo. So even if he had not transferred his feelings associated with Harry's parents to Harry, he would have still treat him poorly like he did the other students. Harry was just getting a double whammy.

I agree with this. Snape showed a favouritism that teachers should never have, and if they do have they should never show. McGonnagal favoured Gryffindors over the other students, but there was no way on earth that anyone would have been able to drag that fact out of her.

I agree with you, but that is the other thing. It didn't have to be that difficult. He could have held onto the past and still been civil to Harry, just as Sirius did.

But Snape's problem was bigger than that because we are just referring to his personal deal with Harry. In addition, he had a real problem as a professor in behaving in a cruel and bullying manner with all of the kids except the Slytherins. So part of Snape's problem was a behavioral/personality defect that affected everyone around him, imo. So even if he had not transferred his feelings associated with Harry's parents to Harry, he would have still treat him poorly like he did the other students. Harry was just getting a double whammy.

I agree.
He wasnt exactly friendly now was he?
It seems the only person he wasnt cruel to was Dumbledore, the man who knew his true feelings. We dont see too much interaction between Snape and other professors, but do you think the reason why he was so reasonable to Dumbledore was that Dumbledore knew Snape better than everyone else?

I agree.
He wasnt exactly friendly now was he?
It seems the only person he wasnt cruel to was Dumbledore, the man who knew his true feelings. We dont see too much interaction between Snape and other professors, but do you think the reason why he was so reasonable to Dumbledore was that Dumbledore knew Snape better than everyone else?

Well Dumbledore knew his secret that he didn't wish to get out; Dumbledore was also his director (as Headmaster and head of the Order). So Snape was in a subserviant position to Dumbledore and I think he recognized that. Dumbledore's reaction would have been far different to Tonks if Snape had treated him that way - Dumbledore would not have run off crying. :lol:. So part of the reason was that Snape was not on equal footing with Dumbledore. Also I think he had respect for Dumbledore like everyone did - he had proven himself to be a great wizard after all. Plus, Dumbledore treated him fairly on the surface, as he treated everyone else. But he was not always reasonable with Dumbledore either - he did squabble with Dumbledore at times and even defy him.

I still believe Snape wished to be Dumbledore's right hand man - his #1 guy. Snape wanted to be in the know about everything - especially concerning Harry. This goes back to the power quest he'd had since he was a child. So that too may have played into his sometimes better behavior with Dumbledore - he was the same way with Voldemort (albeit for different reasons) However, at some point, Snape realized that Dumbledore had no #1 men - that he did not share everything with anyone. Perhaps it was when Dumbledore told him that he realized he would have to settle for being simply another Order member.

Perhaps it was when Dumbledore told him that he realized he would have to settle for being simply another Order member.

Umm - when did that happen? I don't remember it - can you give me a chapter ref please?

Umm - when did that happen? I don't remember it - can you give me a chapter ref please? I think wickedwickedboy is referring to the memory [DH chp. 33 The Princes tale] where Severus wants to know what Dumbledore is telling Harry (a boy who hasn't even mastered legilimency...) and Dumbledore doesn't tell him and says I prefer not to put all my secrets in one basked


IMO Snape respects prowess and competence, that's why he really respects Dumbledore and treats McGonagall politely.(IMO Voldemort's failure to realize that Snape couldn't be loyal to Lily's murderer, made Snape disdain Voldemort.) But I think there is more between him and Dumbldore, it's friendship. After Dumbledore got hit by the curse on the ring Snape scolds him for hurting himself, he is not going on about the damage Dumbledore had done to the cause or anything, it's Dumbledore he cares about. :huggles:
He taunts Tonks because she loves one of his archenemies, I don't think it's because of herself, he really means Lupin. When it comes to the Marauders, the man who prides himself on his logic gets very unreasonable ;)

I think wickedwickedboy is referring to the memory [DH chp. 33 The Princes tale] where Severus wants to know what Dumbledore is telling Harry (a boy who hasn't even mastered legilimency...) and Dumbledore doesn't tell him and says I prefer not to put all my secrets in one basked

That occured to me but if that is what Wick meant he & I really don't see that statment the same way :), I just didn't want to disregard it on those grounds without at least finding out what he meant/was reffering to :)

IMO Snape respects prowess and competence, that's why he really respects Dumbledore and treats McGonagall politely.(IMO Voldemort's failure to realize that Snape couldn't be loyal to Lily's murderer, made Snape disdain Voldemort.)

I agree, although I got the impression in PS that he & McGonagall have more than just a polite relationship, I'm not saying they were best budds or anything but it looked like they had a 'friendly' rivalary as heads of competeing houses jmo :)

He taunts Tonks because she loves one of his archenemies, I don't think it's because of herself, he really means Lupin.

That's how I always saw it - it was not imo a coment about the strength of Tonks patronus but that Snape saw Lupin as 'weak' - one could se that as much as a hint as taunting imo :) I certainly think it matches with things Lupin has said himself about not standing up to his friends and I suspec that it is this 'weakness' that is Snape's main reason for not liking/trusting Lupin. :)

That occured to me but if that is what Wick meant he & I really don't see that statment the same way :), I just didn't want to disregard it on those grounds without at least finding out what he meant/was reffering to :)

Well I think Snape was smart enough to figure it out on his own way back when he was complaining about it outside. But when Dumbledore told him he preferred not to put all his eggs in one basket, that was a definitive and affirmative statement, so Snape could hardly fail to understand it, imo.

I agree, although I got the impression in PS that he & McGonagall have more than just a polite relationship, I'm not saying they were best budds or anything but it looked like they had a 'friendly' rivalary as heads of competeing houses jmo :)

I agree that all of the heads of house had a rivalry and were civil to one another (some had been there 15-20 years together) But I think if they had managed to have even a semblance of anything like friendship, McGonagall would not have immediately turned on him when Harry said he'd killed Dumbledore. There was nothing from her like "there must be some mistake".

That's how I always saw it - it was not imo a coment about the strength of Tonks patronus but that Snape saw Lupin as 'weak' - one could se that as much as a hint as taunting imo :) I certainly think it matches with things Lupin has said himself about not standing up to his friends and I suspec that it is this 'weakness' that is Snape's main reason for not liking/trusting Lupin. :)

But he wasn't talking to Lupin was he? His hurtful comment was aimed directly and according to the canon, maliciously at Tonks. I am sure it did implicate Remus, but it didn't hurt Remus at all. I should mention that Snape would be behaving in a quite immature, unreasonable and well...just plain silly manner, if he wished to hurt Tonks due to Lupin not standing up to his friends some sixteen years before. That may be why - I mean he is known for unfair and illogical transference of his feelings about one person to another, but I rather believe he was just a malicious kind of guy - nothing normally had to drive him to behave in a nasty manner toward others (i.e., is comment about Hermione's teeth), why would that situation be different?

The truth is, I doubt Snape felt Lupin had wanted to (and occassionally did) stand up to his friends - that was only something the readers and Harry found out about. As far as Snape was concerned, Lupin was happy to have his friends go at Snape as most kids would feel, so he wouldn't see it as a "weakness" at all, imo. I mean Remus didn't talk to Snape about leaving his friends alone either as far as we know.

Well I think Snape was smart enough to figure it out on his own way back when he was complaining about it outside. But when Dumbledore told him he preferred not to put all his eggs in one basket, that was a definitive and affirmative statement, so Snape could hardly fail to understand it, imo.

This is not a dispute about what was said, but what Snape, or a reader, might suppose it meant. To me, this was a simple and straightforward restatement of what, in spy thrillers, is called "the need to know". Albus tells Snape that the information he asked after, is something he particularly does not want Snape to know, not because Snape is "just another member of the Order", but because Snape's uniquely dangerous role as a spy means Albus is loath to tell him things that he does not want Voldemort to know.

I really don't see how you take "dangling on Voldemort's arm" and Albus's appreication of the great danger Snape faces, and produce from it "just another member of the Order". Both of those statements seem to me to refer to very unique aspects of Snape's role.

This is how I think Snape took it. I think he accepted the reasoning, too. In DH he was in a situation where he could have tried to force these sorts of facts from Albus - as Headmaster, he had the aithority to commend the portraits. Intead, he continued to take the advice of Albus's portrait, and accepted its decisions about what it might be to dangerous to the mission ofr him to know. (The specific example I have in mind, is Snape's conversation with the porttraits as he departs to bring Harry the sword).

There was nothing from her like "there must be some mistake".

Rather like the reaction to Sirius Black's betrayal of the Potters and mass-murder of Muggles, no? ;)

Sadly, Hermione is one of the very few Gryffindors we see with her nose constantly in a book. Most of the others seem to talk Quidditch or prank. Like Percy, Severus would have stuck out like a sore thumb, especially with the Marauders and their attitude toward life dominating the Common Room.

Well, it seems Lupin was also not averse to reading, if his behaviour in SWM is any indication. Maybe he and Severus would have found something else in common and become friends, and the Marauders as we know them wouldn't even exist. :) Besides, Severus himself was not above pranks, what with his silly toenail-growing spells in the HBP book. :D

Well, it seems Lupin was also not averse to reading, if his behaviour in SWM is any indication. Maybe he and Severus would have found something else in common and become friends, and the Marauders as we know them wouldn't even exist. :) Besides, Severus himself was not above pranks, what with his silly toenail-growing spells in the HBP book. :D

:lol: True enough. It's possible that in both Gryffindor and Slytherin, that attitude would have been fostered by his peers. As a 9-year-old, we see some anger and ambition, but little of that carefree attitude that 11-year-old James and Sirius seemed to have, which developed into...pranking. That leads me to believe that while everyone has a bit of a mischievous side, Snape's grew more prominent because he had peers who valued pranking. Possibly he would have developed the same fondness for pranking anyway if he had been sorted into Gryffindor.

Remus and Severus as friends...:whistle: Wow, what an alternate universe that would be...It would be kind of cool, too. :lol: I think that's a fanfic just waiting to be written. http://e.deviantart.com/emoticons/w/work.gif

This is not a dispute about what was said, but what Snape, or a reader, might suppose it meant. To me, this was a simple and straightforward restatement of what, in spy thrillers, is called "the need to know". Albus tells Snape that the information he asked after, is something he particularly does not want Snape to know, not because Snape is "just another member of the Order", but because Snape's uniquely dangerous role as a spy means Albus is loath to tell him things that he does not want Voldemort to know.

I really don't see how you take "dangling on Voldemort's arm" and Albus's appreication of the great danger Snape faces, and produce from it "just another member of the Order". Both of those statements seem to me to refer to very unique aspects of Snape's role.

"Just another member of the Order" is not derrogatory by any means. Sirius, Lupin, James, Lily, Hestia, Peter, Kingsley, Moody, Tonks, et al., were all "Just another member of the Order" individually. They too got information on a need to know basis, imo. I do not see Snape's work as elevated in any way above the others and I don't think Dumbledore did either. We didn't hear any more about Snape's "dangerous" adventures in spying than we did Lupin's "dangerous adventures" in spying on werewolves or Kingsleys "dangerous adventures" as a double agent in the Ministry. So it is really dependent on the reader to imagine these adventures and come up with their own conclusion as to what level of danger each Order member faced. Others were not spies, and merely Order members and they were killed - so one surely cannot say they did not face grave "danger" in their duties, proven by their deaths alone.

And to stave off a side shoot conversation, I do not apply Harry's statement "probably the bravest man I ever knew" to every situation involving Snape. In context, he was attempting to persuade his son that Slytherin was as a good house as any other and Snape was the only Slytherin example he could use that would be known to his son. So that does not help in this situation, imo, as it would not apply to Harry believing Snape bullying children or Snape's chosing to be a death eater in order to garner power 'brave'.

Nonetheless, I was speaking from Snape's perspective and his desire to know more relative to his underlying desire to be powerful.

This is how I think Snape took it. I think he accepted the reasoning, too. In DH he was in a situation where he could have tried to force these sorts of facts from Albus - as Headmaster, he had the aithority to commend the portraits. Intead, he continued to take the advice of Albus's portrait, and accepted its decisions about what it might be to dangerous to the mission ofr him to know. (The specific example I have in mind, is Snape's conversation with the porttraits as he departs to bring Harry the sword).

I agree Snape accepted it also. I do not believe he could have commanded Dumbledore's portrait though; it was clearly distinct from the others in its ability to interact beyond a mere "imprint" of itself, imo.

Rather like the reaction to Sirius Black's betrayal of the Potters and mass-murder of Muggles, no? ;)

Absolutely - Sirius did not have a friendship relationship with McGonagall at that time either, not even a semblance of one, imo.

Snape wanted to be in the know about everything - especially concerning Harry. This goes back to the power quest he'd had since he was a child.

While I agree that Snape probably did want to know everything about Harry – I really disagree with your interpretation of his reasons for wanting that. To me it seems more likely that as he has both promised and dedicated his life to protecting Harry – it is very likely that he wanted to know as much as possible in order to do so.

I also thing that, given the timing, he may have been trying to find a way that Hary didn’t have to be sacrificed but this is all my interpretation

But he wasn't talking to Lupin was he? His hurtful comment was aimed directly and according to the canon, maliciously at Tonks.

No he wasn't talking to Lupin - that is one of the reasons why I said that it may have been a hint to Tonks that she was making a mistake getting involved with / pining over Lupin. It is true that we have cannon that the comment was aimed directly at Tonks but we have only Harry’s opinion that it was done maliciously – and Harry has been shown in cannon to be very bad at correctly interpreting Snape’s motivation; The Man With Two Faces (PS/SS) springs to mind as one of many examples of this :)

The truth is, I doubt Snape felt Lupin had wanted to (and occassionally did) stand up to his friends - that was only something the readers and Harry found out about. As far as Snape was concerned, Lupin was happy to have his friends go at Snape as most kids would feel, so he wouldn't see it as a "weakness" at all, imo. I mean Remus didn't talk to Snape about leaving his friends alone either as far as we know.

Well that might be your interpretation but it certainly isn’t everyone’s :) We have very little cannon about what Snape saw of Lupin’s relationship with the rest of the Marauders and none that I can think of that conclusively proves your interpretation.

This is not a dispute about what was said, but what Snape, or a reader, might suppose it meant. To me, this was a simple and straightforward restatement of what, in spy thrillers, is called "the need to know".

:tu: That’s pretty much the way I interpreted it too

I do not apply Harry's statement "probably the bravest man I ever knew" to every situation involving Snape. In context, he was attempting to persuade his son that Slytherin was as a good house as any other and Snape was the only Slytherin example he could use that would be known to his son. So that does not help in this situation, imo, as it would not apply to Harry believing Snape bullying children or Snape's chosing to be a death eater in order to garner power 'brave'.


Well I gues that's another thing we interpret very differently - Personally I feel that's a stretch but each to thier own as they say! :)


I do not believe he could have commanded Dumbledore's portrait though; it was clearly distinct from the others in its ability to interact beyond a mere "imprint" of itself, imo.

I believe that it s cannon that both the headmasters portraits at Hogswarts are more than a mere "imprint" of its subject unlike normal portraits and that they are bound to serve the current headmater. This means that Snape would have had the power to order partrait!Dumbledore to tell him anything – including all his secret plans. Perhaps he understood why Dumbledore had not told him.

Perhaps he even understood that at the time & Dumbledore understood that Snape needed to ‘let off steam’ about his frustration – just an idea :)


Absolutely - Sirius did not have a friendship relationship with McGonagall at that time either, not even a semblance of one, imo.

I thought Zara was making a point that in some circumstances (such as murder of someone your friends care about – for example) even one friends ight not stop and listen – grief & anger make it hard to stop & listen, look at Harry at the end of OotP :) Of course I might be misunderstanding Zara

The truth is, I doubt Snape felt Lupin had wanted to (and occassionally did) stand up to his friends - that was only something the readers and Harry found out about. As far as Snape was concerned, Lupin was happy to have his friends go at Snape as most kids would feel, so he wouldn't see it as a "weakness" at all, imo. I mean Remus didn't talk to Snape about leaving his friends alone either as far as we know.

I would agree that Snape was not aware of the extent to which Remus did or didn't step in, not being privy to the Marauders' private conversations. But I don't exactly understand 1) why he wouldn't see Lupin's perceived inaction as a weakness, and 2) what is meant by "happy to have his friends go at Snape as most kids would feel". Are you implying that most kids would be all right if their friends bullied a peer? That doesn't give most children nearly enough credit. A lot of them are decent.

I should mention that Snape would be behaving in a quite immature, unreasonable and well...just plain silly manner

He does that occasionally. ;) Humans aren't Vulcans-- they do sometimes behave illogically.

But in this particular case, I think Snape's words were addressed to Tonks, about Lupin. Throughout HBP, Tonks is distracted and depressed because Lupin is rejecting her advances and she is worried about him. But she also has to patrol the castle and protect the children. I think Snape is aggravated at her because he thinks her feelings are distracting her and getting in the way of her job-- and over someone as "weak" as Lupin.

While I agree that Snape probably did want to know everything about Harry – I really disagree with your interpretation of his reasons for wanting that. To me it seems more likely that as he has both promised and dedicated his life to protecting Harry – it is very likely that he wanted to know as much as possible in order to do so.

I don't know what you mean by "dedicated his life" and I don't wish to put words in your mouth. But my understanding of that term would include being at a minimum, civil to Harry, but certainly not mistreating, bullying or abusing him - all of which Snape did, imo. It would also mean spending the majority of one's time dedicated to the task, but Snape only ended up having to spend a portion of 6.5 years doing so of the total 22 years following his changing sides. So I would have to disagree based on my understanding of that term.

I also thing that, given the timing, he may have been trying to find a way that Hary didn’t have to be sacrificed but this is all my interpretation

Snape began his inquiry and complained about it to Dumbledore prior to finding out that Harry had to be sacrified, so I am unsure what you mean.

No he wasn't talking to Lupin - that is one of the reasons why I said that it may have been a hint to Tonks that she was making a mistake getting involved with / pining over Lupin. It is true that we have cannon that the comment was aimed directly at Tonks but we have only Harry’s opinion that it was done maliciously – and Harry has been shown in cannon to be very bad at correctly interpreting Snape’s motivation; The Man With Two Faces (PS/SS) springs to mind as one of many examples of this :)

Well you did say 'hint' - but then you went on to say Snape's reason was because of his feelings about Lupin arising out of incidents that took place some 16 to 20 years previously. That was the bit I was addressing. Any hints he might wish to give Tonks based on that reason would be behaving in an unreasonable and silly manner to me. I don't personally feel that is what was going on, but I respect your opinion if you believe it was.

As for Harry's interpretation, that is all we have. I personally cannot say that every interpretation Harry made was misguided or else I have no impression of Snape at all. Thus, I cannot pick and choose them either and decide that for this or that one Harry is right and in others he is wrong, unless canon makes it clear that Harry's impression is wrong. So imo, Harry was correct in the many instances he recognized maliciousness in Snape.

Well that might be your interpretation but it certainly isn’t everyone’s :) We have very little cannon about what Snape saw of Lupin’s relationship with the rest of the Marauders and none that I can think of that conclusively proves your interpretation.

I agree, I just do not see how Snape would know Lupin's feelings seeing as they were not friends - ever - at that level. And I don't think that we can base Lupin's reactions to all of the Marauder's encounters on Snape on SWM. I doubt Lupin was as reticent if Snape were the one starting things or discovered in the act of following them around. So imo, it would be more likely that Snape would not have seen Lupin in any different light than he saw the other Marauders. Not to mention that I think - oddly enough - it is a rather harsh judgment on Snape. It is truly an extremely petty exercise to begrudge for a weakness, especially in a man like Snape who has so many of his own. I think he does perhaps do so at times, but I don't think that it is something he'd hold a grudge over - he tended to hold grudges over percieved wrongs (real or otherwise).

I believe that it s cannon that both the headmasters portraits at Hogswarts are more than a mere "imprint" of its subject unlike normal portraits

When you say "both", which portraits are you referring to? Dumbledore and...?

and that they are bound to serve the current headmater. This means that Snape would have had the power to order partrait!Dumbledore to tell him anything – including all his secret plans. Perhaps he understood why Dumbledore had not told him.

They are only bound in as far as the Headmaster is legitimate and Snape was not considered so by the Headmasters office at the time - something overriden by Dumbledore. I think that indicates who had the power in that situation - Dumbledore. Also, Dumbledore may not have imprinted himself with "all" of his knowledge, precisely because he was wary of who might be in the office. So we don't even know how much Dumbledore's portrait knew. Finally, Dumbledore's autonomy as a portriat was greater than that of the other Headmasters in the canon, imo, so traditional rules cannot automatically apply, imo.

Perhaps he even understood that at the time & Dumbledore understood that Snape needed to ‘let off steam’ about his frustration – just an idea :)

That is what I said also - I felt Snape had already pretty much reached the conclusion back when he initially complained which was not to Dumbledore and before he did so to the Elderly Wizard. :tu:

thought Zara was making a point that in some circumstances (such as murder of someone your friends care about – for example) even one friends ight not stop and listen – grief & anger make it hard to stop & listen, look at Harry at the end of OotP :) Of course I might be misunderstanding Zara

But McGonagall was not "friends" with Sirius, so I don't understand your point. What reason would she have to stop and listen to Sirius? And it was the same with Snape, imo. The two never exhibited anything more than cordial relations at best, undercut by competition I agree. So I don't see anything between them that renders her immediate belief in Snape being a loyal Death Eater (and feeling Dumbledore had been fooled) odd behavior. It would be odd if they had a relationship though.

If perchance we are speaking about Remus and Sirius - then grand assumptions are being made if one assumes Remus didn't question the situation when Sirius was imprisoned. He very likely - I would say most assuredly - spoke to Dumbledore about it with incredulty because he very well knew how close Sirius had been to the Potters. But the evidence was completely daming so... But perhaps this is not what was meant.

I would agree that Snape was not aware of the extent to which Remus did or didn't step in, not being privy to the Marauders' private conversations. But I don't exactly understand 1) why he wouldn't see Lupin's perceived inaction as a weakness, and 2) what is meant by "happy to have his friends go at Snape as most kids would feel". Are you implying that most kids would be all right if their friends bullied a peer? That doesn't give most children nearly enough credit. A lot of them are decent.

In answer:

1) Because if he thought Lupin was in agreement with his friends and that is why he didn't say anything, then it would not be perceived as a weakness. Snape may have felt he didn't join in himself because he was a prefect and wished to personally evade demotion.

2) Lupin said in HBP that he wouldn't ever have more than a civil relationship with Snape, because of all that went on between Snape and his friends in the past. Later relayed the fact that Sectumsempra had always been Snape's specialty curse. Finally, there was his previous statement that Snape attacked James at every opportunity in 7th year. So regardless of what readers think, Lupin did see something in the past that made him feel something more than Snape was a victim, imo, or his words would make no sense. Why would he have a problem becoming friendly with a victim? Imo, he would not because being a victim is something Lupin understood all too well.

Hence, imo, Lupin saw it as mutual fighting and understood that his responsibility was to stop initiators (which his friends definitely were at times) and he did not. He felt bad about that. As far as we know, he never said anything to Snape for his initiating moves either.

All of that said, many kids side with their friends in mutual battles. But some don't - Hermione, Lupin and Lily expressed disdain for hex wars their friends were invovled in at times. Other times, Hermione and Lupin did not (I don't know about Lily). Lupin's reasons, like Hermione's were his own.

So from Snape's point of view, Lupin saying nothing could simply be his agreement with his friends that mutual hex wars merited their starting things at times. That was Snape's relationship with his own friends, based on the little canon we have; he felt it was just a laugh when his friends used dark magic on Mary - so he took their part - and in your words would be "indecent" for doing so. But that is just how many people respond - with loyalty to their friends. They don't think of it as indecent. Snape may have felt Lupin was responding in the way he did to his own friends' terrible behavior (or they to him). However others, people like Hermione, Lupin and Lily, might share your opinion. Those are the only three I can think of off the top of my head, but on the other side, off the top of my head (to show you why I said majority), I list: Harry, Ron, Ginny, Peter Fred, George, Crabbe, Snape, Goyle, Draco, James, and Sirius, who all took their friend's part in canon in such situations.


But in this particular case, I think Snape's words were addressed to Tonks, about Lupin. Throughout HBP, Tonks is distracted and depressed because Lupin is rejecting her advances and she is worried about him. But she also has to patrol the castle and protect the children. I think Snape is aggravated at her because he thinks her feelings are distracting her and getting in the way of her job-- and over someone as "weak" as Lupin.

I would respectfully disagree that Tonk's behavior would aggrevate Snape. First, there is no canon that Tonks was unable to do her job. Indeed she had found Harry when noting him missing. Second, Snape was never shown to display aggrevation at how others carried on their work. He taunted Sirius in the same manner, knowing fully well that Sirius could not leave the house. He simply wished to be cruel, imo. If he wished to be helpful to Tonks, he knew fully well the way to do so did not include ridiculing her about her "sore spot". Certainly he learned that lesson when he called Lily a "Mudblood". So imo, he acted intentfully to hurt Tonks. I agree it involved Lupin in that they were speaking about the patronus, but indicating Lupin was weak would only hurt Tonks and that, I feel, was his purpose.

I thought Zara was making a point that in some circumstances (such as murder of someone your friends care about – for example) even one friends ight not stop and listen – grief & anger make it hard to stop & listen, look at Harry at the end of OotP :) Of course I might be misunderstanding Zara

This is indeed what I meant. It appears no one entertained any doubts about Sirius's perfidy. I did not mean McGonagall specifically - no one at all in the Order seems to have doubted he deserved to be locked away in Azkaban.

Likewise, having heard a similarly reliable eyewitness account of Severus's murder of Albus, no one questioned that he was a loyal DE after all.

This is indeed what I meant. It appears no one entertained any doubts about Sirius's perfidy. I did not mean McGonagall specifically - no one at all in the Order seems to have doubted he deserved to be locked away in Azkaban.

But I just recalled: even 12 years later McGonagall was expressing surprise when she retold the story. She was bemused that Sirius could have done it because he and James had been like brothers. So I would have to contend that you are mistaken. And since we didn't see anyone else's immediate or long term reaction, I don't think we can make an analogy in this regard.

Likewise, having heard a similarly reliable eyewitness account of Severus's murder of Albus, no one questioned that he was a loyal DE after all.

But not likewise because we saw the reaction of everyone in the room and the only surprise was that Snape had managed to fool Dumbldore. There was no statements like: "There must be some mistake. How could Snape ever do that! He loved Dumbledore like a father or good friend!" He was immediately relegated to a Death Eater, likely because he'd been one before and no one knew him well enough to counter the notion.

Continued from the Ravenclaw House: Group Character Analysis thread.

I highly doubt he made anything to benefit his Slytherin house in that way simply because if he had, I think it would have been common knowledge around that house.

I do have to agree tho that he seemed very frustrated with the instruction he was being given and thus it probably lead him to come up with things on his own, which would, to me, make him perfect for Ravenclaw. But for one flaw....

Exactly what you said... he had the ambition and drive to want to make himself something, or someone else, someone better. I think that's what drove him into Slytherin instead of Ravenclaw.

:lol: You know, I really love the way you say that Snape wanted to make himself "someone better". Because that's what he truly ended up doing, right? He became a better person in the end. He sure got his wish, but not in the way he originally expected. ;)

I wouldn't argue for one House or the other. What's done is done...or, better yet, who's Sorted is Sorted. He could have fit anywhere.

I highly doubt he made anything to benefit his Slytherin house in that way simply because if he had, I think it would have been common knowledge around that house.


Well, we don't have much evidence that it wasn't common knowledge in Slytherin House. We only have testimony from Remus (a Gryffindor) that he had never heard of the Half-Blood Prince.

But even so, the nickname could easily have been kept hidden by Snape (it's a bit of a personal name, huh?) while knowledge of the spells he made spread. That would explain how Levicorpus became a fad while the Marauders remained in the dark as to who invented it.

Continued from the Ravenclaw House: Group Character Analysis thread.



:lol: You know, I really love the way you say that Snape wanted to make himself "someone better". Because that's what he truly ended up doing, right? He became a better person in the end. He sure got his wish, but not in the way he originally expected. ;)

I wouldn't argue for one House or the other. What's done is done...or, better yet, who's Sorted is Sorted. He could have fit anywhere.

I really think Snape wanted to be BETTER. Now, what his definition of better was, we'll never really know since we can't see into his mind. But I can see how the Dark Arts appealed to the kid who never had anything. I think it's too bad he didn't use the ingenuity he obviously had to a higher degree instead of taking the easy way out, cause he'd have been a much different Snape IMO. Of course then we wouldn't have anything to debate *G*

And you're right, he got what he wanted, just not in the way he wanted I think. And I think it's this realization that makes him seek out Dumbledore



Well, we don't have much evidence that it wasn't common knowledge in Slytherin House. We only have testimony from Remus (a Gryffindor) that he had never heard of the Half-Blood Prince.

But even so, the nickname could easily have been kept hidden by Snape (it's a bit of a personal name, huh?) while knowledge of the spells he made spread. That would explain how Levicorpus became a fad while the Marauders remained in the dark as to who invented it.

I think if it had been common knowledge we'd have heard about it before then. It's shown that some spells kind of go thru fads, and while we can hope that such a harmful spell would not be used willy-nilly, I think there would have been rumors of its existence. But we never really heard anything of the sort.

True, it could have been hidden, I just don't see it. I have to wonder if after creating it, Snape was a bit unsure of actually using it on someone. He obviously could have done a lot of damage to any of his tormentors (Not just James) if he'd wanted, but he never did that we're aware of...

I think if it had been common knowledge we'd have heard about it before then. It's shown that some spells kind of go thru fads, and while we can hope that such a harmful spell would not be used willy-nilly, I think there would have been rumors of its existence. But we never really heard anything of the sort.

Wait, are we talking about Levicorpus or Sectumsempra? Because Levicorpus is only damaging if misused, as we see in SWM and in GoF with the DEs at the QWC. It can be used for a joke, as Harry did with Ron.

My reasoning for Levicorpus being shown to the Slytherins is that since we hear from Remus that the spell was a minor fad, it must have spread throughout the school somehow. Snape, being somewhat paranoid in his teenage years (twitchy gait in SWM, almost expecting an attack), would probably not go around showing his spells to just anyone, though. But he could probably trust his Slytherin friends to appreciate these hexes. And whether he wanted them spread or not, the truth is that it's hard to keep things secret-- especially in a House that values ambition. Some Slytherins may have blabbed, starting the Levicorpus fad.

And since it was a minor fad from the 70's that mainly took place in a single boarding school, it's not exactly surprising that Muggle-raised Harry Potter would not hear much about it (besides the aforementioned QWC incident. If that, indeed, was Levicorpus.)

I have to wonder if after creating it, Snape was a bit unsure of actually using it on someone. He obviously could have done a lot of damage to any of his tormentors (Not just James) if he'd wanted, but he never did that we're aware of...

Well, he did use one spell of his own creation: Sectumsempra on James during SWM-- a smaller, and possibly more controlled version.

I myself have doubts, though, that he went around using Sectumsempra multiple times during his schooldays. If he'd done that, it would be immediate expulsion.

I'd say that if he did use his spells on people like James, it would be the minor hexes, like the toenail hex or Langlock. Langlock is especially good for self-defence if it was James. That one would be very useful if your opponent didn't know how to cast nonverbally.

Wait, are we talking about Levicorpus or Sectumsempra? Because Levicorpus is only damaging if misused, as we see in SWM and in GoF with the DEs at the QWC. It can be used for a joke, as Harry did with Ron.

Sorry, I was talking about Sectumsempra:)

My reasoning for Levicorpus being shown to the Slytherins is that since we hear from Remus that the spell was a minor fad, it must have spread throughout the school somehow. Snape, being somewhat paranoid in his teenage years (twitchy gait in SWM, almost expecting an attack), would probably not go around showing his spells to just anyone, though. But he could probably trust his Slytherin friends to appreciate these hexes. And whether he wanted them spread or not, the truth is that it's hard to keep things secret-- especially in a House that values ambition. Some Slytherins may have blabbed, starting the Levicorpus fad.

I would agree with you on this.

Well, he did use one spell of his own creation: Sectumsempra on James during SWM-- a smaller, and possibly more controlled version.

I myself have doubts, though, that he went around using Sectumsempra multiple times during his schooldays. If he'd done that, it would be immediate expulsion.

I agree. He obviously had the power and control to use it, but I don't see him tossing it around just because.

I'd say that if he did use his spells on people like James, it would be the minor hexes, like the toenail hex or Langlock. Langlock is especially good for self-defence if it was James. That one would be very useful if your opponent didn't know how to cast nonverbally.

Again I have to agree. I don't think Snape would have risked getting thrown out of school if he could help it. Not with something as big as a really, really damaging curse. I also think he would have been hesitant to use it in the beginning knowing the kind of damage it could inflict. I think the first time he used it he was probably as surprised as Harry was.

Again I have to agree. I don't think Snape would have risked getting thrown out of school if he could help it. Not with something as big as a really, really damaging curse. I also think he would have been hesitant to use it in the beginning knowing the kind of damage it could inflict. I think the first time he used it he was probably as surprised as Harry was.

Possibly. I really wish we knew more about that spell's development. Was it simply a chance of him hitting on the right words, or was there experimentation or some gradual spellwork involved? The same with the musical countercurse.

That spell is one of the more fascinating things about young Snape: That he can create something as ugly as Sectumsempra and at the same time, create something so beautiful as the spell to cure it. It really shows how he had the potential for both great good and terrible evil.

Possibly. I really wish we knew more about that spell's development. Was it simply a chance of him hitting on the right words, or was there experimentation or some gradual spellwork involved? The same with the musical countercurse.

That spell is one of the more fascinating things about young Snape: That he can create something as ugly as Sectumsempra and at the same time, create something so beautiful as the spell to cure it. It really shows how he had the potential for both great good and terrible evil.

But we don't know if that is true do we? His learning the countercurse may have actually been performed while he was at Hogwarts, showing his ongoing rejection of Voldemort and DE ways. Actually, I honestly feel that Snape's continued interest in the dark arts did flip to "defense" while he was teaching - that has always been my understanding. I felt things like the countercurse, his words in class, Dumbledore allowing him to teach, his research for a cure for the dark arts against Katie and his ideas about curing Dumbledore's hand of its dark curse all showed this change of heart. It was entirely opposite from the creation of a dark curse "for enemies" - just as Snape rejecting evil was opposite of his changing sides.

This is why I always felt Snape was on the good side no matter what JKR did in the storyline. I said as much before DH - there was too much evidence of change. HBP sealed the deal and his killing Dumbledore was so obviously a red herring I wasn't fooled for a moment. JRK definitvely blew the mystery concerning Snape for me as a reader with HBP.

Possibly. I really wish we knew more about that spell's development. Was it simply a chance of him hitting on the right words, or was there experimentation or some gradual spellwork involved? The same with the musical countercurse.

That spell is one of the more fascinating things about young Snape: That he can create something as ugly as Sectumsempra and at the same time, create something so beautiful as the spell to cure it. It really shows how he had the potential for both great good and terrible evil.

You make a good point. I'd like to think that something as complex as a potion would be something he'd have to fiddle with a bit to get it right. In that same vein, I'd like to think he would have to fiddle with the wording and maybe the intent (Which the intent thing brings me to something regarding Harry and Bella... hmmm) to get the result. And we don't know for SURE he got the result he wanted or was even trying for. I don't see him bumbling in the same way the Twins would have been kind of bumbling for the right words tot he Map, but I see him ahving to work for it. We don't have anything to suggest that all of his knowledge didn't come from hard work. I think it's safe to say that Snape is a pretty smart guy despite his huge flaws. That being said, was the countercurse because the spell wasn't what he had wanted it to be when he started? Or did he feel it needed a countercurse in case it fell into the wrong hands? I would LOVE to have known more about Snape's motivations during his earlier years.


But we don't know if that is true do we? His learning the countercurse may have actually been performed while he was at Hogwarts, showing his ongoing rejection of Voldemort and DE ways. Actually, I honestly feel that Snape's continued interest in the dark arts did flip to "defense" while he was teaching - that has always been my understanding. I felt things like the countercurse, his words in class, Dumbledore allowing him to teach, his research for a cure for the dark arts against Katie and his ideas about curing Dumbledore's hand of its dark curse all showed this change of heart. It was entirely opposite from the creation of a dark curse "for enemies" - just as Snape rejecting evil was opposite of his changing sides.

Ok, sit down, this is going to be hard to take. I agree. *G* I think we were shown time and time again where Snape's loyalties really were, if not his motivations behind them. I would like to know if once he got really entrenched in the DE ways if he found he didn't quite have the stomach for it like he thought he would. I guess I liken it to gang members who decide they want out after their buddies and family get shot, etc.

This is why I always felt Snape was on the good side no matter what JKR did in the storyline. I said as much before DH - there was too much evidence of change. HBP sealed the deal and his killing Dumbledore was so obviously a red herring I wasn't fooled for a moment. JRK definitvely blew the mystery concerning Snape for me as a reader with HBP.

You know, I got to read the books all the way thru, so obviously I came into the fandom late. But I always held out hope that there was a lot more to Snape than we were seeing, for all the reasons you listed above. When he killed Dumbledore I was so shocked that SNAPE had killed him given Dumbledore's persistence that he was a good guy. But it was that simple persistence that made he sit back and go... huh... if Dumbledore thinks he's on the right side then there's something to it. I was very happily rewarded in the end *G*

Something I thought of this morning, and I'm not sure there's really anything in canon to support it, it might just be an impression I got....

Did anyone else feel that even tho Snape let his hatred of James color his view towards Harry that there were also times he felt disappointed in Harry because he expected more out of Lily's son?

After everything came to light and I started looking back, I wondered if Snape was upset with Harry a lot of the time because he expected Lily's son to put more effort into it. Harry rarely put effort into Potions because he didn't like Snape. And when it came time to learn Occlumency (I think I spelled that wrong but I'm too lazy to get up and check), Harry was very uninterested in learning it because it was Snape who was teaching it to him. Not saying Harry didn't have a right to his feelings mind you. More than once I got the impression Snape was more frustrated with Harry during those lessons and not angry because he felt it was somethign Harry should have been able to do easily, and would have been able to do if he'd bothered trying.

Ok, sit down, this is going to be hard to take. I agree. *G* I think we were shown time and time again where Snape's loyalties really were, if not his motivations behind them. I would like to know if once he got really entrenched in the DE ways if he found he didn't quite have the stomach for it like he thought he would. I guess I liken it to gang members who decide they want out after their buddies and family get shot, etc.

Well JKR disputed that - she claimed he would have remained a DE if Lily had not been targeted (if I understand you correctly). So it was not a realization that what he was doing was wrong - he still was willing to allow Harry and James die - but rather a desire to save Lily. His change came later and I have said that I feel it was in part due to the better influences about him - Dumbledore and some of the professors.

You know, I got to read the books all the way thru, so obviously I came into the fandom late. But I always held out hope that there was a lot more to Snape than we were seeing, for all the reasons you listed above. When he killed Dumbledore I was so shocked that SNAPE had killed him given Dumbledore's persistence that he was a good guy. But it was that simple persistence that made he sit back and go... huh... if Dumbledore thinks he's on the right side then there's something to it. I was very happily rewarded in the end *G*

I didn't need Dumbledore's trust though. I thought JKR blew it in a myriad of other ways. But the death scene blew it big time for me. Dumbledore would have said 100 other things before "please Severus" - and that blew the big red herring definitively. She gave him a very negative character, having nothing to do with evil and that also makes it easy to see him as 'evil' I suppose. But that actually worked the opposite for me because there was no point in having him behaving in a cruel and bullying manner just to say - oh by the way, he's evil. :lol:.

Something I thought of this morning, and I'm not sure there's really anything in canon to support it, it might just be an impression I got....

Did anyone else feel that even tho Snape let his hatred of James color his view towards Harry that there were also times he felt disappointed in Harry because he expected more out of Lily's son?

He said he expected much more out of the boy who was supposed to kill Voldemort. I don't think it was based on either James or Lily ability/skill wise as they were both better than Harry in school based on what we know - James decidedly so. So I think it was more because Harry was the 'chosen one' and Snape disdained a boy who in his view, was very mediocre. He didn't understand (or like Voldemort, rejected) the 'love' part.

After everything came to light and I started looking back, I wondered if Snape was upset with Harry a lot of the time because he expected Lily's son to put more effort into it. Harry rarely put effort into Potions because he didn't like Snape. And when it came time to learn Occlumency (I think I spelled that wrong but I'm too lazy to get up and check), Harry was very uninterested in learning it because it was Snape who was teaching it to him. Not saying Harry didn't have a right to his feelings mind you. More than once I got the impression Snape was more frustrated with Harry during those lessons and not angry because he felt it was somethign Harry should have been able to do easily, and would have been able to do if he'd bothered trying.

Well if that were the case, you would have to imagine he'd give Harry at least a half year to adjust to magic - since he'd not lived in the magical world at all (which Snape and all the professors knew). But Snape started in on him day one, demeaning him for being called a hero when he had no talent. And he continued to behave in that manner throughout, even when Harry did show signs of greatness. He constantly put it down to luck and friends, ignoring Harry's greatest gift, although I imagine Dumbledore told him. But Snape always took the most negative view of the Potter boys - that was his MO.

Did anyone else feel that even tho Snape let his hatred of James color his view towards Harry that there were also times he felt disappointed in Harry because he expected more out of Lily's son?

After everything came to light and I started looking back, I wondered if Snape was upset with Harry a lot of the time because he expected Lily's son to put more effort into it. Harry rarely put effort into Potions because he didn't like Snape. And when it came time to learn Occlumency (I think I spelled that wrong but I'm too lazy to get up and check), Harry was very uninterested in learning it because it was Snape who was teaching it to him. Not saying Harry didn't have a right to his feelings mind you. More than once I got the impression Snape was more frustrated with Harry during those lessons and not angry because he felt it was somethign Harry should have been able to do easily, and would have been able to do if he'd bothered trying.

I definately had that impression - not all the time but there are moments where I think you can see the dissapointment rather clearly and I think that Harry being Lily's son has a lot to do with that - probably more that his being 'the chosen one'. I also think that Snape felt that if Lily gave her life for you you should try harder!

I also think that the occlumency lessons make for very interesting reading, you can see Snape trying different ways to try to get Harry to buckle down and learn. I also love the moment when Harry uses Pretego and sees into Snape’s mind - strange how he wasn't cross about that - he even seemed pleased/impressed - one of the things imo that adds to the impression that he is desperately trying to get through to a boy he just doesn't 'get'. I suspect that the idea of The Dark Lord being ale to see into Harry’s mind worries Snape so much because being able to block it is the thing that has keep him alive.

Well if that were the case, you would have to imagine he'd give Harry at least a half year to adjust to magic - since he'd not lived in the magical world at all (which Snape and all the professors knew).

I'm not sure that makes much differance, after all Snape had seen what Lily could do with no training and no knowledge of the magical world - she seemed to have an extraordanary amount of control! So why shouldn't he expect Harry to have something similar????

LOL I've so missed having these dscussions once the Buffy fandom kind of dried up *G*


Well JKR disputed that - she claimed he would have remained a DE if Lily had not been targeted (if I understand you correctly). So it was not a realization that what he was doing was wrong - he still was willing to allow Harry and James die - but rather a desire to save Lily. His change came later and I have said that I feel it was in part due to the better influences about him - Dumbledore and some of the professors.

You'll have to show me the quote cause I'm not familiar with it. Snape could easily have gone two ways with it... it's something you see inner city a lot. Either they get sick of the death and mayhem and want out, or they die by it. There's really not a lot of in between. Even a lot of the gang types (I work in inner city Atlanta, so we run into a lot of the gangs, which is why I use this analogy) who stick around show a lot of desire to get out but just don't see how to do it. I guess I see Snape as one of these types. I'd like to think that at some point he'd get tired of the death and destruction, but the threat to Lily really drove it home that he had started something he couldn't stop. And it was going to deeply effect someone he cared very deeply about. I always though Lily was the catalyst to something that would have happened further out.

I agree that some of the people around him served as a stabilizing influence for Snape. I'm not entirely convinced that they ever really trusted him tho. I think a lot of them merely tolerated him at Dumbledore's insistence.

I didn't need Dumbledore's trust though. I thought JKR blew it in a myriad of other ways. But the death scene blew it big time for me. Dumbledore would have said 100 other things before "please Severus" - and that blew the big red herring definitively. She gave him a very negative character, having nothing to do with evil and that also makes it easy to see him as 'evil' I suppose. But that actually worked the opposite for me because there was no point in having him behaving in a cruel and bullying manner just to say - oh by the way, he's evil. :lol:.

There were a lot of things working for me that didn't have me convinced he was all bad. And of course my own personal hopes that he would redeem himself somewhere along the way played into it I think!

You know, I never thought about it that way RE; the "Please Severus" line. One more reason I need to go back and reread them all. The first time around you're so intent on what's happening that I think a lot of stuff passes you by. So, how much time do you have to put between readings to avoid the "obsessed" label? :lol:

He said he expected much more out of the boy who was supposed to kill Voldemort. I don't think it was based on either James or Lily ability/skill wise as they were both better than Harry in school based on what we know - James decidedly so. So I think it was more because Harry was the 'chosen one' and Snape disdained a boy who in his view, was very mediocre. He didn't understand (or like Voldemort, rejected) the 'love' part.

I got the impression James was good at it, not because he tried but because it just came easily to him. I'm not sure if Lily worked hard or not, or if it just came easily to her as well.

Unfortunately for Snape I think his hatred for James colored a lot of his life, probably even in ways he never would have imagined. Being unable to let go of the past will hurt you in the end, which is again one of Snape's huge character flaws.

I think the "Chosen One' hype annoyed Snape to no end. But I'm not sure it was strictly because of the Voldemort issue. Harry was everything Snape wasn't as a child, just like James was. And going back to the bitterness he felt and was unable to let go of, I think this colored his view of Harry.

Well if that were the case, you would have to imagine he'd give Harry at least a half year to adjust to magic - since he'd not lived in the magical world at all (which Snape and all the professors knew). But Snape started in on him day one, demeaning him for being called a hero when he had no talent. And he continued to behave in that manner throughout, even when Harry did show signs of greatness. He constantly put it down to luck and friends, ignoring Harry's greatest gift, although I imagine Dumbledore told him. But Snape always took the most negative view of the Potter boys - that was his MO.

You're right, one would think he'd have given Harry some adjustment time. But you've got two things at work here.

1. Even tho they were told Harry had no information on the magical world, we don't know how much information Dumbledore gave them about Harry's life. We don't know that they were ever told that the Dursley's pretty much tried to beat the magic out of him, in more ways that one. Even your average Muggle family, as Rowling pointed out, would have noticed something was different about their child. But the Dursley's, at the very least, would never consider the possibilities, and I'm sure if Harry ever brought them up he'd have been soundly punished. We've also seen that magical kids show a lot of things very early on that they can't control, so they know they're different. Harry was never able to express this, and therefore was at an even bigger disadvantage than it shows at first glance.

2. Snape knew Lily in childhood and knew that she showed some skill before ever being formally trained, or even before she knew the truth about what she was.

I'm not sure Snape had the biggest understanding as to how Harry had grown up. In fact, I think if he had, he might have developed a bit of a soft spot for Harry as their childhoods are similar in a lot of ways. Neither one of them were wanted by the families they had and were thought of as lesser clas citizens in their own house.

You're right, Snape always believed the worst in a Potter boy. That goes back to his bitterness and hatred. But Snape also knew something no one else could possibly know: He knew exactly how tough Harry would have it trying to defeat Voldemort. He had served at Voldemort's side and had a better understanding than anyone else of what Harry would face. Snape was never given any encouragement in his life that we know of. Perhaps the only way he knew to bring Harry up to speed was to goad him into wanting to be better.

I dunno, I'll have to go back and reread those chapters, but I still feel that while Snape was giving Harry lessons that he was highly frustrated that harry wasn't doing as well as he should have been and didn't appear to be putting in any effort. Again, only Snape could know how those lessons could have served Harry.

I don't know that any of us could debate that Snape loved Lily (Ok, we could debate it, but I feel like it's been proven well enough). I also think it's very clear he hated James. So which one wins when the product of the thing you loved most in the world hooks up with the thing you hated most in the world? I don't think he could ONLY see Harry as James' son, but that might just be wishful thinking on my part.

Well, if Snape had only seen Harry as James' son, Dumbledore would never have convinced him to protect Harry. That's proof in itself.

Did anyone else feel that even tho Snape let his hatred of James color his view towards Harry that there were also times he felt disappointed in Harry because he expected more out of Lily's son?

I would say that that's correct. We see it a few times, especially in the Occlumency lessons. There's a level of desperation in a few of Snape's rants there that really drive home the idea that he expects more of Harry.

Well, if Snape had only seen Harry as James' son, Dumbledore would never have convinced him to protect Harry. That's proof in itself.

I agree he saw Harry as the son of both - that was one of his main problems JKR said, Harry represented Lily's love for James.

I would say that that's correct. We see it a few times, especially in the Occlumency lessons. There's a level of desperation in a few of Snape's rants there that really drive home the idea that he expects more of Harry.

Except that he bullied all the kids except Slytherins and they were not all James and Lily's kids. We could say that he expected more from all of them, but that does not give him the right to behave in a cruel and bullying manner toward them, imo. In fact, I feel there is no good reason to ever treat children that way - even the interesting idea someone had about his having to show the Slytherin kids that he was a faithful DE. That fails also as an excuse for that type of treatment of children, imo.

I agree he saw Harry as the son of both - that was one of his main problems JKR said, Harry represented Lily's love for James.

Harry represented a lot of things to Snape IMO, things he probably didn't even realize, but I think I've mentioned this before.

Except that he bullied all the kids except Slytherins and they were not all James and Lily's kids. We could say that he expected more from all of them, but that does not give him the right to behave in a cruel and bullying manner toward them, imo. In fact, I feel there is no good reason to ever treat children that way - even the interesting idea someone had about his having to show the Slytherin kids that he was a faithful DE. That fails also as an excuse for that type of treatment of children, imo.

2 things...

1. How much of this was Snape himself and how much of it was what was expected from him? If he had gone easy on students, especially non purebloods, would Voldemort, or other DEs question that? I don't think that was the only reason he behaved this way, but I don't think it can be completely discounted. There seem to be very few people that truly thought Voldemort was gone for good. It seems that a lot of folks fully expected him to pop up again. I guess this goes back to showing the Slytherin kids he was still faithful as a DE.

2. I completely, totally, and wholeheartedly agree that this is never the way you should treat a child. ANY child. But I think Snape always fell back onto behavior he knew and understood. Even tho we'd all like to think all our teachers thought well of us and treated all their students the same, the reality is that it doesn't happen that way. We've all had that one teacher who behaved dreadfully. I think we've all seen teachers who, while never maybe being outwardly mean towards a student, treated the "weird one" differently. And it probably wasn't intentionally a lot of the time. The same way people will give wide berth to someone on the street that's talking to themselves or comes off as a little strange. I think, and yes I realize there's no canon to support it, that Snape was probably treated this way by a lot of people, intentionally and non.

I don't think Snape's change started or ended with Lily. She was a huge part of it, but so was the way he was raised. Snape was, in part, repeating a cycle of abuse that he had suffered. I also don't think that he wouldn't have continued to change, to seek redemption, without Lily's death because I think he would have still felt responsible for the death of James and Harry if he'd managed to save her. And that alone would have kept him from truly being able to face her. I can even see him not letting her know that he had a hand in saving her life, in part because he'd be ashamed, and in part because he'd feel her anger was well placed.

I'm not sure that makes much differance, after all Snape had seen what Lily could do with no training and no knowledge of the magical world - she seemed to have an extraordanary amount of control! So why shouldn't he expect Harry to have something similar????


Sorry Kittling, I missed your question in the shuffle. But I think if Snape truly felt that way, then when Harry used the mega shield charm against him, which worked despite his verbalizing, Snape would have praised him to high heaven. After all, he beat Snape with a verbal spell that sent the professor flying across the room into a desk - a quite powerful shield. So that should have delighted him as it showed Harry's defensive capability was at least increasing from 'mediocre'.

How much of this was Snape himself and how much of it was what was expected from him? If he had gone easy on students, especially non purebloods, would Voldemort, or other DEs question that? I don't think that was the only reason he behaved this way, but I don't think it can be completely discounted. There seem to be very few people that truly thought Voldemort was gone for good. It seems that a lot of folks fully expected him to pop up again. I guess this goes back to showing the Slytherin kids he was still faithful as a DE.

Well I answered how I felt about this in my above post. :)

2. I completely, totally, and wholeheartedly agree that this is never the way you should treat a child. ANY child. But I think Snape always fell back onto behavior he knew and understood. Even tho we'd all like to think all our teachers thought well of us and treated all their students the same, the reality is that it doesn't happen that way. We've all had that one teacher who behaved dreadfully. I think we've all seen teachers who, while never maybe being outwardly mean towards a student, treated the "weird one" differently. And it probably wasn't intentionally a lot of the time. The same way people will give wide berth to someone on the street that's talking to themselves or comes off as a little strange. I think, and yes I realize there's no canon to support it, that Snape was probably treated this way by a lot of people, intentionally and non.

I agree, but I feel it was personal behavior, not in a way in which he was treated. There is no canon that the professors ever mistreated Snape in school - Slughorn even praised him retroactively. But I do think he fell back into old behavior he knew and understood. Snape had been a DE and prior to that, his group of friends treated people similarly. I think he carried that behavior into the classroom and it was a part of his character he never corrected. JKR had him sneering and smiling slyly, etc., while mistreating the children - which I interpreted as his obtaining some type of pleasure from his behavior toward them. I understand his life was difficult and he had little in the way of pleasure, but I cannot condone this type of behavior on account of that. He should have taken up golf or gobstones or whatever wizards do. But seeking pleasure in mistreating kids is simply unacceptable and unforgivable behavior, imo.

I don't think Snape's change started or ended with Lily.

The thing is, any of the DEs may have changed down the line. Lucius, Bella, Rockwell, Yaxley, Peter, the Carrows or Snape if he'd stayed. Any of them may have made a move like Regulus and made an affirmative decision to leave. But we simply have no canon on anyone feeling this way except Regulus.

Sorry Kittling, I missed your question in the shuffle.

That's ok Wick *gets all exited and leaves coventry ;)*

But I think if Snape truly felt that way, then when Harry used the mega shield charm against him, which worked despite his verbalizing, Snape would have praised him to high heaven.

Err ... we are talking about Snape her aren't we?

No I really don't think that would ahve induced Sev to praised him to high heaven! I really don't! but what he did say was

'that was vertainly an improvment'
&
'there is no doubt that it was effective.'

I'd say that coming for Snape that really was high praise ! :D

The thing is, any of the DEs may have changed down the line. Lucius, Bella, Rockwell, Yaxley, Peter, the Carrows or Snape if he'd stayed. Any of them may have made a move like Regulus and made an affirmative decision to leave. But we simply have no canon on anyone feeling this way except Regulus.

Actually I think Lucius, Draco & Narcissa (I know she wasn't a branded member but well I'll count her if she gets to sit in on DE meetings :)) all are shown to have had a change of heart about Voldemort. :)

Err ... we are talking about Snape her aren't we?

No I really don't think that would ahve induced Sev to praised him to high heaven! I really don't! but what he did say was

'that was vertainly an improvment'
&
'there is no doubt that it was effective.'

I'd say that coming for Snape that really was high praise ! :D

:lol: - we are not talking about the same event...I just realized and it is my fault because the conversation had been regarding the Occlucmency lessons. I was referring to the dark arts lesson in HBP which came after that.

But I do agree with you that Snape praised Harry in the OOTP scene. I also agree that he was truly trying to do a good job and in that particular case, would be prone to frustration at Harry's lack of learning - due to lack of practice. Snape understood how important the lessons were.

The thing is, at all times prior to and after that, we have no praise, including the HBP incident as well as the PS/SS, CoS, POA major incidents. Instead of praise, Snape calls all of that 'luck and friends'. He didn't pass judgment on Harry ejecting himself from Voldemort's body - which is telling because it was an incident which could not be put down to either luck or friends. I just don't think Snape's general problem was frustration - either with Harry or the other kids.

:lol: - we are not talking about the same event...I just realized and it is my fault because the conversation had been regarding the Occlucmency lessons.

As it's you I'll be forgiving :p

The thing is, at all times prior to and after that, we have no praise, including the HBP incident as well as the PS/SS, CoS, POA major incidents. Instead of praise, Snape calls all of that 'luck and friends'.

Ok I'm not going to trawl through 7 books to check that fact! But on the 'luck and friends' point - I think it is fair to say that a lot of Harry successes are about 'luck and friends' - Harry himself says so! When the trio are trying to recruit for Dumbledore’s army (In The Hogs Head – OotP)

Often there is at lease a grain (often far more than that) to what Snape says about Harry but because he is often 'unpleasant' & people have a soft spot for Harry his comments are disregarded by other characters & redaer alike :)

He didn't pass judgment on Harry ejecting himself from Voldemort's body - which is telling because it was an incident which could not be put down to either luck or friends.

Do we actually have a scene in the book where Snape hears about that? I don't remember any. In the abscence of such evidence I think it unwise to build a case based on an assumption of how we think he would have acted - regardless of wether we think he would have founda way to deride it or have said - 'woow that was good, didn't expect that. Maybe I was wrong'

As it's you I'll be forgiving :p

Thanks. :D

Ok I'm not going to trawl through 7 books to check that fact! But on the 'luck and friends' point - I think it is fair to say that a lot of Harry successes are about 'luck and friends' - Harry himself says so! When the trio are trying to recruit for Dumbledore’s army (In The Hogs Head – OotP)

Well I didn't mean it definitively in the sense that you should have to feel the need to trawl through 7 books - I know the feeling and I would not wish to trawl either. Let's just say in general.

Often there is at lease a grain (often far more than that) to what Snape says about Harry but because he is often 'unpleasant' & people have a soft spot for Harry his comments are disregarded by other characters & redaer alike :)

The problem here though, was the importance of Harry's fundamental power. I feel it was love - that propelled his magic, his ability and ultimately his success. Snape's view negated that aspect altogether, imo.

Do we actually have a scene in the book where Snape hears about that? I don't remember any. In the abscence of such evidence I think it unwise to build a case based on an assumption of how we think he would have acted - regardless of wether we think he would have founda way to deride it or have said - 'woow that was good, didn't expect that. Maybe I was wrong'

I agree. You are right, we don't have canon about this. It was a pretty massive event where many DEs were jailed and Snape did know about that (he spoke to Draco about it) - but it is possible he was not told about the depossession.

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

NEW TOPIC

I was thinking about why I have a problem with Snape's redemption. There is a sense of unfairness in the idea that offenders committing even heinous crimes should have to suffer the torture of eternal hell if they recognize their wrongs and feel immense regret for them; especially if they attempt to atone for their wrongs in some way. While the idea does draw on one’s sympathy, redemption tends to carry with it the requirement of discounting the past harm to redeemed offender’s victims. If revenge is involved, it can serve as a mitigating factor, but when it is taken savagely and disproportionately, it doesn't do much in terms of mitigation or balancing the equation out.

Snape's vengeance was very disproportionate and savage to me because it was presumably based on his home life and later, dislike and jealousy. But we were never given enough canon to make any sense of this, imo. Snape's home life seemed daunting for him with his father abusively yelling at his mother. There is also evidence that he may have been relatively alone in his neighborhood, imo. We saw one incident at school where he was in a disadvantaged and humiliating circumstance at the hands of his enemies, but again, not enough to really serve as evidence of more than school yard confrontations, imo. Later, Lily ends their friendship which appeared to be on the rocks and he attaches emotions for her within himself that stick like superglue and cause him intense jealousy of her boyfriend and eventual husband.

So I look at this and I see Snape's subsequent revenge taken on Harry and the world in general (when he was a DE and his normal attitude toward many of his peers) as completely disproportionate to the harm we are certain he sustained. His revenge also seemed far more violent and enlarged in that respect. That is often the case with personal revenge and a reason why it is legally not allowed - with legal systems taking the utilitarian view that past harms cannot be undone so let them go. Now Snape never attempts to atone for his revenge taken - or even suggests that he feel it was wrongful, imo - although he does try to atone for the one heinous crime in his past we know about (and if one allows quarter, one could include the other acts as a DE also).

Still, there is lack of atonement for his acts in revenge which were extreme, imo (assuming that every act was an act of intentional or subconscious revenge stemming from past events.) Additionally, the past harms were simply not great enough to account for his present harms to others, imo. I have heard those past harms embellished into him having been physically as well as mentally abused at home (for which there is no canon evidence, imo) and that his school life was one of incredible torment and victimization (for which tehre is no canon evidence, imo). The embellishment is understandable; I feel the canon has to be greatly embellished in order to even partially justify Snape's subsequent actions. But embellishment involves guesswork and is alas, not canon. The harms Snape inflicted in the past are also often overlooked or interpreted as completely defensive (or emotionally compulsory), but these serve to hold him more accountable, so that is also understandable - but again, not canon. So I suppose that is why in the end, the balance of past harms to Snape versus the harms Snape caused (less those atoned for) is overwhelmingly unequal in favor of his wrongdoing in my judgment - based on the actual canon we have.

Mostly, I cannot forget his past victims and the harm they suffered at his hands, especially in light of his singular focus on atoning for "Lily" - only one of the many persons he harmed or helped to harm (where harm includes all of his past offenses including deaths.)

Instead of praise, Snape calls all of that 'luck and friends'.

Wasn't really going to post anything, but couldn't help expressing my opinion on this: Snape may be wrong about Harry in many instances, but here he's absolutely right, IMO. Of course, not all Harry's successes can be narrowed down to luck and the help of his "more talented friends", but when I was rereading the books, it struck me how often Harry got out of tight spots due to one deux ex machina after another, especially in HBP and DH. Also, he seemed too dependent on Hermione and her knowledge/common sense/sense of responsibility/foresight, etc. If Hermione was incapacitated or killed in DH, there's no way Harry would have been able to get that far. He didn't even know how to heal a scratch on his finger, for Merlin's sake! :lol: (And, what's more important, he didn't go and look up in the books how to heal injuries because he decided to leave all this boring stuff to Hermione... again.)

So, getting back to Snape: he may be the vicious, vindictive type and he might be exaggerating as always when speaking about Harry, but in this case I believe he had all the reasons to doubt Harry's competence. He had observed Harry over the years and undoubtedly saw that the boy was rather passive when it came to studying and making sensible decisions and active when it came to reckless risks. I think he had a valid reason to suggest that most of Harry's successes were due to sheer dumb luck and his friendship with reasonable, intelligent Hermione... And, much as I like Harry, I have to agree with with assessment of Snape's.

Snape's vengeance was very disproportionate and savage to me because it was presumably based on his home life and later, dislike and jealousy. But we were never given enough canon to make any sense of this, imo. Snape's homelife seemed at best, irritating for him with his father abusively yelling at his mother. There is also evidence that he may have been relatively alone in his neighborhood, imo. We saw one incident at school where he was in a disadvantaged and humiliating circumstance at the hands of his enemies, but again, not enough to really serve as evidence of more than school yard confrontations, imo. Later, Lily ends their friendship which appeared to be on the rocks and he attaches emotions for her within himself that stick like superglue and cause him intense jealousy of her boyfriend and eventual husband.

First thing, I don't think we can just say "irritating"- it was more than that if a kid cries in the corner, imo. I agree with everything other than that, and I vote that this is due to Snape not being the protagonist. We actually have sufficiently less detail about him to work with. It's easy to analyse when we know the hole story, but we are remarkably low on details here, a lot of what we talk of is nothing more than (likely correct, but nevertheless) circumspection. It's like Shakespeare. Can't ever be quite sure, can we? :)

Good new topic Wick! :)

First thing, I don't think we can just say "irritating"- it was more than that if a kid cries in the corner, imo. I agree with everything other than that, and I vote that this is due to Snape not being the protagonist. We actually have sufficiently less detail about him to work with. It's easy to analyse when we know the hole story, but we are remarkably low on details here, a lot of what we talk of is nothing more than (likely correct, but nevertheless) circumspection. It's like Shakespeare. Can't ever be quite sure, can we? :)

Good new topic Wick! :)

Good point. That reminded me of the Dr. Who ep where they brought up all of that Shakespeare stuff. :lol:.

I also agree that "irritating" was not a good choice of word. It was daunting and can be terrible for kids to have to listen to their parents go at it (or one go at the other). I had just been working in an outside placement law clinic where the poor kids were literally destroyed by their parents. So the comparison was still with me when I wrote - but it is all absolutely horrible - even if it isn't directed at the kid, but they just have to hear it, you are right. Later in the paragraph I added I felt it was mental abuse - but I changed the top to make that clearer off the bat. :tu:

:lol: - good point. That reminded me of the Dr. Who ep where they brought up all of that Shakespeare stuff. I also agree that "irritating" was not a good choice of word. It was daunting and can be terrible for kids to have to listen to their parents go at it (or one go at the other). I had just been working in an outside placement law clinic where the poor kids were literally destroyed by their parents. I was so angry at people that took their anger out on their kids when I left that place. So the comparison was still with me when I wrote - but it is all absolutely horrible - even if it isn't directed at the kid, but they just have to hear it, you are right.

- For a change, eh? ;)

I do think Snape is very Shakespearian in his way. Not the poetic way, evidently..
But we don't ever know enough about him to make enough of a case either for or against him. He's infuriatingly ambiguous and virtually impossible to pin down unless based on very personal thoughts and opinions- I suppose that's why he was "a gift of a character"... :)

Do you mean a Shakepearean type character, like Hamlet or Othello or Julius Ceaser? (Of course the last was a real person who Shakespeare may have twisted. :lol:). The problem there is that as you say, we don't have enough info - where as we have entire books dedicated to explaining the minds, thoughts, feelings, beliefs, outlooks and confusion of Shakespeare's characters, leaving only interpretive ambiguity among readers. But with Snape it is a complete lack of information, imo. Or did you mean he was like the author in some way? I don't know much about him.

- For a change, eh? ;)

But we don't ever know enough about him to make enough of a case either for or against him. He's infuriatingly ambiguous and virtually impossible to pin down unless based on very personal thoughts and opinions- I suppose that's why he was "a gift of a character"... :)

Hmm, I don't think I agree with you there, wicked. Although I respect your opinion (to coin your own phrase :p).

I think that once his passion for Lily was made explicit, we have a clear insight into what made him tick. It may not answer all the questions or explain everything about him, but it does answer a major question about motivation, doesn't it? I felt it did - and I didn't like it.

I'd have admired JKR more if she hadn't given us that motivational cue and had left Snape as a total enigma. A bit like Iago (to use your Shakespeare analogy) who I think is the most intriguing character Shakespeare ever wrote precisely because you never really get to the bottom of his motivation (the one he himself hints never seems convincing to me).

Instead, I find the whole Snape/Lily relationship rather drippy....I'd have rather seen Snape has witty, mordant, malicious, childish, courageous etc - without seeing that backstory about his appalling childhood or his amor for Lily. Then we could have just contemplated how strange and compelling he is without any real explanation for it.

Hmm, I don't think I agree with you there, wicked. Although I respect your opinion (to coin your own phrase :p).

I think that once his passion for Lily was made explicit, we have a clear insight into what made him tick. It may not answer all the questions or explain everything about him, but it does answer a major question about motivation, doesn't it? I felt it did - and I didn't like it.

I'd have admired JKR more if she hadn't given us that motivational cue and had left Snape as a total enigma. A bit like Iago (to use your Shakespeare analogy) who I think is the most intriguing character Shakespeare ever wrote precisely because you never really get to the bottom of his motivation (the one he himself hints never seems convincing to me).

Instead, I find the whole Snape/Lily relationship rather drippy....I'd have rather seen Snape has witty, mordant, malicious, childish, courageous etc - without seeing that backstory about his appalling childhood or his amor for Lily. Then we could have just contemplated how strange and compelling he is without any real explanation for it.

Actually you quoted Vduck and I don't agree with that entirely either. I don't find anything infuriating about Snape in a need to know way, but I do agree with her that there are a lot of holes in Snape's story. I agree with you 100% on the Snape/Lily friendship - I have said before I could have done without that as it turned me off the character completely. I also see what you are saying about Iago and I think it is a valid comparison (except Iago was more like Voldemort in the depths of his heart I think.) I'd have to go wtih Hamlet as the most compelling intriguing character tho. But they were all well woven.

As for what made Snape tick, that I agree we had all we needed to know about in as far as his motivation and where he was at in the story. I believe Vduck was referring to his youth and early years that got him to the place where he was - which we know much less about. In terms of the series, we had plenty though and as you say - a little too much, imo also.

I think that when it comes to Snape, there's always more than just Lily motivating him. He may live in the past in some respects, but he also has a life in the here and now, where he is, well, "witty, mordant, malicious, childish, courageous etc" ;) IMHO, the revelations of DH only enrich the character and add a new angle to it, but don't completely rewrite it. JMO, obviously.

Actually you quoted Vduck


Oops, sorry, put it down to the three large cappucinos I've had already today....:err:

Ignisia, yes - otherwise we'd none of us be having this ongoing discussion about Snape I suppose! I just feel that in giving us the Lily angle, JKR rather "caved in" to the need to explain. I feel that about the Pensieve memories too, to a lesser extent. I wish she had held out completely, that's all. I still find Snape fascinating, so I guess she hasn't taken away all the mystery.....

That is how I felt too. There was nothing at all revealed in the memories for me because I already thought he was on the good side. So the only new news was his motivation being Lily and that was disastrous to his character in my eyes. Maybe if she had made them actual boyfriend and girlfriend for 10 years or something along those lines it would have made sense, but the friendship was childish - frought with misunderstanding, outright refusal to listen on his part and denial on hers, and the whole thing began and ended childishly - then she had Snape take an adult view of it and that just didn't work for me.

but the friendship was childish - frought with misunderstanding, outright refusal to listen on his part and denial on hers, and the whole thing began and ended childishly - then she had Snape take an adult view of it and that just didn't work for me.

Yes, but I think there's an internal logic to JKR's characterisation in that, wicked ; I think Snape is presented as emotionally stunted, or "caught" at a crucial stage of his emotional development (his falling in love with Lily) and never being able to get past that.

So, yes, the friendship was "childish" but Snape is childish too ; he's never grown up emotionally (mentally, intellectually, he does but his feelings remain left behind). He looks back on it all with a "childish" fervour, from his superficially "adult" perspective.

I know some people in RL who are like that about their first loves - never able to get past them. Tragic, actually.

Yes, but I think there's an internal logic to JKR's characterisation in that, wicked ; I think Snape is presented as emotionally stunted, or "caught" at a crucial stage of his emotional development (his falling in love with Lily) and never being able to get past that.

So, yes, the friendship was "childish" but Snape is childish too ; he's never grown up emotionally (mentally, intellectually, he does but his feelings remain left behind). He looks back on it all with a "childish" fervour, from his superficially "adult" perspective.

I know some people in RL who are like that about their first loves - never able to get past them. Tragic, actually.

I agree with you JKR had Snape pretty much stuck in a 16 year old rut emotionally in that regard - so all of his antics would reflect that. But in the ultimate message it is considered 'admirable' because of the bravery it instilled. But my point is: No, it is not admirable to be stuck in a 15 year old emotional rut, acting out on it - even if it causes you to do a brave and helpful thing also. So it gets shimmied into this idea that an adult, which he was, behaving in this manner for the most part, and doing the brave, helpful thing, is as admirable or perhaps moreso, than a well adjusted adult, doing a brave helpful thing with a normative adult motivation. It isn't like it is any harder; a motivation is a motivation.

Hope you can make heads or tails of what I am saying :lol:.

Hope you can make heads or tails of what I am saying :lol:.

Sure I can ; you're saying - you'll tell me if I'm barking up the wrong tree - that Snape's reasons for going over to the Good Side are not morally sound. They are bound up with his emotional illiteracy and so stem from a "bad" source instead of from an adult, morally conscious source. Right?

And I think you're right, in part. Snape is not a moral man in the sense of someone who has an over-arching concept of morality for it's own sake (imo). He is motivated by the personal (his feelings for Lily) , not the impersonal nature of Goodness as an abstract. (Yes, I know others disagree). Actually, if anyone's read Wuthering Heights lately, he reminds me of Heathcliff - he refrains from some evil acts because Cathy asks him to (not because he "gets" that those acts are wrong in themselves).

But I'd add that that doesn't mean Snape has no sense of morality. Rather, it's a case of degree and influence. One could argue that Lily, who does appear to have a concept of impersonal Goodness, may have set an image in his mind of what it means to act from a "pure" motivation. He may not be able to live up to it in his daily life, but it may have sunk in to influence his later decisions.

Of course, I can't quote canon to help myself out - it's just my take on it.

Sure I can ; you're saying - you'll tell me if I'm barking up the wrong tree - that Snape's reasons for going over to the Good Side are not morally sound. They are bound up with his emotional illiteracy and so stem from a "bad" source instead of from an adult, morally conscious source. Right?

And I think you're right, in part. Snape is not a moral man in the sense of someone who has an over-arching concept of morality for it's own sake (imo). He is motivated by the personal (his feelings for Lily) , not the impersonal nature of Goodness as an abstract. (Yes, I know others disagree). Actually, if anyone's read Wuthering Heights lately, he reminds me of Heathcliff - he refrains from some evil acts because Cathy asks him to (not because he "gets" that those acts are wrong in themselves).

But I'd add that that doesn't mean Snape has no sense of morality. Rather, it's a case of degree and influence. One could argue that Lily, who does appear to have a concept of impersonal Goodness, may have set an image in his mind of what it means to act from a "pure" motivation. He may not be able to live up to it in his daily life, but it may have sunk in to influence his later decisions.

Of course, I can't quote canon to help myself out - it's just my take on it.

Wrong tree. But you made a good point. I wasn't talking about it in terms of morality (although that is an aspect of it always of course).

What I meant was JKR said that he behaved in the same bullying, cruel manner till his death and he had issues with reaching proper regret for all of his wrongs, imo. Perhaps it is because he is emotionally stunted at 15; or has an underdeveloped sense of morality; or a combination of those things and/or other things. Whatever reason, it appears that we are supposed to swallow that because Snape simply wasn't a big man.

On the other hand, we are supposed to recognize that he did a brave and helpful thing motivated by his emotions for Lily. But when I note Snape's particular form of unrequited love (that caused him to retain jealousy and loathing for her husband, to the point that he would transfer it to Lily's son, feel the same about him and mistreat him), it isn't so good, imo. But we are supposed to swallow that it is a fine motivation for doing something brave and helpful - because ANYTHING that motivates you to do a brave and helpful act is fine, in the sense of "at least there was something."

So I feel we have to swallow the behavior and the bad motivation, and focus our attention solely on Snape's brave and helpful act (spying, and those things he did for Dumbledore in the end). Well all the swallowing leaves me with a proverbial sore throat and I cannot solely focus on the brave and helpful act. The thing is, I realize you cannot expect much from a small minded person, but I feel that if a small minded person is going to do a "good and grown up thing" like a brave and helpful act, then they can do a "good and grown up thing" and get their act together to at least a reasonable degree - a proper start on regret would be a great step in that direction (i.e., recognizing that acting out on the bullying and cruel behavior, the jealousy and loathing was wrong) - but we didn't even get that, imo.

Actually, if anyone's read Wuthering Heights lately, he reminds me of Heathcliff - he refrains from some evil acts because Cathy asks him to (not because he "gets" that those acts are wrong in themselves).

But I'd add that that doesn't mean Snape has no sense of morality. Rather, it's a case of degree and influence. One could argue that Lily, who does appear to have a concept of impersonal Goodness, may have set an image in his mind of what it means to act from a "pure" motivation. He may not be able to live up to it in his daily life, but it may have sunk in to influence his later decisions.

Precisely. Lily can hardly have a concrete influence on particular decisions Severus takes close to two decades following her death. (Unlike Heathcliff and Cathy). Even if his motivation for right action remains his attachment to her memory, his recognition of which actions those are, is his own.

I'd have admired JKR more if she hadn't given us that motivational cue and had left Snape as a total enigma. A bit like Iago (to use your Shakespeare analogy) who I think is the most intriguing character Shakespeare ever wrote precisely because you never really get to the bottom of his motivation (the one he himself hints never seems convincing to me).

I disagree. What may work in Othello (I've never read it, but my impression of the story was Iago was motivated by jealousy, of Othello's success in life and winning what's-her-name's affection...) would not, in my opinion, fit into HP as well. Love in its many forms is a major theme of the series. Leaving a big character like Snape unexplained would detract from that - making his motivation love, adds to it.

There is also the practical matter - she did not abruptly succumb to a desire to explain, she had always planned thr explanation to be a part of her story. She made why Voldemort would have let Lily live an "official" mystery of the series, one we fans were supposed to mull over and theorize about, and she always had the correct answer in mind - because Severus had asked him to.

So the only new news was his motivation being Lily and that was disastrous to his character in my eyes.

For me, his motivation brought a side to his character that elevated him from what he was being seen through Harry's and Ron's eyes to something else. The motivation being love, changed him, changed his outlook and changed his actions. From being a DE Snape grew to protect James's son. Sure he was Lily's too, but he was not just Lily's son; he was James Potter's son and it was this boy Snape protected for years IMO.

And that came because he changed. That change came because of his love for Lily. The motivation IMO. It was because of this motivation Snape changed from a man whose actions disgusted Dumbledore (DD was very, very wrong on this issue IMO) to a man who Dumbledore felt he was fortunate to have.

I feel motivation is very important seeing especially the role Snape played in the books.

NEW TOPIC

I was thinking about why I have a problem with Snape's redemption. There is a sense of unfairness in the idea that offenders committing even heinous crimes should have to suffer the torture of eternal hell if they recognize their wrongs and feel immense regret for them; especially if they attempt to atone for their wrongs in some way. While the idea does draw on one’s sympathy, redemption tends to carry with it the requirement of discounting the past harm to redeemed offender’s victims. If revenge is involved, it can serve as a mitigating factor, but when it is taken savagely and disproportionately, it doesn't do much in terms of mitigation or balancing the equation out.

Snape's vengeance was very disproportionate and savage to me because it was presumably based on his home life and later, dislike and jealousy. But we were never given enough canon to make any sense of this, imo. Snape's home life seemed daunting for him with his father abusively yelling at his mother. There is also evidence that he may have been relatively alone in his neighborhood, imo. We saw one incident at school where he was in a disadvantaged and humiliating circumstance at the hands of his enemies, but again, not enough to really serve as evidence of more than school yard confrontations, imo. Later, Lily ends their friendship which appeared to be on the rocks and he attaches emotions for her within himself that stick like superglue and cause him intense jealousy of her boyfriend and eventual husband.

I initially skipped this for a few reasons, but after some thought I've decided to comment.

First and foremost I have to address your comment that we have no indication Snape suffered abuse at home. I can't possibly disagree more with this if I made a little dance to go with it. Just because the abuse, be it physical, mental, emotional or otherwise, isn't aimed directly at you, it does NOT mean you come away from it untraumatized. If Snape spent his early years listening to his father arguing with his mother, how is a young child supposed to NOT be traumatized by that? To me this line of thought implies that a child in say an alcoholic home suffers no real damage because they might not have been hit or yelled at.

From DH The Prince's Tale:

"How are things at your house?" Lily asked.
A little crease appeared between his eyes.
"Fine," he said.
"They're not arguing anymore?"
"Oh yes, they're arguing," said Snape. He picked up a fistful of leaves and began tearing them apart, apparently unaware of what he was doing. "But it won't be that long and I'll be gone."
"Doesn't your dad like magic?"
"He doesn't like anything, much," said Snape.

It seems pretty apparently to me that what was going on at home had a very deep effect on him. His comment that his dad doesn't like anything isn't followed by a "But he's not yelling at me." or a "But he doesn't take it out on me." In fact it's something that has effected him deeply enough that he doesn't want to really discuss it, even with his best friend.

We also have this bit from a few pages later where Harry compares his father to Snape:

... saw his father: slight, black-haired like Snape but with that indefinable air of having been well-cared for, even adored, that Snape so conspicuously lacked.

We also have canon that from the first time he, James, and Sirius met, they started picking on him.

Again from DH TPT:

"Who wants to be in Slytherin? I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?" Jameas asked the boy lounging on the seats opposite him, and with a jolt, Harry realized it was Sirius.

[...]

Snape made a small, disparaging noise. James turned on him. "Got a problem with that?"
"No," said Snaoe, though his slight sneer said otherwise. "If you'd rather be rawny than brainy-"
"Where're you hoping to go, seeing as you're neither?" interjected Sirius.
James roared with laughter. Lily sat up, rather flushed, and looked from James to Sirius in dislike.
"Come on, Severus, let's find another compartment."
"Oooooo..."
James and Sirius imitated her lofty voice; James tried to trip Snape as he passed.
"See ya, Snivellus!" a voice called, as the compartment door slammed...

To me this tells us that Snape was a target to the two of them from the get go. If they were willing to harass him without knowing him then, and we know they humiliated him later, how is it logical that in the intervening years they left him alone? After years of abuse at their hands, why should he have any liking for either of them? You're comment about "not enough to really serve as evidence of more than school yard confrontations" implies that these shouldn't have an effect on someone. Perhaps someone who hadn't already been as emotionally battered as Snape might have been able to blow them off, but I'm not sure how you expect someone as damaged as Snape, even this early on, to be able to do so without some kind of assistance.


So I look at this and I see Snape's subsequent revenge taken on Harry and the world in general (when he was a DE and his normal attitude toward many of his peers) as completely disproportionate to the harm we are certain he sustained. His revenge also seemed far more violent and enlarged in that respect. That is often the case with personal revenge and a reason why it is legally not allowed - with legal systems taking the utilitarian view that past harms cannot be undone so let them go. Now Snape never attempts to atone for his revenge taken - or even suggests that he feel it was wrongful, imo - although he does try to atone for the one heinous crime in his past we know about (and if one allows quarter, one could include the other acts as a DE also).

Still, there is lack of atonement for his acts in revenge which were extreme, imo (assuming that every act was an act of intentional or subconscious revenge stemming from past events.) Additionally, the past harms were simply not great enough to account for his present harms to others, imo. I have heard those past harms embellished into him having been physically as well as mentally abused at home (for which there is no canon evidence, imo) and that his school life was one of incredible torment and victimization (for which tehre is no canon evidence, imo). The embellishment is understandable; I feel the canon has to be greatly embellished in order to even partially justify Snape's subsequent actions. But embellishment involves guesswork and is alas, not canon. The harms Snape inflicted in the past are also often overlooked or interpreted as completely defensive (or emotionally compulsory), but these serve to hold him more accountable, so that is also understandable - but again, not canon. So I suppose that is why in the end, the balance of past harms to Snape versus the harms Snape caused (less those atoned for) is overwhelmingly unequal in favor of his wrongdoing in my judgment - based on the actual canon we have.

I personally liken Snape to a lot of the kids I see growing up in the inner city. They have no hope that things will ever get better for them. Time and time again they are pushed around, abused, and a lot of the time fear for their lives. They feel powerless in their own life and so they do something they think will give them that power back. A lot of them do things like sell drugs, join gangs and become bullies themselves.

The DEs, at their core, are a gang. Granted, one with magic at their fingertips, but is it really so different than the guns most gangbangers carry around? Or the death they deal when they sell drugs, put hookers on the streets and terrorize their family and neighbors?

Snape joined the DEs for power. And, based on proven psychological effects of abuse, probably sought to take back that helplessness he often felt. IMO anyway.

So, if I understand what you're saying, that Snape doesn't deserve any redemption because he only ever really cared about Lily, it also means that the gangbanger who's done as much damage in the Muggle world as Snape also does not deserve any kind of redemption.

In the end does it really matter WHAT brought about the desire either of them feel to redeem themselves?

Again from TPT (DH):

"Hide them all, then," he croaked. "Keep her - them- safe. Please."
"And what will you give me in return, Severus?"
"In - in return?" Snape gaped at Dumbledore, and Harry expected him to protest, but after a long moment he said, "Anything."

Snape tells Dumbledore he is will to give him anything if he will hide them. Anything. Anything, IMO, includes his life. If risking your life while pulling someone out of a tunnel is showing compassion, how is being willing to give your life to save someone, and possibly two others as well, not deserving of redemption. If intent and motive don't matter as you've argued previously, then why does Snape have to qualify his willingness to sacrifice anything to Dumbledore for it?

We also have this:
[...]After a moment or two, Snape raised his face, and he looked like a man tho had lived a hundred years of misery since leaving the wild hilltop.
"I thought... you were going... to keep her... safe..."
"She and James put their faith in the wrong person," said Dumbledore. "Rather like you, Severus." Weren't you hoping that Lord Voldemort would spare her?"
Snape's breathing was shallow.
"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 Evan's eyes, I'm sure?"
"DON'!" bellowed Snape. "Gone... dead..."
"Is this remorse, Severus?"
"I wish... I with I were dead..."

In failing to keep Lily safe, Snape wanted to die instead of live. When Dumbledore finally reaches thru Snape's grief, he agrees to protect Harry and all he asks is that Dumbledore not tell anyone why that is. Funny thing is, while he would easily be condemned for his part in it all, there would be those who also praise him for trying to stop it, for being willing to risk, even sacrifice his own life, in exchange for hers. And by your definition, risking your life to save another is a good thing. After the storm passed over the hows and whys the Potters had been killed, Snape could have come across as something as a hero for trying to take action against the Dark Lord he served for so long. I don't think either of us can argue that if Voldemort found out Snape had betrayed him that he would have suffered and died a very painful death.

Mostly, I cannot forget his past victims and the harm they suffered at his hands, especially in light of his singular focus on atoning for "Lily" - only one of the many persons he harmed or helped to harm (where harm includes all of his past offenses including deaths.

When Dumbledore reveals he believes Harry will have to die in order for Vldemort to actually die, Snape is upset. But he also makes a very reavealing comment"

Dumbledore opened his eyes. Snape looked horrified.
"You have kept him alive so the he can die at the right moment?"
"Don't be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?"
"Lately, only those whom I could not save," said Snape. He stood up. "You have used me."

Why would he reference the people he watched die that he couldn't save if they meant nothing to him? Do we ever doubt his core motivation was, and always will be Lily? How can we?

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. Dumbeldore watched her fly awa, 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.

Snape could have let himself die after Lily's death. He even said he WANTED to die. But he didn't. He chose to help protect Harry. Does it matter if he liked the boy or not? Does it matter that he likely did it out of grief, or to honor Lily's memory? How is protecting Harry, a boy he probably hates, a selfish act that doesn't even get him considered for some kind of redemption?

And that's my galleon's worth... :lol:

Instead, I find the whole Snape/Lily relationship rather drippy....I'd have rather seen Snape has witty, mordant, malicious, childish, courageous etc - without seeing that backstory about his appalling childhood or his amor for Lily. Then we could have just contemplated how strange and compelling he is without any real explanation for it.

I think alot of people share your feelings about Snape - they would rather he had stayed an ambiguous villain to Harry, instead of being given the same humanity as the other characters. But in my opinion, Snape has to fit in the same framework of motivation as everyone else.

It isn't just the fact that he loves Lily, but that he is an emotional person with deep feelings, just like Harry.

And JKR is careful to show us that several times so that there is no doubt.

In retrospect, that makes Snape not such a puzzle because he is feeling the same thing that everyone else in the room is feeling at any particular time, whether it is anger towards Umbridge, shock that Sirius Black is in the room in GoF, or disgust about Voldemort, Bellatrix, or the Carrows. He's trapped "like a dog in a burning house," and he does alot of very difficult things in the name of helping Harry survive, so it becomes something greater than a childhood crush. At least that's the way I see it.

Before DH came out, one thing that made me think that Snape could not be another villain is that the story didn't really need one. There were villains a'plenty, but not many Slytherins who sought to do good things. In HBP, we learn that Snape was a healer, and that he had saved Dumbledore's life. So it wouldn't have made sense for him to turn around and kill Dumbledore in cold blood without a good reason.

And then in DH, JKR proved that Slytherin is not the villain's house by giving us Regulus, Sev, and the Malfoys. Not to mention Slughorn, who comes roaring back to the Battle.

First and foremost I have to address your comment that we have no indication Snape suffered abuse at home. I can't possibly disagree more with this if I made a little dance to go with it. Just because the abuse, be it physical, mental, emotional or otherwise, isn't aimed directly at you, it does NOT mean you come away from it untraumatized. If Snape spent his early years listening to his father arguing with his mother, how is a young child supposed to NOT be traumatized by that? To me this line of thought implies that a child in say an alcoholic home suffers no real damage because they might not have been hit or yelled at.

From DH The Prince's Tale:

"How are things at your house?" Lily asked.
A little crease appeared between his eyes.
"Fine," he said.
"They're not arguing anymore?"
"Oh yes, they're arguing," said Snape. He picked up a fistful of leaves and began tearing them apart, apparently unaware of what he was doing. "But it won't be that long and I'll be gone."
"Doesn't your dad like magic?"
"He doesn't like anything, much," said Snape.

It seems pretty apparently to me that what was going on at home had a very deep effect on him. His comment that his dad doesn't like anything isn't followed by a "But he's not yelling at me." or a "But he doesn't take it out on me." In fact it's something that has effected him deeply enough that he doesn't want to really discuss it, even with his best friend.

Actually I cleared this up in a subsequent conversation with Vduck if you look down a few posts. I agree Snape would be affected by his parents yelling at one another. Some kids are affected more than others. My only point was that we don't get much canon about it and we cannot assume to know the effect it had on Snape, imo. He didn't withdraw completely as some kids do (although we know it affected him) - he made friends and appeared to take on his father's bullying characteristics. But apart from that, we don't know much more.

We also have this bit from a few pages later where Harry compares his father to Snape:

... saw his father: slight, black-haired like Snape but with that indefinable air of having been well-cared for, even adored, that Snape so conspicuously lacked.

We also have canon that from the first time he, James, and Sirius met, they started picking on him.

Again from DH TPT:

"Who wants to be in Slytherin? I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?" Jameas asked the boy lounging on the seats opposite him, and with a jolt, Harry realized it was Sirius.

[...]

Yes, but Ron also had hand me down robes and a smudge of dirt on his face, but he was loved, just poor. Snape's mum accompanied him to the station, so he may have had love, but I'd think not as well cared for as Ron, yet likely better cared for than Harry (despite his wealthy looking appearance which others might assume meant he was well cared for - but he'd simply come into money.)

But we cannot separate out all of the information we have. All you have indicated is true. But Snape in addition to having to deal with his parents arguing (and I feel that is mentally abusive), I feel was shown to have adopted that same kind of attitude toward others. JKR showed us this with Petunia, as he aggressively had a go at her (and she returned his venom).

Snape made a small, disparaging noise. James turned on him. "Got a problem with that?"
"No," said Snaoe, though his slight sneer said otherwise. "If you'd rather be rawny than brainy-"
"Where're you hoping to go, seeing as you're neither?" interjected Sirius.
James roared with laughter. Lily sat up, rather flushed, and looked from James to Sirius in dislike.
"Come on, Severus, let's find another compartment."
"Oooooo..."
James and Sirius imitated her lofty voice; James tried to trip Snape as he passed.
"See ya, Snivellus!" a voice called, as the compartment door slammed...

To me this tells us that Snape was a target to the two of them from the get go. If they were willing to harass him without knowing him then, and we know they humiliated him later, how is it logical that in the intervening years they left him alone? After years of abuse at their hands, why should he have any liking for either of them? You're comment about "not enough to really serve as evidence of more than school yard confrontations" implies that these shouldn't have an effect on someone. Perhaps someone who hadn't already been as emotionally battered as Snape might have been able to blow them off, but I'm not sure how you expect someone as damaged as Snape, even this early on, to be able to do so without some kind of assistance.

Here you have Snape behaving in the same way he did with Petunia, however, he was up against people who were more his equal (in Snape's mind, they were wizards, not muggles) and who refused to take anything laying down. Snape was the exact same way. He gave as good as they gave, but he didn't have the advantage he had over Petunia. That part of Snape still existed, even though he was at less of an advantage. One cannot simply shunt that aspect of his character away from scene to scene because is it convenient to do so. The talk Snape didn't like was not directed at him and he finally inserted himself by his disparaging noise. (And it could have easily gone the other way around with James speaking to him directly upon hearing his comment, but he didn't in this instance). Snape did directly insert himself because his noise was not a comment meant for anyone except the person talking, imo. And Snape didn't back down once he was spoken to - which is the way Snape is - just as the boys he was dealing with, they too would not back down.

JKR made this pretty plain as she began the whole train scene with Snape in his element and feeling superior when he disregarded Lily's pain over Petunia - concluding that she was just a muggle so her feelings didn't matter and Lily shouldn't bother being upset. Then Snape himself is challenged in a very similar way with someone commenting that they wanted nothing to do with a place that he felt was stellar - as if his was the inferior choice. Snape's noise said the same thing in reverse, Gryffindor was the inferior choice - then he went on to elaborate, sneering in the meanwhile. And the boys came back with their shots immediately after. In other words, unlike Pentunia, Snape had met his match, likely for the first time, in terms of equal standing with others and his bullying tatics would be met in kind - or doled out in kind. This was the start of a mutual enemy ship that we were being shown, in my view - not the start of Snape being picked on exclusively by others. I am not sure why you disregard Snape's comments and don't consider them picking on others, because they were - in just the same way, imo.

I personally liken Snape to a lot of the kids I see growing up in the inner city. They have no hope that things will ever get better for them. Time and time again they are pushed around, abused, and a lot of the time fear for their lives. They feel powerless in their own life and so they do something they think will give them that power back. A lot of them do things like sell drugs, join gangs and become bullies themselves.

I understand your point, but I do not think that this is applicable to Snape. And also I feel it is stereotyping those from the inner city because in reality it is huge and there are all types of people, etc.

The DEs, at their core, are a gang. Granted, one with magic at their fingertips, but is it really so different than the guns most gangbangers carry around? Or the death they deal when they sell drugs, put hookers on the streets and terrorize their family and neighbors?

Snape joined the DEs for power. And, based on proven psychological effects of abuse, probably sought to take back that helplessness he often felt. IMO anyway.

I agree.

So, if I understand what you're saying, that Snape doesn't deserve any redemption because he only ever really cared about Lily, it also means that the gangbanger who's done as much damage in the Muggle world as Snape also does not deserve any kind of redemption.

No, I am not saying this. :lol:.

In the end does it really matter WHAT brought about the desire either of them feel to redeem themselves?

This was not my point. What drives one to turn their life around from evil to good in this series doesn't matter, I agree. But that is not all Snape's motivation was responsible for doing. It was the other things I was speaking about.

Again from TPT (DH):

"Hide them all, then," he croaked. "Keep her - them- safe. Please."
"And what will you give me in return, Severus?"
"In - in return?" Snape gaped at Dumbledore, and Harry expected him to protest, but after a long moment he said, "Anything."

Snape tells Dumbledore he is will to give him anything if he will hide them. Anything. Anything, IMO, includes his life. If risking your life while pulling someone out of a tunnel is showing compassion, how is being willing to give your life to save someone, and possibly two others as well, not deserving of redemption. If intent and motive don't matter as you've argued previously, then why does Snape have to qualify his willingness to sacrifice anything to Dumbledore for it?

That was not my point either. If I was going to make the comparison you are attempting to make, I would say that James showed compassion by pulling Snape from the tunnel, but that did not redeem him for all of the wrongs he otherwise enacted in life. Those are two separate considerations, imo.

We also have this:
[...]After a moment or two, Snape raised his face, and he looked like a man tho had lived a hundred years of misery since leaving the wild hilltop.
"I thought... you were going... to keep her... safe..."
"She and James put their faith in the wrong person," said Dumbledore. "Rather like you, Severus." Weren't you hoping that Lord Voldemort would spare her?"
Snape's breathing was shallow.
"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 Evan's eyes, I'm sure?"
"DON'!" bellowed Snape. "Gone... dead..."
"Is this remorse, Severus?"
"I wish... I with I were dead..."

In failing to keep Lily safe, Snape wanted to die instead of live. When Dumbledore finally reaches thru Snape's grief, he agrees to protect Harry and all he asks is that Dumbledore not tell anyone why that is. Funny thing is, while he would easily be condemned for his part in it all, there would be those who also praise him for trying to stop it, for being willing to risk, even sacrifice his own life, in exchange for hers. And by your definition, risking your life to save another is a good thing. After the storm passed over the hows and whys the Potters had been killed, Snape could have come across as something as a hero for trying to take action against the Dark Lord he served for so long. I don't think either of us can argue that if Voldemort found out Snape had betrayed him that he would have suffered and died a very painful death.

He suffered a painful death at Voldemort's hands and the dark lord believed him loyal. Mere association with Voldemort was always a risk precisely because he was a dark lord. All of the DEs were at risk in that regard.

But I don't believe that is the point you are trying to make. Snape attempting to ensure Lily was safe was a good thing. Snape's disregard of humanity in general and of James and Harry in particular was a bad thing - but revealed only to show the stage he was at - at that time. He was a Death Eater then, so it was expected, imo. The heroism you speak of is deeply tainted by Snape's overall selfish end to save one person he liked and leave the rest to die, imo. I cannot streamline the story into focusing only on Lily as if his attempt to save her - all other considerations aside - makes his actions praiseworthy. That would only be the case if she was the only one who required saving - but she wasn't, she wasn't even the main person who required saving - that was Harry. Snape took a mitigated risk in trying to save her. He did not do it himself, but asked others to do it on his behalf, so the situation is distinct. Still, that slim aspect of all that occurred was good. But I cannot ignore everything else that took place in order to conclude that Snape's actions in that situation were good overall because my interpretation of the canon shows they were not. Dumbledore forced him to come around to asking to protect them all and that is a good thing - it was the first lesson Snape would learn from Dumbledore on rejecting Death Eater values, imo.

Snape promising to protect Harry was a good thing - admitted or not, he was doing it for both Lily and James as they would both want it. I have always said that. However, you delete a good portion of the story. He went on to mistreat Harry miserably which is not what either parent would want and was a bad thing - and when he did this, Harry required (but did not always get) protection from Snape. Snape did not technically break his promise - he only promised to protect Harry from Voldemort, not from himself. But from my point of view, that aspect cannot be eliminated from the storyline merely because it is convenient to do so in order to help his redemption along. Regret is required, in my judgment and Snape showed none for his mistreatment of Harry - or the other students (or his peers - but I don't count the peers in the redemption equation at all - only the children.)

When Dumbledore reveals he believes Harry will have to die in order for Vldemort to actually die, Snape is upset. But he also makes a very reavealing comment"

Dumbledore opened his eyes. Snape looked horrified.
"You have kept him alive so the he can die at the right moment?"
"Don't be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?"
"Lately, only those whom I could not save," said Snape. He stood up. "You have used me."

Why would he reference the people he watched die that he couldn't save if they meant nothing to him? Do we ever doubt his core motivation was, and always will be Lily? How can we?

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. Dumbeldore watched her fly awa, 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.

Snape could have let himself die after Lily's death. He even said he WANTED to die. But he didn't. He chose to help protect Harry. Does it matter if he liked the boy or not? Does it matter that he likely did it out of grief, or to honor Lily's memory? How is protecting Harry, a boy he probably hates, a selfish act that doesn't even get him considered for some kind of redemption?

Snape chose to help protect Harry - that was good. It didn't matter if he liked the boy or his father or his mother. I agree with that. Snape cannot get away with aggressively acting on his dislike of any of those parties however, and expect a full redemption in my eyes. And he cannot get away with behaving in a bullying and cruel manner with the other children and expect a full redemption from me with out at minimum, showing regret for those things. I consider them grave misdeeds that require regret. I also require regret for past criminal acts - not just those against Lily. So that is my personal requirement for redemption. I do believe Snape redeemed himself from "evil" to the "good side" but that is only one part of the redemption he required.

If all Snape did was "protect" Harry - I would agree with you. But he did more than that, he aggressively mistreated him - and other children as well, but Harry more so. So I would have to respectfully disagree that Snape merits redemption for this as an act of "atonement". It is horribly tainted by his own hand. The good he did (spying and other acts for Dumbledore) are also taken into consideration in the balancing equation. For me personally, I find the equation deeply imbalanced and Snape still had work to do before he could claim full redemption. Imo, JKR wished to redeem him from evil to good and she did that - but she was not willing to redeem him on a character level and so she did not, imo. Instead, she had her hero forgive him - but I am not her hero. So I do not forgive all of the past harms on Harry's behalf, nor Snape's lack of regret for those harms - nor the many harms to other children that Harry didn't have to forgive - but as a reader, I have to if I want to see him as redeemed, but I cannot forgive him those because he did not ask for it, nor appear to be written to want it, he had no regret for them, imo. And again, it is entirely questionable whether or not Snape regretted all of his past criminal harms - I would be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in this regard and go with what to me is Jo's idea that Snape was too small a man to express his regret in any way (because she did want redemption from evil to good). But she admitted in as far as his character was concerned, he died the same man he'd always been - so character redemption is impossible, for me.

Also, I respect, but do not buy into her idea that "Snape's loyalty to his love" was an admirable thing - everyone could love, but showing it and how it is shown is much more important. Bella was extraordinarily loyal to her love and it was shown in a rather deplorable manner, similar to Snape's and I don't admire that either. The distinction being that Snape also did some good deeds as a result, but Bella did not. Snape also did bad ones though as a result and that is the problem. So I disagree with JKR's opinion on that (as I understood her). Love is not just "love" - it takes on varied characteristics and that is important to how people act on the feeling. Snape behaved in a very selfish, immoral and deluded manner with respect to his at times, and also bravely and helpful at others - but it is all in there, not just the latter two factors.

And that's my galleon's worth... :lol:

:lol:.

I think alot of people share your feelings about Snape - they would rather he had stayed an ambiguous villain to Harry, instead of being given the same humanity as the other characters. But in my opinion, Snape has to fit in the same framework of motivation as everyone else. It isn't just the fact that he loves Lily, but that he is an emotional person with deep feelings, just like Harry.

For me that wasn't the problem - he would not have ended up a villain, but a Strong grey character. Instead we got a Weak grey character and while the former is kick, the latter sucks, imo. JKR admits this herself; "Snape is not a big man" - well in my view, it was a shame she had that vision for Snape because he would have been great strong grey character and had the potential to be one, imo.

I disagree. What may work in Othello (I've never read it, but my impression of the story was Iago was motivated by jealousy, of Othello's success in life and winning what's-her-name's affection...) would not, in my opinion, fit into HP as well. Love in its many forms is a major theme of the series. Leaving a big character like Snape unexplained would detract from that - making his motivation love, adds to it.

Actually Iago's motivation was not determinable and that is the comparison that was being made. Yew said: "A bit like Iago (to use your Shakespeare analogy) who I think is the most intriguing character Shakespeare ever wrote precisely because you never really get to the bottom of his motivation (the one he himself hints never seems convincing to me)." I agree with this. The motivations you named are guesses made by some, but many simply feel Iago was innately evil - however, there is no motivation given in Shakespeare canon.

Snape's motivation has that element in it also, imo, because his actions at times make me question his motivation - meaning it is not straightforward (unrequited love and expressing that love in every action.) Things like mistreating Harry, belitting her husband (her choice of love) and sending Harry to his death as well as the friendship on which Snape's emotions are based, are some of the things that make me question the motivation. But unlike Iago, Snape states his motivation, at least in part.

What drives one to turn their life around from evil to good in this series doesn't matter, I agree. But that is not all Snape's motivation was responsible for doing. It was the other things I was speaking about.



That's really at the heart of the debate, isn't it? I think motive does matter in considering a character (otherwise, it's all just about plot action, isn't it?). But your fundamental point is that whatever his motive, doing one good deed - even if it's a biggie - doesn't justify his other thousand bad deeds (is it the right tree I'm barking up this time?:p).

That touches on really profound questions about the scales of moral justice and also the Christian thought structure which is that a thousand terrible deeds can be redeemed by one action - accepting Christ's sacrifice to buy off those sins. Some posters would say that Snape's redeeming acts outweigh his pathetic power struggles and cruelty. You, evidently, would not!

I suspect that underlying your comments is a stance against the romanticism of Snape's character that is so tempting to us who really think he's the best thing in the books. Would that be a fair thing to say?

Because if so, I quite agree with you (and I say that as a Snape-lover!).

That's really at the heart of the debate, isn't it? I think motive does matter in considering a character (otherwise, it's all just about plot action, isn't it?). But your fundamental point is that whatever his motive, doing one good deed - even if it's a biggie - doesn't justify his other thousand bad deeds (is it the right tree I'm barking up this time?:p).

Quite - and all carrying the same fundamental motivation. So it also touches on the issue of the quailty of Snape's motivation. So yes it does matter in certain respect (in a major way). However, I do not feel it matters in terms of rejecting evil in fiction of this type because that is the primary goal of the work: rejecting and defeating evil. It only comes to bear when one goes on to speak of full redemption in light of later acts, imo.

That touches on really profound questions about the scales of moral justice and also the Christian thought structure which is that a thousand terrible deeds can be redeemed by one action - accepting Christ's sacrifice to buy off those sins. Some posters would say that Snape's redeeming acts outweigh his pathetic power struggles and cruelty. You, evidently, would not!

But I confused the point because I did speak of weighing. But it is really not a balancing equation in terms of good acts and bad acts. The idea concerns those bad acts for which there was no expression of regret on Snape's part. Redemption is based, in my judgment, on a person recognizing their bad acts and finding regret for them (mentally at least). "Bad acts" here are those which are criminally or civilly punishable. So it becomes very subjective because people will disagree on the amount of damage/harm Snape enacted. For example, some feel he was simply a strict teacher and others feel he was simply an unfair and quarrelsome professor. However, I saw his actions as extreme cruel and bullying behavior and I do count his mental and physical abuse of certain students, although that was focused on only a couple of children. However, when one's behavior reaches that level, it is a situation I feel draws a need for recognition of wrongs and regret on the part of the offender.

I suspect that underlying your comments is a stance against the romanticism of Snape's character that is so tempting to us who really think he's the best thing in the books. Would that be a fair thing to say?
Because if so, I quite agree with you (and I say that as a Snape-lover!).

Well actually infusing ideas of romance in his character doesn't bother me at all - no more than it did when it was infused in Harry's, Dumbledore's or Bella's.

With Snape, it was the fatally slim basis on which that idea was infused. The friendship was one of children and grew rocky by their early teens and came to a crushing end in the mid teenage years. I refuse to imagine a 36 year old Snape pining over a 15 year old Lily - in other words, I don't think the idea was that Snape's vision of romance included only giving a flower picked from Hogwarts grounds and a stolen kiss when professors weren't looking - even if he'd never actually experienced romance in his life. So I imagine he used his imagination to have Lily grow with him as he aged. He remained in love with this vision which included whatever other child-teenage understandings he had of her. And that is the basis for Snape's romance - perhaps fueled by what he may have read in books.

The motivation fails, not because it is unbelievable a person would do this - they might. The motivation fails because it is not enough, in my judgment to support the purported strength of Snape's emotions for Lily, the strength of the emotion fueling his jealousy for her husband and the equally strong feelings Snape showed toward their son (the representation of their love) in transference - and the negative acts that arose out of those emotions. That is in addition to the idea that the negative acts directly and fatally discount any possible idea that Snape's emotions for Lily were pure and selfless, imo, because you simply cannot have negative acts arising out of these same emotions and try to insist they were "good" when they were not and "all for her" when she would find them deplorable and hate them - and he knew it. Love itself is a good emotion, but the character of the love (the infusion of romance) in this case was obsessive, selfish and self-serving the majority of the time, imo, and only less so on occassion.

Hence I feel JKR's idea is that Snape is simply not a big man and indeed so small that he would behave this way based on a motivation that should not in reality support his doing so. I mean it is that or else Snape has a serious mental deficiency which I do not believe JKR was trying to say.

The motivation fails, not because it is unbelievable a person would do this - they might. The motivation fails because it is not enough, in my judgment to support the purported strength of Snape's emotions for Lily, the strength of the emotion fueling his jealousy for her husband and the equally strong feelings Snape showed toward their son (the representation of their love) in transference - and the negative acts that arose out of those emotions. .

Ah, I see.

What would I say about that?

Well, I'd say that Snape is presented as mentally deficient/emotionally damaged (call it what you will) to a sufficient degree by JKR that to me, his life-long infatuation with Lily is perfectly consistent.

In fact, if I had thought about him without knowing the back story about Lily, I'd have hazarded a guess that any relatiionship he had would be of that type - secretive, unexpressed properly, unreciprocated and involving a lot of self-delusion/idealisation of the beloved object. But very powerful.

In other words - not real or realistic. Not rooted in rational assessment of the other person's character (who does that when they are in the first flush of love anyway, let alone a lonely kid?)

See, I think what you haven't commented on is that some characters (in RL and in books), the nature of obsession is overwhleming and often based on the flimsiest of triggers. The beloved object may be unaware of the feelings they've unleashed in the obsessive or find them incomprehensible.

I see Snape as being on the "stalker spectrum" - someone who obsesses so much about the fantasy object that normality doesn't intrude. He may not be at the top end of that spectrum (instead, he seems to have internalised his feelings) but I think he's definitely on it! I would say that he's a character with a huge vacuum inside him, where family relationships, self-esteem and optimism should have been, none of which he got from his family and upbringing.

And when he spots Lily, that vacuum suddenly gets filled - he's like a Black Hole of the Wizarding world! :p

That means that he would never have been able to see a relationship through it's ups and downs, the gloss wearing off, the friendship that might follow the initial passion - in his "caught" mindset, his feelings remain at fever pitch forever because there's never an outlet for them. They've never resolved into love, or friendship because they never got beyond that first stage. And add to that the fact that he then caused the death of the very person he was obsessed by!

No, I think that's one of the things JKR does very well and in a relatively few words and scenes. But, of course, that's just how I read it ; you either find it convincing or you don't. :)

I do, though, take your point about "redemption". Snape's remorse is all focused on Lily - he's got nothing left over for anyone or anything else. So even at the very end, he hasn't gained any insight into his own condition. Which is an essential component to remorse, I guess.

Ah, I see. What would I say about that?

Well, I'd say that Snape is presented as mentally deficient/emotionally damaged (call it what you will) to a sufficient degree by JKR that to me, his life-long infatuation with Lily is perfectly consistent.

In fact, if I had thought about him without knowing the back story about Lily, I'd have hazarded a guess that any relatiionship he had would be of that type - secretive, unexpressed properly, unreciprocated and involving a lot of self-delusion/idealisation of the beloved object. But very powerful.

In other words - not real or realistic. Not rooted in rational assessment of the other person's character (who does that when they are in the first flush of love anyway, let alone a lonely kid?)

I agree except with the part about "very powerful" because I feel that is contradictory to the natural cynicism and arrogance written into his character. That it was all a front for a weak man is the problem.

See, I think what you haven't commented on is that some characters (in RL and in books), the nature of obsession is overwhleming and often based on the flimsiest of triggers. The beloved object may be unaware of the feelings they've unleashed in the obsessive or find them incomprehensible.

I see Snape as being on the "stalker spectrum" - someone who obsesses so much about the fantasy object that normality doesn't intrude. He may not be at the top end of that spectrum (instead, he seems to have internalised his feelings) but I think he's definitely on it! I would say that he's a character with a huge vacuum inside him, where family relationships, self-esteem and optimism should have been, none of which he got from his family and upbringing.

And when he spots Lily, that vacuum suddenly gets filled - he's like a Black Hole of the Wizarding world! :p

That is also my impression of what was written. Again, not the way I hoped to see the character in the end. I don't think it was only Lily that filled that vaccuum though; his father and mother and his friends at school I think did as well. His enemies and stint as a Death Eater also filled it, imo as well as Dumbledore and those he associated with in later life.

Part of Snape's character - true character - was that he had a bullying and cruel nature, imo. Part of his character - his true character - was an odd enjoyment garnered from causing pain in others, imo. Part of his character was that he could find compassion within in certain circumstances, imo. Part of his character was that he could be helpful, pull out a bravery and loyalty at times. Another part was vulnerability, insecurity and cowardice - and so on.

Now one can trace these things back to whatever they like. But to me, everything Snape became was a aggregation of his entire background. For example let's take just one of your attributes: self esteem.

-Lily helped build it in befriending him, showing him he was friend worthy.
-Mulciber and Avery helped build it in befriending him, showing he was friend worthy (and Lucius, et al.)
-His enemies helped him build it in inspiring him to best them
-Muggleborns and Muggles helped him build it in giving him feelings of superiority
-His parents helped him to build it in giving him methodology via emulation on their vision of how to hold esteemed standing - as he understood it
-Dumbledore help build it later in Snape's life in placing trust in him and treating him with respect.
-Joining the DEs and feeling 'privleged' to be among the group - especially when doing something valuable for Voldemort like handing over the prophecy also assisted in building it.

Those are just a few examples, and there would be many more if every event in his life was evaluated. At the same time, all of those persons or factors could dampen his self esteem (i.e, Lily ending the friendship; the Marauders besting him; his view on Muggles/Muggle borns changing; Dumbledore keeping him out of the know; etc.)

So I don't feel that attributes in Snape can be traced to any one person or event, rather, it is a case of all of the things in his background influencing to be the person he was (and I feel this goes for everyone). And I don't buy the idea that Lily alone provided Snape with "everything good" - many people did that for Snape, imo. The distinction was that Snape's emotions for her were greater, imo.

I see Snape as being on the "stalker spectrum" - someone who obsesses so much about the fantasy object that normality doesn't intrude. He may not be at the top end of that spectrum (instead, he seems to have internalised his feelings) but I think he's definitely on it! I would say that he's a character with a huge vacuum inside him, where family relationships, self-esteem and optimism should have been, none of which he got from his family and upbringing.

Once again, it's quite fascinating to think that Harry named his son Albus Severus after a "stalker." Harry simply states to Voldemort that Snape always loved her, so he sees it in the same context as everyone else in the series who can love. To me the canon is that Snape and Lily were "friends" and then after their final break-up at fifteen, there is no canon that he ever stalked Lily. Thought about her, still loved her, and didn't want her dead, but he wasn't following her around. And even if he was, that's no different than Harry watching Ginny on the Marauder's Map - which James probably did with Lily, as well, since he also had the Map. Snape had no map with which to stalk anyone.

I just can't see Snape as someone with a "vacuum" inside him. The canon tells me the opposite, since he obviously cares about Dumbledore and McGonagall, cares about the school enough to help protect it, and cares enough about Harry to get shocked and anguished when he thinks Harry might have to die. Snape is human, and it's his basic humanity which saves him from being a villain, imo.

Once again, it's quite fascinating to think that Harry named his son Albus Severus after a "stalker."

And even more fascinating, imo, to think that Harry named his son Albus Severus after a man who helped to kill his parents and loathed him. These are the things that Harry forgave Snape for, imo.

But my understanding was that what was proposed was not that Snape was an actual Stalker, but that he was on the Stalker Spectrum - which is quite distinct.

And even more fascinating, imo, to think that Harry named his son Albus Severus after a man who helped to kill his parents and loathed him. These are the things that Harry forgave Snape for, imo.

But my understanding was that what was proposed was not that Snape was an actual Stalker, but that he was on the Stalker Spectrum - which is quite distinct.
Well, a finely wrought distinction, but I see your point.

I just don't think the word fits Snape in any way. :)

Once again, it's quite fascinating to think that Harry named his son Albus Severus after a "stalker."
But why is that fascinating? Harry named his first born "James Sirius" after two great men who were horrible bullying berks as teens. Harry forgave them that and loved them anyway. He named his second son "Albus" after a mental old warlock with a Machiavellian plot to train Harry up so that he could "be slaughtered like an animal", a mental old warlock that Harry loved and respected and forgave. And he named his son Severus, after one of the bravest men he knew. Who also seemed to take pleasure in bullying Harry and insulting Harry's father; a man who seemed to have an obsessive love for Lily and never forgave Harry for being the image of his father, James. But Harry forgave him that and honored Snape's memory.

I just don't think the word fits Snape in any way. :)
I can totally respect that point of view, but I disagree that the word doesn't fit Snape in any way. These are behaviors of stalkers across the spectrum of six diagnosed types:

A sense of loss could be combined with frustration, anger, jealousy, vindictiveness, and sadness in ever-changing proportions.
In most cases, they will have poor social skills and a poor social network.
They may become jealous if their victim enters or continues a romantic relationship with another person.
The stalker views the target as being similar to those who have oppressed and humiliated them in the past, and they may view themselves as someone striking back against an oppressor.
To them, the victim is a long sought-after soul mate, and they were meant to be together.
This stalker may become jealous if their victim enters or continues a romantic relationship with another person.
The Incompetent Suitor desires a romantic or intimate relationship with the victim but is impaired in their social and courting skills.

Personally, even though it could be argued that there were some signs across the spectrum, none of the signs fall within a single category of classic stalker. I do NOT believe Severus was a stalker, though. He was socially awkward and had few friends, he cherished his friendship but was unable to set aside a personal drive to 'be somebody' {not a terrible thing in and of itself but in this instance it was a love of the Dark Arts and the drive to become a Death Eater}, he loathed James Potter for the bullying toerag he was, he mourned the loss of his friend.

Snape had a life-long enduring love for someone who did not return his feelings and he accepted that even if he did not like it. He protected the child of his 'enemy', James the bully who was also the rival for Lily's affection.

He risked his life time and time and time again and it was truly a thankless job all the way around. He was a hero, never a stalker, IMO.

But why is that fascinating? Harry named his first born "James Sirius" after two great men who were horrible bullying berks as teens. Harry forgave them that and loved them anyway.

Well, it's hardly surprising to me that Harry would name his first son after his father, whom he loved, even though he never knew James, and his godfather, whom Harry did know, and love. :) As for being 'horrible, bullying jerks as teens', no argument from me on that one :p but their sins were not actually against Harry. So he had nothing to forgive them for in that respect. And he was also mature enough to realise that James and Sirius's stupid behaviour in their adolescence did not define them as adults.

Personally, even though it could be argued that there were some signs across the spectrum, none of the signs fall within a single category of classic stalker. I do NOT believe Severus was a stalker, though.

I agree with this ... both with the fact that Severus does show some signs of being on the stalker spectrum, or at least that he is a pretty dysfunctional character (I love him no less because of it :D ) and also that he was not, in the final analysis, a stalker. I don't think The Prince's Tale shows us a man who, at the age of 38, was still a stalker (if he had ever been one).

I have come to regard The Prince's Tale as giving us the most complete and true picture of Snape, not as an immature young Death Eater who has no remorse about the death of James Potter, but who, as Silver Ink Pot says, is a man capable of mature emotions and regrets.

In any event, I actually find it one of the best written, and most emotionally satisfying, chapters in the whole book, even though the story it tells is desperately sad. :(

I don't regard Severus as a nice character. (Not many of Rowling's principal characters are actually that nice, when you analyse them in depth! But that only makes them far more interesting: I am not interested in 'nice' characters, whether they be heroes or villains. :) ) I do, however, regard him as a flawed hero.

I can totally respect that point of view, but I disagree that the word doesn't fit Snape in any way. These are behaviors of stalkers across the spectrum of six diagnosed types:

A sense of loss could be combined with frustration, anger, jealousy, vindictiveness, and sadness in ever-changing proportions.
In most cases, they will have poor social skills and a poor social network.
They may become jealous if their victim enters or continues a romantic relationship with another person.
The stalker views the target as being similar to those who have oppressed and humiliated them in the past, and they may view themselves as someone striking back against an oppressor.
To them, the victim is a long sought-after soul mate, and they were meant to be together.
This stalker may become jealous if their victim enters or continues a romantic relationship with another person.
The Incompetent Suitor desires a romantic or intimate relationship with the victim but is impaired in their social and courting skills.



I think the key points are the ones I have bolded. Having poor social skills doth not a stalker make, IMO. Nor does jealousy, which is a normal and typical human reaction to people who have something one lacks and wants. How one ACTS on those feelings might make one a stalker (which is why I find this list a poor description). Simply having them? Not for me - I've had all those feelings, myself! :p

The thing is, Lily is not Snape's victim. He does not view her as an oppressor. He does not believe they are soulmates. From all the evidence we have, she walks out of his life and he leaves her alone, accepting that she not only has no romantic interest in him, but even that she no longer wishes to continue as his (platonic) friend.

He does contribute to her danger, but canon makes it amply clear that this was not at all his intent (see e.g. Albus's explanation in HBP that Snape could not know which couple Voldemort would pursue.) A stalker's stalking is deeply personal - Snape's action in serving Voldemort was certainly anti-social, but not at all targeted at a specific person (Lily, in this case), as a stalker's would be.

Happy Holidays Pearl, good to see ya back. :)

Well, it's hardly surprising to me that Harry would name his first son after his father, whom he loved, even though he never knew James, and his godfather, whom Harry did know, and love. :) As for being 'horrible, bullying jerks as teens', no argument from me on that one :p but their sins were not actually against Harry. So he had nothing to forgive them for in that respect. And he was also mature enough to realise that James and Sirius's stupid behaviour in their adolescence did not define them as adults.

Agreed. Harry had nothing to forgive his parents or godfather for. He did forgive the other two though. Harry was shown to be quite a big man.

I agree with this ... both with the fact that Severus does show some signs of being on the stalker spectrum, or at least that he is a pretty dysfunctional character (I love him no less because of it :D ) and also that he was not, in the final analysis, a stalker. I don't think The Prince's Tale shows us a man who, at the age of 38, was still a stalker (if he had ever been one).

Well again, I don't think the proposition was that Snape was a stalker. He just had some of the tendencies common to them, imo.

He does contribute to her danger, but canon makes it amply clear that this was not at all his intent (see e.g. Albus's explanation in HBP that Snape could not know which couple Voldemort would pursue.) A stalker's stalking is deeply personal - Snape's action in serving Voldemort was certainly anti-social, but not at all targeted at a specific person (Lily, in this case), as a stalker's would be.

Happy Holidays Zara. :)

Personally, I wasn't referring to those things. I was speaking in terms of the obsession and possessiveness of Snape's behavior in regard to Lily. And I was also thinking of his interaction with Harry - in his continual undesired hounding of him and lack of respect for him as a person. These things Snape appeared loathed to admit of himself, rather placing a different slant on his actions, words and behavior.

So that is what I feel, I agree one does not have to put a label on it.

But why is that fascinating? Harry named his first born "James Sirius" after two great men who were horrible bullying berks as teens. Harry forgave them that and loved them anyway. He named his second son "Albus" after a mental old warlock with a Machiavellian plot to train Harry up so that he could "be slaughtered like an animal", a mental old warlock that Harry loved and respected and forgave. And he named his son Severus, after one of the bravest men he knew. Who also seemed to take pleasure in bullying Harry and insulting Harry's father; a man who seemed to have an obsessive love for Lily and never forgave Harry for being the image of his father, James. But Harry forgave him that and honored Snape's memory.

You know, when you put it that way, Scorpius Hyperion actually did get the less awful name.

Unbelievable as that is.

He just had some of the tendencies common to them, imo.

That's because Snape has that whole Byronic Hero thing happening in the last book. I was getting Wuthering Heights flashbacks with "The Prince's Tale".

Can I just say something? Every aspect of Severus Snape's life and the whole character has been discussed. I think you all finished discussing everything about him maybe 3 or 4 versions of this thread ago. I'm just saying, you all must be some pretty die-hard Severus Snape fans if you all can think of so many things to discuss about him that it takes up 9 versions of this thread.

I'm re-reading the Harry Potter series right now and the only time I ever liked Snape was in Deathly Hallows because we finally knew more about him. We learned about his childhood, his relationship with Lily, all of the things he went though, but it still doesn't make up for the fact that he was a very harsh man. Giving punishments left and right and hating Harry so much. Sure, Harry looked like James and did act like him, but did Harry ever do anything to Snape, NO! It was unnecessary. You would think that Snape would learn to have a better attitude and be a better person if he crossed over to the good side. It is a fact that he turned from the dark side, but still his behavior was completely unnecessary. I really do actually dislike the character from books 1 - 6.

:sigh: Too late now, the elections are already over. I think I should have stayed on with the Sirius Black campaign team. I regret it now, I really do. My opinions change over time, it's just who I am.

Can I just say something? Every aspect of Severus Snape's life and the whole character has been discussed. I think you all finished discussing everything about him maybe 3 or 4 versions of this thread ago. I'm just saying, you all must be some pretty die-hard Severus Snape fans if you all can think of so many things to discuss about him that it takes up 9 versions of this thread.

I know exactly what you mean, PurebloodGirl, but that is also a testament to how fascinating a lot of the fandom still find this character. :)

I'm pretty much done with discussing Severus in canon but it's nice to look in here now and then. :)

My opinions change over time, it's just who I am.

I don't think there is any rule about our literary opinions having to stay the same. :) That to me is the attraction of messageboards like this one ... that sometimes my opinion on characters can be changed, just by hearing another perspective on it from another reader with a different approach.

I have often approached Snape's character from different angles. I also sometimes play Devil's Advocate in discussions, not to be provocative for the sake of it but because I enjoy the challenge and it makes me think.

I think the key points are the ones I have bolded. Having poor social skills doth not a stalker make, IMO. Nor does jealousy, which is a normal and typical human reaction to people who have something one lacks and wants. How one ACTS on those feelings might make one a stalker (which is why I find this list a poor description).:) I understand your point and certainly respect it. Like I said previously, I don't believe that Snape was a stalker.

What had been said was "I just don't think the word fits Snape in any way" in response to the "stalker spectrum", rather than "stalker" per se. The list above, is based solely upon characteristics of six known types/categories of stalkers. So, whether one agrees with the above list or not, those are the characteristics of stalkers across the spectrum and yes, some of those characteristics are certainly applicable to Severus Snape as he is written by Rowling. Again, none of those characteristics fall within a singular 'type' of stalker, just characteristics across that broad spectrum.
Can I just say something? Every aspect of Severus Snape's life and the whole character has been discussed. I think you all finished discussing everything about him maybe 3 or 4 versions of this thread ago. I'm just saying, you all must be some pretty die-hard Severus Snape fans if you all can think of so many things to discuss about him that it takes up 9 versions of this thread.
That's because he's such an amazing and intriguing character. Some see him as extra good and deeply maligned, mistreated, and misunderstood; others see him as extra evil unworthy of forgiveness despite the unquestioning loyalty and uncommon bravery he'd displayed---for years; and some see him as somewhere in the middle. I'm in the middle, I don't see him as exceeding good/evil, but in the middle. To me, that's how he was written, as the anti-hero. :p

[QUOTE]Wasn't Lily berating him for cruelty at least by association?

If Snape's inaction can be interpreted as cruelty, what about Lupin's inaction in SWM? Was it also "cruelty by association"?

If he was hanging out with all those future Death Eaters, we may assume that he took part in their "pranks", which by all reports were a lot nastier than anything the Marauders did.

We may assume this, but this would be an assumption which is completely unsupported by canon. There were numerous times when Snape's bullying past could be brought up in the books, but it wasn't. Lily accused him of "hanging out" with other Slytherins, but she never mentioned his participation in any of their "pranks". James could have pointed out to Lily in SWM that Snape was just as much of a bully and was merely getting the taste of his own medicine, yet James didn't do that. Lupin and Sirius could have placated Harry by saying that teenage Snape was not above bullying himself, but they didn't. If Snape was a bully because he was part of the bullies' gang, then Lupin was also a bully.

He certainly didn't improve when he became a teacher. An unfair one, with a rather curious way of "encouraging" Neville.

I don't see his treatment of Neville as encouraging", of course. I think he felt contempt for Neville which stemmed from his distaste for displays of weakness in general. So he chose to be harsh and sarcastic instead of being sympathetic. So yeah, I think Snape and his students would have been much happier if he had chosen another career.:lol: Not that he had much of a choice, though.

Quite different way than the one he used with the Slytherins (Crabbe and Goyle were not exactly the brightest bulbs in the pack, yet Snape never "encouraged" them the way he did Neville, did he?)

Yes, he never tried to hide his obvious bias in favour of his own House. McGonagall was also biased, but she was never as blunt about it as Snape. It is interesting that Snape had a very Gryffindor approach to things at times. So much for the subtlety he was so fond of! :lol:

As for Crabbe and Goyle, we know that their "academic successes" actually were a source of concern for Snape, because it is mentioned in HBP that he gave them detention because of their poor grades.

We may assume this, but this would be an assumption which is completely unsupported by canon.

I would respectfully disagree. I think JKR was very precise in showing what was meant by dark magic. She had Snape, who would know the difference, do that for us in HBP. He told Harry his sectumsempra spell was dark in the sense Lily was speaking about in DH, imo, and I do feel that spell which left Draco bleeding to death was far beyond any of the other normal spells we saw in hex wars (like making people dance or lifting them in the air or making hair grow all over their bodies or body their parts grow as Harry did on another occassion.) JRK referred to those things in parenthesis as petty misdeeds, but she made it clear that what Harry had done to Draco was well beyond that, imo.

So to me that is what Lily was referring to when she spoke to Snape. Dark Spells of the nature of Sectumsempra, but not necessarily that. It was a young person's series and so at times, JKR used some discretion, imo. But the dark magic was those spells which would do dangerous harm and cause serious pain/injury. Snape laughed it off at the time, which is why Lily got angry and made the comparison I have made above. But Snape didn't laugh it off as an adult; he quite rightly strictured Harry about it and tried to get to the bottom of his learning dangerous spells of that nature. This was another example of Snape's evolution from evil to the good side with respect to his character arc, imo.

Snape also invented light spells when he was young that were merely petty misdeeds (like levicorpus or the jelly leg jinx) - and while delinquent, they didn't do serious harm or injury to another. But his dark spell, as Snape himself pointed out, was far worse and that is the type of stuff Mulciber was doing to Mary (based on the same term being used "dark magic"). Lily wasn't stupid; she would not differentiate for no reason - clearly the dark magic acts were doing very nasty things to people like sectumsempra does, imo. So Snape confirmed that dark magic was nastier in nature than the other spells, imo, showing his surprise at Harry and - notably - the one time he didn't say "just like your father".

There were numerous times when Snape's bullying past could be brought up in the books, but it wasn't. Lily accused him of "hanging out" with other Slytherins, but she never mentioned his participation in any of their "pranks". James could have pointed out to Lily in SWM that Snape was just as much of a bully and was merely getting the taste of his own medicine, yet James didn't do that. Lupin and Sirius could have placated Harry by saying that teenage Snape was not above bullying himself, but they didn't. If Snape was a bully because he was part of the bullies' gang, then Lupin was also a bully.

Well Lupin does get tossed in by what you refer to as association actually, imo, because it is supporting and abetting the behavior (just like all who join Voldemort aid his cause) - so yes, Snape did receive the title from being in the gang - but canon provides that he used dark magic himself (SWM) and called others Mudblood (another form of bullying - DH), so I think it was participation as well as association. But more importantly, we did not need to have people tell us that Snape behaved in a bullying manner when young or have Lily accuse him of it - because JKR showed it to us. He bullied Petunia, then the boys on the train, and during SWM, he showed exactly what he was capable of. Snape then declared that using dark magic (which I have explained above) was 'just a laugh'. And Sirius did say that Snape hexed James at every opportunity in 7th - that makes him 17-18 and still behaving with bullying behavior, imo. Additionally, Sirius said that Snape deserved the scare he got when he went into the tunnel and had to be rescued and precisely said that he felt that way because of Snape's behavior. Finally Lupin said that he neither liked nor disliked Snape, but could never see them as friends because of all that had gone on in the past between he, James and Sirius. Which if Snape had been an innocent party, based on what he was saying at the time, he would have definitely tried to be friends with the guy. And Lily would have no reason to be bothered by Snape's obsession with Marauders and following them around if his actions in that regard were not considered hostile, imo, so she too referred to his behavior as untoward. So all of the points you were making about what could have been said by these people - was said. Maybe not when you would have liked to have heard it, but JKR did include the information.

So that Snape went on to behave in a bullying manner as a DE and later continued with the children is no surprise because I feel he behaved in a bullying manner from the moment we saw him as a young boy at home.

Snape is seen as the bully, but the thing is JKR had Lily call James a bully, not Snape.

"An Arrogant, bullying toerag!", she called him in the SWM.

Snape was never called the bully when he was in School and he was never called a bully by any of the teachers or other students except Ron and maybe Harry IIRC. (who did not know everything about Snape, like the fact he was a spy and that he could not be pleasant to the BWL).

What's interesting is every one who knew he was a spy did not call him a bully. Not even Sirius or Remus or Molly call Snape a bully and they saw Snape teaching Harry for five and six years respectively and after POA Remus would have known a bit about Snape's relationship with Harry; Remus who was in the School and later Sirius. But they never thought Snape's behaviour towards Harry was bullying IMO.

You know, when you put it that way, Scorpius Hyperion actually did get the less awful name.

Unbelievable as that is.:p I definitely disagree with that. I'd rather be named James Severus, heck even Bilius, than the above. But as this thread is about Snape...
That's because Snape has that whole Byronic Hero thing happening in the last book. I was getting Wuthering Heights flashbacks with "The Prince's Tale".I too got the whole anti-hero vibe with the final revelations of Snape's true character.

"An Arrogant, bullying toerag!", she called him in the SWM.

Snape was never called the bully when he was in School and he was never called a bully by any of the teachers or other students except Ron and maybe Harry IIRC. (who did not know everything about Snape, like the fact he was a spy and that he could not be pleasant to the BWL).
Sorry, please don't take this the wrong way: But what the heck is a BWL? I generally can follow the abbreviations for the books and the occassional netspeak, but I'm at a loss...:hmm:

His being a spy did not require him to treat the students so shabbily, to humiliate and terrify Neville, or to take such vindictive pleasure in taking pot shots at Harry.

Jo said:

As a teacher, the "worst, shabbiest thing you can do" is to bully children (draws parallel to Snape). [Conversations with JK Rowling, p.21]
Snape is a compendium of all the bullying teachers she ever encountered.[Read the exact quote from The Herald, 2000]

But for the most part no one needed Jo's commentary on Snape's behavior because it was readily evident from the story itself as to what his behavior was: Bullying

Whether Harry ever complained to Hogwarts staff, Dumbledore, Sirius or others about how Snape treated him specifically, beyond his statement after Dumbledore's death, is unknown. Snape certainly didn't go out of his way to advertise to other staff members how he treated his students during lessons or detentions. Nor did he go out of his way to conceal how he really treated Harry when he confronted the Trio, Sirius, & Remus in the Shrieking Shack. In Phoenix, Sirius had concerns of how Snape would behave with Harry during Occlumency lessons, that's what triggered the squabble in Grimmauld Place and what led to Sirius giving Harry the mirror..."a way ot letting me know if Snape's giving you a hard time."

Sorry, please don't take this the wrong way: But what the heck is a BWL? I generally can follow the abbreviations for the books and the occassional netspeak, but I'm at a loss...:hmm:

BWL - Boy-Who-Lived. I am sorry. :)

His being a spy did not require him to treat the students so shabbily, to humiliate and terrify Neville, or to take such vindictive pleasure in taking pot shots at Harry.

Treating the students harshly and strictly so that no one student would ever like or trust Snape was the best thing Snape did for them. If any student who was not in Slytherin or indeed any muggleborn or anyone had liked Snape or if Snape had been say pleasant to Harry, patient with Neville or had appreciated Hermione, he would have been seen as the traitor Bellatrix called him in HBP and he would have found it very difficult to refuse Voldemort's request to bring Harry to him once he resurrected and his crucial part in the war would have been compromised for Snape would have been unable to comply with Voldemort's requests IMO.

By treating the students harshly Snape protected them, because not even Voldemort could order Snape to use his pleasantness, the trust the students had in him to bring muggleborns or even Harry to him IMO.

Snape's attitude helped in 2 ways; 1, to alienate himself from the students openly so that no one would ever use him to get to the students and 2, to show the DEs that even though he was with Dumbledore he was only a DE (death eater) to Voldemort because his favourite was only Slytherin and he hated muggleborns IMO.

Jo said:
As a teacher, the "worst, shabbiest thing you can do" is to bully children (draws parallel to Snape). [Conversations with JK Rowling, p.21]
Snape is a compendium of all the bullying teachers she ever encountered.[Read the exact quote from The Herald, 2000]

Well, for me, it is also important who was doing the bullying and under what circumstances. I would not argue if James or Sirius was called a bully or if Snape was called a bully by Lily while he was in school. At that time there was no other reason to bully others except to be mean.

Snape as a teacher after he came to Dumbledore on the hill? I respectfully disagree he was a bully, even with Jo, for I feel she has contradicted herself by saying one thing and presenting quite another in the books about Snape IMO.

Whether Harry ever complained to Hogwarts staff, Dumbledore, Sirius or others about how Snape treated him specifically, beyond his statement after Dumbledore's death, is unknown. Snape certainly didn't go out of his way to advertise to other staff members how he treated his students during lessons or detentions. Nor did he go out of his way to conceal how he really treated Harry when he confronted the Trio, Sirius, & Remus in the Shrieking Shack. In Phoenix, Sirius had concerns of how Snape would behave with Harry during Occlumency lessons, that's what triggered the squabble in Grimmauld Place and what led to Sirius giving Harry the mirror..."a way ot letting me know if Snape's giving you a hard time."

I very much doubt if Snape had indeed been a bully and a vindictive person, that would not have come to Dumbledore notice. Harry's hatred of Snape was very well known and surely the reasons for such hatred would have been discussed as well IMO.

Sirius openly says he is doubtful of Snape's loyalties in OOTP (Occlumency) and Harry was right there; and then we have Harry yelling about Snape at the end of the same book to Dumbledore and as early as Harry's first year Harry asks Dumbledore why Snape hates him and his father (I think).

So Harry's opinions and feelings are not unknown and Dumbledore takes no action. McGonagall in the 7th year, after she believes Snape to be a killer and a DE, never calls him a bully; on the contrary she called him a coward IMO.

I don't think Snape was a bully. I think he went out of his way to be harsh and earn the students hatred, especially Harry's , knowing the type of people he was dealing with and taking no chances, but protecting the students, Harry and himself so that his role would not be jeopardised or his true loyalties would not be known to Voldemort or his DEs IMO.

BWL - Boy-Who-Lived. I am sorry. :)Ahhh...muchas gracias!

Treating the students harshly and strictly so that no one student would ever like or trust Snape was the best thing Snape did for them. If any student who was not in Slytherin or indeed any muggleborn or anyone had liked Snape or if Snape had been say pleasant to Harry, patient with Neville or had appreciated Hermione, he would have been seen as the traitor Bellatrix called him in HBP and he would have found it very difficult to refuse Voldemort's request to bring Harry to him once he resurrected and his crucial part in the war would have been compromised for Snape would have been unable to comply with Voldemort's requests IMO.McGonagall could be very harsh, sharp and brusque, she was utterly no-nonsense, but she wasn't cruel or vindictive. One would think, considering for Voldemort's appearance-sake {if Snape was supposed to have wooed Dumbledore into believing Snape had changed and was working for the good side} that it would have been much more plausible and credible to show that "change" to Dumbledore, the faculty, the students, and others.

By treating the students harshly Snape protected them, because not even Voldemort could order Snape to use his pleasantness, the trust the students had in him to bring muggleborns or even Harry to him IMO.

Snape's attitude helped in 2 ways; 1, to alienate himself from the students openly so that no one would ever use him to get to the students and 2, to show the DEs that even though he was with Dumbledore he was only a DE (death eater) to Voldemort because his favourite was only Slytherin and he hated muggleborns IMO.Snape did not have to behave in the manner that he did and and his bullying certainly was not for the benefit of keeping his cover or for protecting the students of Hogwarts, that makes no sense to me. Alienating himself from the students for the 13+ years during the time that Voldemort was Vapor? What was he protecting those students from? The ones that would have left Hogwarts for good by the time Voldemort returned to power? Absolutely nothing at all.

For the benefit of the students? Tell me, how exactly was it beneficial to bully, humiliate, and terrify Neville Longbottom to the point that 'Bogart Snape' was the boy's greatest fear? How exactly was it beneficial to take a student's beloved pet and use it in a sick experiment to see if a potion was correctly made or not? There is no excuse, much less benefit, for such behavior.

Well, for me, it is also important who was doing the bullying and under what circumstances. I would not argue if James or Sirius was called a bully or if Snape was called a bully by Lily while he was in school. At that time there was no other reason to bully others except to be mean.

Snape as a teacher after he came to Dumbledore on the hill? I respectfully disagree he was a bully, even with Jo, for I feel she has contradicted herself by saying one thing and presenting quite another in the books about Snape IMO.That's okay, not all of us are gonna agree. In the books we have the statement via 3rd person narrative: 'Cruel, sarcastic, and disliked by everybody...' [Chamber of Secrets]

IMO: He was a bully. He did treat the students of Hogwarts shabbily. He terrified Neville. He took distinct pleasure in taking potshots at Harry. He was also a brilliant Potions Master, a loyal man, a good friend to Albus, and brave beyond belief.
I very much doubt if Snape had indeed been a bully and a vindictive person, that would not have come to Dumbledore notice. Harry's hatred of Snape was very well known and surely the reasons for such hatred would have been discussed as well IMO.

Sirius openly says he is doubtful of Snape's loyalties in OOTP (Occlumency) and Harry was right there; and then we have Harry yelling about Snape at the end of the same book to Dumbledore and as early as Harry's first year Harry asks Dumbledore why Snape hates him and his father (I think). So Harry's opinions and feelings are not unknown and Dumbledore takes no action.
"You see what you expect to see" is what Dumbledore told Severus regarding Harry in year 1, just as Dumbledore told Harry "I thought Professor Snape could overcome his feelings about your father---I was wrong".

What actions could be taken, knowing that Snape must remain and teach at Hogwarts? "Be nicer, please?" "Be more tactful?" "Play nice?" "Kiss and make up?" :lol:

No, of course not, instead we get stuff like:

"Thank you, Severus,"

"Innocent until proven guilty, Severus."

"Why? You aren't trying to give the boy more detentions, Severus? The boy will soon have spent more time in detention than out."
"He is his father over again---"
"In looks, perhaps, but his deepest nature is much more like his mother's."

Let's also not forget Snape's reactions in Azkaban after Sirius escaped and how alarming Fudge found it, nor should we forget the remarks he made about Harry in Goblet of Fire right in front of Dumbledore, McGonagall, Imposter Moody, Bartemius Crouch, Madame Maxime, Igor Karkaroff, Ludo Bagman, Cedric Diggory, Fleur Delacour, Viktor Krum:

"It's no one's fault but Potter's, Karkaroff," said Snape softly. His black eyes were alight with malice. "Don't go blaming Dumbledore for Potter's determination to break rules. He has been crossing lines ever since he arrived here---"
"Thank you, Severus," said Dumbledore firmly, and Snape went quiet, though his eyes still glinted malevolently....

I believe that Dumbledore and the staff knew full well how horribly Snape treated Harry and the other students.

Other than Umbridge, when do we see the Headmaster inserting himself in the day to day teaching/disciplining of students by the staff/Heads of Houses? We see him interfere with one detention of Harry's, not to nullify it but to postpone it in order that the Headmaster can show Harry a memory in the Pensieve. Even McGonagall refused to interfere with another teacher's assignment of detention to Harry.

McGonagall in the 7th year, after she believes Snape to be a killer and a DE, never calls him a bully; on the contrary she called him a coward IMO.We see a singular interaction, though. Since when does a five minute encounter account for all of the interactions that may have occurred from September 1 until May 2 {isn't that the date for the Battle of Hogwarts}? The point trying to be made, that she didn't call him a bully in the one instant of interaction we see of them together, somehow meaning that she never once called him a bully in all the years he's been at Hogwarts, is, IMO, an oversimplification. We don't know if she did or if she didn't because we never see it, but that doesn't mean that it never ever happened. How did Harry get his invisibility cloak back in Prince? Dunno, we never see it happen, but happen it does. How did Harry get the Marauder's Map back in Goblet of Fire? Dunno, we never see it occur in canon. How did Wormtail get Voldemort's wand? Dunno, we never see it. Where did Frank Bryce's body go? Dunno, we never see it.

The printed text only gets us so far, but the above questions help re-enforce the point that just because we don't see something occur on page doesn't mean it never occurred at all.
I don't think Snape was a bully. I think he went out of his way to be harsh and earn the students hatred, especially Harry's , knowing the type of people he was dealing with and taking no chances, but protecting the students, Harry and himself so that his role would not be jeopardised or his true loyalties would not be known to Voldemort or his DEs IMO.I can totally understand your opinion. I just can't agree with it. You said above that you had to disagree with Jo's answers regarding Snape's behavior because you thought she was saying one thing but then written something entirely different in the book. So let's look at that for a moment.

The type of bullying that I'm talking about is known as indirect bullying or social aggression, is much more subtle than direct bullying or physical aggression. Indirect bullying is a form of psychological abuse and has many techniques/characteristics, some {not all} are listed in questions below.

Was the behavior intentional? Yes.
Was the behavior habitual? Yes.
Was Snape's treatment of students, at times, cruel? Yes.
Did Snape call students insulting/derogatory names to their faces? To other people? Yes. {To be fair though, I think McGonagall did too on occasion}
Did Snape mock his students? Yes.
Did Snape try to exclude a student from an activity? From a conversation? Yes.
Did Snape give the silent treatment to his student(s)? Yes.
Did Snape harass his students? Yes.
Did Snape intimidate his students? Yes.
Did Snape verbally abuse his students? Yes.
Did Snape physically abuse his students? Yes. {To be fair he'd been pushed beyond reason by finding Harry viewing his own worst memory and then after killing Albus he was again pushed beyond reason, not by Harry but by what he'd been forced to do}

All of the above is indirect bullying, but no mistake, it IS bullying. The person displaying the behavior~Snape~was a bully, whether that word ever appears in canon or not. He wasn't only a bully, that was simply one of many differing aspects of his multi-faceted character, IMO.

In the interests of keeping this thread moving smoothly and avoiding the ruffling of any feathers, perhaps it's time we all take a quick breather and refresh Jessica's How to have a pleasant conversation on any topic (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108019) in our heads again.

This isn't directed at any one poster, but rather the mood this thread likes to take sometimes.
Remember, we all have different opinions and it's nice to hear sides that aren't our own.
Thanks.

In the interests of keeping this thread moving smoothly and avoiding the ruffling of any feathers, perhaps it's time we all take a quick breather and refresh Jessica's How to have a pleasant conversation on any topic (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108019) in our heads again.

This isn't directed at any one poster, but rather the mood this thread likes to take sometimes.
Remember, we all have different opinions and it's nice to hear sides that aren't our own.
Thanks.:blush: Sorry about that, I have a tendancy to express my opinions {hopefully politely} by sorta driving home a point.

New topic direction? Okay.

I've thought about this for a while but never discussed it and don't recall seeing it discussed. All the times that it appears that Severus is trying to get Harry expelled from Hogwarts:

I've thought at times that he really wanted Harry gone, because of how Severus appears to perceive Harry as being not just a physical image of James, but the embodiment of his father's personality traits. He didn't like having to see the everyday reminder of losing Lily, to another man and then, to death.

But then I wonder if he really was, deep down, under the belief that Harry's best source of protection was with the Muggles on Privet Drive {where he could not be touched or harmed by Voldemort}. The protection was always strongest at the house in Little Whinging, so at home he should be, and not at Hogwarts.

Or could it be a combination of the two?

I've thought at times that he really wanted Harry gone, because of how Severus appears to perceive Harry as being not just a physical image of James, but the embodiment of his father's personality traits. He didn't like having to see the everyday reminder of losing Lily, to another man and then, to death.

But then I wonder if he really was, deep down, under the belief that Harry's best source of protection was with the Muggles on Privet Drive {where he could not be touched or harmed by Voldemort}. The protection was always strongest at the house in Little Whinging, so at home he should be, and not at Hogwarts.

Or could it be a combination of the two?

In my view, Snape knew the importance of Harry being trained as a wizard because he had to eventually confront Voldemort. While Dumbledore made it clear that 'love' would be an important factor, Harry would also need to learn the lore, ways and use of magic. He could not do so at Little Whinging.

Snape only spoke of expulsion when he was angry. I feel if JKR wanted us to believe that Snape believed Harry should stay at his Aunt's home, she would have had him made a serious suggestion about it to Dumbledore (say, during the memories.) Also, Snape knew that Harry was likely safer at Hogwarts (as it together with Gringotts were the safest places in the Wizard World) and under the close care of Dumbledore.

So I feel Snape was simply upset when he spoke of expelling Harry and wished to dole out the stiffest stricture possible; plus I agree he did not enjoy seeing the reminder of Lily's preference for another man everyday. After all, deep within Harry's nature, he held some of Lily's nature and it came out when he was more reserved in certain instances, imo. But Snape rarely saw that side of Harry - he saw his everyday nature which was much more like his father's. Lily didn't have a personal enemy like James and Harry did and she didn't likely make people's body parts grow in size the way James and Harry did (head/toenails), nor behave arrogantly the way Harry could at times and James as well - nor play Quidditch and gain notarity as Harry and James did in their differing ways. So he'd see much more James than Lily - actually everyone would, imo. But Harry could be more reserved, less arrogant and quick to temper at times, more like his mum, so he did have characteristics of both, imo (and I feel in ways James and Lily were similar - belief systems, etc., so he had that too - but Snape would likely only see James even if it also could be a Lily trait as well.)

Nonetheless, that is rather academic isn't it? He was Lily's son and Snape knew it - how he looked and behaved is beside the point; he was behaving in a negative fashion with her son, including his attempts to get him expelled, imo. Harry may have been just as safe at home, but he wouldn't have been able to learn magic there and that was also important in relation to the confrontation with Voldy which Snape knew was foretold to occur, imo.

What's interesting is every one who knew he was a spy did not call him a bully. Not even Sirius or Remus or Molly call Snape a bully and they saw Snape teaching Harry for five and six years respectively and after POA Remus would have known a bit about Snape's relationship with Harry; Remus who was in the School and later Sirius. But they never thought Snape's behaviour towards Harry was bullying IMO.

Well, they didn't know the half of it, did they? :) And I disagree with you that Sirius didn't think Snape was a bully -- as Kat_Suki points out, he aggressively tells Snape not to give Harry a hard time when giving him Occlumency lessons: he's worried about Snape's attitude to Harry so he's fighting his godson's corner.

(Not that Sirius himself is always an angel, I hasten to add, but that is not a topic for this thread. :lol: )

I absolutely agree there is more to Snape than meets the eye -- Rowling solidly hints at this all the way through the series :) -- but I don't think you can avoid the very clear implications in the text, backed up by what the author says, that his issues with Harry being James's son were very personal. His behaviour to Harry was not just about his cover as a spy, and I do think that's made pretty clear. :)

So I feel Snape was simply upset when he spoke of expelling Harry and wished to dole out the stiffest stricture possible; plus I agree he did not enjoy seeing the reminder of Lily's preference for another man everyday. After all, deep within Harry's nature, he held some of Lily's nature and it came out when he was more reserved in certain instances, imo. But Snape rarely saw that side of Harry - he saw his everyday nature which was much more like his father's. Lily didn't have a personal enemy like James and Harry did and she didn't likely make people's body parts grow in size the way James and Harry did (head/toenails), nor behave arrogantly the way Harry could at times and James as well - nor play Quidditch and gain notarity as Harry and James did in their differing ways. So he'd see much more James than Lily - actually everyone would, imo. But Harry could be more reserved, less arrogant and quick to temper at times, more like his mum, so he did have characteristics of both, imo (and I feel in ways James and Lily were similar - belief systems, etc., so he had that too - but Snape would likely only see James even if it also could be a Lily trait as well.)

I agree with this. To Snape, Harry is James Incarnate. Which is unfortunate. :( Although, in The Prince's Tale, we do see him acknowledging Harry as Lily's son too.

Nonetheless, that is rather academic isn't it? He was Lily's son and Snape knew it - how he looked and behaved is beside the point; he was behaving in a negative fashion with her son, including his attempts to get him expelled, imo. Harry may have been just as safe at home, but he wouldn't have been able to learn magic there and that was also important in relation to the confrontation with Voldy which Snape knew was foretold to occur, imo.

I really don't understand why Snape would have been serious about getting Harry expelled. :hmm: It makes no sense at all in the light of his career as double agent who had sworn to protect Harry from Voldemort. Most odd.

I really don't understand why Snape would have been serious about getting Harry expelled. :hmm: It makes no sense at all in the light of his career as double agent who had sworn to protect Harry from Voldemort. Most odd.

He was angry. He didn't go around on a daily basis trying to get Harry expelled, it only happened in moments when he became angry at what he saw as preferential treatment of Harry in times when Snape wanted to see severe stricture (or at at least some stricture given).

Snape didn't always take the big picture into consideration when the little things became more important to him - like when he dropped the Occlucmency lessons, or suggested Harry be expelled to the Minister of Magic. He was just caught up in his personal anger, imo. Also, he wasn't a double agent at those times he was suggesting Harry get expelled. Perhaps he had his own doubts about Voldemort's actual return until the end of GoF. I don't recall him suggesting Harry be expelled in OOTP or HBP.

I haven't had a chance to go thru all the comments since the last time I posted but I've had something circling around in my head for a few days that I wanted to get out before I go back and read everything.

First let me say that I find Snape to be neither black or white. He is very, very gray. Which is probably why I find him so fascinating. He has some very predictable responses based on the things he's done and seen and been thru. He's a really big canidate for the nature vs. nurture argument IMO.

That being said...

Snape went to Dumbledore when he realized that Lily Potter's family was going to be the target of Voldemort's wrath. That the information Snape had given him was going to prove to be the undoing of the woman he loved. Right or wrong, he wanted to save Lily, and if that meant saving everyone he was ok with that. I keep seeing the argument that he was willing to sacrifice Harry and James in order to save Lily, but I'm still unclear how anyone can think it's possible he COULD save Harry. The ball was already rolling downhill and there was no way to stop it. Is there ANYTHING he could have done to save Harry once it had started? I don't see that he could. As I said before, it's not like he could have gone to Voldemort and been like, "Hey, I think I may have been wrong about this." We have no proof that he didn't consider, or have any guilt about having to sacrifice Harry.

We also have no proof as to whether or not he wanted James sacrificed. We don't know if Voldemort saw him as a bigger threat than lily because maybe he was better skill wise than she was and therefore posed a bigger threat. We know he offered to let Lily live, but he doesn't seem to give that offer to James. Why is that? Did James attack and maybe not give him the chance to make that offer? Why did LILY get it ant not James? Is it because Snape had asked him to spare her?

We don't really have any canon that proves how Snape felt about knowing Harry would die, and we don't know if he tried to save James either. I think we can all agree that his main concern was Lily, but we don't know that he didn't try to save James as well. He knows he sacrificed Harry simply because he was the one who gave the info to Voldemort. But we don't know what else he might have tried, or didn't try, to do.

We don't know how Snape treated the Hufflepuffs or the Ravenclaw students. In PoA, it's said that Snape treats "practically everyone" badly, but we're not given details. Is he as hard on the other houses as he is on Gryffindor? The only classes we see him teach are Gryffindor and Slytherin together. Was he merely tolerating of he other two houses? Did he bully them the same way he tended to bully a lot of the Gryffindors? We don't know.

Now, I'm the first to agree that Snape's calling was NOT being a teacher. He might have made a good accountant.... dunno. He was a horrible teacher. He seemed to think that bullying was a better tactic than encouragement and that weakness should never be rewarded. He never acknowledged that some students would be better at one thing than another. He seemed to think they should all excel in potions. Yeah, he was a really crappy teacher. But that's where Dumbledore put him, so that's where he stayed. I somehow doubt he enjoyed teaching any more than Harry enjoyed having him for a teacher. And we don't know for a fact why Dumbledore never gave him the DADA position. All we have is Snape's explanation to Narcissa. We don't know it was fact.

The only person who ever actually trusted Snape completely was Dumbledore. Even the other teachers never supported him professionally or personally. When asked about Snape, all the others would say was that if Dumbledore trusted him so did they. Not really a ringing endorsement is it? They couldn't even say that he knew potions well, which I think he did. The ONLY support Snape had was Dumbledore. And, being a kid that we know did suffer some abuse, Snape probably saw himself as tainted in Dumbeldore's eyes for the things he had done. While he did Dumbledore's bidding I don't think Snape ever saw himself as equal to anyone except during his time with the DEs. No one else would be allowed to see Snape as the Snape Dumbledore got to see. He always had to keep himself hidden. One slip and he could blow his cover, or he could put everyone in danger because someone would know he wasn't really on Voldemort's side any more.

Snape was, in essence, a deep undercover agent. And if you ever speak to a lot of undercover guys, they will tell you that finding the line between who you are and who you're supposed to be gets very hard as time goes on. Most of those guys lose families, friends, and a lot of themselves. Snape was undercover for more than 10 years. The only person who was allowed to see him as Severus Snape, not Severus Snape, former Death Eater, was Dumbeldore. That's it.

Snape had a lot of flaws. He had a lot of damage to his psyche and was emotionally stunted. But I think Dumbeldore played a part in this. Snape was put into a position that he couldn't escape from. He HAD to be Snape, Death Eater, because like Dumbledore, he knew Voldemort would be back. I don't think he ever really doubted that one he got past the trauma of Lily's death. I have to wonder who Snape would have been if he hadn't felt he need to keep being the person everyone thought he was.

Was Snape worth of redemption? I guess in the end only TPTB can answer that. Snape wasn't a nice person. He wasn't even a likable person a lot of the time. But once Lily was gone he didn't have to agree to protect Harry. He didn't have to agree to work for Dumbledore. He didn't have to agree to do much of anything. He could easily have turned that pain even more inward and lashed out at the whole world. He could have stayed with the DEs and possibly even acted in Voldemort's stead while he was incapacitated. There are a lot of things he could have done that would have indicated to me that he felt no need for redemption, and didn't deserve it. But he didn't. So, IMO, as flawed and unlikable as he was many times, he was still worth of redemption.

Snape went to Dumbledore when he realized that Lily Potter's family was going to be the target of Voldemort's wrath. That the information Snape had given him was going to prove to be the undoing of the woman he loved. Right or wrong, he wanted to save Lily, and if that meant saving everyone he was ok with that. I keep seeing the argument that he was willing to sacrifice Harry and James in order to save Lily, but I'm still unclear how anyone can think it's possible he COULD save Harry. The ball was already rolling downhill and there was no way to stop it. Is there ANYTHING he could have done to save Harry once it had started? I don't see that he could. As I said before, it's not like he could have gone to Voldemort and been like, "Hey, I think I may have been wrong about this." We have no proof that he didn't consider, or have any guilt about having to sacrifice Harry.

I respect your view. It isn't that Snape understood that he could not bargain for Harry's life - it is Snape's original willingness to put a baby - any baby - to death, to advance both Voldemort's position and his own. That baby turned out to be Harry and Snape did not know Harry from Mick Jagger. So in his eyes at that time (recalling he was a Death Eater), his willingness to see a baby die extended to Harry. He was not willing to see Lily die, however, and so he attempted to save her.

Now one could opine that once Snape found out that Harry was Lily's son, he also felt a need to save Harry (for Lily's sake). But one would be hard pressed to make that argument considering that After Snape changed sides, he behaved in an abusive and cruel manner toward Harry - while he was purportedly honoring Lily's sacrifice to save the boy.

One could explain that by opiniing that Snape was compelled to do so because he blamed Harry for Lily's death (if Voldemort hadn't hunted Harry, Lily would not have died). But one would be hard pressed to make that argument because Voldemort wouldn't have been hunting Harry in the first place if Snape hadn't given him the prophecy - so it was actually his fault, completely. That would be too big a point to ignore unless Snape was on the verge of medical insanity, imo, and there is no canon to indicate he was. I do feel he was portrayed as mentally unstable, but not in the realm of insane.

We also have no proof as to whether or not he wanted James sacrificed. We don't know if Voldemort saw him as a bigger threat than lily because maybe he was better skill wise than she was and therefore posed a bigger threat. We know he offered to let Lily live, but he doesn't seem to give that offer to James. Why is that? Did James attack and maybe not give him the chance to make that offer? Why did LILY get it ant not James? Is it because Snape had asked him to spare her?

Voldemort didn't dole out favors because he was a loving, kind and generous kinda guy - he would have seen a benefit in sparing Lily once Snape had asked him (even if it was to reward Snape for the prophecy and tightening the noose about his neck more so he'd remain faithful) and for that reason, went in with the idea of allowing her to live - if she cooperated and allowed him to kill her son. Snape knew that Lily would not cooperate and he knew Voldemort would lose patience - if Voldemeort even attempted to heed his request - that is why he went to Dumbledore declaring Voldemort planned to kill them all. Snape simply did not trust Voldemort would spare her, imo, and he was right. James was a confirmed Order member and had already turned down Voldemort's offer to become a DE - there was no reason to keep him alive.

We don't really have any canon that proves how Snape felt about knowing Harry would die, and we don't know if he tried to save James either. I think we can all agree that his main concern was Lily, but we don't know that he didn't try to save James as well. He knows he sacrificed Harry simply because he was the one who gave the info to Voldemort. But we don't know what else he might have tried, or didn't try, to do.

But we do know, imo. He told Dumbledore he asked Voldemort to exchange the son for the mother - kill Harry, but spare Lily. So he had not tried to keep Harry alive. We don't have any information about James, but if he had tried to save James, I feel JKR would have put it in the memories because it would have been a super duper plus point for Snape's redemption. But more than that, JKR showed Snape's unwillingness to even ask Dumbledore to keep Harry and James safe, imo - only after prodding from Dumbledore did he manage to croak it out - and croak is the word JKR used. So I think canon was intending to show that Snape was a Death Eater at the time and his value for human life was at an all time low - this to me is confirmed when he later says that he "no longer" watches those die he could save - that means at some point he was watching people die that he could have saved but didn't. I feel that is how he felt about James and Harry when he was speaking to Dumbledore.

The only person who ever actually trusted Snape completely was Dumbledore. Even the other teachers never supported him professionally or personally. When asked about Snape, all the others would say was that if Dumbledore trusted him so did they. Not really a ringing endorsement is it? They couldn't even say that he knew potions well, which I think he did. The ONLY support Snape had was Dumbledore. And, being a kid that we know did suffer some abuse, Snape probably saw himself as tainted in Dumbeldore's eyes for the things he had done. While he did Dumbledore's bidding I don't think Snape ever saw himself as equal to anyone except during his time with the DEs. No one else would be allowed to see Snape as the Snape Dumbledore got to see. He always had to keep himself hidden. One slip and he could blow his cover, or he could put everyone in danger because someone would know he wasn't really on Voldemort's side any more.

The thing is, being a double agent didn't mean he had to aggressively bully the children, imo. Quirrell didn't and he Was on Voldemort's side - carrying the dark lord around and all. Talk about keeping things hidden! Surely if Quirrell could be simply "weird", then Snape could too, there was no need for the aggressive bullying, imo.

Snape was, in essence, a deep undercover agent. And if you ever speak to a lot of undercover guys, they will tell you that finding the line between who you are and who you're supposed to be gets very hard as time goes on. Most of those guys lose families, friends, and a lot of themselves. Snape was undercover for more than 10 years. The only person who was allowed to see him as Severus Snape, not Severus Snape, former Death Eater, was Dumbeldore. That's it.

I don't think anyone would argue that Snape had a tough job once Voldemort came back and he had to attend the meetings. But remember he was a Double Spy - meaning that Voldemort intended for him to fool Dumbledore into believing he was on the good side. So his primary mission could have been a very easy one - he simply had to behave like the good sider he purported himself to be in reality when he was at the school. But he didn't and I am not sure why Voldemort didn't chastise him for behaving as he did because his behavior made him seem like a Death Eater which was not too good in terms of fooling anybody. Not to mention that Snape was kind of blowing his own cover by bullying the kids because any normal headmaster would have kicked him out. Voldemort should have been suspicious that Snape was able to remain teaching at all. The only thing I can think is that Voldemort never found out about Snape's behavior at the school.

Snape had a lot of flaws. He had a lot of damage to his psyche and was emotionally stunted.

So did Sirius though - worse actually - he'd spent 12 years with Dementors and came out a human wreck in comparison to what he had been. His young life was also terrible and unlike Snape, it was so bad he ran away from home. Snape made his life at Hogwarts miserable in his eyes to the point where he was willing to see Snape truck into a shack that contained a werewolf.

The point is, everyone has a "story" and many, like Sirius had it extremely hard. Harry, Neville and others also had very difficult youths and times at Hogwarts. But Snape was the only one in canon to bully children and he took that same attitude with his peers. And the thing is, it wasn't like Snape's past "created" his personality because he was bullying Petunia the same way before he ever stepped foot in Hogwarts, imo. So I feel his character was formed early on and he just grew worse by the company he kept and later joining the DEs - there was no opportunity for the 'bully' to be eradicated from his persona until he changed sides. But by then I believe he was unfortunately too used to obtaining pleasure from bullying others and so he kept it up.

But I think Dumbeldore played a part in this. Snape was put into a position that he couldn't escape from. He HAD to be Snape, Death Eater, because like Dumbledore, he knew Voldemort would be back. I don't think he ever really doubted that one he got past the trauma of Lily's death. I have to wonder who Snape would have been if he hadn't felt he need to keep being the person everyone thought he was.

Snape didn't have to play death eater for nearly 15 years prior to Voldemort's return and he had the same personality - character - behavior the whole time according to his description in canon. There was no active Order or Death Eaters to "perform" for; many were in jail, others were in hiding and some like Lucius, Crabbe and Goyle didn't even believe Voldemort would return. Snape was merely in his classroom behaving in a negative manner because that is who he was, imo. When Harry arrived, I feel he simply had more incentive to behave in a bullying and abusive manner with him, but it was his modus operandi in any case per the canon (COS - Whomping Willow)

Was Snape worth of redemption? I guess in the end only TPTB can answer that. Snape wasn't a nice person. He wasn't even a likable person a lot of the time. But once Lily was gone he didn't have to agree to protect Harry. He didn't have to agree to work for Dumbledore. He didn't have to agree to do much of anything. He could easily have turned that pain even more inward and lashed out at the whole world. He could have stayed with the DEs and possibly even acted in Voldemort's stead while he was incapacitated. There are a lot of things he could have done that would have indicated to me that he felt no need for redemption, and didn't deserve it. But he didn't. So, IMO, as flawed and unlikable as he was many times, he was still worth of redemption.

I am not sure what TPTB is, but in my judgment Snape was not redeemed. He did turn from and reject Voldemort's evil and that was great. However, his behavior after the fact included things which to me are just as unforgivable - things he never turned from or regretted in canon, imo. So I personally don't see him as redeemed as an individual. He was forgiven by the protagonist - but Harry had a motive; his parents were involved and Snape had honored them through his promise - and spied and died doing so showing bravery in that. Not to mention JKR wished to show how big of a man Harry was and that he could live up to Lupin's teachings. But they were not my parents and I don't feel his manner and method of honor was righteous, so I cannot forgive him on Harry's behalf nor on behalf of others.

I respect your view. It isn't that Snape understood that he could not bargain for Harry's life - it is Snape's original willingness to put a baby - any baby - to death, to advance both Voldemort's position and his own. That baby turned out to be Harry and Snape did not know Harry from Mick Jagger. So in his eyes at that time (recalling he was a Death Eater), his willingness to see a baby die extended to Harry. He was not willing to see Lily die, however, and so he attempted to save her.

You're right, giving the info to Voldemort meant watching a child die. One way or the other. No way around that.

Even with such a low regard for human life, he still tried to save Lily. I'm really confused as to why we're arguing this particular point over and over again.

Snape [staff edit-replaced by "messed up] when he told Voldemort about the prophecy. He set into motion a series of events that were pretty horrible. He knew this. He knew full well what he was doing when he did it. But when it hit home for him that Lily would be effected, he changed his mind. You can't change what's done in the past, you can only change the future. And he tried to. It just didn't work. At least not like he wanted.

Now one could opine that once Snape found out that Harry was Lily's son, he also felt a need to save Harry (for Lily's sake). But one would be hard pressed to make that argument considering that After Snape changed sides, he behaved in an abusive and cruel manner toward Harry - while he was purportedly honoring Lily's sacrifice to save the boy.

I don't think Snape was at a point where he ever considered saving Harry's life. Whether he was incapable of even thinking about it, or whether he thought it was impossible to do we'll never know. The same for James. We only see him telling Dumbledore he offered the son for the mother, nothing about James. But it still go back to the fact Voldemort wasn't going to let Harry live if he was a threat and per the prophecy he was.

So once again I ask, how was he supposed to save Harry once he realized his error? How could he have possibly bargained for Harry? How could he have changed the outcome that was already being written?

One could explain that by opiniing that Snape was compelled to do so because he blamed Harry for Lily's death (if Voldemort hadn't hunted Harry, Lily would not have died). But one would be hard pressed to make that argument because Voldemort wouldn't have been hunting Harry in the first place if Snape hadn't given him the prophecy - so it was actually his fault, completely. That would be too big a point to ignore unless Snape was on the verge of medical insanity, imo, and there is no canon to indicate he was. I do feel he was portrayed as mentally unstable, but not in the realm of insane.

We never saw anything that indicates that he blamed Harry for Lily's death. If anything I think we saw enough self loathing from Snape to show he felt guilty about her death, he blamed himself IMO. And he should. If it weren't for him that ball never would have gotten to roll.

I'm not sure where you're going with this. I get the feeling you think Snape wasn't aware of what he'd done, but per his words to Dumbledore we do know he was aware and wanted to die himself because of it.


Voldemort didn't dole out favors because he was a loving, kind and generous kinda guy - he would have seen a benefit in sparing Lily once Snape had asked him (even if it was to reward Snape for the prophecy and tightening the noose about his neck more so he'd remain faithful) and for that reason, went in with the idea of allowing her to live - if she cooperated and allowed him to kill her son. Snape knew that Lily would not cooperate and he knew Voldemort would lose patience - if Voldemeort even attempted to heed his request - that is why he went to Dumbledore declaring Voldemort planned to kill them all. Snape simply did not trust Voldemort would spare her, imo, and he was right. James was a confirmed Order member and had already turned down Voldemort's offer to become a DE - there was no reason to keep him alive.

There is NO canon that says that Voldemort offered Lily her life because SNAPE asked for it. None. We have nothing that indicates why he offered Lily her life in exchange for her son. In fact, I always found it a little OOC for Voldemort. Voldemort would never have let someone live if he felt they were a threat to him, whether or not one of the DEs asked him to. He thought a BABY was a threat and set off to kill that child. If he's threatened by a mere child, then he should ahve been threatened by Lily, yet he doesn't seem to be.

But we do know, imo. He told Dumbledore he asked Voldemort to exchange the son for the mother - kill Harry, but spare Lily. So he had not tried to keep Harry alive. We don't have any information about James, but if he had tried to save James, I feel JKR would have put it in the memories because it would have been a super duper plus point for Snape's redemption. But more than that, JKR showed Snape's unwillingness to even ask Dumbledore to keep Harry and James safe, imo - only after prodding from Dumbledore did he manage to croak it out - and croak is the word JKR used. So I think canon was intending to show that Snape was a Death Eater at the time and his value for human life was at an all time low - this to me is confirmed when he later says that he "no longer" watches those die he could save - that means at some point he was watching people die that he could have saved but didn't. I feel that is how he felt about James and Harry when he was speaking to Dumbledore.

Again, we know he asked for the mother in trade for the son, but we don't know WHY. Harry was a goner. He was a threat to Voldemort. The same Dark Lord that obliterated everyone who was a threat with the exception of Dumbledore (Whom he might have gone after later if given enough time, tho I think their relationship while Voldemort was still Tom Riddle had a lot to do with his fear of DD.)

We're back to what you think he could have done to save Harry. This is simple triage. If someone can't be saved, you turn your efforts to something that CAN be saved, or at least stand a chance of being saved.

And again, why did Voldemort kill James and offer Lily her life? He apparently killed James outright. He didn't play with him, didn't really give him a fighting chance or a head start. Why do you leave someone alive who's a threat? It's simple, IMO, you don't. Voldemort seriously underestimated a mother's love for her son, and the need she'd feel to protect him. Voldemort hated his own father because he'd abandoned them which to me indicates he felt a father should always protect his child. Is this why james Potter was a threat?

You can't say waht Snape did in regards to James, because we don't know. We know Snape watched people die that he could have helped. But we don't know who, when or how he was referring to. Didn't all Death Eaters watch people die? But Snape is still the only one of them to ever show true regret for the things he'd done.


The thing is, being a double agent didn't mean he had to aggressively bully the children, imo. Quirrell didn't and he Was on Voldemort's side - carrying the dark lord around and all. Talk about keeping things hidden! Surely if Quirrell could be simply "weird", then Snape could too, there was no need for the aggressive bullying, imo.

And Quirrell had to deal with Voldemort for how long? A year, two tops? Big difference.

*sigh* At no point have I ever said Snape didn't bully the kids. He did. He was the world's worst teacher. Give him a plaque. But we still don't know how he treated anyone aside from Slytherin and Gryffindor. For all we know he was rather neutral, if not acid tongued, towards the other houses. We don't know. Nothing tells us one way or the other.

I don't think anyone would argue that Snape had a tough job once Voldemort came back and he had to attend the meetings. But remember he was a Double Spy - meaning that Voldemort intended for him to fool Dumbledore into believing he was on the good side. So his primary mission could have been a very easy one - he simply had to behave like the good sider he purported himself to be in reality when he was at the school. But he didn't and I am not sure why Voldemort didn't chastise him for behaving as he did because his behavior made him seem like a Death Eater which was not too good in terms of fooling anybody. Not to mention that Snape was kind of blowing his own cover by bullying the kids because any normal headmaster would have kicked him out. Voldemort should have been suspicious that Snape was able to remain teaching at all. The only thing I can think is that Voldemort never found out about Snape's behavior at the school.

We don't have any reason to believe that Snape never thought Voldemort wouldn't come back. In fact, Dumbledore was very adamant about it. So why would Snape feel he wouldn't?

By this logic, all teachers that bully kids are soon out of a teaching job. But since we've all had at least one of these teachers, we know this isn't true.

So did Sirius though - worse actually - he'd spent 12 years with Dementors and came out a human wreck in comparison to what he had been. His young life was also terrible and unlike Snape, it was so bad he ran away from home. Snape made his life at Hogwarts miserable in his eyes to the point where he was willing to see Snape truck into a shack that contained a werewolf.

I'm so not getting into anything Sirius related. There's a reason I don't go to that threat. Sirius was tortured by the Dementors for 12 years. But he stated it himself, he knew he was INNOCENT. Snape knew that HE wasn't innocent because he had caused the death of the Potters. That's all I'm willing to say in regards to Sirius.

The point is, everyone has a "story" and many, like Sirius had it extremely hard. Harry, Neville and others also had very difficult youths and times at Hogwarts. But Snape was the only one in canon to bully children and he took that same attitude with his peers. And the thing is, it wasn't like Snape's past "created" his personality because he was bullying Petunia the same way before he ever stepped foot in Hogwarts, imo. So I feel his character was formed early on and he just grew worse by the company he kept and later joining the DEs - there was no opportunity for the 'bully' to be eradicated from his persona until he changed sides. But by then I believe he was unfortunately too used to obtaining pleasure from bullying others and so he kept it up.

So, his bullying Petunia didn't have anything to do with what happened to him at home? I'm confused. I thought we agreed that he did suffer damage due to the events at home.

Snape. Was. A. Bully. I've seen no argument in anything I've said that says otherwise. He was a horrid teacher. Dumbledore should have given him a different position IMO. What, I haven't the slightest idea, but something.

Snape didn't have to play death eater for nearly 15 years prior to Voldemort's return and he had the same personality - character - behavior the whole time according to his description in canon. There was no active Order or Death Eaters to "perform" for; many were in jail, others were in hiding and some like Lucius, Crabbe and Goyle didn't even believe Voldemort would return. Snape was merely in his classroom behaving in a negative manner because that is who he was, imo. When Harry arrived, I feel he simply had more incentive to behave in a bullying and abusive manner with him, but it was his modus operandi in any case per the canon (COS - Whomping Willow)

Why didn't he have to play DE? If he expected Voldemort to return, then he still had to maintain that he was a DE and would continue to be so once the return happened. He never once claimed he wasn't acting of his own accord like Lucius Malfoy and others.

Taking the car and flying it to Hogwarts was a very stupid and dangerous thing to do. They SHOULD have been yelled at IMO. Maybe they even should have been suspended. But it's not like they could have suspended Harry in reality because without school he'd have been very unprepared to face Voldemort when the time came, and Dumbeldore seemed awful sure that time was going to come.

I am not sure what TPTB is, but in my judgment Snape was not redeemed. He did turn from and reject Voldemort's evil and that was great. However, his behavior after the fact included things which to me are just as unforgivable - things he never turned from or regretted in canon, imo. So I personally don't see him as redeemed as an individual. He was forgiven by the protagonist - but Harry had a motive; his parents were involved and Snape had honored them through his promise - and spied and died doing so showing bravery in that. Not to mention JKR wished to show how big of a man Harry was and that he could live up to Lupin's teachings. But they were not my parents and I don't feel his manner and method of honor was righteous, so I cannot forgive him on Harry's behalf nor on behalf of others.

Sorry, Buffy reference, TPTB = The Powers That Be.

I never said he GOT redemption. I said he was WORTHY of redemption. Big difference.

One could explain that by opiniing that Snape was compelled to do so because he blamed Harry for Lily's death (if Voldemort hadn't hunted Harry, Lily would not have died). But one would be hard pressed to make that argument because Voldemort wouldn't have been hunting Harry in the first place if Snape hadn't given him the prophecy - so it was actually his fault, completely. That would be too big a point to ignore unless Snape was on the verge of medical insanity, imo, and there is no canon to indicate he was. I do feel he was portrayed as mentally unstable, but not in the realm of insane.

I've known some mentally unstable people, Wick, and none of them remotely fit the way JKR writes Snape. I think he is deeply dysfunctional ... that is, however, very different from being mentally unstable. We see that Snape can be both coldly logical and also passionately angry. Neither characteristic, nor the combination of them, indicates mental instability.

So did Sirius though - worse actually - he'd spent 12 years with Dementors and came out a human wreck in comparison to what he had been. His young life was also terrible and unlike Snape, it was so bad he ran away from home. Snape made his life at Hogwarts miserable in his eyes to the point where he was willing to see Snape truck into a shack that contained a werewolf.

Whoah! :wow: 'Snape made Sirius's life at Hogwarts miserable in his eyes to the point where he was willing to see Snape truck into a shack that contained a werewolf'??? What canon is there to prove this statement, Wick? :huh:

The point is, everyone has a "story" and many, like Sirius had it extremely hard. Harry, Neville and others also had very difficult youths and times at Hogwarts. But Snape was the only one in canon to bully children and he took that same attitude with his peers. And the thing is, it wasn't like Snape's past "created" his personality because he was bullying Petunia the same way before he ever stepped foot in Hogwarts, imo.

I am firmly of the opinion that Snape's past did create his personality. I think JKR gives us a vivid portrait of a lonely, inadequate child, possibly bullied at home. Of course not every abused person grows up to be an abuser -- far from it -- but some do. It is well documented that children bullied or abused by adults can exhibit abusive and bullying behaviour to other children. Snape's questionable behaviour to Petunia is entirely believable, given his unhappy background.

I agree completely that Harry and Neville both had it worse than Severus: Harry's parents were murdered and he was abused by his relatives, and Neville's parents were tortured into insanity. I also agree that Severus made his own choices in life. However, our childhoods shape us, and Snape's certainly shaped him. That certainly does not absolve him of moral responsibility but I for one pitied him deeply as a child.

So I feel his character was formed early on and he just grew worse by the company he kept and later joining the DEs - there was no opportunity for the 'bully' to be eradicated from his persona until he changed sides. But by then I believe he was unfortunately too used to obtaining pleasure from bullying others and so he kept it up.


I would not dispute that.

So once again I ask, how was he supposed to save Harry once he realized his error? How could he have possibly bargained for Harry? How could he have changed the outcome that was already being written?

In answer I would say that Snape couldn't do any bargaining or talking with Voldemort in an attempt to change anything with respect to Harry.

But Snape could attempt to do so with Dumbledore. That is where he dropped the ball, imo, because the prophecy concerned a baby boy, not a grown woman. That is why Dumbledore became disgusted in canon.

We never saw anything that indicates that he blamed Harry for Lily's death. If anything I think we saw enough self loathing from Snape to show he felt guilty about her death, he blamed himself IMO. And he should. If it weren't for him that ball never would have gotten to roll.

I agree.

There is NO canon that says that Voldemort offered Lily her life because SNAPE asked for it. None. We have nothing that indicates why he offered Lily her life in exchange for her son. In fact, I always found it a little OOC for Voldemort. Voldemort would never have let someone live if he felt they were a threat to him, whether or not one of the DEs asked him to. He thought a BABY was a threat and set off to kill that child. If he's threatened by a mere child, then he should ahve been threatened by Lily, yet he doesn't seem to be.

I agree with this too. But Snape did ask and Voldemort did offer - for a moment anyway. But I agree, Voldemort saw some benefit in it for himself or he wouldn't have done it, imo.

We're back to what you think he could have done to save Harry. This is simple triage. If someone can't be saved, you turn your efforts to something that CAN be saved, or at least stand a chance of being saved.

With Voldemort absolutely - Snape did all he could. I was speaking about when he went to Dumbledore which is quite distinct because Dumbledore would wish to save them all, especially Harry (the one who would challenge the dark lord according to the prophecy), imo.

Neither Lily or James were a "threat" to Voldemort in that scenario - only Harry because of the prophecy.

Didn't all Death Eaters watch people die? But Snape is still the only one of them to ever show true regret for the things he'd done.

Actually Regulus and Draco did as well.

And Quirrell had to deal with Voldemort for how long? A year, two tops? Big difference.

Well that was not my point. I was only speaking of the fact that while Quirrell was dealing wiht Voldemort, he wasn't also bullying the children - proving that it was not necessary in terms of proving anything to anyone, imo.

I'm so not getting into anything Sirius related. There's a reason I don't go to that threat. Sirius was tortured by the Dementors for 12 years. But he stated it himself, he knew he was INNOCENT. Snape knew that HE wasn't innocent because he had caused the death of the Potters. That's all I'm willing to say in regards to Sirius.

Actually Sirius held himself to be guilty (wrongly so) - but my only point was that many people faced a lot of trauma, but not all of them lashed out at others. Snape did lash out, that was simply his way, imo.

Why didn't he have to play DE? If he expected Voldemort to return, then he still had to maintain that he was a DE and would continue to be so once the return happened. He never once claimed he wasn't acting of his own accord like Lucius Malfoy and others.

Play DE for whose benefit? Old Order members like McGonagall were told that he was trustworthy and reformed - so he didn't have to play it for her or those like her. People like Lucius, Goyle, etc., were all free and didn't believe the dark lord would return - so he didn't need to play it for them either. My point is there was simply no one to play it for. And his behavior didn't save him from Bella believing him to be disloyal - she still questioned him and believed he'd jumped sides. So I would respectfully disagree that Snape was playing DE for 15 years. It was simply his character to behave in a cruel and bullying manner with the children, imo.

Snape believed Dumbledore who told him Voldemort would return. And it was for that day Snape was making preperations. And despite all his harshness, Bellatrix still suspected him. Lucius and others like McNair, Avery and Rookwood were free; perhaps they did not believe Voldemort would return, but they were very much death eaters, and would be at Voldemort's side when he reserructed. Snape, if he needed to go back at that time, having got away from being exposed as a DE, had to behave in a certain manner to the boy who caused the downfall of Voldemort IMO.

And I think Snape played it best. I would agree with everyone who said Snape was nasty and mean and a bully to Harry if not for the memories and the lack of punishment for serious crimes, like asking Snape to shut up in POA, like lying to Snape in HBP about the book; the sectumsempra, not saying a word about the memoies he saw in the occlumency lessons and so on.

For Snape to develop into a person who gave the memories, I think would take some time. Memories of that nature given by a man to a boy he is supposed to have hated does not happen and if it must happen, there would need to be a character shift from Snape IMO.

I think Snape to become the person who would hand over those memories would take a few years at the very least. The memories came to Harry at the end of what would have been his 7th year had he been in School.

Snape IMO would have had to look at Harry differently for some time, before he could even think of showing those memories to him. That character development would need time to happen.

Which IMO means Snape's treatment of Harry for sometime was a charade, was for public benefit, for Voldemort who Snape believed would return. That is why I think Snape's actions are not bullying. Normally they would be; but Snape and Harry were not living in normal times; Harry did not know that initially, but Snape did. And he made sure Harry would only hate him and he made sure no one would ever accuse him of being kind to Gryffindors or muggleborns IMO. I also think he succeeded.

I've known some mentally unstable people, Wick, and none of them remotely fit the way JKR writes Snape. I think he is deeply dysfunctional ... that is, however, very different from being mentally unstable. We see that Snape can be both coldly logical and also passionately angry. Neither characteristic, nor the combination of them, indicates mental instability.

Well I was trying to differentiate between mental as in psychological difficulties (emotional, maturity, etc.) and mental disability (insanity and all medical problems leading in that direction). I feel Snape was shown to have emotional and maturity issues.

Whoah! :wow: 'Snape made Sirius's life at Hogwarts miserable in his eyes to the point where he was willing to see Snape truck into a shack that contained a werewolf'??? What canon is there to prove this statement, Wick? :huh:

Sirius' own statement in POA that Snape merited it based on his behavior toward them. (Cat Rat & Dog - POA) We two short snap shots of a 7 year period in SWM & the Train scenes - Sirius was filling us in a little, imo, from his point of view.

I am firmly of the opinion that Snape's past did create his personality. I think JKR gives us a vivid portrait of a lonely, inadequate child, possibly bullied at home. Of course not every abused person grows up to be an abuser -- far from it -- but some do. It is well documented that children bullied or abused by adults can exhibit abusive and bullying behaviour to other children. Snape's questionable behaviour to Petunia is entirely believable, given his unhappy background.

Agreed. My only point was that not all people with rough and tough backgrounds grow up to lash out at others. That was Snape's way in canon, perhaps based on his childhood (at least in part) but not everyone showed the same response.

And I think Snape played it best. I would agree with everyone who said Snape was nasty and mean and a bully to Harry if not for the memories and the lack of punishment for serious crimes, like asking Snape to shut up in POA, like lying to Snape in HBP about the book; the sectumsempra, not saying a word about the memoies he saw in the occlumency lessons and so on.

TGW, I do agree that Snape is not always as awful to Harry as we expect him to be. :) I am not one to believe the worst of Snape in every single circumstance we see him in. Absolutely not. :)

However, I do accept what JKR says as canon, because they are her characters. I may not agree with her about canon :) but that's different from denying it is canon at all. When she says Snape resented Harry for being James's son, I have to agree, because it helps make sense of Snape's character and it's what she presents on page.

At the same time, I do believe that characters take on a life of their own beyond what the author intends. :cool: So I hold these two things in tension.

For Snape to develop into a person who gave the memories, I think would take some time. Memories of that nature given by a man to a boy he is supposed to have hated does not happen and if it must happen, there would need to be a character shift from Snape IMO.

I think Snape to become the person who would hand over those memories would take a few years at the very least. The memories came to Harry at the end of what would have been his 7th year had he been in School.

I think you raise a very good point here. For myself, I saw that character shift in The Prince's Tale.

Which IMO means Snape's treatment of Harry for sometime was a charade, was for public benefit, for Voldemort who Snape believed would return. That is why I think Snape's actions are not bullying. Normally they would be; but Snape and Harry were not living in normal times; Harry did not know that initially, but Snape did. And he made sure Harry would only hate him and he made sure no one would ever accuse him of being kind to Gryffindors or muggleborns IMO. I also think he succeeded.

Personally, I'm not convinced that he needed to pretend to hate Harry in order to be a good double agent, because I think his issues of resentment with Harry were genuine.

Which would make the final shift in his character more meaningful, of course.

Well I was trying to differentiate between mental as in psychological difficulties (emotional, maturity, etc.) and mental disability (insanity and all medical problems leading in that direction). I feel Snape was shown to have emotional and maturity issues.

I wouldn't dispute that he has emotional and maturity issues. :)

Sirius' own statement in POA that Snape merited it based on his behavior toward them. (Cat Rat & Dog - POA) We two short snap shots of a 7 year period in SWM & the Train scenes - Sirius was filling us in a little, imo, from his point of view.

But Sirius's statement in the Shack is deeply suspect and needs much examination. :huh: He's in a highly emotional state, for one thing. Do you think JKR intends us to take him literally when he snarls that Snape deserved a horrible fright and to be almost killed?? He's a grown man in his thirties and here he is reverting to his schoolboy self, harking on schoolboy hostilities that he should have let go of decades ago (of course the same applies to Snape!) OK, so Sirius has just suffered 12 years in Azkaban and is on the run, so I cut him slack. :) But my point is, I find his attitude here towards Severus just as suspect as I find Snape's attitude towards James Potter (and Remus). In any case, I see no evidence that Snape made Sirius suffer in any way. It was Remus who, out of all the Marauders, could jusfiably resent Snape because of Snape's prejudice against him: but Remus never acts on that grievance. It is Sirius who exacerbates matters by telling Snape to go down the Tunnel, thus placing not only Snape but also Remus and James in such a dangerous position. Frankly, he was lucky that Dumbledore didn't expel him!

But he doesn't tell Harry that. ;) Not that I would expect him to, at that juncture ... it's a very charged situation.

As for the train incident, I fail to see how Snape made Sirius's life miserable there in any way. :lol:

Agreed. My only point was that not all people with rough and tough backgrounds grow up to lash out at others. That was Snape's way in canon, perhaps based on his childhood (at least in part) but not everyone showed the same response.

Well, I made the same point too. :)

But Sirius's statement in the Shack is deeply suspect and needs much examination. :huh: He's in a highly emotional state, for one thing. Do you think JKR intends us to take him literally when he snarls that Snape deserved a horrible fright and to be almost killed?? He's a grown man in his thirties and here he is reverting to his schoolboy self, harking on schoolboy hostilities that he should have let go of decades ago (of course the same applies to Snape!) OK, so Sirius has just suffered 12 years in Azkaban and is on the run, so I cut him slack. :) But my point is, I find his attitude here towards Severus just as suspect as I find Snape's attitude towards James Potter (and Remus). In any case, I see no evidence that Snape made Sirius suffer in any way. It was Remus who, out of all the Marauders, could jusfiably resent Snape because of Snape's prejudice against him: but Remus never acts on that grievance. It is Sirius who exacerbates matters by telling Snape to go down the Tunnel, thus placing not only Snape but also Remus and James in such a dangerous position. Frankly, he was lucky that Dumbledore didn't expel him!

But he doesn't tell Harry that. ;) Not that I would expect him to, at that juncture ... it's a very charged situation.

As for the train incident, I fail to see how Snape made Sirius's life miserable there in any way. :lol:

I was speaking from Sirius' point of view. He admitted that he had been a berk as a child, and in doing so, in my opinion, was admitting to having made Snape's life miserable. However, in the shack, he was not emotionally charged when he spoke. He said plainly that Snape deserved the scare he got because of his behavior - which I understood was making Sirius' life miserable at the time. (Btw, Sirius didn't say Snape deserved to be killed, he said he deserved what he got (which presumably was a scare).

Snape never used the words "they made my life miserable" either - but however the Marauders made Snape feel, he made them feel that way too, imo. Sirius spoke of Snape's stalking behavior (trying to expose Lupin and get them in trouble), is dark magic antics and we saw first hand that his prejudice name calling was upsetting, at least to James, imo. Those things would have made my life miserable as a student, so I can understand that -and I understand Snape would feel that way too (just like Harry and Draco). So my only point was that whatever misery Snape ascribed to them, they ascribed that same misery to him as a result of his behavior.

Sirius was holding his grudge for what he was still viewing as percieved or real harms he sustained as a child - not because he wished to continue bullying Snape - that doesn't make sense in light of his admission that he'd been a jerk. Snape felt the same way - he was not holding a grudge in order to continue to bully - he was thinking about past harms, imo.

Snape did not have to behave in the manner that he did and and his bullying certainly was not for the benefit of keeping his cover or for protecting the students of Hogwarts, that makes no sense to me. Alienating himself from the students for the 13+ years during the time that Voldemort was Vapor? What was he protecting those students from? The ones that would have left Hogwarts for good by the time Voldemort returned to power? Absolutely nothing at all.

KatSuki: There seems to be no canon that Snape was "alienated" from all the students for 13 years. He is Draco's "favorite teacher" up until HBP, according to Narcissa. Some characters seem to have no trouble with him at all, such as Ginny - she never says a word about him! Ernie McMillan, Hufflepuff, seems to like him and makes good grades. Also, Luna Lovegood, who doesn't say anything about problems with Snape.

I was speaking from Sirius' point of view.

Well, sure. :) I understand that Sirius doesn't think he is particularly culpable in the werewolf incident and that he still thinks, almost 20 years on, that Snape deserved a nasty scare (which could have been even worse). I just don't happen to agree with him. :lol:

Which IMO means Snape's treatment of Harry for sometime was a charade, was for public benefit, for Voldemort who Snape believed would return. That is why I think Snape's actions are not bullying. Normally they would be; but Snape and Harry were not living in normal times; Harry did not know that initially, but Snape did. And he made sure Harry would only hate him and he made sure no one would ever accuse him of being kind to Gryffindors or muggleborns IMO. I also think he succeeded.
Great post, TGW! :)

Snape is quite inconsistent with Harry, which betrays a sort of leniency that is not apparent from what he says. Harry always assumes that Snape is lowering his grades, but there is no proof of that in the canon. After the Pensieve dive in OotP, Snape tells him to get out of his office and never come back, then the following year after Sectumsempra, Snape sets up the detention that insures that Harry has to not only be in his Office, but be there every Saturday!

I find it amusing that the "nice" teachers all have dark hidden things about them: Lockhart that he is a thief and a phoney; Lupin that he was a werewolf and that he knew Sirius was an illegal Animagus; Dumbledore that he nearly became a Pureblood racist; and the worst - Umbridge - with her giggle and pink sweater, who is really the High Inquisitor of Hogwarts.

Snape on the other hand appears "dark" yet becomes Harry's best ally in getting rid of Voldemort.

KatSuki: There seems to be no canon that Snape was "alienated" from all the students for 13 years. He is Draco's "favorite teacher" up until HBP, according to Narcissa. Some characters seem to have no trouble with him at all, such as Ginny - she never says a word about him! Ernie McMillan, Hufflepuff, seems to like him and makes good grades. Also, Luna Lovegood, who doesn't say anything about problems with Snape.

I am not sure I understand your point. Are you saying that all of the students actually believed that Snape was a great professor and Harry was delusional?

I find it amusing that the "nice" teachers all have dark hidden things about them: Lockhart that he is a thief and a phoney; Lupin that he was a werewolf and that he knew Sirius was an illegal Animagus; Dumbledore that he nearly became a Pureblood racist; and the worst - Umbridge - with her giggle and pink sweater, who is really the High Inquisitor of Hogwarts.

Lockhart and Umbridge are hardly presented as "nice" teachers though. It is patently obvious from the get-go that Lockhart is a fool, and a rather unpleasant one at that, and as for Umbridge ...

Snape on the other hand appears "dark" yet becomes Harry's best ally in getting rid of Voldemort.

I certainly agree that Severus is not always as dark as he appears to be. His issues with Harry, though, remain unresolved until the very end. Just my own interpretation. :)

Great post, TGW! :)

Snape is quite inconsistent with Harry, which betrays a sort of leniency that is not apparent from what he says. Harry always assumes that Snape is lowering his grades, but there is no proof of that in the canon. After the Pensieve dive in OotP, Snape tells him to get out of his office and never come back, then the following year after Sectumsempra, Snape sets up the detention that insures that Harry has to not only be in his Office, but be there every Saturday!

I find it amusing that the "nice" teachers all have dark hidden things about them: Lockhart that he is a thief and a phoney; Lupin that he was a werewolf and that he knew Sirius was an illegal Animagus; Dumbledore that he nearly became a Pureblood racist; and the worst - Umbridge - with her giggle and pink sweater, who is really the High Inquisitor of Hogwarts.

Snape on the other hand appears "dark" yet becomes Harry's best ally in getting rid of Voldemort.

You felt Lockheart and Umbridge were "nice" teachers? You felt their antics were dark and hidden? My take on them was just the opposite - I suppose that is why you find it amusing and I see it as foolish in the case of Lockheart and abusive in the case of Umbridge.

How did Dumbledore's past reflect on his teaching or Lupin being a werewolf reflect on his? It didn't cause them to bully or abuse the children. All of the professor's had pasts - including Snape, some good, some bad, some tragic, some nefarious, but I don't see what bearing that had on their teaching unless they made it so.

I think Snape's efforts to get revenge on Voldemort were helpful to the cause and he showed bravery at times, however, I don't believe canon showed them to be elevated above anyone else's contribution and canon does not indicate this as I recall - nor did JKR to my memory.

Thanks SIP. :)

@WWB:: Lupin was not abusive to the kids, but he being a teacher was plain dangerous, not just because he forgot to take his wolfsbane, but because he was willing to allow Harry to die and perhaps even other students if Sirius who all of them thought was a DE took into his mind to harm. (going into the Gryffindor dorm)

I feel there is no point being pleasant when by one's negligence and non-action Harry and the others could have been killed had Sirius been a DE. That was what Lupin was guilty of.

Lockhart was foolish and he would have sacrificed anyone to look smart; he was dangerous for his memory charms.

Umbridge was plain abusive and Dumbledore had Ariana not died may have along with GG become the darkest lord of them all.

And none of them were harsh like Snape was to Harry. I think the point I understand from the texts is Snape was harsh for a reason. That reason was his work for Dumbledore, the Light and Harry IMO.

The others were not harsh; they did not speak a word against James Potter but IMO they were far more dangerous to Harry's life than Snape who spoke ill of James to keep Harry away from him; who took points from Gryffindor to avoid suspicion and mocked muggleborns to show off as a DE in mind to others.

Negligence and uncaring of Harry's life IMO is far a greater crime than to be harsh to Harry for a specific reason, and one which IMO Snape made amends with his memories at the very end.

The entire post is my opinion only.

KatSuki: There seems to be no canon that Snape was "alienated" from all the students for 13 years. He is Draco's "favorite teacher" up until HBP, according to Narcissa. Some characters seem to have no trouble with him at all, such as Ginny - she never says a word about him! Ernie McMillan, Hufflepuff, seems to like him and makes good grades. Also, Luna Lovegood, who doesn't say anything about problems with Snape.
It is clear that almost all the Slytherin's liked Snape (considering he was Head of Slytherin House and favored those students, this is not surprising).

We also know Ginny does seem to dislike Snape:
"Shame. I really fancied finding out what Snape's been up to."
... "He's on our side now," said Hermione reprovingly.
Ron snorted. "Doesn't stop him being a git. The way he looks at us when he sees us..."
"Bill doesn't like him either," said Ginny, as though that settled the matter.
Although Ginny does not invoke her own opinion, I think it is clear, as she cites Bill with approval, that she dislikes Snape as well.

Also, simply because we do not hear each student voicing their opinions of Snape (such as Ernie and Luna), we cannot say it does not happen (nor can we say the opposite). However, the mood at which Snape is introduced to an audience (i.e. When his "promotion" to Defense Against the Dark Arts professor is announced) is largely negative towards the Potions master.
And none of them were harsh like Snape was to Harry. I think the point I understand from the texts is Snape was harsh for a reason. That reason was his work for Dumbledore, the Light and Harry IMO.

The others were not harsh; they did not speak a word against James Potter but IMO they were far more dangerous to Harry's life than Snape who spoke ill of James to keep Harry away from him; who took points from Gryffindor to avoid suspicion and mocked muggleborns to show off as a DE in mind to others.
I agree Snape did not endanger Harry's life (or memory) nearly as much as Lockhart or Umbridge (only in his rage was he ever dangerous towards Harry - but not life-threatening), but I do not believe his "harshness" can be justified by "his work for Dumbledore, the Light and Harry." He could have been equally effective in his work as a spy if he did not verbally attack Harry or the other students (and even colleagues). His job was not dependent on being harsh towards others. I think his crudeness was resultant of his obsession with Lily (and dislike towards those who replaced him, James and Harry) and his difficult past. In my opinion, these are the reasons for his harshness - not his work for Dumbledore.

Snape went to Dumbledore when he realized that Lily Potter's family was going to be the target of Voldemort's wrath. That the information Snape had given him was going to prove to be the undoing of the woman he loved. Right or wrong, he wanted to save Lily, and if that meant saving everyone he was ok with that.

I agree. It's not that he wanted the others dead - he just did not care the way he cared about Lily.

We know he offered to let Lily live, but he doesn't seem to give that offer to James. Why is that? Did James attack and maybe not give him the chance to make that offer? Why did LILY get it ant not James? Is it because Snape had asked him to spare her?

Yes, to the final question. Snape admits asking, we see this in "The Prince's Tale". And Voldemort finds it necessary to discuss his killing of Lily with Snape - he mentions this to Harry in their discussion during their final confrontation.

He knows he sacrificed Harry simply because he was the one who gave the info to Voldemort. But we don't know what else he might have tried, or didn't try, to do.

I disagree that he sacrificed Harry. His actions upon learning about the threat to the Potters, were such that they would benefit all three equally. He went to Albus, the leader of the Order. Snape had to know that while his own priority would be Lily, Albus's would certainly be "the One with the power to defeat the Dark Lord". And Albus was more powerful and better situated to protect Harry.

Was he merely tolerating of he other two houses? Did he bully them the same way he tended to bully a lot of the Gryffindors? We don't know.

I agree. Ernie MacMillan (a strong student, and taking NEWT Potions) expressed no surprise while complimenting Snape's first DADA class. This seems to suggest it is posible for students outside Slytherin to have found him a teacher whose classes they liked.

Now, I'm the first to agree that Snape's calling was NOT being a teacher. He might have made a good accountant.... dunno. He was a horrible teacher.

I disagree. I think he would have made a good teacher for advanced students interested in his subjects. What was the reaction of Hermione, for example, to his opening speech? As Harry put it, she set about immediately trying to prove that she was not a dunderhead. :lol:

And we don't know for a fact why Dumbledore never gave him the DADA position. All we have is Snape's explanation to Narcissa. We don't know it was fact.

We can also attempt to apply logic to the situation. ;) In HBP it was confirmed by Albus that there really was a curse on the position. So I tend to think Albus was not planning to move Snape to that position unless he needed to - and when he had less than a year to live, and needed to get Slughorn, he needed to move Snape.

It makes no sense he feared Snape would succumb again to the Dark Arts. This contradicts his own statements ("I trust Severus Snape completely") and is also, IMO, silly from GoF onwards. Teaching conterspells to dunderheads is going to be far less tempting than hanging out with Voldemort and his bunch to a supposed Dark Arts addict. (Which I don't personally believe describes Snape at all.)

They couldn't even say that he knew potions well, which I think he did.

Slughorn expresses respect for his professional achievements. He attempts to credit Snape with Harry's excellence in his class (which would not make sense unless Slughorn though Snape either a good teacher or a good Potions expert), and refers glowingly to Snape's own first attempt at the Draught of Living Death (which Snape presumably did in Sluggie's class way back when). McGonagall expresses her confidence in his Dark Arts/DADA expertise, both favorably (when she orders Filch to take the dangerously cursed necklace to him) and and unfavorably (when after Albus's "murder" she supposes he would have known how to lift the magical barrier the DEs had put up around the Astronomy Tower).

But I think Dumbeldore played a part in this. Snape was put into a position that he couldn't escape from. He HAD to be Snape, Death Eater, because like Dumbledore, he knew Voldemort would be back.

I would disagree he could not escape. Yes, Dumbledore told him Voldemort would be back, but what Snape decided to do with that knowledge was Snape's own, freely made, choice.

Which is why I agree with your conclusion. :D

However, the mood at which Snape is introduced to an audience (i.e. When his "promotion" to Defense Against the Dark Arts professor is announced) is largely negative towards the Potions master.

To address the second of your two points first...this is not my memory of the scene. Harry responds with anger, denial, and hatred. (NO! followed by the beautifully ironic hope that the curse will result in another death). The Slytherins applaud their Head, and the general reaction seems to be one of surprise. I took this to be a reflection not of anyone's like or dislike of Snape, but of the long-standing and popularly held rumor that Snape wanted the DADA job and Albus would not give it to him, on top of the surprise that Slughorn, contrary to the usual pattern, is introduced not as thins years DADA teacher, but as the Potions teacher (a position in which the students would have thought there was not an opening).

What you refer to as "the mood at which Snape is introduced to an audience" (I presume you mean the audience of readers here?) seems to me simply Rowling's choice of narration. Harry and Snape dislike one another thoroughly from their first class together, and the narrator shares with us Harry's reactions to Snape, which we may then vicariously share.

To address the second of your two points first...this is not my memory of the scene. Harry responds with anger, denial, and hatred. (NO! followed by the beautifully ironic hope that the curse will result in another death). The Slytherins applaud their Head, and the general reaction seems to be one of surprise. I took this to be a reflection not of anyone's like or dislike of Snape, but of the long-standing and popularly held rumor that Snape wanted the DADA job and Albus would not give it to him, on top of the surprise that Slughorn, contrary to the usual pattern, is introduced not as thins years DADA teacher, but as the Potions teacher (a position in which the students would have thought there was not an opening).

What you refer to as "the mood at which Snape is introduced to an audience" (I presume you mean the audience of readers here?) seems to me simply Rowling's choice of narration. Harry and Snape dislike one another thoroughly from their first class together, and the narrator shares with us Harry's reactions to Snape, which we may then vicariously share.

So who is Snape? Not the man Harry tells us about throughout 6 books if his opinion is biased. Not the man seen in Spinner's End chapter because he was putting on a front for Bella. Not the man we saw in DH chapter one because he was acting like a DE for Voldemort's benefit. Not the man in the memories because we were hearing it related through Harry's biased opinion to us as he watched.

So who is Snape? How are you reaching conclusions about his character, behavior, actions or how the students felt about him and what he was thinking, etc., if we never get to meet the real man and all of the information is from a biased Harry or when Snape was pretending for Voldy and the Death Eaters?

I disagree that he sacrificed Harry. His actions upon learning about the threat to the Potters, were such that they would benefit all three equally. He went to Albus, the leader of the Order. Snape had to know that while his own priority would be Lily, Albus's would certainly be "the One with the power to defeat the Dark Lord". And Albus was more powerful and better situated to protect Harry.
I disagree that "Snape had to know" that Dumbledore's priority would be to protect Harry. As I read that scene, Snape was deeply aggravated and emotional, hardly thinking straight. He did not appear to foresee Dumbledore objecting to hide only Lily ("Hide them all, then" tells me he was only thinking of Lily when he was talking to Dumbledore and was then resigned to accept Dumbledore's implied proposal). Not until Dumbledore objects to Snape's proposal of the deaths of James and Harry does Snape appear to realize his fault and "Albus's priority." While I agree his actions helped each of the Potters, I do not believe it was intentional on Snape's part - more of a bargaining chip to have Dumbledore hide Lily (and for Snape not to be punished).
I agree. Ernie MacMillan (a strong student, and taking NEWT Potions) expressed no surprise while complimenting Snape's first DADA class. This seems to suggest it is posible for students outside Slytherin to have found him a teacher whose classes they liked.
I do not find Ernie the best example, for he is a very pompous student whom rarely expresses dislike (he objected to Umbridge because she jeopardized his education). Since Snape's Defense Against the Dark Arts class did not negatively impact Ernie's education, he had no reason to complain (especially as a Prefect).
I disagree. I think he would have made a good teacher for advanced students interested in his subjects. What was the reaction of Hermione, for example, to his opening speech? As Harry put it, she set about immediately trying to prove that she was not a dunderhead. :lol:
I found his opening Defense Against the Dark Arts class very contradictory to this. Most of his students were advanced (N.E.W.T. level) and interested in the subject (all those in the D.A., especially), yet Snape continued his derogatory, insulting teaching methods. Even for older students, that method of teaching is never beneficial for the student. I would agree with you only if those "advanced students interested in his subjects" were Slytherins.
Slughorn expresses respect for his professional achievements. He attempts to credit Snape with Harry's excellence in his class (which would not make sense unless Slughorn though Snape either a good teacher or a good Potions expert)
I doubt Slughorn knew very much of Snape's teaching methods. I thought his statement at his Christmas party assumed Snape was a normal, at least average instructor (giving him the "benefit of the doubt," if you will). I am unsure if it was a statement Slughorn could support with any understanding of how Snape actually taught.
To address the second of your two points first...this is not my memory of the scene. Harry responds with anger, denial, and hatred. (NO! followed by the beautifully ironic hope that the curse will result in another death). The Slytherins applaud their Head, and the general reaction seems to be one of surprise.
I agree, and it is certainly not the best example of my argument. However, despite the students' surprise, I find it telling that none of the other Houses applauded. The Slytherins were clearly surprised, but their shock did not stop them from congratulating their well-liked Head. The other Houses had the chance to applause, did not, and, thus, I feel they were not too favorable with Snape.

Although the following statement is certainly biased (though it cannot be wholly discarded), perhaps this is more supportive:
"Or he might have been sacked!" said Ron enthusiastically. "I mean, everyone hates him -"

KatSuki: There seems to be no canon that Snape was "alienated" from all the students for 13 years. He is Draco's "favorite teacher" up until HBP, according to Narcissa. Some characters seem to have no trouble with him at all, such as Ginny - she never says a word about him! Ernie McMillan, Hufflepuff, seems to like him and makes good grades. Also, Luna Lovegood, who doesn't say anything about problems with Snape.The term "alienation" was not mine, it was The_Green_Woods, and thus I was responding to his usage of it.

I agree some characters have never said anything bad about Snape. This does not mean that those characters never had a problem with him though. To use an example: How many students were heard to complain about Care of Magical Creatures as taught by Rubeus Hagrid? Or History of Magic as taught by Professor Binns? From this are we to assume that the vast majority of Hogwarts students simply adored those teachers and those subjects? Seems rather silly to me. :rolleyes:

Lupin was not abusive to the kids, but he being a teacher was plain dangerous, not just because he forgot to take his wolfsbane, but because he was willing to allow Harry to die and perhaps even other students if Sirius who all of them thought was a DE took into his mind to harm. (going into the Gryffindor dorm)Without jumping on board the whole Marauder thing, I just would like to point out that Lupin didn't "forget" his potion. He was reading the map and saw the very distinct names of Harry Potter, Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger, Peter Pettigrew, and Sirius Black---and then dashed to the last point on the map he'd seen the name.

Should he have told what he knew? Yes. But then we wouldn't have had book 3. :lol:

I would agree with everyone who said Snape was nasty and mean and a bully to Harry if not for the memories and the lack of punishment for serious crimes, like asking Snape to shut up in POA, like lying to Snape in HBP about the book; the sectumsempra, not saying a word about the memoies he saw in the occlumency lessons and so on.When I read that comment it comes across as 'Harry brought it on himself', which is just wrong to me on so many levels. If that's not the intent behind the comment, then I'm sorry.

Harry wasn't a saint, he could and did do wrong. That doesn't mean that he deserved any of the bullying, petty, vindictive behavior that Snape heaped on him for six years.

If a child misbehaves, punish them. However, misbehavior does not mean that the child has earned or deserves abuse at the hands of an individual who is in a position of authority over them.

I disagree that "Snape had to know" that Dumbledore's priority would be to protect Harry.I agree. Not only was Snape not thinking in advance of saving baby Harry or even James, but after Lily and James died he didn't seem to think that Harry needed protection, either, not until Dumbledore told him so.

But Snape could attempt to do so with Dumbledore. That is where he dropped the ball, imo, because the prophecy concerned a baby boy, not a grown woman. That is why Dumbledore became disgusted in canon.

With Voldemort absolutely - Snape did all he could. I was speaking about when he went to Dumbledore which is quite distinct because Dumbledore would wish to save them all, especially Harry (the one who would challenge the dark lord according to the prophecy), imo.

Neither Lily or James were a "threat" to Voldemort in that scenario - only Harry because of the prophecy.

While I would agree to some extent with Dumbeldore, I think in Snape's head Harry was already dead because Voldemort wanted it so.

But again, we don't know who he thought of as a threat. I'd say he obviously didn't see Lily as one because he offered to let her live. But he killed James outright. To me that indicates he thought James was some kind of threat. He could have offered both of them their lives, but he didn't. And I still have my doubts he offered Lily her life simply because Snape wished it. Voldemort wasn't stupid, he might not have understood things on an emotional level, but he was good at controlling people, and apparently quite handy with a wand.

Actually Regulus and Draco did as well.

We know Regulus regretted his decision, but we don't really have much that says Draco regretted it for anything more than the threat to his parents. If the lives of his parents hadn't been in danger, would he have still regretted his decision?

Well that was not my point. I was only speaking of the fact that while Quirrell was dealing wiht Voldemort, he wasn't also bullying the children - proving that it was not necessary in terms of proving anything to anyone, imo.

Quirrell hardly seemed able to keep himself upright, let alone do much else IMO. I don't doubt Voldemort was draining him, but it seems to me if he'd been causing problems with the children he'd have drawn more attention to himself and because of that, more attention to Voldemort.

And his behavior didn't save him from Bella believing him to be disloyal - she still questioned him and believed he'd jumped sides. So I would respectfully disagree that Snape was playing DE for 15 years. It was simply his character to behave in a cruel and bullying manner with the children, imo.

How many of the DEs would have questioned him if he'd acted otherwise? Knowing Voldemort would return he still had appearances to keep up. Do you think if a majority of the DEs started pointing their fingers at him that Voldemort would have let it slide. Bellatrix felt everyone but herself were disloyal to Voldemort, so having her point a finger wasn't a huge deal. Having a large number of them talking about what a good little man he was to Dumbeldore might raise a few brows... well it would if Voldemort had any.

That being said, I do think some of his actions were caused by him just being Snape. He's far from perfect as I've said many times. But I don't think everything we saw was just Snape being Snape.

Which IMO means Snape's treatment of Harry for sometime was a charade, was for public benefit, for Voldemort who Snape believed would return. That is why I think Snape's actions are not bullying. Normally they would be; but Snape and Harry were not living in normal times; Harry did not know that initially, but Snape did. And he made sure Harry would only hate him and he made sure no one would ever accuse him of being kind to Gryffindors or muggleborns IMO. I also think he succeeded.

I couldn't have said it better myself :)

Personally, I'm not convinced that he needed to pretend to hate Harry in order to be a good double agent, because I think his issues of resentment with Harry were genuine.

I agree to some extent. Tho as someone else pointed out, Snape is a little inconsistent with Harry and I don't think all of his lashing out was really heartfelt.

But Sirius's statement in the Shack is deeply suspect and needs much examination.

:lol: That's the possible understatement of the year!

Harry always assumes that Snape is lowering his grades, but there is no proof of that in the canon.

Maybe it was just me, but I always thought Harry's grades in potions were because he didn't want to be there and didn't really seem to try. Of all the classes he had, the only one he seemed to really slack in was Divination, and we can't really blame him for that can we?

We also know Ginny does seem to dislike Snape:
OotP; Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place; Ch. 4; Page 69; American; HB"Shame. I really fancied finding out what Snape's been up to."
... "He's on our side now," said Hermione reprovingly.
Ron snorted. "Doesn't stop him being a git. The way he looks at us when he sees us..."
"Bill doesn't like him either," said Ginny, as though that settled the matter.

This just says that Bill doesn't like him. Ginny doesn't give her opinion one way or another here IMO.

Yes, to the final question. Snape admits asking, we see this in "The Prince's Tale". And Voldemort finds it necessary to discuss his killing of Lily with Snape - he mentions this to Harry in their discussion during their final confrontation.

But we don't know this for fact. Once again I don't see Voldemort giving Snape something he wanted just because he wanted it. If he saw Lily as a threat he would have killed her flat out. None of his Death Eaters seemed brave enough to call him out to his face when it comes down to it. Snape's request might have given him something to think about, but when does Voldemort do something out of the kindness of his heart?

I disagree that he sacrificed Harry. His actions upon learning about the threat to the Potters, were such that they would benefit all three equally. He went to Albus, the leader of the Order. Snape had to know that while his own priority would be Lily, Albus's would certainly be "the One with the power to defeat the Dark Lord". And Albus was more powerful and better situated to protect Harry.

I guess I can see this going either way. I think someone else said it best when they said that Snape's original intent in going to Dumbledore was to save Lily merely because he hadn't thought past that point.

I disagree. I think he would have made a good teacher for advanced students interested in his subjects. What was the reaction of Hermione, for example, to his opening speech? As Harry put it, she set about immediately trying to prove that she was not a dunderhead.

I'd have to think on this a while. It's possible Snape reacts to the students who do want to be there, but I still don't think teaching should have been his first career choice.

We can also attempt to apply logic to the situation. In HBP it was confirmed by Albus that there really was a curse on the position. So I tend to think Albus was not planning to move Snape to that position unless he needed to - and when he had less than a year to live, and needed to get Slughorn, he needed to move Snape.

It makes no sense he feared Snape would succumb again to the Dark Arts. This contradicts his own statements ("I trust Severus Snape completely") and is also, IMO, silly from GoF onwards. Teaching conterspells to dunderheads is going to be far less tempting than hanging out with Voldemort and his bunch to a supposed Dark Arts addict. (Which I don't personally believe describes Snape at all.)

Huh, good points actually. ROFL at the last comment.

Slughorn expresses respect for his professional achievements.

I know later on someone pans Slughorn for his knowledge of Snape, but in POA Lupin points out that not many wizards would be able to brew his wolfsbane potion because it is so complex. Which indicates Snape is good at potions. Of course it begs the question who was making it for Lupin when he wasn't at Hogwarts... did he learn to do it himself out of neccessity? Hmm....

And going back a bit now that I have the chance....

Yes, but Ron also had hand me down robes and a smudge of dirt on his face, but he was loved, just poor. Snape's mum accompanied him to the station, so he may have had love, but I'd think not as well cared for as Ron, yet likely better cared for than Harry (despite his wealthy looking appearance which others might assume meant he was well cared for - but he'd simply come into money.)

When did Harry appear wealthy? He wore broken glasses held together with tape, was said to be pitifully skinny, and wore clothes several sizes too big because he only got Dudley's hand me downs.

As for Ron's appearance, sure they were poor, but that doesn't mean they weren't well cared for. Have you ever been someplace around a lot of kids and been able to pick out the ones who are probably bordering on neglect if not full blown neglect? I have. This is what I took away from that passage. that Snape was one of those kids you could watch and tell he hadn't really been cared for.

I understand your point, but I do not think that this is applicable to Snape. And also I feel it is stereotyping those from the inner city because in reality it is huge and there are all types of people, etc.

I'm very clear there are a lot of types of people. But I work in the inner city. I work in the "hood" day in and day out. And just because it's sterotyping to some extent doesn't make it untrue. I've listened to a lout of young folks say the exact same thing over and over again, "It seemed better than where I was." That's all I'm saying.

BTW, I find the stalker comparisons very interesting.

As far as redemption goes, I imagine Snape felt he did get it simply because Harry forgave him.

Which IMO means Snape's treatment of Harry for sometime was a charade, was for public benefit, for Voldemort who Snape believed would return.I gotta disagree. Voldemort got to see Snape's treatment of Harry in Philosopher's Stone. Voldemort didn't trust Snape enough to reveal himself to him, yet we know that Prof. Quirrell/Voldemort got to see exactly how Snape acted at Hogwarts and how he treated Harry:

Philosopher's Stone, The Man With Two Faces:
"But Snape tried to kill me!"
"No, no, no. I tried to kill you..."
"...I'd have managed it before then if Snape hadn't been muttering a countercurse, trying to save you."
"Snape was trying to save me?"
"Of course," said Quirrell coolly. "Why do you think he wanted to referee your next match? He was trying to make sure I didn't do it again."
"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. But he never wanted you dead."Even this character could recognize Harry's treatement by Snape as entirely separate from wanting Harry dead, or for that matter, being loyal to the Dark Lord.

How many of the DEs would have questioned him if he'd acted otherwise? Knowing Voldemort would return he still had appearances to keep up. Do you think if a majority of the DEs started pointing their fingers at him that Voldemort would have let it slide. Bellatrix felt everyone but herself were disloyal to Voldemort, so having her point a finger wasn't a huge deal. Having a large number of them talking about what a good little man he was to Dumbeldore might raise a few brows... well it would if Voldemort had any.I believe that all the DEs questioned Snape's loyalty, period. He stayed at Hogwarts, he stayed with Dumbledore, he didn't seek out Voldemort. I'm not even sure that any Death Eaters even knew of Snape's treatment of his students during the years that Voldemort was Vapor.

Do I think Voldemort would let the finger-pointing slide? Absolutely. For me that's a given. Why? Because Voldemort himself didn't trust Snape enough to reveal himself in the Philosopher's Stone. He was able to observe Snape for nearly the entire year, while possessing Prof. Quirrell. He didn't trust him in Goblet of Fire, either, hence his usage of the faithful Death Eater Barty, Jr. Barty, Jr. had to orchestrate handing a student of Hogwarts over to Voldemort.

But after his rebirth Voldemort didn't kill Severus at all, did he? Despite everything, Voldemort's personal doubts and the DEs pointing fingers, Severus got to keep his life and stay in Voldemort's inner circle until the very end.

He could have been equally effective in his work as a spy if he did not verbally attack Harry or the other students (and even colleagues). His job was not dependent on being harsh towards others.

There was always a danger of Voldemort or other DEs asking Snape to bring Harry or others to Voldemort if Snape was pleasant to Harry or others, except Slytherins IMO.

I think his crudeness was resultant of his obsession with Lily (and dislike towards those who replaced him, James and Harry) and his difficult past. In my opinion, these are the reasons for his harshness - not his work for Dumbledore.

I respectfully disagree. Snape IMO hated James Potter long before he became Lily's husband. While there may have been a jealously or envy or even longing for what James was to Lily, I don't think his hatred of James or Sirius was fuelled because of Lily. And that hatred is what I think Snape used to his advantage, when he pushed Harry and others away from him.

Not the man Harry tells us about throughout 6 books if his opinion is biased.

No. For Harry himself changes his opinion he held of Snape for the first 6 books IMO.

Not the man seen in Spinner's End chapter because he was putting on a front for Bella.

Yes.

Not the man we saw in DH chapter one because he was acting like a DE for Voldemort's benefit.

Yes.

Not the man in the memories because we were hearing it related through Harry's biased opinion to us as he watched.

I differ on this. We watched the memories themselves. Harry's thoughts were his opinion, but that cannot IMO change the memories which are an account of what happened. We can draw conclusions for ourselves based on the memories themselves IMO.

How are you reaching conclusions about his character, behavior, actions or how the students felt about him and what he was thinking, etc., if we never get to meet the real man and all of the information is from a biased Harry or when Snape was pretending for Voldy and the Death Eaters?

I cannot answer for others, but I draw conclusions based on what I read of him in relation to what I see in the memories, plus what other characters have to say of him. Only when I speak of other charactes's opinion of Snape, I also take into account their motivations for such statements.

So, I would view a statement about Snape by the person saying it, the circumstances under which he/she said it, the character him/herself (for example I would view the statements made by Ron and those made by Dumbledore differently), plus Snape's actions, his motivations and his memories.

So who is Snape?

In the books, Snape is hope. He tells us however low one may fall, one always has a chance to redeem oneself. The lower one falls, the harder one has to strive, but if one wish to make amends, they can. They only need not to justify their actions to themselves and they need to work honestly doing "Anything" which they may need to do in order to face themselves.

He tells us while we cannot correct the wrongs we already did, we can help to stop such wrongs in the future. And he shows us that there is a dignity in living, a dignity that will be rewarded even when we may be hated, repulsed and unwanted by everyone, for our past and also at times for the actions we may have to take in the present in order to atone for our past.

All we need is the courage to face ourselves and the courage to act. If we do, he shows us that redemption is given by those who were harmed.

But the saddest thing would be that such redemption would not be given by him to himself for his actions and that he would need to live with those for the rest of his life.

I think Snape did every one of those things and he died with dignity. He was accepted by Harry, whose parents deaths he had a hand in by giving the Prophecy to Voldmeort, but he never forgave himself nor did he forget or justify those actions. And truly that is one of the more admirable things about him. :)

Should he have told what he knew? Yes. But then we wouldn't have had book 3. :lol:

I differ here. It's like saying had Snape not given the Prophecy we would not have had Harry Potter books at all. :D Snape was culpable in handing over the Prophecy, to the extent he did not care at that time that a baby and possibly its parents would be killed.

Lupin was more than culpable. Had Sirius been a DE (death eater) that night Harry would have died. And then what ever Lupin did or said would not have been enough IMO.

When I read that comment it comes across as 'Harry brought it on himself', which is just wrong to me on so many levels. If that's not the intent behind the comment, then I'm sorry.

No; that was not the intent. :)

I was not talking about Harry, I was talking about Snape, the many times he let Harry off, when he was well within his rights as a teacher to punish him and punish him severely IMO.

I gotta disagree. Voldemort got to see Snape's treatment of Harry in Philosopher's Stone. Voldemort didn't trust Snape enough to reveal himself to him, yet we know that Prof. Quirrell/Voldemort got to see exactly how Snape acted at Hogwarts and how he treated Harry:

I think Snape answers this in HBP, Spinner's End Chapter to Bella.

"I think you next wanted to know," he pressed on, a litle loudly, for Bellatris showed every sign of interrupting, "why I stood between the Dark Lord and the Philosopher's stone. That is easily answered. He did not know whether he could trust me. He had thought, like you, that I had turned from faithful DE to Dumbledore's stooge. He was in a pitiable condition, very weak, sharing the body of a mediocre wizard. He did not dare to reveal himself to a former ally, if that ally might turn him over to Dumbeldore or the Ministry. I deeply regret he did not trust me. He would have returned to power 3 years sooner."

This also shows, how much of Snape's actions were under scrutiny over the years. How carefully Snape had to play a part, because there was a chance he would be questioned on every action because of his proximity to Dumbledore.

And such scrutiny would increase a thousand fold once Harry came to Hogwarts because he was the BWL. The boy who destroyed the Dark Lord. And snape with the belief Voldmeort was coming back and he would be needed to spy for Dumbeldore and with the knowledge of what being a DE was all about and how suspicious Voldemort could be, would have needed to walk very carefully, showing hate towards the BWL, because he caused the death of Voldemort, disdain aand mocking the Gryffindors and favouring the Slytherins.

The last question Bellatrix asks Snape, which Voldmeort would have asked Snape as well, was "Why, Snape, is Harry Potter still alive, when you have had him at your mercy for five years?"

Snape could not be kind, pleasant or good to Harry and explain his position IMO. If he was kind saying that Dumbledore would have had his hide otherwise, Voldemort would have smiled and said, "Good! Now you can use that and bring the boy to me." And Dumbeldore and the Light and Harry would have lost Snape as the spy IMO.

The way Snape was in the books, he was, under the pretext of being harsh to Harry, and the other Gryffindors, protecting them, making sure neither Voldemort nor any other DE could come to him asking him to bring Harry or any other student to them IMO.

We know Regulus regretted his decision, but we don't really have much that says Draco regretted it for anything more than the threat to his parents. If the lives of his parents hadn't been in danger, would he have still regretted his decision?

Well Draco wasn't a killer at that point, he couldn't kill Dumbledore and he was the only one to react negatively when Voldemort killed Charity, unable to control his emotions when it really mattered. So we don't know. But more importantly, Draco had no blood on his hands - so his regrets would pertain to quite distinct factors.

Quirrell hardly seemed able to keep himself upright, let alone do much else IMO. I don't doubt Voldemort was draining him, but it seems to me if he'd been causing problems with the children he'd have drawn more attention to himself and because of that, more attention to Voldemort.

Which is what I said about Snape - his classroom antics and treatment of Harry didn't draw attention to him that we know of. If Voldemort had found out, I am under the impression he would have been very angry at Snape because Snape was supposed to be posing as an agent of the good side - Voldemort's spy.

How many of the DEs would have questioned him if he'd acted otherwise? Knowing Voldemort would return he still had appearances to keep up. Do you think if a majority of the DEs started pointing their fingers at him that Voldemort would have let it slide. Bellatrix felt everyone but herself were disloyal to Voldemort, so having her point a finger wasn't a huge deal. Having a large number of them talking about what a good little man he was to Dumbeldore might raise a few brows... well it would if Voldemort had any.

Snape admitted he'd lost faith in the Dark Lord, just like Goyle and Crabbe and Lucius - none of them were killed. Snape then lied and said that his staying in Dumbledore's pocket would ultimately help the dark lord because he would be trusted by Dumbledore. So it was expected that Snape had been (and would continue to) behave in an upstanding fashion in order to keep Dumbledore's trust and the trust of all of those on the good side. That way he could continue to spy. (HBP)

That being said, I do think some of his actions were caused by him just being Snape. He's far from perfect as I've said many times. But I don't think everything we saw was just Snape being Snape.

Is that because if all of Snape's behavior was "Snape being Snape" you would not be able to appreciate the character?

I agree to some extent. Tho as someone else pointed out, Snape is a little inconsistent with Harry and I don't think all of his lashing out was really heartfelt.

If it was, would you still appreciate the character?

This just says that Bill doesn't like him. Ginny doesn't give her opinion one way or another here IMO.

If 3/4 of the student body did not like him (which it says in Cos - Whomping Willow), would that change your view of the character?

But we don't know this for fact. Once again I don't see Voldemort giving Snape something he wanted just because he wanted it. If he saw Lily as a threat he would have killed her flat out. None of his Death Eaters seemed brave enough to call him out to his face when it comes down to it. Snape's request might have given him something to think about, but when does Voldemort do something out of the kindness of his heart?

I agree with this. Voldemort saw a benefit for himself in some fashion or form, imo, even if it was just to reward Snape and ensure his continued loyalty.

I guess I can see this going either way. I think someone else said it best when they said that Snape's original intent in going to Dumbledore was to save Lily merely because he hadn't thought past that point.

I would have to respectfully disagree with both views. Snape definitely thought about the death of Harry because that was the whole point, imo. Further, he didn't run to Voldemort incoherent and scared, begging him to spare Lily like he'd done with Dumbledore or else Voldemort would not have been fooled into thinking Snape merely desired Lily and wished to use her (and he did believe this, he confirmed it in DH). So Snape evidently played Voldemort and we do not know what Voldemort's response was to him. But whatever it was, Snape still feared that Voldemort would kill them all and not spare Lily.

I do not think Snape desired Lily in the way Voldemort believed. He really fancied himself in love, and he wanted her to love him back. Voldemort, if he did spare Lily, would not just let her go afterward - he would deliver her to Snape - and Snape would be her "hero and savior" in the situation. So Snape would finally become powerful in her eyes (from Snape's point of view) and I believe he still thought that would be enough to win her affections - despite losing her family which he figured she'd get over (just as she had presumably gotten over losing Petunia when they were young.)

When did Harry appear wealthy? He wore broken glasses held together with tape, was said to be pitifully skinny, and wore clothes several sizes too big because he only got Dudley's hand me downs. As for Ron's appearance, sure they were poor, but that doesn't mean they weren't well cared for. Have you ever been someplace around a lot of kids and been able to pick out the ones who are probably bordering on neglect if not full blown neglect? I have. This is what I took away from that passage. that Snape was one of those kids you could watch and tell he hadn't really been cared for.

Hagrid had taken him to Diagon Alley to buy new robes and such prior to his leaving for Hogsmeade on the train. I think if he'd been in his oversized clothes looking funny, it would have been noted - especially by Draco who commented upon Ron's apparent poverty. But once Harry put on his brand new robes it would be evident that he had money to afford them, imo. So people might be under the mistaken notion that he had been 'cared for'.

Snape's appearance did show that he was uncared for to some extent - in my judgment - because JKR let the reader know that was the case. But it does not speak to the extent of his neglect, only that there was some. Just as Ron's appearance doesn't speak to the extent of his neglect - he wasn't neglected at all that we know of - but he may have had that appearance about him to someone just looking on.

I'm very clear there are a lot of types of people. But I work in the inner city. I work in the "hood" day in and day out. And just because it's sterotyping to some extent doesn't make it untrue. I've listened to a lout of young folks say the exact same thing over and over again, "It seemed better than where I was." That's all I'm saying.

I have as well in three legal clinics and so all those I met were saying similar things - but I simply feel it is important to remember the other 1000's that I didn't speak to, who are making far better choices than those who found themselves in the clinics - despite facing similar hardship. JKR is correct in the importance of choice, imo.

As far as redemption goes, I imagine Snape felt he did get it simply because Harry forgave him.

Well Harry is not a sacred being who can grant redemption, imo, so Snape I doubt would look to Harry, who he loathed, for redemption, imo. I feel Snape saw his rejection of evil as redemptive in nature and it was, however, he didn't look to his personal character to find his other evils, imo, and that is where he failed in terms of redemption for me. Being mean and even cruel and bullying does not stop one from being redeemed imo, but acting out on it in an abusive manner, without regret does. Imo, Snape also fails due to the question of regret for truly criminal acts such as the deaths of others on his hands with the exception of Lily - did he feel regret for those others? That is the question that still remains, imo.

No. For Harry himself changes his opinion he held of Snape for the first 6 books IMO.

But all 7 books, including while watching the memories, Harry loathed Snape (DH - Sacking of Severus Snape. HBP -Flight of the Prince) And it was during all of this time that Harry was relaying information to us.

I differ on this. We watched the memories themselves. Harry's thoughts were his opinion, but that cannot IMO change the memories which are an account of what happened. We can draw conclusions for ourselves based on the memories themselves IMO.

I respectfully disagree. We did not watch the memories ourselves; Harry watched them for us and relayed what he saw. Just like he watched Snape with Tonks or Snape in the classroom, or Snape interacting with him directly and related to us what he saw. There is no difference at all, imo. I feel Either we figure that Harry was relaying the truth or that Harry was lying the entire time and giving us a biased opinion. But in my opinion, Harry's view cannot be biased only when a reader wishes it to be to fit with their interpretations - and otherwise unbiased.

Harry's bias is always there, whether relaying a memory or what he is seeing in person. It is there even in the Epilogue when he forgives Snape because Snape's actions involved his parents, imo. So to me, one cannot use the Harry bias angle when convenient to ignoring what Harry says and then not use it on those occassions when they like what Harry has to say. That is my view of that particular aspect of the series.

I respectfully disagree. We did not watch the memories ourselves; Harry watched them for us and relayed what he saw. Just like he watched Snape with Tonks or Snape in the classroom, or Snape interacting with him directly and related to us what he saw. There is no difference at all, imo. I feel Either we figure that Harry was relaying the truth or that Harry was lying the entire time and giving us a biased opinion. But in my opinion, Harry's view cannot be biased only when a reader wishes it to be to fit with their interpretations - and otherwise unbiased.

Harry's bias is always there, whether relaying a memory or what he is seeing in person. It is there even in the Epilogue when he forgives Snape because Snape's actions involved his parents, imo. So to me, one cannot use the Harry bias angle when convenient to ignoring what Harry says and then not use it on those occassions when they like what Harry has to say. That is my view of that particular aspect of the series.

Or we could say that JKR wrote the information she wanted us to receive. She is the narrator and she is telling us through the story what she thinks is important information. There is no 'Harry bias', there is only canon and unless it is directly contradicted in text it stands.

So who is Snape? How are you reaching conclusions about his character, behavior, actions or how the students felt about him and what he was thinking, etc., if we never get to meet the real man and all of the information is from a biased Harry or when Snape was pretending for Voldy and the Death Eaters?

When Harry presumes to tell me what Snape is thinking and feeling (facts of which he is certainly unaware), I feel free to ignore him. We are, however, presented with seven books' worth of actions and dialogue involving Snape based on which I find myself able to get quite a detailed picture of Snape. As of the end of HBP, my picture was demonstrably more accurate than Harry's. ;) Unlike Harry, Snape's speech and actions had caused me to draw correct conclusions about Snape's loyalties in the larger conflict of the series, and of the history/motivations that lay behind that. I therefore find my own position of regarding the Harry-centric narration as having the secondary function of being a red herring of sorts for the Snape subplot, eminently reasonable.

I agree. Not only was Snape not thinking in advance of saving baby Harry or even James, but after Lily and James died he didn't seem to think that Harry needed protection, either, not until Dumbledore told him so.

Why would Snape think Harry needed protection? Unless you are suggesting he ought to have volunteered himself as a foster parent for the newly orhpaned Harry! :lol: As we may recall from PS/SS - the entire WW was celebrating the death of Voldemort. As soon as Albus shared with Snape his belief that Voldemort was not gone, Snape saw the need to protect Harry, and agreed to help.

I guess I can see this going either way. I think someone else said it best when they said that Snape's original intent in going to Dumbledore was to save Lily merely because he hadn't thought past that point.

This is what I think too. But the sense I get from certain posts here is that people are taking it a step further - suggesting either that Snape had consciously thought through the matter, knew Harry and James would die, and did not care, or worse, was pleased because he wanted Harry and James dead. Not thinking that far because of his hangup with Lily is less than either of these, to me anyway.

Or we could say that JKR wrote the information she wanted us to receive. She is the narrator and she is telling us through the story what she thinks is important information. There is no 'Harry bias', there is only canon and unless it is directly contradicted in text it stands.

I agree and it is in canon that she makes Harry name his son after Snape and calls him the bravest man he ever knew. And those statements came after Harry saw the memories, which showed Harry the real Snape, perhaps.

When Harry presumes to tell me what Snape is thinking and feeling (facts of which he is certainly unaware), I feel free to ignore him. We are, however, presented with seven books' worth of actions and dialogue involving Snape based on which I find myself able to get quite a detailed picture of Snape. As of the end of HBP, my picture was demonstrably more accurate than Harry's. ;) Unlike Harry, Snape's speech and actions had caused me to draw correct conclusions about Snape's loyalties in the larger conflict of the series, and of the history/motivations that lay behind that. I therefore find my own position of regarding the Harry-centric narration as having the secondary function of being a red herring of sorts for the Snape subplot, eminently reasonable.

:tu: :)

Or we could say that JKR wrote the information she wanted us to receive. She is the narrator and she is telling us through the story what she thinks is important information. There is no 'Harry bias', there is only canon and unless it is directly contradicted in text it stands.

To me there is a 'Harry bias', by which I mean that we only ever see things through Harry's point of view. JKR has deliberately limited the narrative viewpoint of the series in that way. It does mean that we are limited to seeing characters like, say, Cho Chang, purely through Harry's eyes -- which to me is a very limited filter, given Harry's immaturity and insensitivity towards Cho at the time. I would not wholly trust Harry's judgement when it comes to Cho. :lol: However, she is a less important character to the story than Snape ...

We never see inside Snape's head, we never see his thoughts ... and I prefer it that way, myself, as I tend to enjoy Snape the way JKR writes him. :lol:

When Harry presumes to tell me what Snape is thinking and feeling (facts of which he is certainly unaware), I feel free to ignore him. We are, however, presented with seven books' worth of actions and dialogue involving Snape based on which I find myself able to get quite a detailed picture of Snape. As of the end of HBP, my picture was demonstrably more accurate than Harry's. ;) Unlike Harry, Snape's speech and actions had caused me to draw correct conclusions about Snape's loyalties in the larger conflict of the series, and of the history/motivations that lay behind that. I therefore find my own position of regarding the Harry-centric narration as having the secondary function of being a red herring of sorts for the Snape subplot, eminently reasonable.

Very well put. :agree:

For most of the series, I still thought Snape was a git. :lol: But I also knew there was more to him than met the eye, more than our young narrator, Harry, could tell us. I was reading things into Snape that Harry could, or would, not. :lol: And I thought that a deliberate ploy on Rowling's part. :) And I think that's clever. :D

This is what I think too. But the sense I get from certain posts here is that people are taking it a step further - suggesting either that Snape had consciously thought through the matter, knew Harry and James would die, and did not care, or worse, was pleased because he wanted Harry and James dead. Not thinking that far because of his hangup with Lily is less than either of these, to me anyway.

That's pretty much the way I read it first time. Not that I found Snape very admirable at this point. He seems to demonstrate a coldness towards James and baby Harry which is chilling. However, I do not think that means he actively wanted them dead.

When Harry presumes to tell me what Snape is thinking and feeling (facts of which he is certainly unaware), I feel free to ignore him. We are, however, presented with seven books' worth of actions and dialogue involving Snape based on which I find myself able to get quite a detailed picture of Snape. As of the end of HBP, my picture was demonstrably more accurate than Harry's. ;) Unlike Harry, Snape's speech and actions had caused me to draw correct conclusions about Snape's loyalties in the larger conflict of the series, and of the history/motivations that lay behind that. I therefore find my own position of regarding the Harry-centric narration as having the secondary function of being a red herring of sorts for the Snape subplot, eminently reasonable.

I agree with what you have said. But I do not know how you define "what Snape is thinking". Harry rarely attempted to define what Snape was thinking. The text would read: "Snape said maliciously with a sneer" - to inform us of his behavior and attitude. I trust Harry on that because that is what JKR was attempting to tell us, imo. When Harry says things like "he hated my mom - he called her a Mudblood" - that is not biased, he truly believes it - but of course it was false. No matter how much thinking Harry did about that issue, he would reach the same conclusion though and not because he hated Snape, but because of what Snape said.

But I agree with you in terms of Harry's attempts to define Snape's thoughts, I merely separate that from the words, behavior and actions of Snape in reaching conclusions. I too always believed he was on the good side - just additionally horrible character - I still believe that, but solely based on what I thought, not Harry's personal opinoins or his rarer 'thinking for Snape'. But as I pointed out, Harry did not always show bias even in his own thinking. For example, "Snape tried to save me?" is not a question indicating Harry was putting the worst construction on Snape's behavior in that moment. But when I listen to Snape's description of James saving him - even before knowing the truth, it was obvious by the descriptors Harry gave about Snape (frothing and sneering, malicious glints and so forth) that he was placing the worst possible construction on Harry's dad's efforts. In both cases, the story comes to us through Harry, but the third person descriptors allow us to understand both when Harry is being biased and when we are getting pretty much the facts as is, imo.

This is what I think too. But the sense I get from certain posts here is that people are taking it a step further - suggesting either that Snape had consciously thought through the matter, knew Harry and James would die, and did not care, or worse, was pleased because he wanted Harry and James dead. Not thinking that far because of his hangup with Lily is less than either of these, to me anyway.

I would respectfully add that I being one to take it that step further, do so because the canon so indicates, imo. I do not carry that interpretation futher of my own accord. If JKR didn't wish to make an issue of Snape's feelings about James and Harry, then she would have left out or applied different treatment to her writing of the scene on the hill. There is no point in having Dumbledore show disgust - no point in making Snape silent and hesitate - and later conciliatory in the descriptors if she was not highlighting Snape's view on Harry and James relative to Lily. The canon flat out has Dumbledore raise the issue: "you don't care then if her husband and child die as long as you get what you want?" JKR could easily have written Snape's eyes going wide and his head rocking back and forth in avid denial of Dumbledore's words - stuttering out that he would never think any such thing, angry that Dumbledore would even accuse him of such a thought. But that isn't what we got, was it? I would expect that reaction (or something along those lines) even if Snape hadn't considered it at all prior to that, but was made to consider it when Dumbledore raised it - IF Snape was truly not thinking about it at all. Instead we get utter silence followed by a croaking "hide them all, THEN" (conciliatory) - just keep HER (whoops! This is what Dumbledore is digusted with me about) - them (rectified)safe". I don't know how much clearer JKR could have made the text - the words I emphasized were not slip of the hand on JKR's part, they were to help us understand where Snape was coming from, imo.

I differ here. It's like saying had Snape not given the Prophecy we would not have had Harry Potter books at all. Snape was culpable in handing over the Prophecy, to the extent he did not care at that time that a baby and possibly its parents would be killed.

Lupin was more than culpable. Had Sirius been a DE (death eater) that night Harry would have died. And then what ever Lupin did or said would not have been enough IMO.If one person does not behave in a specific way or manner then where is the plot of the book? Had Snape not revealed the prophecy, the prophecy that only Dumbledore and he heard, the prophecy that Trelawney had no memory of, then IMO we would not have had the story at all because Voldemort would never have heard it, never targeted the Potters to get rid of "the chosen one", Snape would not have been moved to ask him to spare Lily's life or turn to Dumbledore and start working for the Order simply because Voldemort wouldn't have based an attack on that family based solely upon his interpretation of that prophecy. Cause and effect, action and reaction.

I do not disagree that Lupin was culpable. In fact, my wording was "Should he have told what he knew? Yes." He kept vital information secret, information for all he knew could have led to the death of students.

No; that was not the intent.

I was not talking about Harry, I was talking about Snape, the many times he let Harry off, when he was well within his rights as a teacher to punish him and punish him severely IMO.Yes, Snape as a teacher is well within his rights to punish misbehaving students, just as the other staff are. I do not disagree. I wholeheartedly disagree with the idea that simply because Snape didn't punish Harry means he didn't bully him. Or that Snape let Harry off "many times" rather than punish. You mentioned three instances, and three isn't "many" of anything in particular:

like asking Snape to shut up in POA,
like lying to Snape in HBP about the book
the sectumsempra, not saying a word about the memoies he saw in the occlumency lessons and so on.

Let's look at these shall we? Harry didn't ask Snape to shut up, he rudely yelled it in his teachers face and then the Trio attacked him. What did Snape do? He put it down to the fact that the three must have been Confunded and therefore weren't acting as they should. No punishment required when he'd already blown off the incident to Fudge and presumably Dumbledore. IMO, Snape should have made sure that Harry received punishment for being out of bounds, for his rude behavior, and for the attacking of a teacher.

Lying about the Prince's book and the use of Sectumsempra, well Snape certainly knew he'd invented that spell "for enemies" and scribbled it in his book. He knew for a fact that Harry was bald-face lying to him. Did he punish Harry for the incident? Absolutely. By denying him the right to participate in the Quidditch Final and by putting Harry in detention for the rest of the school year, a detention in which Harry had to do tedious boring work, punctuated though, with jarring moments of reading again and again the names of his father & godfather in their petty misdeeds at school. That was the sadistic intent behind that seeming innocuous punishment.

With Snape's Worst Memory, we have him holding on to Harry so physically that he's bruising Harry's arm. Then Snape throws Harry across the room. Then he throws a jar at the wall above Harry's head, behind Harry's back as Harry's running out the door, and on top of all of this he stops giving Harry Occlumency lessons, lessons that he knew darn well that Harry needed. I absolutely do not blame Snape for his anger over Harry's intrusion into his personal memories. But we have bullying abusive behavior on top of a punishment {no more lessons}. On top of this he destroyed Harry's Potion sample which resulted in a failing grade for Harry {we are given to believe} and then results to giving Harry the silent treatment {a form of continuing social aggression/indirect bullying}.

So I disagree that one, no severe punishment occurred, or two, that no bullying/abusive behavior occurred with the punishment.

I think Snape answers this in HBP, Spinner's End Chapter to Bella.

"I think you next wanted to know," he pressed on, a litle loudly, for Bellatris showed every sign of interrupting, "why I stood between the Dark Lord and the Philosopher's stone. That is easily answered. He did not know whether he could trust me. He had thought, like you, that I had turned from faithful DE to Dumbledore's stooge. He was in a pitiable condition, very weak, sharing the body of a mediocre wizard. He did not dare to reveal himself to a former ally, if that ally might turn him over to Dumbeldore or the Ministry. I deeply regret he did not trust me. He would have returned to power 3 years sooner."
This also shows, how much of Snape's actions were under scrutiny over the years. How carefully Snape had to play a part, because there was a chance he would be questioned on every action because of his proximity to Dumbledore.

And such scrutiny would increase a thousand fold once Harry came to Hogwarts because he was the BWL. The boy who destroyed the Dark Lord. And snape with the belief Voldmeort was coming back and he would be needed to spy for Dumbeldore and with the knowledge of what being a DE was all about and how suspicious Voldemort could be, would have needed to walk very carefully, showing hate towards the BWL, because he caused the death of Voldemort, disdain aand mocking the Gryffindors and favouring the Slytherins.In that chapter Snape is often lying to Bella, we know this. But IMO it certainly had nuggets of truth. Snape's comments go to my point, however. Voldemort didn't trust him, Quirrell/Voldemort didn't associated Snape's treatment of students with loyalty to him, did he? Voldemort still didn't trust him even though he witnessed Snape's behavior towards the students as a whole, and towards Harry, for a year.

Snape didn't know he was under Voldemort's direct scrutiny at all. His behavior as a teacher was not linked in Voldemort's mind to Snape's loyalty. His loyalty was questioned, not his bullying behavior. That speaks volumes, IMO. If his intent was to instill faith that he was loyal by acting as he did, then he failed utterly.
The last question Bellatrix asks Snape, which Voldmeort would have asked Snape as well, was "Why, Snape, is Harry Potter still alive, when you have had him at your mercy for five years?"Yep, she did ask that and Snape lied to her, just as he lied to Voldemort. We know he lied, because he was working for Dumbledore all along.

No other Death Eaters made an attempt on Harry. Snape was comfortable, didn't want a cell next to Bella. Thought Voldemort was gone for good. But hey, Voldemort was pleased that Snape hadn't killed him, because Voldemort was glad to have use of Harry's blood to make a new body for himself, and too, he wanted to be the one to kill Harry Potter.

like asking Snape to shut up in POA... Let's look at these shall we? Harry didn't ask Snape to shut up, he rudely yelled it in his teachers face and then the Trio attacked him. What did Snape do? He put it down to the fact that the three must have been Confunded and therefore weren't acting as they should. No punishment required when he'd already blown off the incident to Fudge and presumably Dumbledore. IMO, Snape should have made sure that Harry received punishment for being out of bounds, for his rude behavior, and for the attacking of a teacher.

Actually, Harry didn't tell Snape to shut up then, it was the other way around, with Snape telling Hermione to shut up and Harry to move out of his way. Harry told him to shut up during the Marauder's Map incident, when Snape had been demeaning his dead father before him - including telling Harry a lie - because Snape had no facts about what James was thinking or had done and presented his wrong opinion as the truth. Thus, in my judgment, Harry had every right to demand that Snape shut up about his father. Snape was completely in the wrong. Harry actually responded in a much nicer fashion than I would have in those circumstances, so I admire him for keeping his cool to the extent he did. The only person Snape should have punished as a result was himself, imo, because he was the only one behaving in an inappropriate and cruel manner; showing disrespect for the dead - a man he'd helped to kill and cruelly degrading the man before his orphan child, simultaneously comparing his negative opinion of Harry's father to Harry. Snape could see the impact his words were having on the child - he realized he hit a sore spot and he did not stop, but continued to rub salt in a very sore wound until it festered; and he was described as obtaining pleasure from doing so. (POA)

Actually, Harry didn't tell Snape to shut up then, it was the other way around, with Snape telling Hermione to shut up and Harry to move out of his way. Harry told him to shut up during the Marauder's Map incident, when Snape had been demeaning his dead father before him - including telling Harry a lie - because Snape had no facts about what James was thinking or had done and presented his wrong opinion as the truth. Thus, in my judgment, Harry had every right to demand that Snape shut up about his father. Snape was completely in the wrong. Harry actually responded in a much nicer fashion than I would have in those circumstances, so I admire him for keeping his cool to the extent he did. The only person Snape should have punished as a result was himself, imo, because he was the only one behaving in an inappropriate and cruel manner; showing disrespect for the dead - a man he'd helped to kill and cruelly degrading the man before his orphan child, simultaneously comparing his negative opinion of Harry's father to Harry. Snape could see the impact his words were having on the child - he realized he hit a sore spot and he did not stop, but continued to rub salt in a very sore wound until it festered; and he was described as obtaining pleasure from doing so. (POA)I'd forgotten that bit. In that instance, I'd agree that Harry had the right to ask his teacher to shut up about his father.

Actually, Harry didn't tell Snape to shut up then, it was the other way around, with Snape telling Hermione to shut up and Harry to move out of his way. Harry told him to shut up during the Marauder's Map incident, when Snape had been demeaning his dead father before him - including telling Harry a lie - because Snape had no facts about what James was thinking or had done and presented his wrong opinion as the truth. Thus, in my judgment, Harry had every right to demand that Snape shut up about his father. Snape was completely in the wrong. Harry actually responded in a much nicer fashion than I would have in those circumstances, so I admire him for keeping his cool to the extent he did. The only person Snape should have punished as a result was himself, imo, because he was the only one behaving in an inappropriate and cruel manner; showing disrespect for the dead - a man he'd helped to kill and cruelly degrading the man before his orphan child, simultaneously comparing his negative opinion of Harry's father to Harry. Snape could see the impact his words were having on the child - he realized he hit a sore spot and he did not stop, but continued to rub salt in a very sore wound until it festered; and he was described as obtaining pleasure from doing so. (POA)

But put yourself in Snape's shoes. Knowing about the whole Lily thing and not winning her heart afterall but infact losing her to James... would you speak nicely about him? dead or not. And I admit snape was selfish in having Lily be protected and not James but look at there past. I mean the first time he set eyes on snape he was an automatic victim.:no:

But put yourself in Snape's shoes. Knowing about the whole Lily thing and not winning her heart afterall but infact losing her to James... would you speak nicely about him? dead or not. And I admit snape was selfish in having Lily be protected and not James but look at there past.Would I speak nicely of my rival/enemy? No. Would I fling vindictive aspersions about this long-dead individual in his son's face, not just once but many, many times, and seem to enjoy it? No.
I mean the first time he set eyes on snape he was an automatic victim.:no:Everyone interprets that scene a bit differently. The text to me shows that the bullying began after Severus insulted James Potter with the "brawny instead of brainy" comment. Sirius responds to that insult with an insult of his own. James then tries to trip Severus as he and Lily are leaving the compartment, and someone {it's never stated who} says "See ya, Snivellus!"

But put yourself in Snape's shoes.

You're kidding right? :lol:.

Knowing about the whole Lily thing and not winning her heart afterall but infact losing her to James... would you speak nicely about him? dead or not.

I would say nothing at all to his son I helped make an orphan about the father I had helped kill, if it wasn't nice or neutral. To me it shows a lack of repentant feelings for those things. I certainly would not call the man an attempted murderer based on my own person guess and state it as fact. Snape never lost Lily to James, Snape never had Lily at all. He lost her as a friend due to his own behavior, words and actions. If Snape saw it otherwise that is his mental instability at play - but there is no canon that he did; he seemed to understand why he lost the friendship. He was jealous and disliked James, but he never accused him of taking Lily away in canon, neither has JKR indicated Snape felt that way, to my knowledge. Snape simply didn't like it.

And I admit snape was selfish in having Lily be protected and not James but look at there past. I mean the first time he set eyes on snape he was an automatic victim.:no:

I think helping to kill him evened up the score - whatever it was, don't you? It is about having general respect for the dead - lifting Snape up and washing out his mouth at 15 doesn't warrant such disrespect, imo, sorry. If he had killed Snape's mother I would totally understand - that is how Snape acted. If all schoolyard enemies behaved like Snape, the world would be a sad, sad place.

Would I speak nicely of my rival/enemy? No. Would I fling vindictive aspersions about this long-dead individual in his son's face, not just once but many, many times, and seem to enjoy it? No.
Well I don't think he enjoys it. I think bringing it up so many times is a way of hiding his insecurities. :lol: I think he's just that kind of person...I mean he lost the Lily to James so he brings up his bad things and what not to make himself feel better I guess.. That's just how I interpret it. He probably doesn't even mean half of the things and if he does, it goes to show how strong *** hate was between the two...

Everyone interprets that scene a bit differently. The text to me shows that the bullying began after Severus insulted James Potter with the "brawny instead of brainy" comment. Sirius responds to that insult with an insult of his own. James then tries to trip Severus as he and Lily are leaving the compartment, and someone {it's never stated who} says "See ya, Snivellus!"

Well then you're right..Because I think it started iwth them first and got worse after Snape stood up fpr himself.

I would say nothing at all to his son I helped make an orphan about the father I had helped kill, if it wasn't nice or neutral. To me it shows a lack of repentant feelings for those things. I certainly would not call the man an attempted murderer based on my own person guess and state it as fact. Snape never lost Lily to James, Snape never had Lily at all. He lost her as a friend due to his own behavior, words and actions. If Snape saw it otherwise that is his mental instability at play - but there is no canon that he did; he seemed to understand why he lost the friendship. He was jealous and disliked James, but he never accused him of taking Lily away in canon, neither has JKR indicated Snape felt that way, to my knowledge. Snape simply didn't like it.
Well he did have her as a friend. And he lost her (I'm not saying why he lost her and who's fault it was) and James got her in the end. We all know Snape still liked her after all this time... So it hurts him and he deals with it differently then you and me do. We weren't raised like him, we don;t think like him and we haven't gone through what he has, so his reactions and what not are different don't you think?


I think helping to kill him evened up the score - whatever it was, don't you? It is about having general respect for the dead - lifting Snape up and washing out his mouth at 15 doesn't warrant such disrespect, imo, sorry. If he had killed Snape's mother I would totally understand - that is how Snape acted. If all schoolyard enemies behaved like Snape, the world would be a sad, sad place.

Well you're right about that... but like I said he's difefrent from you and me...

I don't want to see sarcastic or rude comments in here.

Respect each other, and respect opinions that are not your own. I'm not asking you to share them - just don't belittle them.

Well he did have her as a friend. And he lost her (I'm not saying why he lost her and who's fault it was) and James got her in the end. We all know Snape still liked her after all this time... So it hurts him and he deals with it differently then you and me do. We weren't raised like him, we don;t think like him and we haven't gone through what he has, so his reactions and what not are different don't you think?

I agree with that; but it is true of everyone in the series really...I wasn't raised like Lupin or Sirius or Harry, etc., but I do try to understand how that might impact them based on the canon. I just feel that in the case of Snape, much of his behavior and his words and actions cannot be explained based on the canon we were given. So it leads me to believe that much of his character is inherent.

Well you're right about that... but like I said he's difefrent from you and me...

True and I would say that is the problem in relating to a character like Snape for me. I feel it also might be why there is such wide and varied opinion on his character. But for me, I feel that he was not presented as all that complex; just distinct from other characters in being 'grey' - much like my impression of Draco. I think Snape was shown in ways that are difficult to fathom on purpose, in order to keep him somewhat ambivalent - but not in a complex way, just an unresolved way. That is, the solutions can be guessed at, but I have no canon to support exactly what Snape was thinking because it was all written in Harry's POV. Many things about what Snape was thinking throughout the series were left unresolved for me, so all I can conclude from that is that his actions, words and behavior are simply his character (for whatever reason) - that is simply how he was.