Severus Snape: Character Analysis v.10

Welcome to the 10th instalment of this thread! I double-checked, it's really the 10th version. :scared:

For background reading and reference:
version one (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108022)
version two (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=109066)
version three (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=110006)
version four (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=111003)
version five (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=112236)
version six (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=113719)
version seven (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=115221)
version eight (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=116258)
version nine (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=117791)

A new quotation to get this thread started:

Perhaps Dumbledore was in the staffroom? He started running as fast as he could toward the staircase -

"POTTER!"

Harry skidded to a halt and looked around. Snape had just emerged from the hidden staircase behind the stone gargoyle. The wall was sliding shut behind him even as he beckoned Harry back toward him.

"What are you doing here, Potter?"

"I need to see Professor Dumbledore!" said Harry, running back up the corridor and skidding to a standstill in front of Snape instead. "It's Mr. Crouch . . . he's just turned up ... he's in the forest... he's asking -"

"What is this rubbish?" said Snape, his black eyes glittering. "What are you talking about?"

"Mr. Crouch!" Harry shouted. "From the Ministry! He's ill or something - he's in the forest, he wants to see Dumbledore! Just give me the password up to -"

"The headmaster is busy, Potter," said Snape, his thin mouth curling into an unpleasant smile.

"I've got to tell Dumbledore!" Harry yelled.

"Didn't you hear me. Potter?"

Harry could tell Snape was thoroughly enjoying himself, denying Harry the thing he wanted when he was so panicky.

"Look," said Harry angrily, "Crouch isn't right - he's - he's out of his mind - he says he wants to warn -"

The stone wall behind Snape slid open. Dumbledore was standing there, wearing long green robes and a mildly curious expression. "Is there a problem?" he said, looking between Harry and Snape.

"Professor!" Harry said, sidestepping Snape before Snape could speak, "Mr. Crouch is here - he's down in the forest, he wants to speak to you!"

Harry expected Dumbledore to ask questions, but to his relief, Dumbledore did nothing of the sort.

"Lead the way," he said promptly, and he swept off along the corridor behind Harry, leaving Snape standing next to the gargoyle and looking twice as ugly.


Do you interpret this scene differently after DH?
What do you think was Snape's main motivation in this scene?
Do you think that Snape was really enjoying the situation, as Harry surmised?

Old and new study questions:

Based on how his character is supposed to end up: if you could change/improve one thing about Snape, what would it be?
What do you think Snape would have done, if he had survived DH?
Do you agree with the author's take on Snape's character as revealed in interviews?
Do you think Snape would have moved on if Lily had not died? Would he have turned to the good side in that case?
Snape is revealed to have been acting throughout the series out of love for Lily, how does this effect your view of his actions in the series - his "murder" of Dumbledore, his treatment of Sirius.
Why do you think Snape chose to become a Death Eater?
How do the revelations of DH impact your view of Snape's treatment of Harry and Neville throughout the series?
What do you think of Snape's actions after learning who Voldemort had targeted with the prophecy?
What do you think of Snape's actions after Lily's death. How do you think this death has affected his character?
What do you think are Snape's major strengths? What are his major flaws?
Do you believe Snape came to care about Harry?
What do you think about Snape's relationship with Dumbledore? Did they become friends or was Dumbledore a substitute father figure for him?
Do you think Snape should have been sorted in Slytherin? Would he have made the same choices if he had been sorted elsewhere?
There are all kinds of bravery in this series, what characteristics of Snape's make him brave? In what sense is he a hero?

AS THIS IS STILL A HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL AND SENSITIVE TOPIC WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK EVERYONE TO PLEASE BE SENSITIVE TO OTHERS OPINIONS. THIS MEANS NO GLOATING AS WELL AS NO BASHING. CONSEQUENCES WILL BE SEVERE.

Additionally please read How to have a pleasant conversation on any topic (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108019) and Character Bashing/Worship: aka Shades of Gray (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108021) BEFORE POSTING IN THIS THREAD

Now go on and have fun! :)

Welcome to the 10th instalment of this thread! I double-checked, it's really the 10th version. :scared:

:lol:



A new quotation to get this thread started:Perhaps Dumbledore was in the staffroom? He started running as fast as he could toward the staircase -

"POTTER!"

Harry skidded to a halt and looked around. Snape had just emerged from the hidden staircase behind the stone gargoyle. The wall was sliding shut behind him even as he beckoned Harry back toward him.

"What are you doing here, Potter?"

"I need to see Professor Dumbledore!" said Harry, running back up the corridor and skidding to a standstill in front of Snape instead. "It's Mr. Crouch . . . he's just turned up ... he's in the forest... he's asking -"

"What is this rubbish?" said Snape, his black eyes glittering. "What are you talking about?"

"Mr. Crouch!" Harry shouted. "From the Ministry! He's ill or something - he's in the forest, he wants to see Dumbledore! Just give me the password up to -"

"The headmaster is busy, Potter," said Snape, his thin mouth curling into an unpleasant smile.

"I've got to tell Dumbledore!" Harry yelled.

"Didn't you hear me. Potter?"

Harry could tell Snape was thoroughly enjoying himself, denying Harry the thing he wanted when he was so panicky.

"Look," said Harry angrily, "Crouch isn't right - he's - he's out of his mind - he says he wants to warn -"

The stone wall behind Snape slid open. Dumbledore was standing there, wearing long green robes and a mildly curious expression. "Is there a problem?" he said, looking between Harry and Snape.

"Professor!" Harry said, sidestepping Snape before Snape could speak, "Mr. Crouch is here - he's down in the forest, he wants to speak to you!"

Harry expected Dumbledore to ask questions, but to his relief, Dumbledore did nothing of the sort.

"Lead the way," he said promptly, and he swept off along the corridor behind Harry, leaving Snape standing next to the gargoyle and looking twice as ugly.


Do you interpret this scene differently after DH?
What do you think was Snape's main motivation in this scene?
Do you think that Snape was really enjoying the situation, as Harry surmised?

Yes, I think Snape was enjoying the situation just like Harry thought. I suppose Snape knew Dumbledore was coming down anyway, and used the time until he appeared to taunt Harry.

Based on how his character is supposed to end up: if you could change/improve one thing about Snape, what would it be?

Nothing. He's a great literary creation as he is.

What do you think Snape would have done, if he had survived DH?

I don't know... I suppose he'd have continued teaching DADA, or retired and lead a quiet life with his books.

Do you agree with the author's take on Snape's character as revealed in interviews?

Not entirely. And I don't think they're even comparable, our opinions, because she speaks and analyses him as the creator, and I speak as a reader. She gives her intention, and I give my impression. We stand in completely different positions.

Do you think Snape would have moved on if Lily had not died? Would he have turned to the good side in that case?

Yes, I do believe he would have. Lily's life being in danger wasn't a character-changer, it was merely a catalyst, in my opinion.

Thanks, Moriath, for the shiny new thread and poll! (the Sev pet question was getting old... ;) ) I voted for every option except "To prevent others from vindicating him". "Something completely different" would be because Snape is a fascinating character to discuss, one of my very favorites and I don't just mean in HP. His story is not only central to the series plot, it develops some of the big themes in the series.

Woohoo! Version 10! :clap: We are awesome to have got this far!

I'd pick "To vindicate him" if he actually needed it. The books were pretty clear on his loyalties and such, actually. :lol: I haven't voted yet, but I'll get around to it...someday.

I'm pretty much here because I'm an argumentative brat--*ahem* I mean, Snape is a pretty interesting guy to discuss. He is one of those who can be interpreted in several different ways while still being canon-compliant. Plus, it's always fun to try and unravel different scenes and see what's going on in his head in each. Because he really does hide his innermost thoughts and feelings a lot, being a spy and all. He's a puzzle you could spend years trying to solve.

As for the GoF Scene-
I looked over the scene and drew the same conclusions as Yoana. It looked like Snape wanted to keep Harry right where he was until Dumbledore came down, and couldn't resist provoking a panicky Harry in order to do so.

I do wonder, though, what he and Dumbledore had been discussing before Snape came down from his office. We'll probably never know if it was Order business or something else. :sigh:

Welcome to the 10th instalment of this thread! I double-checked, it's really the 10th version. :scared:

*gives the mods a nice soothing cup of herbal tea* :D

I love the poll! :lol: I ticked quite a few options. ;) Oh, and Snape makes me do it. :yuhup:

The scene from GoF:

Do you interpret this scene differently after DH?

Not really.

But I began to interpret Snape's character differently after I'd finished reading GoF. :cool: I always suspected there was more to him that met the eye, that he was much more than the teacher who's mean to Harry.

What do you think was Snape's main motivation in this scene?

I am sure he realised that whatever was making Harry panic was probably important. No doubt he would have alerted Dumbledore himself about Harry's message, or, as Ignisia says (and this seems more likely) waited until Dumbledore himself emerged. But he just can't resist making life difficult for James's son. :sigh:

Do you think that Snape was really enjoying the situation, as Harry surmised?

Oh, undoubtedly. :whistle:

I do wonder, though, what he and Dumbledore had been discussing before Snape came down from his office. We'll probably never know if it was Order business or something else. :sigh:

Good point, Iggy. :tu: There is so much going on behind the scenes that I'd love to know about ...

:clap: :clap: GO SNAPE! :love: 10th version. :wow:

I voted for everything except the first 2. I loved the option "If I stop HP will be truly over! *clings*" :lol:

I think Snape enjoyed himself and I'd like to think he knew Dumbledore was on the way and that there wasn't really going to be a loss for time if it was as important as Harry obviously thought it was. However I also have to consider that Harry was right and that Snape really just wanted to make him squirm a bit. One would think that the mention of Crouch would have at least set up a warning flag in his head given that he was playing both sides and probably knew a lot more than Harry did.

You know, I always felt that Snape was enjoying himself at that time but I also always felt from that scene that Dumbledore was actually 'busy' doing something of importance in the office and that Snape was stalling Harry off because of it.

Do you interpret this scene differently after DH?

I don't see how DH could have any impact on this scene. Ah, perhaps if one thought Snape was on Voldy's side back then it would. But I didn't.

What do you think was Snape's main motivation in this scene?

To behave in a bullying manner toward Harry, as he did at every opportunity.

I used to believe he actually would look at Harry and see his old enemy. But today I decided that Snape would have to be actually psychotic if that were the case. So now I understand the canon to mean that while Snape began by unfairly transfering his feelings of dislike on Harry and hating him - what happened is that he began to truly hate Harry. So everything Harry did, I feel Snape just looked on it in a negative manner, placing the worst constructions on his actions. While some things would conjure up memories of his old enemy and make it simple (because he hated the dad too) for the most part, he just construed everything Harry did (who he likely saw more of) as having a bad motive and wrongful in some way. But it wasn't so much to justify his behavior - because he would treat all of the children in a similar manner - but rather to justify his original hatred which had been unfair in nature.

I don't think he hated all the kids, so I don't believe his behavior toward all of them included hate. But it did in the case of Harry and I think this added a need to mischaracterize everything Harry said and did that was not facially hateable into something that Snape could find hateful - and if it happened to be something his dad might do (i.e., play Quidditch), then it just made it easier because he'd already come to hate someone for those things and would not have to find a basis in his mind.

And that is my new psychological understanding of Snape. :lol:.

Do you think that Snape was really enjoying the situation, as Harry surmised?

Yes he was, hence his denials and his mouth curling into an unplesant smile. Plus, the canon reads that Harry could tell he was enjoying himself. These little things were never explained in any other way and there was no reason for Snape to behave that way at all under the circumstances, imo.

I disagree Snape thought Dumbledore was coming down. My understanding was that Dumbledore was retired in his rooms to whatever he was doing. Dumbledore knew when people came to his doorway - he had to. So he came of his own accord based on Harry's worry or presence, imo. He obviously had no business with Snape at that point according to my interpretation.

Snape couldn't know that he was hindering the correction of some evil deal - and this is an example of his placing the worst construction on Harry's behavior and motive in order to justify his hatred which again, he didn't need to treat Harry in a bullying manner, but he would need, imo, to treat him with the extra disregard and disrespect he was showing here - which he may not have done with other kids. With other kids (non-Slytherins), I feel he would have still behaved nastily, but he would have likely showed less disregard and disdain for them, imo.

You know, I always felt that Snape was enjoying himself at that time but I also always felt from that scene that Dumbledore was actually 'busy' doing something of importance in the office and that Snape was stalling Harry off because of it.

I agree with this. I see echoes in this scene of Harry's PS/SS interaction with McGonagall, when he was worried that Snape was going after the Philosopher's Stone.

"We want to see Professor Dumbledore," said Hermione, rather bravely, Harry and Ron thought.

"See Professor Dumbledore?" Professor McGonagall repeated, as though this was a very fishy thing to want to do. "Why?"

Harry swallowed -- now what?

"It's sort of secret," he said, but he wished at once he hadn't, because Professor McGonagall's nostrils flared.

"Professor Dumbledore left ten minutes ago," she said coldly. "He received an urgent owl from the Ministry of Magic and flew off for London at once."

"He's gone?" said Harry frantically. "Now?"

"Professor Dumbledore is a very great wizard, Potter, he has many demands on his time --

"But this is important."

"Something you have to say is more important than the Ministry of Magic, Potter.

"Look," said Harry, throwing caution to the winds, "Professor -- it's about the Sorcerer's Stone --"

Whatever Professor McGonagall had expected, it wasn't that. The books she was carrying tumbled out of her arms, but she didn't pick them up. "How do you know --?" she spluttered.

"Professor, I think -- I know -- that Sn- that someone's going to try and steal the Stone. I've got to talk to Professor Dumbledore."

She eyed him with a mixture of shock and suspicion.

"Professor Dumbledore will be back tomorrow," she said finally. I don't know how you found out about the Stone, but rest assured, no one can possibly steal it, it's too well protected."

I am not so sure that enjoyment was Snape's number one priority in this scene, either. I think that (like McGonagall in the scene above when Harry insisted his reasons were a secret) he wanted to know what it was that Harry thought was so important.

"What is this rubbish?" said Snape, his black eyes glittering. "What are you talking about?"

This seems to me to be a straightforward, if less than friendly, request for information.

Oooh... a shiny new version!!! :clap:


As for the GoF Scene-
I looked over the scene and drew the same conclusions as Yoana. It looked like Snape wanted to keep Harry right where he was until Dumbledore came down, and couldn't resist provoking a panicky Harry in order to do so.

Yeah, I agree with,Yoana too! Harry couldn't get past the gargoyle and was running off to search for Dumbledore in the staff room, when Snape emerged from the gargoyle and called him back.


Dumbledore knew when people came to his doorway - he had to. So he came of his own accord based on Harry's worry or presence, imo. He obviously had no business with Snape at that point according to my interpretation.


Hmm...I don't think we are given any evidence that Dumbledore knew when people approached the gargoyle. Actually, in one instance, Dumbledore didn't even know Harry was standing right outside his office door until Moody told him.

As to enjoyment, it was more the 'glittering eyes' the 'unpleasant smile' and then 'looking twice as ugly' {hah, I just got that...Snape looked 'twice as ugly as the gargoyle'} that I'm referring to. Sheesh, I've read these books numerous times and still find things on rereads.

The 'glittering eyes' either indicate irritation, anger, quiet happiness, or pleasure in Snape, at least that's how it always appears to me. The 'unpleasant smile' is also a standard whenever he's talking to or taunting Harry. And then the irritation he had when Dumbledore instantly addressed Harry's concerns and trotted off with him...these things seem to indicate that Snape was enjoying keeping Harry stymied at the gargoyle.

I agree though, that this instance is similar to McGonagall's reaction to Harry's request(s) to see Dumbledore and not overly insulting or aggressive. The only difference though, is that in the two instances Harry makes the request to McGonagall {Philosopher's Stone and the Prince, I believe} Dumbledore is truly unavailable due to not even being at the castle and in this instance Dumbledore is in the castle, though occupied. Obviously whatever Dumbledore was doing could have been interrupted, as he came down from his office and made inquiry...but I always wondered just what exactly Dumbledore had been up to in the office.

Hmm...I don't think we are given any evidence that Dumbledore knew when people approached the gargoyle. Actually, in one instance, Dumbledore didn't even know Harry was standing right outside his office door until Moody told him.Just the once, I think, when we see him set Fawkes to spy and send signal if Delores was about.

The 'glittering eyes' either indicate irritation, anger, quiet happiness, or pleasure in Snape, at least that's how it always appears to me.

Which of these do you suggest Snape was feeling as he set out for his meeting with Voldmeort at the end of GoF? Persoanlly, I don't think any of them fit. To me a seriousness of intent fits more. Which would be consistent both with setting out on one of his more dangerous missions, and with wanting to know about trouble on the school grounds that Snape might then deal with himself, or deal with along with Albus.

And then the irritation he had when Dumbledore instantly addressed Harry's concerns and trotted off with him...these things seem to indicate that Snape was enjoying keeping Harry stymied at the gargoyle.

Or Snape still wants to know what is going on, but he's not invited along. ;)

To be clear, I am not suggesting Snape did not enjoy the scene at all. I am merely suggesting his behavior was not primarily motivated by wanting to irritate Harry. To the extent to which he might have enjoyed it, I see this as having been a fringe benefit. :lol:

Obviously whatever Dumbledore was doing could have been interrupted, as he came down from his office and made inquiry...but I always wondered just what exactly Dumbledore had been up to in the office.

But I think both Minerva in that scene, and Snape in the GoF one we are discussing, would have wanted to be the judges of whether bothering Albus was really necessary.

My guess as to what Albus was up to, is using the Pensieve. He had just been speaking to Snape (obviously, as Snape exited the office when Harry ran by). I think Snape made some sort of report to him concerning the Dark Mark, or Karkaroff, or a similar matter of possible bearing on the mystery that troubled Albus, and Albus was using the Pensieve to consider some memory or other in light of the new information.

Hmm...I don't think we are given any evidence that Dumbledore knew when people approached the gargoyle. Actually, in one instance, Dumbledore didn't even know Harry was standing right outside his office door until Moody told him.

I think the evidence is provided in the scene itself.

Just the once, I think, when we see him set Fawkes to spy and send signal if Delores was about.

Ah... yes, you are right we do! :) Although, in this case it is a rather unusual set of circumstances and he was expecting Delores. I am just not to sure Dumbledore would use this method on a more general day to day basis.



My guess as to what Albus was up to, is using the Pensieve. He had just been speaking to Snape (obviously, as Snape exited the office when Harry ran by). I think Snape made some sort of report to him concerning the Dark Mark, or Karkaroff, or a similar matter of possible bearing on the mystery that troubled Albus, and Albus was using the Pensieve to consider some memory or other in light of the new information.

That would be my guess also! :D

Which of these do you suggest Snape was feeling as he set out for his meeting with Voldmeort at the end of GoF? Strictly my opinion, I think he was nervous, but that the strange glittering eyes was for quiet happiness/pleasure. Not to be putting his neck on the line, or facing imminent death but to be taking that first real step in many long, lingering years to bring down the man who'd murder Lily.

To be clear, I am not suggesting Snape did not enjoy the scene at all. I am merely suggesting his behavior was not primarily motivated by wanting to irritate Harry. To the extent to which he might have enjoyed it, I see this as having been a fringe benefit. :lol:

Well canon doesn't provide anything else - unless we dig around to find it. Snape could have been thinking one of a million things - all of which we can consign to him. One could say that what we got was from Harry's view, and that is true, but he actually did feel it. Snape's motivation is clear to me because he knows the child is in a panic and does nothing to relieve it, but adds to it instead. He does inquire of Harry what the problem is, but after being told, he was no more helpful or consoling.

Snape is not and never purported to be Dumbledore's watchdog or protector. He was well aware that Dumbledore required no such thing. If Harry Potter - and I name him because of all of the special circumstances that surrounded his life and which Snape was well aware of - is requesting to see Dumbledore (something he did not do day in and day out), then the matter should be given the attention it deserves.

FROM THE CANON:

"What is this rubbish?" said Snape, his black eyes glittering. "What are you talking about?"

"Mr. Crouch!" Harry shouted. "From the Ministry! He's ill or something - he's in the forest, he wants to see Dumbledore! Just give me the password up to -"

"The headmaster is busy, Potter," said Snape, his thin mouth curling into an unpleasant smile.

"I've got to tell Dumbledore!" Harry yelled.

Didn't you hear me. Potter?"

Harry could tell Snape was thoroughly enjoying himself, denying Harry the thing he wanted when he was so panicky.

-END-

The sentences highlighted in red are indicative of Snape's disregard and disrespect for Harry and what he was trying to say. Snape's response makes one wonder why he even bothered to ask what the problem was. That Crouch is sick in the forest seems not to matter to Snape at all, despite the dangers there and the fact that a human is evidently suffering in some regard. Does he think Harry is lying? Wouldn't he get slammed by Dumbledore later if that was the case? of course, so there was no reason not to allow him to speak to Dumbledore or suggest that he himself would take matters in hand and attempt to help Crouch. Standing there with his curling lips and aggressively disregarding speech was enough to tell any reasonable child that Snape was disregarding of humanity and having a good time bullying him in a circumstance where there were much more important things to be worrying about - clearly a human being suffering in a dangerous place is enough information for Snape to act on, imo. That is definitely important enough to interrupt Dumbledore in whatever he is doing - or at the very least take command and move to rescue/help Crouch. If it is all lies, then he has an even greater basis for torturing Harry later - but instead he misconstructs Harry's character as I stated above, imo, and then in what to me is an unbelievable act of arrogance, ignores him and instead takes pleasure in causing Harry's panic to increase - all of this in the face of a man's life quite possibly in terrible danger.

I never thought of this before, but (from the v9 thread):


He might not have been able to complete what he had been trying to do, which I'm guessing was completely remove the curse that had been placed (Or was being placed?) on Harry's broom, but without his actions we don't know that Harry wouldn't have taken a header into the ground at 200mph.
What if Snape was trying to partially counter the curse, so that Harry would not fall off his broom and die, but would also not catch then Snitch and win the game for Gryffindor? This would be most unfair, but we all know that Snape is unfair in favoring Slytherins over Gryffindor especially.

I never thought of this before, but (from the v9 thread):


What if Snape was trying to partially counter the curse, so that Harry would not fall off his broom and die, but would also not catch then Snitch and win the game for Gryffindor? This would be most unfair, but we all know that Snape is unfair in favoring Slytherins over Gryffindor especially.I don't think that the game was registering in Snape's mind at the moment. He had much more important things to worry about. All of his concentration was focused on Harry at that time, so much so he didn't realize he was on fire.

:lol: I think the game in which Snape showed his prejudice was when he took over from Hooch, but he'd also taken that task with the intent to stay closer to Harry in the case of any further broom tampering occurred.

I have always wondered what Snape and DD might be discussing just before that scene in GOF. I had always assumed that Dumbledore was in the middle of something that could not be interrupted. Perhaps there were people or things in the office Harry was not to see.

In any event DD did come out soon enough.

Something that occurred to me upon re-reading this bit of GOF - regarding this scene was Snape's concern about the creation and use of Polyjuice. Snape knew someone was being impersonated inside the castle- and he also knew the Dark Lord was making a comeback so he needed to mark his words and deed carefully from this point on.

Something that occurred to me upon re-reading this bit of GOF - regarding this scene was Snape's concern about the creation and use of Polyjuice. Snape knew someone was being impersonated inside the castle- and he also knew the Dark Lord was making a comeback so he needed to mark his words and deed carefully from this point on.

That is an interesting aspect. But I still think in the moment the most important concern would be a sick man in the dangerous forest and Snape would act on that knowledge either himself or alert Dumbledore if he feared going into the forest himself.

Something that occurred to me upon re-reading this bit of GOF - regarding this scene was Snape's concern about the creation and use of Polyjuice. Snape knew someone was being impersonated inside the castle- and he also knew the Dark Lord was making a comeback so he needed to mark his words and deed carefully from this point on.

:tu: Excellent point.
I think that Snape is used to keeping many different pieces of information in his mind at any one time & this would be one that would remain uppermost in his thoughts untill the end of Flesh, Blood & Bone at the earliest imo :)

A sick man would seem to be more Poppy's concern than anyone else's & tend to feel that Snape may well have wanted proof that the Headmasted actually needed to be disturbed - that would be one of the jobs of both the deputy head & the heads of houses, to deal with things that don't need the Headmasters immediate attention.

But I also wonder if there isn't another thing going on as well. A few days ago I was talking with a friend about Snapes speach about people who wear thier hearts on their sleeve in OotP. I had always seen it simply as an insight into how Snape sees himself / why he is as gaurded as he is, but as I was reading it this time something else hit me.
He is talking about people who are provoked easily standing 'no chance against his [Voldemorts] power.

It occured to me that he spends alot of time deliberatly provoking Harry, and I wondered if prehaps some of it was done with purpose, to teach Harry how not to be provoked easily. Are these continual jibes, hits to emotion sore points all about teaching Harry to survive?

If this is the case might he also be trying to teach Harry to deal with stress / panic??? Just a thought :)

:tu: Excellent point.
A sick man would seem to be more Poppy's concern than anyone else's & tend to feel that Snape may well have wanted proof that the Headmasted actually needed to be disturbed - that would be one of the jobs of both the deputy head & the heads of houses, to deal with things that don't need the Headmasters immediate attention.

I think if Snape had said that he was going to the forest to check things out - or going to alert Poppy to the fact that a man may require her help, Harry's panic may have been relieved to some degree. At least he would understand that someone was going to try to help Crouch. Snape didn't seemed to be concerned with this aspect at all, imo.

I agree he'd wish to determine if Dumbledore was needed. However, it appears he decided that he was not needed by his words to Harry. To me that is not the problem - the problem remains that Snape took no move to act on Crouch's behalf, imo. I understand readers are not likely too fond of Crouch, but imagine if it had been some character people do like who was sick in the dangerous forest and asking to see Dumbledore. The point is that Crouch is as human as those beloved characters and Snape was ignoring his trauma and danger, imo, merely to have a bit of fun at Harry's expense. By his own words, Snape felt that Dumbledore was to busy to deal with a sick man in the dangerous forest and by his own inaction he implied he couldn't care less about it himself, imo.

I retract my earlier statement; perhaps this does tell us something in light of DH. It would appear that Snape had not yet reached the point where he 'no longer watched those die he could save'.

To me he seemed to want some proper information about what is going on - that to me say's he is taking it seriously :)

I retract my earlier statement; perhaps this does tell us something in light of DH. It would appear that Snape had not yet reached the point where he 'no longer watched those die he could save'.

Hmm. I think you have a good point there. I don't think Snape considered other people until Voldemort's return at the end of GoF, when he would be hit with the reality of what it used to be like when Voldemort had been around running the show. Not that I think Snape suddenly sprouted empathy for other people, but after a many year respite from Voldemort-inspired activities, the sudden juxtaposition of how he was expected to act during those years versus what Voldemort now expected might have been enough of a shock to actually nudge Snape towards human decency.

I didn't know we could pick more than one option to vote on. To me, Snape was just mean to Harry. If he really loved Lily, he would have been nicer to Harry. As for that scene from Goblet of Fire, I knew Snape was enjoying himself. To me, that's why he was so annoying. In OothP, I felt sorry for him. And I wish Voldy didn't kill him, at least not with a snake. That was brutal.
I never thought Snape was evil. But, I didn't think he was all good either. He was a puzzling character to me. As to why he became a Death Eater? DE's were supposed to be cool. And Voldemort could be very persuasive.

I voted for several of the poll options. One of them was "something completely different". Since I haven't discussed Snape on this board prior to the past few months (or anywhere online really) then it's a new experience for me. The questions may be repeated for many around here, but there will always be people who are a bit more new to the topic online. :)

As for this GoF scene...

* Do you interpret this scene differently after DH?

I interpret everything when it comes to Snape a bit differently if only because DH added layers to his character in my view. We also know there was a lot going on behind the scenes between Snape and Dumbledore and it's interesting to read these scenes with these things in mind.

* What do you think was Snape's main motivation in this scene?

I think he wanted to learn more about what Harry was talking about, even if he wasn't nice about it. I think he knew Dumbledore was busy at the moment but would be down shortly so he wanted to stall Harry until Dumbledore emerged. I also think he was just messing with Harry a little bit in the process.

* Do you think that Snape was really enjoying the situation, as Harry surmised?

Probably, but as zgirnius mentioned, I think it was just a side benefit to watch him squirm a bit.

About Snape not valuing human life until Goblet of Fire... I'd have to disagree with that because I think he gradually learned that after turning back to the good side.

I don't think he didn't care that someone was sick in the forest. I just really don't see him rushing off to the forest to save someone without getting the full story or waiting on Dumbledore, since he was likely on his way down. Especially if he knew at this point about someone brewing polyjuice potion... Harry could have been fooled and was being used... I also don't know if he was that upset at Dumbledore just walking off with Harry... I think that Harry just thought Snape was twice as ugly as a gargoyle. :lol: If he was upset, I'd say he was more upset that he was being left behind.

I understand readers are not likely too fond of Crouch, but imagine if it had been some character people do like who was sick in the dangerous forest and asking to see Dumbledore. The point is that Crouch is as human as those beloved characters and Snape was ignoring his trauma and danger, imo, merely to have a bit of fun at Harry's expense.

If readers choose to interpret Snape in a different way in this scene, I don't see how that means they don't care about Crouch or his well-being. :whistle:

By his own words, Snape felt that Dumbledore was to busy to deal with a sick man in the dangerous forest and by his own inaction he implied he couldn't care less about it himself, imo.

Yes, that is how at first glance the scene comes across: that Snape is his usual horrible self and he doesn't care. But as ever, where Snape is involved, things are not always quite what they seem. (And sometimes they are.)

If we look at the conversation again:

"What are you doing here, Potter?"

"I need to see Professor Dumbledore!" said Harry, running back up the corridor and skidding to a standstill in front of Snape instead. "It's Mr. Crouch . . . he's just turned up ... he's in the forest... he's asking -"

"What is this rubbish?" said Snape, his black eyes glittering. "What are you talking about?"

"Mr. Crouch!" Harry shouted. "From the Ministry! He's ill or something - he's in the forest, he wants to see Dumbledore! Just give me the password up to -"

That is it. That is all the information Harry manages to get out before Snape interrupts him again.

I am certainly not saying that Snape is behaving nicely, or reasonably! -- clearly he isn't.

But I think it's much more a case of Snape realising far more than he's letting on than him not caring about Crouch. I think he would have relayed this information about Crouch being ill to Dumbledore as soon as he got the chance. That was his job, apart from anything else ... but I don't infer from this incident that he wouldn't have taken Harry's message seriously (and therefore not taken Crouch's plight seriously) -- despite appearances to the contrary.

And that for me is what Snape is very much about ... appearances to the contrary.

Personally I'm somewhat worried that this is on its tenth version- and the man is still a relative enigma in many ways.

But regardless, I ticked one option and one option only. Noone ever, ever expects the Snapish Inquisition. Fact.

:D

Personally I'm somewhat worried that this is on its tenth version- and the man is still a relative enigma in many ways.

I enjoy the enigma. :D :tu: :)

I enjoy the enigma. :D :tu: :)

I imagine we all do. We're still here! :D

As for the Crouch scenario- I do think Snape was being more than a little vindictive there, but I also imagine that he picked up more than he would be able to let on. He was also, however, quite determined to have Harry hate him, and boy did he ever excel in that way.

If readers choose to interpret Snape in a different way in this scene, I don't see how that means they don't care about Crouch or his well-being. :whistle:

Who knows, but a suggestion is to imagine that a beloved character was sick in the forest and how one might like a person with a modicum of authority like a professor to behave. You know, for Snape, if Lily hadn't died and it had been a 30 year old Lily sick in the dangerous forest, I doubt he'd stand there curling his lips and trying to assert his authority. :rolleyes:

Yes, that is how at first glance the scene comes across: that Snape is his usual horrible self and he doesn't care. But as ever, where Snape is involved, things are not always quite what they seem. (And sometimes they are.)
If we look at the conversation again:

"What are you doing here, Potter?"

"I need to see Professor Dumbledore!" said Harry, running back up the corridor and skidding to a standstill in front of Snape instead. "It's Mr. Crouch . . . he's just turned up ... he's in the forest... he's asking -"

"What is this rubbish?" said Snape, his black eyes glittering. "What are you talking about?"

"Mr. Crouch!" Harry shouted. "From the Ministry! He's ill or something - he's in the forest, he wants to see Dumbledore! Just give me the password up to -"

That is it. That is all the information Harry manages to get out before Snape interrupts him again.

I am certainly not saying that Snape is behaving nicely, or reasonably! -- clearly he isn't.

But I think it's much more a case of Snape realising far more than he's letting on than him not caring about Crouch. I think he would have relayed this information about Crouch being ill to Dumbledore as soon as he got the chance. That was his job, apart from anything else ... but I don't infer from this incident that he wouldn't have taken Harry's message seriously (and therefore not taken Crouch's plight seriously) -- despite appearances to the contrary.

And he couldn't just say that to Harry? Why not? And what of Crouch? He should wait sick and in the dangerous forest until Dumbledore is finished with whatever he is doing? I opine that unless Dumbledore was upstairs saving someone from the brink of death, someone in the forest whose life was in danger by his merely being there and sick besides would take priority. Further, Dumbledore did come down and see to the matter, so it would seem he agreed that whatever he was doing was not as important, imo.

And that for me is what Snape is very much about ... appearances to the contrary.

Well that works until he does something like try to stop Harry's fall. Was he actually trying to cause it to happen? Or is it only appearances to the contrary when he is doing something seemingly wrongful? In my view, there is no canon to suggest that Snape was behaving in a contrary manner at all times. To me, it is evident when he is supposed to be interpreted as behaving in a manner that is contrary to appearance. For example when he spoke with Bella and Narcissa at Spinner's End. One has to read that in terms of DH because it concerned his dual position as a spy. But here in the hallway with no one around but him and Harry, there is no reason he cannot tell Harry he will inform Dumbledore immediately or see to the matter himself. And there is no reason for inaction either, imo.

New thread and new poll :clap: I didn't vote (again), because the option 'he's a fascinating character and all of his actions and motivations can be interpreted in at least two ways' was missing :D.

About the scene from GoF: I always thought that like McGonagall in PS Snape felt that Harry was taking himself a bit too important. But there the parallel ends, McGonagall is, as usual, matter of factly gets the information and makes a decission.
The GoF scene is four years later, and Snape should know by then that Harry is not an attention seeking wannabe hero, who's puffing himself up. And McGonagall doesn't call Harry's concerns 'rubbish', she's at least polite. It's always hard to tell how much of the nastiness Harry meets is due to the Harry-filter, but I think Harry was right and Snape was thoroughly enjoying himself, denying Harry the thing he wanted when he was so panicky.

Reading through the other posts and rethinking made me see another possible explaination for Snapes behaviour though. I don't think Dumbledore in his office could hear what was going on in the corridor, no one heared Harry try to get in after his vision and it does not appear as though Dumbledore had heared what Harry had been shouting about, before he had opened the door. So why did he come down? It's possible that Snape realized that something important was wrong, maybe he heard Harry outside when he was walking down the stairs or the moment he opened the gargoyl door, and he alerted Dumbledore before he steped out.
Maybe Dumbledore had been doing something Snape did not want Harry to see, so Snape kept him busy, or Snape just wanted to keep up his camouflage or he just enjoyed the possibility to taunt Harry.


The main purpose of the scene was of course to give BartyMoody time and to make Snape look suspicious once again.

I, too, would say that Snape does care that there is a sick man in the forest, but he it's not as though he's going to necessarily believe every word that comes out of Harry's mouth. If Harry were the attention-seeking James clone Severus is determined to believe he is, Harry would likely be exaggerating.

Not only that, but Professor Snape has no idea what the situation is or, indeed, if he can be seen at the side of the sick man in question. What if another DE were close, as one was, in fact, soon after? What if Krum, who was nearby, turned out to be untrustworthy and reported to Karkaroff? Snape has to be very careful to look more and more like a loyal DE, especially now that his Mark is burning.

And, as many of us think, he was probably just keeping Harry there until Dumbledore came down anyway. If that were the case, then he was getting help for the sick man...in a sufficiently indirect way so as not to arouse Voldy's suspicion.

I don't see any evidence that Snape cared that Crouch was in danger, nor do I see any evidence that Snape was on some sort of cover-up mission. I just can't see how that fits into the plot. But like WWB pointed out, Snape says in DH that doing something to stop people dying is something he only recently started caring about, so I think that fits in with this scene. Crouch isn't anything to Snape, and Snape hates Harry, so he doesn't do the right thing and take immediate action to try to save Crouch.

I, too, would say that Snape does care that there is a sick man in the forest, but he it's not as though he's going to necessarily believe every word that comes out of Harry's mouth. If Harry were the attention-seeking James clone Severus is determined to believe he is, Harry would likely be exaggerating.

Not only that, but Professor Snape has no idea what the situation is or, indeed, if he can be seen at the side of the sick man in question. What if another DE were close, as one was, in fact, soon after? What if Krum, who was nearby, turned out to be untrustworthy and reported to Karkaroff? Snape has to be very careful to look more and more like a loyal DE, especially now that his Mark is burning.

And, as many of us think, he was probably just keeping Harry there until Dumbledore came down anyway. If that were the case, then he was getting help for the sick man...in a sufficiently indirect way so as not to arouse Voldy's suspicion.

I respect your views, but I think this begs the old question that I still don't have an answer for. Why would Snape, presumably posing as a goodsider to stay in Dumbledore's good graces - like any good Death Eater Spy would be expected to do - worry about appearing to be a goodsider to Death Eaters or anyone else?

I don't see any evidence that Snape cared that Crouch was in danger, nor do I see any evidence that Snape was on some sort of cover-up mission. I just can't see how that fits into the plot. But like WWB pointed out, Snape says in DH that doing something to stop people dying is something he only recently started caring about, so I think that fits in with this scene. Crouch isn't anything to Snape, and Snape hates Harry, so he doesn't do the right thing and take immediate action to try to save Crouch.

I agree. That is how I see it as well.

Do you interpret this scene differently after DH?

No.

What do you think was Snape's main motivation in this scene?

To keep Harry right there, until Dumbledore came down.

Do you think that Snape was really enjoying the situation, as Harry surmised?

No; but I also think Snape and Dumbledore were aware of something wrong.

Reading the whole scene, where Snape apparently kept Harry from Dumbledore, I see it this way. One like others have said, it was to keep Harry right where he was instead of rushing off to the staff room.

I think Snape was in a meeting with Dumbledore, when Dumbledore may have felt the wards of Hogwarts go off, right at the time when Barty Crouch Sr, entered Hogwarts through the Forest. He must have told Snape that he felt the wards were breeched so he needed to go and check them, ending the meeting, and Snape coming down first, seeing Harry speak about the very thing Dumbledore had ended the meeting for, kept Harry right there, until Dumbledore came dowm, which was almost immediately after Snape.

There was no question of Snape keeping Harry from Dumbledore or not caring about Barty Crouch Sr. I think it was because he knew Dumbledore was coming down and since Harry had information about why the wards were breeched, kept him there, until Dumbledore came down.

I, too, would say that Snape does care that there is a sick man in the forest, but he it's not as though he's going to necessarily believe every word that comes out of Harry's mouth. If Harry were the attention-seeking James clone Severus is determined to believe he is, Harry would likely be exaggerating.

And if the matter were a simple medical emergency, Harry would be more idiotic than usual for running to Albus instead of Poppy. :lol: Snape had good reason to think there was more going on.

Well, to be fair, Harry wasn't being idiotic for not going to Madam Pomfrey. He ran to Dumbledore because Crouch insisted he needed Dumbledore. Other than his incoherent rambling state Crouch didn't appear to be in any imminent danger. I don't see how Snape thought 'more was going on' because I always got the impression that he didn't believe Harry that [1] Crouch was really there and [2] that anything was really going on. "What's this rubbish?" And to be fair to Snape, it wasn't that he wasn't concerned for Crouch's welfare because he couldn't have known that Crouch was in any imminent danger either.

Well, to be fair, Harry wasn't being idiotic for not going to Madam Pomfrey.

I did not say he was. I was saying that IF it had been a matter of a simple medical emergency, it would have been illogical for Harry to do anything other than run to the infirmary.

I don't think Snape thought Harry was making something up with no basis at all. To me, he seemed interested in knowing what was going on, which would not be the case if he thought Harry was pulling his leg. But he might well have thought Harry was exaggerating.

I don't think Snape thought Harry was making something up with no basis at all. To me, he seemed interested in knowing what was going on, which would not be the case if he thought Harry was pulling his leg. But he might well have thought Harry was exaggerating.

I don't really understand how Harry could be exaggerating. He simply informed Snape that Crouch was sick or something in the forest. Snape knows the dangers of the forest and he understands what 'sick' is. Snape's response was "Dumbledore is busy". How does that show interest? To me, that shows that for Snape, the conversation was over. JKR gave us an example of the proper response in Dumbledore, imo. Upon hearing only a few words in explanation, he asked to be led to Crouch. JKR did many scenes in which someone showed the proper way to behave in the wake of Snape's behavior, imo, and this was another example of that.

There are a lot of suggestions made so far to help explain Snape's behavior, but in all of them we are left with a man suffering in the dangerous forest, and Snape doing nothing about it in the moment. Letting Dumbledore know down the line when it was convenient for Snape - or alerting Poppy at some future time (something he never indicated) or worrying about Voldemort or Kardikoff popping up in the forest (another worry he didn't voice) or already in the know about the situation (which the canon seems to negate altogether as Dumbledore didn't know until Harry told him) - well I would have to respectfully disagree with all of those suggestions although I feel they are very creative and of course, anything is possible as always. But based on the canon we have - and that which became known to us in later chapters and books - I feel that there was no excuse or justification for Snape's behavior because what actually did happen was that after finding out the problem, he did nothing at all except attempt to assert his authority with Harry and make the poor child squirm, imo.

I think it would be interesting to compare this interaction in GOF between Snape and Harry -outside DD's office to any other moment in the series where Harry ran up to someone shouting about something or someone in need. Rowling often likes to do repeat scenarios with different characters and I'll bet is someone looked- they could find a similar situation.

Also-again the issue of whether or not Snape "appeared" to "care" one way or the other about people is frankly just soooo moot IMO. I think it's a bit over reaching to suggest or even try to perceive what Snape cared about in re someone else- as many of his inner workings throughout the Novel were by necessity ambiguous and impenetrable. Tthe reason he is still being discussed here- is also a creative act: because Rowling built an ambigous nature into almost every aspect of this character.

One thing we know for sure - Voldemort - the man who can walk through a person's mind like the aisle and a grocery store- was coming back. Snape knew The DL was going to revisit each and every Death Eater to make them account for each and every indiscretion. Snape simple could not be SEEN by the BOY or anyone around the BOY to "care" about life or death of anyone. He simple had to appear be cold and antagonistic.

I think it would be interesting to compare this interaction in GOF between Snape and Harry -outside DD's office to any other moment in the series where Harry ran up to someone shouting about something or someone in need. Rowling often likes to do repeat scenarios with different characters and I'll bet is someone looked- they could find a similar situation.

Also-again the issue of whether or not Snape "appeared" to "care" one way or the other about people is frankly just soooo moot IMO. I think it's a bit over reaching to suggest or even try to perceive what Snape cared about in re someone else- as many of his inner workings throughout the Novel were by necessity ambiguous and impenetrable. Tthe reason he is still being discussed here- is also a creative act: because Rowling built an ambigous nature into almost every aspect of this character.

One thing we know for sure - Voldemort - the man who can walk through a person's mind like the aisle and a grocery store- was coming back. Snape knew The DL was going to revisit each and every Death Eater to make them account for each and every indiscretion. Snape simple could not be SEEN by the BOY or anyone around the BOY to "care" about life or death of anyone. He simple had to appear be cold and antagonistic.

Why? No one ever explains this idea. Snape was supposed to be pretending to be a goodsider - that is what Voldemort would want him to do in that situation so he would not be exposed as a Death Eater spy. I do not understand there being any need for Snape to pretend to be a Death Eater.

[B]

Reading the whole scene, where Snape apparently kept Harry from Dumbledore, I see it this way. One like others have said, it was to keep Harry right where he was instead of rushing off to the staff room.

I think Snape was in a meeting with Dumbledore, when Dumbledore may have felt the wards of Hogwarts go off, right at the time when Barty Crouch Sr, entered Hogwarts through the Forest. He must have told Snape that he felt the wards were breeched so he needed to go and check them, ending the meeting, and Snape coming down first, seeing Harry speak about the very thing Dumbledore had ended the meeting for, kept Harry right there, until Dumbledore came dowm, which was almost immediately after Snape.

There was no question of Snape keeping Harry from Dumbledore or not caring about Barty Crouch Sr. I think it was because he knew Dumbledore was coming down and since Harry had information about why the wards were breeched, kept him there, until Dumbledore came down.

The problem with this is, it is not canon. If it isn't on page, it did not happen. There is nothing about a meeting at this time between Dumbledore and Snape. We can surmise there was one but we could also surmise Snape had just been strolling along the corridor whistling a happy tune and one supposition is as good as the other. I feel we have to go with what is on page, Snape was being difficult and he was being nasty to Harry. We will never know for sure either way. It does serve to make Snape a lot of fun though.

Why? No one ever explains this idea. Snape was supposed to be pretending to be a goodsider - that is what Voldemort would want him to do in that situation so he would not be exposed as a Death Eater spy. I do not understand there being any need for Snape to pretend to be a Death Eater.

I find this puzzling as well. There is simply no reason for Snape to be so nastly. It is in many ways counter-productive to his purpose as a double-agent.

There is nothing about a meeting at this time between Dumbledore and Snape. We can surmise there was one but we could also surmise Snape had just been strolling along the corridor whistling a happy tune and one supposition is as good as the other.

I think we can assume there was a meeting between Snape and Dumbledore, as Snape is seen emerging from the gargoyle that conceals the stairs leading up to Dumbledore's office.

Snape had just emerged from the hidden staircase behind the stone gargoyle. The wall was sliding shut behind him even as he beckoned Harry back toward him.

The problem with this is, it is not canon. If it isn't on page, it did not happen. There is nothing about a meeting at this time between Dumbledore and Snape. We can surmise there was one but we could also surmise Snape had just been strolling along the corridor whistling a happy tune and one supposition is as good as the other. I feel we have to go with what is on page, Snape was being difficult and he was being nasty to Harry. We will never know for sure either way. It does serve to make Snape a lot of fun though.

TT has given the quote; Snape was coming out of the hidden staircase. It is not unreasonable, I presume, that as Headmaster, Dumbledore would know when and if someone entered the School. In POA Hermione says that there are enchantments of all sorts to prevent people from entering the School and I suppose if they do, Dumbledore as Headmaster would know about it.

"Because the castle is protected by more than walls, you know," said Hermione. There are all sorts of enchantments on it, to stop people entering by stealth...."

But Barty Crouch was able to enter. Barty Crouch met Harry and Co. near Hagrid's hut. That is also canon. Which means he met them inside the School and Dumbledore who was with Snape would have known that someone had entered the School.

I think that was reason the meeting ended and Snape came out just as Harry was about to take off to the staff room.

Snape asks a couple of questions, before Dumbledore comes down, which IMO would not have taken more than a minute.

"POTTER!"

Harry skidded to a halt and looked around. Snape had just emerged from the hidden staircase behind the stone gargoyle. The wall was sliding shut behind him even as he beckoned Harry back toward him.

"What are you doing here, Potter?"

"I need to see Professor Dumbledore!" said Harry, running back up the corridor and skidding to a standstill in front of Snape instead. "It's Mr. Crouch . . . he's just turned up ... he's in the forest... he's asking -"

"What is this rubbish?" said Snape, his black eyes glittering. "What are you talking about?"

"Mr. Crouch!" Harry shouted. "From the Ministry! He's ill or something - he's in the forest, he wants to see Dumbledore! Just give me the password up to -"

"The headmaster is busy, Potter," said Snape, his thin mouth curling into an unpleasant smile.

"I've got to tell Dumbledore!" Harry yelled.

"Didn't you hear me. Potter?"

Harry could tell Snape was thoroughly enjoying himself, denying Harry the thing he wanted when he was so panicky.

"Look," said Harry angrily, "Crouch isn't right - he's - he's out of his mind - he says he wants to warn -"

The stone wall behind Snape slid open. Dumbledore was standing there, wearing long green robes and a mildly curious expression. "Is there a problem?" he said, looking between Harry and Snape.

This was what happened before Dumbledore came out. The whole conversation IMO would not have taken more than a minute.

But in PoA the protection of the castle does not work, Sirius was able to enter the grounds undetected through the forest. IMO the fact that Harry met Crouch at the edge of the forest indicates that he entered via the forest too. The extra security Dumbledore added in HBP was not yet in place, and from PoA I got the impression that the forest was seen as a safe enough barrier.

In POA Sirius was able to enter the castle as an animagus. Not as Sirius, for Dumbledore would have warded Hogwarts against him and the dementors were there too IMO.

Here, Snape was in a meeting with Dumbledore, both Snape and Dumbledore come out around the same time Harry comes running, makes me feel that a few minutes before Harry came to the Headmaster's office, Dumbledore would have been alerted of an intruder crossing the wards. Dumbledore would have finished the meeting with Snape and sent him along, before coming down himself to meet Harry and go with him.

The conversation Snape has with Harry shows he is not surprised about the information Harry brought and nor was he alarmed. Snape knew Dumbledore was going to check and he simply kept Harry right there until Dumbledore came down IMO.

I think we can assume there was a meeting between Snape and Dumbledore, as Snape is seen emerging from the gargoyle that conceals the stairs leading up to Dumbledore's office.

Snape had just emerged from the hidden staircase behind the stone gargoyle. The wall was sliding shut behind him even as he beckoned Harry back toward him.

Okay, I will assume Snape was strolling along the corridor whistling his happy tune and came to the gargoyle and thought 'I'll just pop up and see Dumbledore.' He goes through the gargoyle has his foot on the first step and remembers that he has left the kettle on in the Potions classroom and turns around and comes out quickly when he sees Harry running hell for leather down the corridor and then speaks to him. That's the problem with assumptions, any scenario can be made to fit. IMO it's better to stick with what is on the page and what is on the page is Snape being nasty and difficult, just how I like him.

Okay, I will assume Snape was strolling along the corridor whistling his happy tune and came to the gargoyle and thought 'I'll just pop up and see Dumbledore.' He goes through the gargoyle has his foot on the first step and remembers that he has left the kettle on in the Potions classroom and turns around and comes out quickly when he sees Harry running hell for leather down the corridor and then speaks to him. That's the problem with assumptions, any scenario can be made to fit. IMO it's better to stick with what is on the page and what is on the page is Snape being nasty and difficult, just how I like him.

It doesn't really work this way. Fiction is not life, and anything mentioned in a book has some purpose. If Snape emerged from the staircase leading to Dumbledore's office, I think you will agree that the most logical (in the context of this being a work of fiction, and not real life where anything is possible) assumption would be that he had been in Dumbledore's office, where he was coming from.

I agree with Yoana and the word "emerged" makes me feel he came out of Dumbledore's office rather than anything else. If Snape was strolling and thought to pop in and see Dumbledore, the word emerged would not be used (of course I may be wrong; usage of words in the Englinsh language is not my strong point) but still if Snape had stepped inside the staircase and came out because he forgot something, I think "emerged" would not be used.

Snape was definitely completely inside the gargoyle, and had been for some time. Harry was in front of it before Snape even emerged, trying to guess the password. And as Snape's not the sort of person who pops by for a quick gossip session, I think it is most likely that what he and Dumbledore were discussing had at least some importance, whether it was academic or war-related.

It doesn't really work this way. Fiction is not life, and anything mentioned in a book has some purpose. If Snape emerged from the staircase leading to Dumbledore's office, I think you will agree that the most logical (in the context of this being a work of fiction, and not real life where anything is possible) assumption would be that he had been in Dumbledore's office, where he was coming from.

I agree, but I don't think that was the point. Snape had likely been talking with Dumbledore because he said the man was busy and came from his office. But what does that have to do with Snape's treatment of Harry?

I feel that is where Eliza's point becomes relevant because people are going on to try to justify Snape's behavior based on what went on in that office and they haven't a clue. I opine Dumbledore was up there balling Snape out for his behavior with one of the children - or it may have been the scene where Snape was going on about Harry being mediocre and Dumbledore was all but dissing him by reading the paper which left him in that foul mood. But my guess is as good as anyone else's.

I don't feel Dumbledore knew about Crouch - nor was he discussing it with Snape, or he would not have had to have Harry explain it to him, nor gone with Harry instead of Snape to the forest. Plus, I give Snape the benefit of the doubt because if Snape did know that Dumbledore already knew about it - then his words to Harry are even more bullying in nature, imo. That is because Snape could have simply said that Dumbledore knew about it and was planning to take care of it instead of standing there watching the child suffer and grow more panicky by the minute, imo. Although granted I give him no benefit when it comes to his evidently not caring about sick Crouch in the dangerous forest - so technically is stands as a rather backhand benefit because Snape comes out looking bad either way.

The staircase is not accessible unless one gives the password to the gargoyle. (Harry tried yelling at it instead, this did not work any better with the gargoyle than it did with Snape). The gargoyle then moves out of the way and the moving, spiral staircase up to the office appears. So for Snape to emerge from the staircase, he must have given the password and stepped onto the staircase, which would immediately have started to move him up to the office.

I think it is most likely he rode the staircase to the top, met with Albus, who was undeniably in his office, and was leaving when Harry came by.

Alternatively, he ran the wrong way down the stairs at the start of his visit, and emerged, something I can only see him doing in reaction to Harry's yelling. I would also imagine this would have provoked Albus's interest - someone coming up to his office via the magic staircase, and failing to show up. Snape was not merely hiding behind the statue, because that's not a matter of interpretation - it is stated that he emerged from the staircase, not "from behind the statue".

I agree, but I don't think that was the point. Snape had likely been talking with Dumbledore because he said the man was busy and came from his office. But what does that have to do with Snape's treatment of Harry?

I feel that is where Eliza's point becomes relevant because people are going on to try to justify Snape's behavior based on what went on in that office and they haven't a clue.

I haven't been a part of that discussion. I was only pointing out that assuming that Snape had just been with Dumbledore and assuming that Snape was passing by, stepped in and then immediately popped out again do not hold the same weight.

I haven't been a part of that discussion. I was only pointing out that assuming that Snape had just been with Dumbledore and assuming that Snape was passing by, stepped in and then immediately popped out again do not hold the same weight.

Ah, well I agree with you on that part and I stand corrected. ;)


Alternatively, he ran the wrong way down the stairs at the start of his visit, and emerged, something I can only see him doing in reaction to Harry's yelling. I would also imagine this would have provoked Albus's interest - someone coming up to his office via the magic staircase, and failing to show up. Snape was not merely hiding behind the statue, because that's not a matter of interpretation - it is stated that he emerged from the staircase, not "from behind the statue".

I don't think this occurred because otherwise Snape was lying by omission when he demanded Dumbledore was busy (rather than opine or suggest it was true because in his opinion Dumbledore was always busy or whatever.) I think he had been dismissed from the office because Dumbledore indicated he was on to something else - and I feel whatever their discussion had been about left Snape feeling vindictive (which is why I think he was balled out or in a conversation like that we saw in the memories when Dumbledore read the paper while Snape prattled on about Harry and his dad) and subsequently Snape took it out on Harry.

I think he had been dismissed from the office because Dumbledore indicated he was on to something else - and I feel whatever their discussion had been about left Snape feeling vindictive (which is why I think he was balled out or in a conversation like that we saw in the memories when Dumbledore read the paper while Snape prattled on about Harry and his dad) and subsequently Snape took it out on Harry.

I though Snape was always feeling vindictive when it came to Harry? :p

I though Snape was always feeling vindictive when it came to Harry? :p

I agree with that also. I have actually never given my opinion on what occurred in the office, but I did so only in light of Eliza's comment to show that my subsequent interpretation can be backed up by that office meeting as well as anyone else's interpretation.

That is why I felt the meeting was largely irrelevant. If it didn't leave Snape feeling vindictive, then he merely grew vindictive upon spotting Harry which is in line with his normal treatment of the child, imo.

I don't think Snape thought Harry was making something up with no basis at all. To me, he seemed interested in knowing what was going on, which would not be the case if he thought Harry was pulling his leg. But he might well have thought Harry was exaggerating.This, to me, makes no sense. If Snape believed Harry was telling the truth then he IMO should have sprang into action, especially knowing that a senior member of the Ministry, who'd been missing since March and hadn't been heard from since - he being the second one to go missing in a year BTW, was now suddenly making an appearance in May while raving like a loon in the Dark Forest.
TT has given the quote; Snape was coming out of the hidden staircase. It is not unreasonable, I presume, that as Headmaster, Dumbledore would know when and if someone entered the School.The Forest is not under the same protections. The map ends as the grounds end and forest begins, which means that it was a clue that Moody summoned the Map and still saw nothing - besides the fact that Moody has a magical eye that can see through solid objects like skulls, stone walls, and trees. Did Crouch ever step out of the Forest? Not that we see, that I'm aware. He remains in the forest talking to the Weaselby-tree. Hagrid's Hut and where Maxime coach was, and also the Whomping Willow are all on Hogwarts grounds.



In POA Sirius was able to enter the castle as an animagus. Not as Sirius, for Dumbledore would have warded Hogwarts against him and the dementors were there too IMO.Sirius got in through the witch's hump, but once there he was very much 'Sirius' and not 'Padfoot' evidenced by the Fat Lady attack and his giving the password to Cadogan and then entering the boys dormitory to kill Peter-the-rat. To get out via the witch's hump he had to speak the incantation, which means he was still in human form. The Halloween attack on the Fat Lady was followed by new measures being put in place and Flitwick can be seen to be teaching the castle doors to recognize a picture of Black. Sorry, while Black snuck onto the grounds as Padfoot, he still got into and out of the castle as Sirius and there did not appear to be any massive spells that Dumbledore used to identify those intrusions. But again, Crouch didn't officially enter the grounds, he remained just on the cusp of the Forest.

There is nothing about a meeting at this time between Dumbledore and Snape. We can surmise there was one but we could also surmise Snape had just been strolling along the corridorRight. It's not like the films. There's the stone gargoyle standing sentinel in front of a solid stone wall which conceals a moving spiral staircase leading to the Headmaster's office. Isn't that the only thing down that empty corridor, too?

So I don't see how Snape could have heard Harry through the stone wall that he's shown stepping out of or just wondered by, either.

Snape didn't really appear too angry when he came down the steps. In fact, he doesn't appear angry at all throughout the scene (unless you count Snape looking as ugly as the gargoyle, but that could just be a jab at the man, and not a description of his expression), which leads me to believe that the meeting itself did not anger him. Harry's yelling, however, could have, but apparently didn't. In fact, Snape seems somewhat amused.

I have to say, I think that Snape did genuinely want to help, and knew Dumbledore was coming down anyway. But on the other hand, Harry was so panicky, I think Snape was really just enjoying stalling him until Dumbledore came down because it provoked Harry and made the boy go even more crazy.

I feel that is where Eliza's point becomes relevant because people are going on to try to justify Snape's behavior based on what went on in that office and they haven't a clue. I opine Dumbledore was up there balling Snape out for his behavior with one of the children - or it may have been the scene where Snape was going on about Harry being mediocre and Dumbledore was all but dissing him by reading the paper which left him in that foul mood. But my guess is as good as anyone else's.


The speculation was started not to justify Snape's behavior, which does not require it. It was started because a poster on this thread wondered why Snape was in the office.

The scene with the paper has a known timeline which places it outside of GoF. Quirrell is still alive during that conversation. The conversation of "The Prince's Tale" that IS within the timeline of GoF (though it took place earlier, during the Yule Ball) is the one in which Severus announced his intention to return to Voldemort as a spy, mentioned Karkaroff's intention to flee, and Albus made the observation about Sorting too soon.

Incidentally, this scene with Harry and Snape that we are discussing, occurs very shortly after the scene in which Karkaroff comes to Potions class to discuss the Dark Mark with Snape, which produces a potential topic for discussion that we know the two of them have discussed in the past. Snape may, of course, have also taken the opportunity to grumble about Harry, who was eavesdropping in that Potions class. :)

I agree, zgirnius, there are times which appear in canon where Snape and Dumbledore have conversations within the Head's office and he could have been discussing anything with him. Additionally, not only is Snape a teacher at that school but he is also Dumbledore's spy and given that this was set a month prior to the final task they could have been, in some form, logistically planning things in that maze, the teachers who'd be patrolling it while the champions were in it, etc.

This, to me, makes no sense. If Snape believed Harry was telling the truth then he IMO should have sprang into action, especially knowing that a senior member of the Ministry, who'd been missing since March and hadn't been heard from since - he being the second one to go missing in a year BTW, was now suddenly making an appearance in May while raving like a loon in the Dark Forest.

We know that, having been with Harry in the Forest. Based on Harry's garbled account to Snape that included two incomplete statements even before Snape interrupted him, I am not convinced that Snape did. Also, what action should Snape have sprung into? What he actually did, was ask Harry for more information. This could definitely be because he was thinking of acting, but was not yet sure what action would be appropriate.

Personally, I see two reasonable courses of action once more is known about the circumstances - checking out Harry's story or taking it up to Albus. Snape was never going to do #2 just because Harry wanted it - he was going to have what HE considered a good reason. Jumping into #1 wihtout making sure #2 is called for would be a mistake, however.

I have to say, I think that Snape did genuinely want to help, and knew Dumbledore was coming down anyway. But on the other hand, Harry was so panicky, I think Snape was really just enjoying stalling him until Dumbledore came down because it provoked Harry and made the boy go even more crazy.

So you feel Snape was lying by and through his words, 'what is this nonsense?' - indicating he didn't know what Harry was talking about. And further lying when he said 'Dumbledore is busy' knowing the man was coming down for some reason? Although it is unlikely Dumbledore was coming down to deal with Crouch because he had to have Harry explain it to him, imo.

However, that would be in line with Snape's previous behavior because he lied by ommission and undisclosed opinion to Harry quite frequently in order to rile him up and take enjoyment from his distress, imo, so that could have been the case here. Although to be honest, I felt the canon indicated that Snape truly didn't know what Harry was on about in this instance and was simply taking enjoyment from riling him up once he found out because he'd not yet come to fully appreciate saving those he could unless he'd promised to do so.

We know that, having been with Harry in the Forest. Based on Harry's garbled account to Snape that included two incomplete statements even before Snape interrupted him, I am not convinced that Snape did. Also, what action should Snape have sprung into? What he actually did, was ask Harry for more information. This could definitely be because he was thinking of acting, but was not yet sure what action would be appropriate.Either he believed him or he did not. Harry's explanation - while garbled - was not so bad as to not understand or to disregard. It wasn't enough to get him to investigate? Sure it was. To send for Dumbledore or another teacher? Sure it was. To be worried for Harry's safety should Harry blow him off in frustration and return to the Forest? Sure it was.
Personally, I see two reasonable courses of action once more is known about the circumstances - checking out Harry's story or taking it up to Albus. Snape was never going to do #2 just because Harry wanted it - he was going to have what HE considered a good reason. Jumping into #1 wihtout making sure #2 is called for would be a mistake, however.Well, that's my point, though. If Snape believed Harry then Snape was not seeking more information and he was completely in the wrong, as a teacher and as Dumbledore's agent, for his complete inaction with the given situation.

IMO, Snape didn't believe Harry's garbled story that Crouch was in the forest and that's why I don't have such an issue with his inaction. Why act on something you've discounted?

Sirius got in through the witch's hump, but once there he was very much 'Sirius' and not 'Padfoot' evidenced by the Fat Lady attack and his giving the password to Cadogan and then entering the boys dormitory to kill Peter-the-rat. To get out via the witch's hump he had to speak the incantation, which means he was still in human form. The Halloween attack on the Fat Lady was followed by new measures being put in place and Flitwick can be seen to be teaching the castle doors to recognize a picture of Black. Sorry, while Black snuck onto the grounds as Padfoot, he still got into and out of the castle as Sirius and there did not appear to be any massive spells that Dumbledore used to identify those intrusions. But again, Crouch didn't officially enter the grounds, he remained just on the cusp of the Forest.

Yes; Sirius changed once he was inside Hogwarts; but he must have enetered the School as an animagus; the wards are usually placed on the School boundaries and if he would be recognised or found out that's where it would have been. Barty Crouch met with Harry and Victor Krum a little away from Hagrid's Hut, which I think was inside the School wards.

"Of course,' said Moody taking a swig from his flask. "Took a leaf out of your book, Potter. Summoned it from my office into the Forest. He wasn't anywhere on there."

"So he did Disappparate?" said Ron.

"You can't disapparate in the grounds, Ron!" said Hermione. "There are other ways he could have disappeared, aren't thre, Professor?"

"You'rer another one who might think about a career as an Auror," he told her, "Mind works the right way Granger!"

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

GOF - The Madness of Mr. Crouch

"Is there a problem?" he asked looking between Harry and snape.

"Professor!" Harry said, side-stepping Snape and before Snape could speak. "Mr. Crouch is herre - he's down in the Forest, he wants to speak to you!"

Harry expected Dumbledore to ask questions, but to his relief, Dumbledore did nothing of the sort. "Lead the way," he said promptly, and he swept off along the corridor behind Harry.... bold mine

I see it this way.

1. Crouch was inside the School and he must have crossed the wards, alerting Dumbledore, that someone had crossed into the School.

2. Harry comes running to tell Dumbeldore that Crouch wanted to see him and that he was waiting in the grounds.

3. Dumbledore comes down and agrees to go at once with Harry without asking any questions, until he and Harry set off and then it's to know what Harry knew.

4. So, I concluded, that Snape knew about the intruder from Dumbledore, and when Harry told him everything, he simply listened, not allowing him to go into the Head's office, because Dumbledore was coming down and Harry going up would waste more minutes.

Yes; Sirius changed once he was inside Hogwarts; but he must have enetered the School as an animagus; the wards are usually placed on the School boundaries and if he would be recognised or found out that's where it would have been. Barty Crouch met with Harry and Victor Krum a little away from Hagrid's Hut, which I think was inside the School wards.Actually, I think you're right, now that I think of it. I seem to recall the Imposter Moody using the map to watch Barty Sr enter the Hogwarts grounds. Yep, here's the quote:"For a week I waited for my father to arrive at Hogwarts. At last, one evening, the map showed my father entering the grounds."Which begs the questions, of IF the protections had sounded, then:

Why did Snape blow off Harry's concern?
Why didn't any of the other teachers at the school "know" someone had entered the grounds?
Why were none of them addressing this issue?
Why was Dumbledore just strolling out of his office like he was on his way to a tupperware party?
Actually, make that why would the Headmaster be doing the task of the professors?
Why didn't Snape go on ahead?
Why didn't Snape accompany the Headmaster?
Where was the backup?
Where was the concern for the safety of the the denizens of the castle and its grounds?

That seems like a horrible dereliction of duty to me and thus makes Snape's and every other Hogwarts teacher {excepting Binns} behavior and lack of action that much worse under scrutiny.

Why did Snape blow off Harry's concern?

Because Dumbledore had taken charge IMO.

Why didn't any of the other teachers at the school "know" someone had entered the grounds?

I think this could be because the wards would have been under Dumbledore's control as Headmaster and so, he would have known when someone entered the grounds. I don't think the other Professors would know the instant someone entered the grounds, because the wards may not have been under their control.

Why were none of them addressing this issue?

I think it was because none of them knew.

Why was Dumbledore just strolling out of his office like he was on his way to a tupperware party?

LOL! I think he came as quickly as he could.

Actually, make that why would the Headmaster be doing the task of the professors?

I don't understand. The Headmaster has the control of the wards, I presume, and not all the teachers; so only he would know if someone had broken through those wards IMO.

Why didn't Snape go on ahead?

It's the saame asnwer as above; I think it was because Dumbledore had taken charge.

Why didn't Snape accompany the Headmaster?

I think it was because Dumbledore did not wish it.

Where was the backup?

Dumbledore at that time had no reason to believe he or the School was under attack; he would have only known there was someone who entered the School; so he may have felt he need not have the backup; especially when Harry had come to call him, leaving Krum with that person right there.

I gotta disagree, The_Green_Woods.

I still do not believe that any alarms went off. I don't believe Dumbledore was coming down to address an intrusion. Frankly, protection of the castle and the grounds fall on the entire faculty, not just the Headmaster and if the Headmaster - who is often shown away from the castle/grounds itself - is to be believed as the only person who knows that someone's using a magical means of trespass onto the grounds....that's....well IMO, utterly useless, not to mention a completely ridiculous, form of protection. :lol: "Oops, the alarm's gone off and I'm in Gringotts. Oh well, someone is bound to notice something soon enough."

You know though, that in the Deathly Hallows we do see the teachers strengthening the protections and also fortifying new protections for the castle/grounds.

IF Snape had been aware of the magical intrusion, assuming an alarm went off and he was in Dumbledore's office when it did, upon learning from Harry that the intruder was the now deranged and long missing Ministry of Magic employee, Barty Crouch Senior, then Snape absolutely failed to address the issue. It doesn't matter if he thought or if he knew Dumbledore was on the way, he would still have failed to act considering the known dangers/concerns.

Bertha Jorkins went missing in Albania
Someone set off the Dark Mark at the World Quidditch Cup
Dumbledore's concern is such that he's gotten Mad Eye out of retirement
Someone snuck Harry's name into the Goblet of Fire, despite Dumbledore's protections, forcing him to compete in highly dangerous tasks
Barty Crouch Senior becomes ill and stops going to work; come March he is missing & no one sees hide nor hair of him since {until this incident}
Some unknown entity has penetrated Hogwarts defenses
The response to all of the above knowledge, if we're to believe Dumbledore already knew via an alarm, was a "let's tiptoe through the daisies as we slowly meander down the stairs as though we had not a care in the world" while "Snape stands around doing nothing", not even bothering to follow along as the Headmaster "walks Harry out the castle to confront the intruder"...? :huh:

I don't believe Dumbledore knew of an intruder or that Snape did either, until told so by Harry.

Well that works until he does something like try to stop Harry's fall. Was he actually trying to cause it to happen? Or is it only appearances to the contrary when he is doing something seemingly wrongful?
I'm not really sure what you are suggesting here - Are you suggesting that there is any doubt that Snape was trying to stop Harry from falling from his broom? I think that is a very clear case of "appearances to the contrary"

In my view, there is no canon to suggest that Snape was behaving in a contrary manner at all times.
I do not think that anyone was suggesting that Snapes behaviour was always contrary to appearances. How ever the way Snape is written and in light of the revelations from DH and because of the nature of his character, it is prudent to throroughly examine each scene he is in and not take everything on face value.

To me, it is evident when he is supposed to be interpreted as behaving in a manner that is contrary to appearance. Really?

For example when he spoke with Bella and Narcissa at Spinner's End. One has to read that in terms of DH because it concerned his dual position as a spy. But here in the hallway with no one around but him and Harry, there is no reason he cannot tell Harry he will inform Dumbledore immediately or see to the matter himself. And there is no reason for inaction either, imo.
But there is also no reason to assume that once Harry is out of the picture that Snape will not tell Dumbledore or do something about the situation himself.

Snape is a bully and a control freak. He enjoys having the power to deny Harry and seeing Harry panic and squirm. However that does not mean that he is not concerned about what Harry has told him and will do nothing. In fact I would say that it is very in character for Snape to belittle and dismiss Harry then scurry off to assist behind the scenes (e.g.In PoA Snape is horrible to Lupin, but he still brews the Wolfsbane potion for him every month.) We see this repeatedly with Snape. Just because he isn't nice does not mean that he doesn't get things done that require doing. Nor does it mean that he does not care. He is afterall the man who definitely does not where his heart on his sleeve, so one cannot expect his emotions to be obvious.

In a way his character is in contrast to Lockhart, who is handsome and nice and appears to be a hero, but in fact is a liar and a cheat and a complete coward.

In fact I would say that it is very in character for Snape to belittle and dismiss Harry then scurry off to assist behind the scenes (e.g.In PoA Snape is horrible to Lupin, but he still brews the Wolfsbane potion for him every month.) We see this repeatedly with Snape. Just because he isn't nice does not mean that he doesn't get things done that require doing. Nor does it mean that he does not care.

'I have no idea,' said Snape coldly. 'Potter, when 1 want nonsense shouted at me I shall give you a Babbling Beverage.'

Said on his way to verify that Sirius Black is safe at 12 GP. :lol:

In fact I would say that it is very in character for Snape to belittle and dismiss Harry then scurry off to assist behind the scenes.Yet in this instance, he did not. So what was his reasoning behind his inaction after he successfully delayed Harry?

In a way his character is in contrast to Lockhart, who is handsome and nice and appears to be a hero, but in fact is a liar and a cheat and a complete coward.Nice compare/contrast. :tu:

Yet in this instance, he did not. So what was his reasoning behind his inaction after he successfully delayed Harry?

None. He did not have time to scurry off, Albus showed up and took over instead.

I disagree he delayed Harry. His intervention got Harry to ALbus faster. If he had stayed out of it, Harry would have run off to the staff room, where Albus wasn't. This is what Harry was in the process of doing when Snape called him back.

Good heavens, four pages in and we're still all on the same scene in GoF. :lol:

In my view, there is no canon to suggest that Snape was behaving in a contrary manner at all times.

And I would like to point out that I never claimed any such thing. :cool:

I have no qualms about calling Snape's behaviour to Harry obnoxious. He has no call to needle the kid like this.

What I do dispute is the assumption that Snape had no interest in helping a stricken man. I don't think we can necessarily draw that conclusion. Especially with what we now know about Snape with hindsight.

Snape is a bully and a control freak. He enjoys having the power to deny Harry and seeing Harry panic and squirm. However that does not mean that he is not concerned about what Harry has told him and will do nothing. In fact I would say that it is very in character for Snape to belittle and dismiss Harry then scurry off to assist behind the scenes (e.g.In PoA Snape is horrible to Lupin, but he still brews the Wolfsbane potion for him every month.) We see this repeatedly with Snape. Just because he isn't nice does not mean that he doesn't get things done that require doing. Nor does it mean that he does not care. He is afterall the man who definitely does not where his heart on his sleeve, so one cannot expect his emotions to be obvious.

:agree:

In a way his character is in contrast to Lockhart, who is handsome and nice and appears to be a hero, but in fact is a liar and a cheat and a complete coward.

Oh, I thought that immediately of that contrast when I read CoS. :cool: Although it's obvious that Lockhart is vain and shallow from the get-go, we don't realise he has a really nasty side until the very end of the book. Snape never bothers to be nice to anyone :lol: or at least very few people (Albus, Minerva and Narcissa are among the very few exceptions!) but underneath he's working for the good.

I know who I prefer. :cool:

I'm not really sure what you are suggesting here - Are you suggesting that there is any doubt that Snape was trying to stop Harry from falling from his broom? I think that is a very clear case of "appearances to the contrary"

Nah, this was in answer to a statement by someone else which has since been corrected to my understanding. So just ignore it - 3 layers of misunderstanding. :lol:.

I do not think that anyone was suggesting that Snapes behaviour was always contrary to appearances. How ever the way Snape is written and in light of the revelations from DH and because of the nature of his character, it is prudent to throroughly examine each scene he is in and not take everything on face value.

I agree with some scenes, I just don't agree with the fundamental position that Snape had to behave in a contrary to appearances manner when he was alone with Harry - the Order members or the kids in general.

Really?

Yah. I've never had a problem with that.

But there is also no reason to assume that once Harry is out of the picture that Snape will not tell Dumbledore or do something about the situation himself.

Why do you feel Harry had to be out of the picture? He already knew all about it.

Snape is a bully and a control freak. He enjoys having the power to deny Harry and seeing Harry panic and squirm. However that does not mean that he is not concerned about what Harry has told him and will do nothing. In fact I would say that it is very in character for Snape to belittle and dismiss Harry then scurry off to assist behind the scenes (e.g.In PoA Snape is horrible to Lupin, but he still brews the Wolfsbane potion for him every month.)

I agree, but after that he declared he was going to have Lupin kissed, then disclosed his secret to his students in the same book. So if I note the totality of the circumstances, Snape's overall behavior was not assistive, imo. In light of DH, none of that changes, imo, however, there is added information. At some point what I feel we have is a change in Snape. I believe he recognized what his past action had rendered and he also came to feel that those innocents he could save he should - including those he dislikes. So he attempted to save Lupin.

I think the question comes doewn to: when did that change take place in Snape? I suppose all readers would have a differing idea about that. Some have suggested it was instant on the hill, others feel it took several years, others even longer and it has even been suggested that he was being untruthful and never changed. I am among the group that feels it took a while, as changing viewpoints and outlooks that relate to self-identity often do. So to me, in the GoF scene, it is possible Snape had not yet completed his transformation of thought yet. I feel that his first meeting with Voldemort in person may have acted as the trigger, securing his beliefs in that regard. But admittedly that is pure speculation.

We see this repeatedly with Snape. Just because he isn't nice does not mean that he doesn't get things done that require doing. Nor does it mean that he does not care. He is afterall the man who definitely does not where his heart on his sleeve, so one cannot expect his emotions to be obvious.

I feel that is true, but his response in this scene was inaction at the time Harry told him a man was sick in the dangerous forest and so that is what led me to believe that Snape had likely not quite completed his transformation yet.

In a way his character is in contrast to Lockhart, who is handsome and nice and appears to be a hero, but in fact is a liar and a cheat and a complete coward.

Snape was also a liar, and quite a good one, and too had his moments of cowardice, imo. But I don't think he was a cheat and I am not sure how Lockheart was either. Do you mean in selling the books? They were entertaining with nice pictures of him that people liked, so he was lying, but he gave them product for their money, so I don't feel that one could say that he cheated them. But like Snape, Lockheart was on the good side, so I don't really see all that much difference between them. They were both problematic characters on the good side, but simply faced distinct difficulties.

None. He did not have time to scurry off, Albus showed up and took over instead. And after that Snape did.....?

I disagree he delayed Harry. His intervention got Harry to ALbus faster. If he had stayed out of it, Harry would have run off to the staff room, where Albus wasn't. This is what Harry was in the process of doing when Snape called him back.:lol: He called him back, yeah...and then he delayed him, he got his answers and still would not allow Harry access. For whatever reason, and I personally believe it was because Dumbledore was doing something, but there is no denying that Snape didn't (and wasn't going) to send Harry up to Dumbledore. That is 'delaying'.

'I have no idea,' said Snape coldly. 'Potter, when 1 want nonsense shouted at me I shall give you a Babbling Beverage.'

Said on his way to verify that Sirius Black is safe at 12 GP. :lol:

"Wash out your mouth," said James coldly. "Scourgify!" Pink soap bubbles streamed from Snape's mouth at once...

He was giving Snape a babbling beverage of sorts at Hogwarts for swearing. :lol:

"Let me? Let me?" Lily's bright green eyes were slits.

Then Snape did truly begin to babble incoherently. :lol:

I think JKR was making the babbling idea a repetitive theme with Snape.


And after that Snape did.....?

:lol: He called him back, yeah...and then he delayed him, he got his answers and still would not allow Harry access. For whatever reason, and I personally believe it was because Dumbledore was doing something, but there is no denying that Snape didn't (and wasn't going) to send Harry up to Dumbledore. That is 'delaying'.

I don't think Snape believed Dumbledore was coming downstairs. There is no canon to indicate that was the case. I believe he came because of the conflict going on belowstairs.

I gotta disagree, The_Green_Woods.

I still do not believe that any alarms went off. I don't believe Dumbledore was coming down to address an intrusion. Frankly, protection of the castle and the grounds fall on the entire faculty, not just the Headmaster and if the Headmaster - who is often shown away from the castle/grounds itself - is to be believed as the only person who knows that someone's using a magical means of trespass onto the grounds....that's....well IMO, utterly useless, not to mention a completely ridiculous, form of protection. :lol: "Oops, the alarm's gone off and I'm in Gringotts. Oh well, someone is bound to notice something soon enough."

Protection of the castle fall on the entire faculty, but I think the wards surrounding the castle would be held by the Headmaster. While I don't have explicit cannon on this, I have a comparison of sorts. In PS/SS, Dumbledore was on his way to the MInistry, the night Quirrell went for the Stone, when "suddenly" he told Harry, "he felt he had to be back in the castle, specifically where the Stone was" (not the exact words); all the Professors had cast their protections and set their challenges, but McGonagall, did not even believe it or knew when her challenge had already been broken once by Quirrell and second by the Trio.

Neither did Sprout, Flitwick or Snape. But Dumbledore knew something was wrong, probably the moment Quirrell tried to get the Stone or walked into the room where the Stone was held. I think this was like that.

You know though, that in the Deathly Hallows we do see the teachers strengthening the protections and also fortifying new protections for the castle/grounds.

Same answer as above. Professors can cast strengthening charms and other spells, but I don't think all of them would be in a position to know when someone would come in IMO.

IF Snape had been aware of the magical intrusion, assuming an alarm went off and he was in Dumbledore's office when it did, upon learning from Harry that the intruder was the now deranged and long missing Ministry of Magic employee, Barty Crouch Senior, then Snape absolutely failed to address the issue. It doesn't matter if he thought or if he knew Dumbledore was on the way, he would still have failed to act considering the known dangers/concerns.

You would have been correct, had Dumbledore been busy with other things and had Dumbledore known it was Barty Crouch who had come into the School and if Dumbeldore had instructed Snape to go on first and take a look.

None of those things happened IMO. Snape was followed by Dumbledore within a minute and the way Snape was left standing, without asking any question and without an explanation by Dumbledore, makes me feel that Dumbledore had assumed charge and I really don't think anyone in the School could disobey Dumbledore, least of all Snape.

Bertha Jorkins went missing in Albania
Someone set off the Dark Mark at the World Quidditch Cup
Dumbledore's concern is such that he's gotten Mad Eye out of retirement
Someone snuck Harry's name into the Goblet of Fire, despite Dumbledore's protections, forcing him to compete in highly dangerous tasks
Barty Crouch Senior becomes ill and stops going to work; come March he is missing & no one sees hide nor hair of him since {until this incident}
Some unknown entity has penetrated Hogwarts defenses

That is why I think Dumbledore had those wards alerting him of any intruder in the first place IMO.

I don't believe Dumbledore knew of an intruder or that Snape did either, until told so by Harry.

"Professor!" Harry said, sidestepping Snape before Snape could speak, "Mr. Crouch is here - he's down in the forest, he wants to speak to you!"

Harry expected Dumbledore to ask questions, but to his relief, Dumbledore did nothing of the sort.

"Lead the way," he said promptly, and he swept off along the corridor behind Harry, leaving Snape standing next to the gargoyle and looking twice as ugly.bold mine

As I wrote before, the bolded words make me feel Dumbledore did know; perhaps he did not know who it was, but he must have known someone had copme into Hogwarts, just like he knew halfway through his journey to the Ministry (?) in PS/SS that he should have been back in Hogwarts IMO.

Good heavens, four pages in and we're still all on the same scene in GoF.

Oi, it's the first time any of my opening post scenes kicked off. :D

I agree, but after that he declared he was going to have Lupin kissed

See, this is why fandom is bad for you. It took me at least 20 seconds to understand the proper meaning of this line. :rotfl:

Okay, this was me being random...carry on. I'll iron my hands behind the scenes now.

Nah, this was in answer to a statement by someone else which has since been corrected to my understanding. So just ignore it - 3 layers of misunderstanding. :lol:.

Fine, no problem. :D

I agree with some scenes, I just don't agree with the fundamental position that Snape had to behave in a contrary to appearances manner when he was alone with Harry - the Order members or the kids in general.

Well, I don't agree with that either. :) I'm firmly in the camp that believes Snape's issues with Harry were genuine and personal, that he forever saw the boy through his own distorted 'James filter'. I absolutely don't believe, from what we are shown in the text, that his treatment of Harry was only for the benefit of watching Slytherins.

I also firmly believe that despite his personal dislike of the boy, he really was committed to protecting Harry from Voldemort and obeying Albus's orders.

That is the conundrum of Snape! :lol: :)

I think the question comes down to: when did that change take place in Snape? I suppose all readers would have a differing idea about that. Some have suggested it was instant on the hill, others feel it took several years, others even longer and it has even been suggested that he was being untruthful and never changed. I am among the group that feels it took a while, as changing viewpoints and outlooks that relate to self-identity often do. So to me, in the GoF scene, it is possible Snape had not yet completed his transformation of thought yet. I feel that his first meeting with Voldemort in person may have acted as the trigger, securing his beliefs in that regard. But admittedly that is pure speculation.

People are complicated. It is more likely that his transformation was gradual. (It is also imperfect, I would say, until the very moment of his death.) I don't see Severus as having a 'Saul of Damascus' sudden type conversion. I think it was Cathy_Weasley who said that the scene on the hill, where he comes to Albus in desperation to tell him that Lily and her family have been targeted for murder, acted as a catalyst, and I agree with that.

In terms of his actual character change, I would say that was long and difficult. Unwisely, he hangs onto his ancient grudge against James, which I guess was activated the moment he first set eyes on Harry. But I think his overall ethics did change, albeit slowly and painfully: he had more work to do on his Harry-issues, clearly. :shrug: He's a very damaged and bitter man. But we certainly see that he no longer believed in the ethnic cleansing of Muggleborns. And we see that he didn't find it pleasant having to watch innocent victims of Voldemort (like Charity Burbage) die.

I don't think he ever changed his belief that Slytherin was a superior House to Gryffindor. :whistle: :lol:

But like Snape, Lockheart was on the good side, so I don't really see all that much difference between them. They were both problematic characters on the good side, but simply faced distinct difficulties.

I see a considerable difference. Lockhart is proved to be a coward, whereas Snape is 'probably the bravest man that Harry ever knew'. :)

I'm not sure I would say Lockhart was on the good side either. Just because someone doesn't believe in racist genocide doesn't automatically make them a good person. :shrug:

I don't really believe Snape is that good a person either, I hasten to add :lol: certainly not for most of his life. He's certainly not a nice person. I just prefer him to Lockhart. :D Especially as he does more than Lockhart ever does in the fight against Voldemort, IMO: I refer of course to his dangerous job as double agent, which Harry himself fully acknowledges by the end of DH. :cool: :)

As I say, Snape is a conundrum, a puzzle ... and JKR's most memorable character, IMO.

Yah. I've never had a problem with that.
I find it very surprising that you have no problem interpreting Snapes scenes when he has been deliberately written to be ambiguous, is a double agent, and a master of occlumency. If ever there was a character whose motives were many and deeply layered it is Snape!

Why do you feel Harry had to be out of the picture? He already knew all about it.As I have explained - Snape isn't nice to Harry. He displays a very different side of his character to Harry than he does to say Dumbledore. When interacting with Harry he will belittle him and dismiss anything he has to say simply to put Harry down and satisfy his own sad little cravings. Having had his fix of Harry bashing he will then go away and do what is required of him.

I agree, but after that he declared he was going to have Lupin kissed, then disclosed his secret to his students in the same book.But he didn't actually have Lupin kissed did he. The facts are that again and again Snape issues pure venom from his mouth (threatening to have Black and Lupin kissed) then goes away and does the right thing (conjurs a stretcher for Black to carry him up to the castle which was actually treating an unconscious Black better than Black treated him when he was unconscious) (ETA Please please let's not get into the who was meaner to whom thing with Snape and Black. I do like Sirius as well and this comment meant as an illustration of Snape doing the right thing rather than being negative about Black)

Zgirnius also quotes an excellent example of Snape being dismissive of what Harry is saying and then acting on the information that he has been given.

IMO Snape should be judged by what he actually does and not what he says. The two things are very different as they are with Lockhart who says he has done all these wonderfully brave things but actually has only wiped a few memories.

I am reminded of the parable of the two sons - two sons are asked by their father to go and work in the vineyard, the first says "Yes I will" but doesn't go. The second says " No I won't", but changes his mind and goes. It is the second son that is doing his fathers will.


See, this is why fandom is bad for you. It took me at least 20 seconds to understand the proper meaning of this line. :rotfl:

Okay, this was me being random...carry on. I'll iron my hands behind the scenes now.

*snort* I nearly sprayed my keyboard with tea!

IMO Snape should be judged by what he actually does and not what he says. The two things are very different as they are with Lockhart who says he has done all these wonderfully brave things but actually has only wiped a few memories.

:agree:

Lockhart is a phoney, a fraud. Snape is not, in himself. He is genuine in his foolish and wrong desire to be a Death Eater in his teens, he is genuine when he comes to plead with Albus on the hill, he is genuine in his hatred of James and Sirius :whistle: and of poor Harry :( , he is genuine in his turning from Voldemort's side to working for Albus's. And so on.

I think he is pretty genuine in his belief that kids are dunderheads and that Slytherin is better than Gryffindor. :whistle: :lol:

Of course there's another conundrum: Snape, the Master Legilimens and Occlumens, is not always honest. He certainly wasn't always honest with Harry about his father. Whatever his own issues about his past, he had no right to bad-mouth James to Harry.

And as a double agent of course he had to be sneaky and devious and put up a clever facade for years. :whistle: I think we can say he did a superb job of this, given Voldemort's trust of him.

But I do think he is genuine. Genuine in his passions, certainly, as we see in his single-minded and singular love for Lily.

Of course there's another conundrum: Snape, the Master Legilimens and Occlumens, is not always honest. He certainly wasn't always honest with Harry about his father. Whatever his own issues about his past, he had no right to bad-mouth James to Harry.

:hmm: I'm not sure what you mean by "honest", because it seems to me he genuinely believes every word he says about James as well. He has no reason not to think these things, after all. Even on the off-chance that James did grow up, Snape never saw that side of him.

Now, obviously he shouldn't say those things to the guy's 13-year-old son, but there's no reason to believe Snape is deliberately lying to him


See, this is why fandom is bad for you. It took me at least 20 seconds to understand the proper meaning of this line. :rotfl:

:rotfl: Wow...

Now, obviously he shouldn't say those things to the guy's 13-year-old son, but there's no reason to believe Snape is deliberately lying to him

I also don't think Snape was lying about James to Harry. I think he did believe every thing of James, which he told Harry. Apart from lying to Voldemort, I really don't think Snape utters a falsehood in the Books. He is evasive ("For him? Expecto Patronum" before sending out the Patronus in DH - TPT; he is evasive and one can assume anything from those words), but I don't know if he id dishonest.

See, this is why fandom is bad for you. It took me at least 20 seconds to understand the proper meaning of this line. :rotfl:

Okay, this was me being random...carry on. I'll iron my hands behind the scenes now.

:lol: :lol:

:hmm: I'm not sure what you mean by "honest", because it seems to me he genuinely believes every word he says about James as well. He has no reason not to think these things, after all. Even on the off-chance that James did grow up, Snape never saw that side of him.

Now, obviously he shouldn't say those things to the guy's 13-year-old son, but there's no reason to believe Snape is deliberately lying to him.

Iggy, on further reflection I think you are perfectly right. :tu: There was nothing feigned or fake about Snape's feelings about James. That, after all, is the whole point!

I certainly don't see Snape as a deliberate liar ... and certainly he's nothing like Lockhart, IMO. (And I know who I think is the better man out of the two of them!)

I don't expect that all of Snape's actions would be on page for the reader. In fact the necessity of his job as a Spy relies on not being seen in action, much like the legend of a Gargoyle.

1) I doubt the scene was as long and drawn out as we seem to be reading it. This conversation between Harry/Snape took place in a matter of a minute or less. It took a less than a couple seconds for Albus and Harry to leave.

2) ONE Glimpse -perhaps- of Harry looking back at Snape as he left with Albus does not even constitute (IMO) an extended pause, let alone the idea that Snape was just standing around and twiddling his thumbs. I suggest that this sentence that described Snape as "standing there" was only for Rowling to compare him to the gargoyle and draw another "how ugly is he?" jab on Harry's part.

If Snape was standing there waiting for Albus and Harry to leave- it might very well be that Snape had just received orders from Albus to do something else at that moment. Any number of things could come to mind- just off the top of my head- perhaps after realizing what had happened on the ground- Snape knew he should go back up to the office and did not want Harry to hear the password or to see that Snape had it. Or perhaps he was prepared to search some other part of the castle- the point is that trying to read in to this description of Snape and Gargoyle as an indicator of Snape's greater personality flaws being inaction and uncaring or indifference- seems a bit far reaching to me.

The text that describes that moment does not allow for much beyond a brief glimpse and comparison to a gargoyle which, I also suggest, is a double layered metaphor. Snape is "ugly" but he is also in fixed in place- like a gargoyle- to protect and ward off evil. Rowling was merely trying to lay a hint down here. Snape=protector. Period.

Gargoyles in themselves are a fascinating subject. Many of the original gargoyles were based on Medusa, the goddess whose stare turned men to stone. Here some food for thought from Stephen King about the Medusa Gargoyle.

I am suggesting that the gargoyles....may continue to perform their original function: to drain away that which might cause rot and erosion. Their horrible, stony faces offer a unique catharsis; when we look upon them and shudder, we create the exact reversal of the Medusa myth; we are not flesh turned to stone, but flesh proving it is flesh still, if only by the bumps that cool flush of fear always produces. It is not too much to say that great art, no matter how primitive, constantly recreates the imagination, and keeps it from turning to stone....Look closely, because we see these ominous lares of the human psyche so seldom. They are there, these nightmares, but thy are in the sky. Look closely, because even when you don't see them...they are watching you."1 (source link (http://northstargallery.com/gargoyles/aboutgargoyles.htm))

I find it very surprising that you have no problem interpreting Snapes scenes when he has been deliberately written to be ambiguous, is a double agent, and a master of occlumency. If ever there was a character whose motives were many and deeply layered it is Snape!

Ah, we are talking about two different things I think. I was merely refering to when Snape is appearing contrary to his true character. For example, in the Spinner's End and Dark Lord Ascending chapters. Or when he is speaking to Draco and purposely trying to make him believe that he is loyal and in support of Voldemort. In all three of those examples, Snape is attempting to appear contrary to his true character relative to being on the good side.

As for knowing Snape's exact reasoning and motive for every single thing he does and says - well we don't know that about anyone for certain except Harry, imo. (And then only when he or JKR tells us). We don't know that even for Ron and Hermione - the co-stars of the series, for example, unless they tell Harry. But sometimes, JKR tells us.

There is also the fact that JKR left a number of plot holes relative to Snape, imo, so in those cases I try to just give her a break. For example, when he was out of line over the Marauder's map - in order to show the more correct way to handle the situation, she brought Lupin in and had him carry Harry away to deal with him apart from Snape. While the moral lesson was nice, she failed to explain why Snape, who was tremendously worried that Lupin was in league with Black and was especially worried that they had plans relative to the Marauder's Map for Harry - would allow Lupin to carry Harry off alone, unattended, with the map. But I have never brought this point up for discussion (and I am not doing so now :lol: - just giving an example) because while people can 'conjur' up lots of reasons for Snape's inaction on JKR's behalf here, the bottom line is that it is a point left unaddressed in the canon.

So I take all of those things into consideration.

As I have explained - Snape isn't nice to Harry. He displays a very different side of his character to Harry than he does to say Dumbledore. When interacting with Harry he will belittle him and dismiss anything he has to say simply to put Harry down and satisfy his own sad little cravings. Having had his fix of Harry bashing he will then go away and do what is required of him.

But he didn't actually have Lupin kissed did he. The facts are that again and again Snape issues pure venom from his mouth (threatening to have Black and Lupin kissed) then goes away and does the right thing (conjurs a stretcher for Black

Well I don't interpret scenes this way. For example, you skipped what to me was a phenomenally important part of the tale and so while I agree with what you have said (based on the canon you provided), I feel like perhaps those parts of the story that you and I consider important may differ. My interpretation is this: The fact per the canon, imo, is that Snape was not given the opportunity to go through with his threat. It wasn't that he chose not to have Lupin (and Sirius) kissed, it is that he was not allowed to do so.

In answer, no, Snape did not have Lupin kissed. Now that totally supports the point that "Snape was spewing venom, but then went away and did the right thing by placing Harry and Sirius on stretchers." But when I interpret this scene, I include these facts: Snape was spewing venom and threatening to have them kissed. Then he took a substantial step toward having them kissed. He bound Lupin from head to toe (including his mouth which is very significant to me because Lupin could not defend either himself or Sirius with reason). Then Snape grabbed the end of the ropes, held Sirius at wand point and basically said 'let's go' (I don't remember his exact words). It was then that JKR had all 3 of the children move to stop Snape by sending a spell that rendered him unconscious.

So what I take away from using more of the points in canon than you described is that Snape was in a state of mind known as the "heat of passion". In such a state, people will do things like kill others. The reason that courts allow this as a mitigation and lessen the severity of the charges, for example, is that it is felt that if the person had time to "cool down", they would not act impetuously, without reflection and loss of control and do things like kill for revenge.

So to me, Snape had a period when he was unconscious to "cool down", and when that happens, most people (who aren't Voldemort :lol:) will cool down and reconsider their behavior. That is what I feel happened with Snape and as such, he woke up, and at that point with a cool head, was able to do the right thing (carrying them back to the castle and allowing the Ministry to enact Justice - and we'll leave out the whole "without a trial" bit for now).

So when you say that "Snape spewed venom, but then did the right thing" - (and I may be misunderstanding you) I feel you are leaving out the part where Snape was in the heat of passion and not planning to do the right thing. However, even if you are including that part, my point is that Snape is the kind of character who gets into "the heat of passion" and does the wrong thing when he is. So here, he was not allowed to have anyone kissed, rather than spewing venom and then doing the right thing as you indicated - he was spewing venom, planning to go through with his threat and "forced" to do the right thing. Only after his head had cooled was Snape willing to reassess his behavior and do the right thing, imo.

JKR caused someone to intercede in those cases when Snape was going to carry his passionate feelings to an end that would be impossible to retract, imo. But in those cases where the end was less daunting, she allowed him to play through on his emotions, imo. This scene in the shack is a case where Snape would have gone too far, and the trio interceded. In the case where, for example, in the heat of passion Snape shoved Harry to the ground with all of his might in his office (the pensieve incident in OOTP) - he was allowed to carry through with his heat of passion act, because while wrongful in nature, he didn't kill Harry (which could not be retracted), but merely hurt him, which at least for some people, is a retractable act. Whereas killing an innocent Sirius and especially Lupin, would not have been retractable, and many while mitigating for "heat of passion", still hold the person completely guilty for the wrongful act - and here there would be no mitigation for many people because of the way Snape behaved (not listening after sneaking in under the invisibility cloak and taking his time before interceding).

to carry him up to the castle which was actually treating an unconscious Black better than Black treated him when he was unconscious)
(ETA Please please let's not get into the who was meaner to whom thing with Snape and Black. I do like Sirius as well and this comment meant as an illustration of Snape doing the right thing rather than being negative about Black)

:lol:. We agree in any case, I believe. I remain fair in my judgments in these situations, imo.

Zgirnius also quotes an excellent example of Snape being dismissive of what Harry is saying and then acting on the information that he has been given.

IMO Snape should be judged by what he actually does and not what he says. The two things are very different as they are with Lockhart who says he has done all these wonderfully brave things but actually has only wiped a few memories.

I am reminded of the parable of the two sons - two sons are asked by their father to go and work in the vineyard, the first says "Yes I will" but doesn't go. The second says " No I won't", but changes his mind and goes. It is the second son that is doing his fathers will.

Well I feel your parable is very on point. Neither son is worse than the other. Both sons lied. Without knowing the relevant value of working in the vineyard, they cannot be judged for either doing so or not doing so, imo, unless more information is given. Is following the father's will a good thing or a bad thing? Who knows. But what they can be judged on is the "lie" because in both cases it was wrongful.

This is what I was trying to say earlier - Snape and Lockheart both have problems associated with their character. I respect that people consider the merits of their wrongfulness distinctly, but I do not. I merely feel that they both had to work on different issues that caused them problems and problems for others.

For example, Lockheart never joined Voldemort and became a DE that we know of, Snape did. Snape never wrote a book purporting to be heroic when he was not, Lockheart did. Snape was not vain, but he was unattractive, so that opportunity was not available to him; Lockheart was vain, but he was attractive, so he had the opportunity to be. I could go on and on, but the bottom line is that these characters were different, their problems were different and I don't feel that drawing a comparison between them in general can be done validly (just my opinion). We can say they both lied at times or that they both behaved cowardly at times - but the circumstances were totally different and it is difficult to compare their lies or cowardice in light of that fact, imo.

:hmm: I'm not sure what you mean by "honest", because it seems to me he genuinely believes every word he says about James as well. He has no reason not to think these things, after all. Even on the off-chance that James did grow up, Snape never saw that side of him.

He did lie - directly in canon. In POA, Snape stated his opinion as fact (James was an attempted murderer who got cold feet) - this is "lying" because the speaker both understands that he is unsure of the truth, and that he is speaking as if what he is saying is true. It makes no difference whether or not the person believes their opinion themselves - it is what they feel the "listener" believes as a result of their statement that is important. That is called lying by omission and in law, you are as guilty as if you told a bold faced lie. In addition, he lied by omission because he attempted to make it appear that his enemies were totally guilty and that he was innocent by not disclosing the knowledge he had at the time. And ironically, Snape includes the statement 'I wouldn't want you to go away with the wrong impression of your father' - which is exactly what he gave to Harry in the form of his lie by opinion stated as fact and lying by omission.

For example, he also lied when he said that Harry and his dad had a "little bit of talent on the Quidditch pitch". Again, perhaps it was his opinion and that is fine, but he didn't say that it was, and he further went on to draw conclusions based on his opinion that were untrue. In that case, Harry knew he was lying, so a determination of whether Snape was lying or merely blathering would depend on whether or not Snape knew that Harry knew he was lying - something canon does not tell us. But the initial opinion stated as fact is a lie, there is no way around that characterization of "lie".

This is like if after POA, Harry went home and told Pentunia that "Snape is an evil Death Eater". Petunia doesn't know any relevant facts one way or the other and Harry knows it. Because he doesn't tell her it is merely his opinion (which he firmly believes in his little mind), he is lying to her because he knows that he has stated his opinion in a way that it would lead Petunia to believe he was speaking in fact based on knowledge she doesn't have. Petunia, thus is left to believe the lie that Snape is a Death Eater, when he is in fact, not.

Snape lied when he told Hermione he saw no difference between her teeth when they were spellbound as compared to normal (even if he meant he saw no difference between her damage and Goyle's). In that case, for example, one could say that was his true opinion, but they would have to agree also that something was fundamentally wrong with Snape if he couldn't see a distinction between Hermione's normal teeth and those that reached her shoulders - or that that particular damage was no worse than what had occurred to Goyle.

So I feel Snape quite often told lies in the form of direct lies, half truths, lies by omission, stating his opinion as fact when he was aware that his "listener" did not know the facts, and so on. Snape's personal beliefs do not save him from lying in these instances - based on what characterizes a lie.

Protection of the castle fall on the entire faculty, but I think the wards surrounding the castle would be held by the Headmaster.Did all of the protections stop functioning upon the death of each Headmaster, because from what we've seen there have been a lot of Head's who passed away while still at Hogwarts. Did their protections die with them? If not, how did people cancel them out? Who got the chore of putting up all of the new protections and what happened when that person died? This doesn't even begin to include the "extra" fortifications that the Ministry itself placed on the school.

What about when Dumbledore died? Yes he removed some, but surely not all, of his protections. What about Snape, when he died without giving official resignation? What happened to his enchantments/protections? Well, we see him fly away {so at this point he's still alive} and then the Professors promptly get to work setting up and "re-enforcing" protections.

So I'm sorry, but I disagree that the Headmaster and only the Headmaster holds the info about the wards and again point out the sheer, utter uselessness of a single individual receiving notification of a breach - especially if that person isn't even at Hogwarts where the students remain as potential targets.

I don't believe and there's no canon to support, that an alert had been given to Dumbledore while Snape was inside his office.
Neither did Sprout, Flitwick or Snape. But Dumbledore knew something was wrong, probably the moment Quirrell tried to get the Stone or walked into the room where the Stone was held. I think this was like that. The problem with this is that Dumbledore was gone for hours {left during the afternoon} and Quirrell had been through the challenges and into that room before Harry, who didn't start the challenges until well after dark...yet we know it didn't take Dumbledore the blink of an eye to return to the school and save Harry, because he tells us he was halfway to where he was going when he decided to return. So IMO, logistically, the coming back at an alarm is incongruous with the timeline of events as we saw them unfold.

This also, to me, reinforces the idea that it makes no sense for a single person to be alerted, especially if that person is away from the castle...when the faculty are there in total ignorance of intruders and should address that situation promptly.
Professors can cast strengthening charms and other spells, but I don't think all of them would be in a position to know when someone would come in IMO.As my response remains the same: It is utterly useless protection - therefore no protection at all - if only one person knows when the magical barriers have been breached. IMO knowing how conscious Dumbledore was regarding safety for Harry while at school, not something he'd overlook. We should probably simply agree to disagree on this point. :lol:

You would have been correct, had Dumbledore been busy with other things and had Dumbledore known it was Barty Crouch who had come into the School and if Dumbeldore had instructed Snape to go on first and take a look.

None of those things happened IMO. We're each expressing opinion, The_Green_Woods based on little to no canon, because neither of us know what occurred in Dumbledore's office. I do not see how one speculative opinion makes another speculative opinion incorrect. I just don't want anyone to think that my opinion must be 'correct' over anyone else's because we certainly all have valid ideas and varying viewpoints. :cool: Snape was followed by Dumbledore within a minute and the way Snape was left standing, without asking any question and without an explanation by Dumbledore, makes me feel that Dumbledore had assumed charge and I really don't think anyone in the School could disobey Dumbledore, least of all Snape.Dumbledore could just as easily have been alerted by Fawkes that Snape/Harry were having a discussion at the entrance to the staircase. This allows Dumbledore to come and address the situation without knowledge of an intruder and without Snape's being aware that Dumbledore is on his way. Remember too, that Harry sidestepped Snape before he could stop him, which implies that Snape would have tried to prevent Harry relaying his message of "Crouch was in the forest" which really doesn't jibe if we're to believe Sev knew Dumbledore was coming down the stairs to investigate an intruder.

As for faculty disobeying Dumbledore...:err: Hagrid got drunk and spilled the secret about Fluffy; Hagrid grabbed Karkaroff and shook him like a dog thereby initially disobeying Dumbledore regards to letting Igor go; Lockhart disobeyed established rules/protocol to let the students walk the corridors alone rather than escort them to their next class; McGonagall disobeyed established rules/protocol and allowed Ron and Harry to sneak in and see petrified Hermione; the Dementors {sorry I know they're not faculty but they were part of security} disobeyed Dumbledore and came into the grounds; and Snape disobeyed Dumbledore when he was specifically told to teach Harry Occlumency. Now, it's given that Harry put his nose where it didn't belong and he was entirely in the wrong for doing so. I'm not trying to minimize his actions. However, Snape knew the importance of the lessons and refused to continue them anyway. That's a whole lot of disobeying Dumbledore, IMO.

Plus, Dumbledore even goes so far to tell a lowly house-elf that unquestioning loyalty and service is not necessary and that he could call Dumbledore a "barmy old codger if he wanted to". People are people, er...except when they're house-elves and Dementors. :lol: Despite employment, they're still gonna mess up, do it wrong, bend/break the rules, go against the establishment...on occasion.

See, this is why fandom is bad for you. It took me at least 20 seconds to understand the proper meaning of this line.

Okay, this was me being random...carry on. I'll iron my hands behind the scenes now. Woohoo! :whistle:

(...)and Snape disobeyed Dumbledore when he was specifically told to teach Harry Occlumency.

This is a whole other can of worms to be opened. I disagree with the sentiment implied here. Snape was ordered to give Harry Occlumency lessons. He did. Thus he did not disobey Dumbledore anymore that Harry disobeyed Dumbledore in not learning how to do it.

Snape was not vain, but he was unattractive, so that opportunity was not available to him; Lockheart was vain, but he was attractive, so he had the opportunity to be

Says you. No, I'm not talking MovieSnape here. The sense of "attractive" is a subjective opinion contingent upon social and cultural values. "Vanity" however, is a character behavior. Someone who is "unnattractive" in one sense to many people might still be vain and Vanity does not rely on cultural standards of beauty.

Snape was ordered to give Harry Occlumency lessons. He did.

I agree. And even if he told Harry to get lost that day, I believe that if Dumbledore wanted the lessons resumed, Snape and Harry would have had no choice but to agree and fall in line. Dumbledore was not a person one could refuse to obey IMO.

Says you. No, I'm not talking MovieSnape here. The sense of "attractive" is a subjective opinion contingent upon social and cultural values. "Vanity" however, is a character behavior. Someone who is "unnattractive" in one sense to many people might still be vain and Vanity does not rely on cultural standards of beauty.

I meant vain only in terms of his feeling that he was better looking than most men and flaunting that fact by and through his actions. I don't feel that Snape felt that way or did that, but if you do, I respect your opinion. I feel Lockheart did feel that way and do that - and again, if you disagree, I respect your view.

I also agree with you in terms of vanity per se. I do feel Snape was vain; just not on account of his of his looks.

This is a whole other can of worms to be opened. I disagree with the sentiment implied here. Snape was ordered to give Harry Occlumency lessons. He did. Thus he did not disobey Dumbledore anymore that Harry disobeyed Dumbledore in not learning how to do it.

First, I don't think "disobey" works, because it is my understanding that Dumbledore asked Snape to do it - rather than it having been some kind of command. However, Snape broke his promise to Dumbledore - which could be construed as disobeying Dumbledore, in light of the storyline, imo, but distinct from the common understanding of the word 'disobey' in my opinion.

By giving 1 second of 1 lesson Snape could facially claim to be obeying Dumbledore's request and keeping his promise, but reasonably, it could not be construed as Snape obeying or keeping his promise relative to the "spirit" of Dumbledore's request. That is what I feel is important. By stopping the lessons before achieving the important goal, Snape both broke his promise to Dumbledore and disobeyed an assignment by the head of the Order (Dumbles also) which could be construed as disobeying.

I feel Harry too disobeyed in the same sense, not Dumbledore, but Sirius, Lupin, who had stressed the importance of occlucmency lessons. Harry had indicated he would attempt to do the lessons in a serious fashion and he did not.

This is a whole other can of worms to be opened. I disagree with the sentiment implied here. Snape was ordered to give Harry Occlumency lessons. He did. Thus he did not disobey Dumbledore anymore that Harry disobeyed Dumbledore in not learning how to do it.Right, but the discussion wasn't Harry disobeying, it was whether faculty ever countermanded or disobeyed Dumbledore. We know that Harry disobeyed. IMO, we know that Snape disobeyed.

"I suppose because it is a headmaster's privilege to delegate less enjoyable tasks...I assure you I did not beg for the job." ~ "Listen to me, Harry," he said urgently, "you must study Occlumency as hard as you can, do you understand me?" ~ "In an attempt to arm you against Voldemort's mind, I arranged Occlumency lessons with Professor Snape." ~ "It became a matter of even greater urgency that you should master Occlumency."

These quotes, to me, signify that Snape was told by Dumbledore to "teach Harry" Occlumency and that it was of great importance that Harry "master" this particular magic. We know that Harry never really tried, we know also that Snape continued to taunt and harass Harry in those lessons and then tell him to clear his mind and master his anger. We know from Jo that Harry would never have been able to compartmentalize his emotions which is one of the reasons why he sucked at Occlumency. We know that Snape, after finding Harry went Pensieve diving and trespassing through Snape's private thoughts with utter disregard to Snape's feelings in the matter, stopped providing those private lessons even knowing how very important they were. That is Snape refusing to teach and thus "disobeying" what Dumbledore had told him to do in order to keep Harry safe.

I feel Harry too disobeyed in the same sense, not Dumbledore, but Sirius, Lupin, who had stressed the importance of occlucmency lessons. Harry had indicated he would attempt to do the lessons in a serious fashion and he did not.I completely agree. He didn't like the thought of the lessons with Snape, he didn't practice, we don't know that he even followed Lupin's order to ask Snape to resume lessons. Harry certainly bears half the burden in this mess.

I agree. And even if he told Harry to get lost that day, I believe that if Dumbledore wanted the lessons resumed, Snape and Harry would have had no choice but to agree and fall in line. Dumbledore was not a person one could refuse to obey IMO.I'm sorry, but I gotta laugh here. It's Voldemort who demanded unswerving loyalty/service, not Dumbledore. People loyal to Dumbledore, whether Hogwarts faculty or the Order or even Harry, have been shown time and again doing opposite of what they've been told to do by Dumbledore.

Right, but the discussion wasn't Harry disobeying, it was whether faculty ever countermanded or disobeyed Dumbledore. We know that Harry disobeyed. IMO, we know that Snape disobeyed.

"I suppose because it is a headmaster's privilege to delegate less enjoyable tasks...I assure you I did not beg for the job." ~ "Listen to me, Harry," he said urgently, "you must study Occlumency as hard as you can, do you understand me?" ~ "In an attempt to arm you against Voldemort's mind, I arranged Occlumency lessons with Professor Snape." ~ "It became a matter of even greater urgency that you should master Occlumency."

These quotes, to me, signify that Snape was told by Dumbledore to "teach Harry" Occlumency and that it was of great importance that Harry "master" this particular magic. We know that Harry never really tried, we know also that Snape continued to taunt and harass Harry in those lessons and then tell him to clear his mind and master his anger. We know from Jo that Harry would never have been able to compartmentalize his emotions which is one of the reasons why he sucked at Occlumency. We know that Snape, after finding Harry went Pensieve diving and trespassing through Snape's private thoughts with utter disregard to Snape's feelings in the matter, stopped providing those private lessons even knowing how very important they were. That is Snape refusing to teach and thus "disobeying" what Dumbledore had told him to do in order to keep Harry safe.

Good point and let's not forget that in DH Harry practiced "Harry-o-mancy" against Voldemort and prevented him from breaking into his mind, while practicing "Legili-0-Harry" and breaking into Voldemort's mind. So he came up with his own versions of occlumency and legilimens, and in the end didn't need Snape or Dumbledore's assistance.

That of course does not exonerate Harry for not trying in Occlucmency or Snape for stopping the lessons. However, it brings up another point relative to Snape's abilityto teach and his narrow viewpoint in general that prevents him from being a good professor. He is very single minded which is interesting when one considers he saw nothing wrong in figuring out different ways to perform potions tasks that worked out better for him. You would think that Snape would understand from his own experience that everyone learns in different ways that work best for them. When Harry was struggling so much, it was easy to put it down to his not practicing and not desiring to do so - but an introspective professor may have tried a different method - and worked with Harry to develop the method he ended up using.

Snape had that problem in all of his teaching, imo, for example with Neville and Hermione. However, I think the problem was only in part that he wasn't a natural born professor. The other part I think concerned his character itself and his wont to misbehave as a professor - I feel that he had times allowed that to cloud his ability because I think if he really wanted to, he could have learned to be a better professor, but he would have had to drop off a lot of the baggage he carried around in order to achieve that goal, imo.

when he was out of line over the Marauder's map - in order to show the more correct way to handle the situation, she brought Lupin in and had him carry Harry away to deal with him apart from Snape.
I completely disagree with the assumption that Jo Rowling is showing the correct way to deal with a situation. She has written a fiction not a moral hand book! :)

I am not going to argue about whether or not Snape would have had Lupin kissed or not. As far as I am concerned he had ample opportunity when he came around to do what ever he liked to Sriius Black who was unconscious, but not only did he refrain from harming Black (there wasn't even a surreptitious kick :evil: ) he treated him with kindness and respect. That is an absolute fact that is written in black and white in the text of the books and is not open to interpretation. This is something that Snape actually did and I will base my judgement of his character on what he actually did.

There is IMO a very good reason that Jo frequently has third parties interupt Snape's " heat of the moment " scenes and that is to keep the reader guessing. Often it doesn't matter what the interuption is as long as there is an interuption, so we don't see Snape back down. This is vital to maintain the ambiguity of his character throughout the series.

Well I feel your parable is very on point. Neither son is worse than the other. Both sons lied. Without knowing the relevant value of working in the vineyard, they cannot be judged for either doing so or not doing so, imo, unless more information is given. Is following the father's will a good thing or a bad thing? Who knows. But what they can be judged on is the "lie" because in both cases it was wrongful.It is not my parable. It is Jesus Christ's parable from the New Testament. And Jesus made it quite clear that it was the son who did the will of the father who was in the right. Whether you agree with this or not is neither here nor there. Jo is a Christian and her Christian views quite obviously heavily influence her writing and therefore Christian doctrine should be considered when discussing her characters and particularly when discussing the morality of her characters. Failure to understand basic Christian doctrine could well lead to seriously misunderstanding key scenes in the series.

As for Snape lying - I disagree that he lied regarding James. As far as he was concerned he told the truth. It seems that Dumbledore, unlike these forums, did not require his staff to add "In My Opinion" to every statement they utter, but that didn't make it any less his opinion.
"Vanity" however, is a character behavior. Someone who is "unnattractive" in one sense to many people might still be vain and Vanity does not rely on cultural standards of beauty.
:agree: Well said!! :tu:

Ahem, could you all please tone it down a bit? It's not actually a death match.

I am not going to argue about whether or not Snape would have had Lupin kissed or not. As far as I am concerned he had ample opportunity when he came around to do what ever he liked to Sriius Black who was unconscious, but not only did he refrain from harming Black (there wasn't even a surreptitious kick) he treated him with kindness and respect. That is an absolute fact that is written in black and white in the text of the books and is not open to interpretation. This is something that Snape actually did and I will base my judgement of his character on what he actually did.

I think that is a respectable way to look at it, but the scenes I include in my interpretation are in the canon also. That is why I suggested that we might consider differing scenes when making a determination about Snape's character. You consider the scene above, but I consider the scenes that came before as well. I would have to respectfully disagree that the scene is not open to interpretation; I feel all scenes are. I don't discount what occured in the shack; I feel Snape, in the heat of passion, had every intent of carrying through with his stated objective. Because canon only advises that Snape loaded Sirius and Harry onto stretchers and carried them toward the castle, I am not in agreement that we know he was kind and respectful throughout the journey. If I had to guess, I would assume he was not, but admittedly I feel that is something each reader has to determine themselves as the canon does not detail that journey for us or tell us what occurred when he arrived, imo. :)

Ther is a reason that Jo frequently has third parties interupt Snape's " heat of the moment " scenes and that is to keep the reader guessing. Often it doesn't matter what the interuption is as long as there is an interuption so we don't see Snape back down. This is vital to maintain the ambiguity of his character throughout the series.

I agree, however, it doesn't mean that Snape didn't actually do what canon stated that he did do. I agree each reader has to determine for themselves whether they feel Snape would carry out his stated or partially acted upon intent. That is why I feel our selection of scenes is important to our characterization. If we give differing value to those scenes, our interpretations can vary. I happen to feel that Snape had every intention of having Black and Lupin kissed, however, I respect the views of those who don't.

It is not my parable. It is Jesus Christ's parable from the New Testament. And Jesus made it quite clear that it was the son who did the will of the father who was in the right. Whether you agree with this or not is neither here nor there. Jo is a Christian and her Christian views quite obviously heavily influence her writing and therefore Christian doctrine should be considered when discussing her characters and particularly when discussing the morality of her characters. Failure to understand basic Christian doctrine could well lead to seriously misunderstanding key scenes in the series.

Well I would respectfully disagree. I feel if it were that necessary to understanding the books JKR would have ensured copies of the bible were included with them. However, I respect your view on that. I am afraid I am not qualified to speak of the these scenes in terms of biblical text, however, so I cannot respond to your contentions in that regard.

As for Snape lying - I disagree that he lied regarding James. As far as he was concerned he told the truth. It seems that Dumbledore, unlike these forums, did not require his staff to add "In My Opinion" to every statement they utter, but that didn't make it any less his opinion.

:agree: Well said!! :tu:

Again, I respect your view, but my conclusions had nothing to do with what Dumbledore might require. I was basing my conclusions on Snape's words which were untrue and he knew they very well might be but did not disclose that fact to his listener - knowing they would have no idea what the truth was. That is lying via omission (see Black's Legal Dictionary (http://www.specialist-online-dictionary.com/legal-dictionary.html)). I didn't make it up. :lol:. However, we can agree to disagree on this.

I think that is a respectable way to look at it, but the scenes I include in my interpretation are in the canon also. That is why I suggested that we might consider differing scenes when making a determination about Snape's character. You consider the scene above, but I consider the scenes that came before as well.
But the point remains that saying you are going to do something and actually doing it are two completely different things. I will not give equal weight to Severus threatening to have Lupin kissed as I will to Snape putting the unconscious body of Black onto a stretcher because the former is merely words whereas the latter is action. We can never really know whether or not he would have had Lupin kissed, but we can know that he treated the unconscious Black with respect.

I feel if it were that necessary to understanding the books JKR would have ensured copies of the bible were included with them. However, I respect your view on that. I am afraid I am not qualified to speak of the these scenes in terms of biblical text, however, so I cannot respond to your contentions in that regard.
I think you have misunderstood me. Of course we do not need to know the Bible or the intricacies of Christian doctrine to be able to read and understand the Harry Potter series. However if we are to comment on the morality of characters presented in the books then knowing the authors personal beliefs will give a clearer picture of her intent in this regard.

And as Severus Snape did not make his statements to Harry in a court of Law I would suggest that the legal definition of lying would be inappropriate. Snape is not on trial.

But the point remains that saying you are going to do something and actually doing it are two completely different things. I will not give equal weight to Severus threatening to have Lupin kissed as I will to Snape putting the unconscious body of Black onto a stretcher because the former is merely words whereas the latter is action. We can never really know whether or not he would have had Lupin kissed, but we can know that he treated the unconscious Black with respect.

I respect your view in that regard. I give weight to what occurred in the shack because Snape was stopped by the trio from carrying out his intent rather than stopping of his own accord. I also feel that his head had cooled by the time he woke up, and the dementors were back at their posts. All of these factors I feel are relevant to my interpretation. I feel Snape saw that if he took Sirius to the castle, his desire for him to be kissed could more easily be fulfilled than him having to try and tangle with dementors and protect himself and Harry from them at the same time (we are not certain he could even do this). With a cool head, I think he was able to consider all of these factors. However, we can agree to disagree on this.

I think you have misunderstood me. Of course we do not need to know the Bible or the intricacies of Christian doctrine to be able to read and understand the Harry Potter series. However if we are to comment on the morality of characters presented in the books then knowing the authors personal beliefs will give a clearer picture of her intent in this regard.

Ah, I understand. Well I was just giving my opinion - I agree JKR might see it distinctly. :)

And as Severus Snape did not make his statements to Harry in a court of Law I would suggest that the legal definition of lying would be inappropriate. Snape is not on trial.

Well again, I am merely basing my interpretation on my knowledge and beliefs and I was providing a basis for that. However, it does not mean I feel anyone has to agree with me. :lol:. To the contrary, I respect the fact that some people may not consider that lying, it is just that I do. Essentially, I didn't want anyone to think I was making up forms of lying in order to condemn Snape - I don't believe that would be fair play.

I am curious, was it ever mentioned about how Snape knew so many Dark Arts curses? Somehow I couldn't imagine Eileen Snape knowing about the Dark Arts.

We can never really know whether or not he would have had Lupin kissed, but we can know that he treated the unconscious Black with respect. I would dispute "respect" because I wholeheartedly believe that Snape never esteemed or honored Sirius Black in any way, shape, or form - even as a doggy. :lol: He loathed him. We can know that he put an unconscious man and two unconscious kids on stretchers. Was it compassion, as in deep sorrow and the desire to alleviate suffering? Regarding Black....IMO, nope, no way.

So what was it then, what was his motivation, why did Sev do as he did? IMO his key intent was the same as when he'd entered the Shack - to rescue Harry and keep him safe. He'd just awoken to see the three unconscious and a bajillion dementors gliding away. He had no idea why they'd attacked the "kids", who'd cast the powerful Patronus to get them to back off, or where Lupin (who'd forgotten his potion and was now doing his Wolfy impersonation) was at. His priority was to get them inside, behind the doors, and to safety...and if he had to drag Black along, oh well. At least he could look forward to the Kiss still being performed later on.
I think you have misunderstood me. Of course we do not need to know the Bible or the intricacies of Christian doctrine to be able to read and understand the Harry Potter series. However if we are to comment on the morality of characters presented in the books then knowing the authors personal beliefs will give a clearer picture of her intent in this regard.I disagree with this, in the fact that IMO how characters were written and the answers given by Jo in interviews regarding character/behavior/personality show her intent. We don't have to agree with her, because we each have our interpretations that may or may not fall along the same lines.

While it's nice to know that she has religious affiliations, not all Christians hold the same basic tenets of faith, specific beliefs vary significantly between established groups. I don't feel knowing she's Christian aids in understanding her characters anymore than knowing Phil Pullman is a proud atheist helps in understanding his intent regards to characters in The Golden Compass.

I'd feel much more comfortable leaving religion out of the discussion, especially since no specific beliefs were mentioned within the context of the stories themselves.

Snape is not on trial.Ah-ha...but you see, no one expects the Snapish Inquisition. :p

I agree, we're not talking the legal definition hear, as in lying under oath = perjury. We are talking in regards to Sev speaking deliberate untruths, half-truths, and lies by omission - we see many, many characters do through out the series, BTW. But since this thread is about Snape, his assertions are the focus. *shrugs*
I am curious, was it ever mentioned about how Snape knew so many Dark Arts curses? Somehow I couldn't imagine Eileen Snape knowing about the Dark Arts. Well, it never says how Sev came to know dark arts so early on in life. His father was a Muggle, his mother a witch. We never see Snape's youth beyond the memories of Lily, those of interactions with James/Sirius etc, and those seen when Harry unintentionally sees into Snape's mind during Occlumency.

Also, the comment of his knowing more whatever than the 7th years combined should be taken with more than a few grains of salt, considering the source. :whistle:

We do know from Jo that he was, well I guess enamored is the word, of the Dark Arts...the simplistic answer is that he wanted to be somebody...yet he wanted to be somebody so that a certain person would recognize his talent and see him in a new light, IMO.

So what was it then, what was his motivation, why did Sev do as he did? IMO his key intent was the same as when he'd entered the Shack - to rescue Harry and keep him safe. He'd just awoken to see the three unconscious and a bajillion dementors gliding away. He had no idea why they'd attacked the "kids", who'd cast the powerful Patronus to get them to back off, or where Lupin (who'd forgotten his potion and was now doing his Wolfy impersonation) was at. His priority was to get them inside, behind the doors, and to safety...and if he had to drag Black along, oh well.

But that's the point people are making. He could have, literally, "dragged Black along". He didn't.

But that's the point people are making. He could have, literally, "dragged Black along". He didn't.I get that, zgirnius, I honestly do. I still do not equate it to "respect" or "compassion" though I freely admit his mode of transport for Sirius was much more decent than Sirius's mode of transport for Sev was.

But that's the point people are making. He could have, literally, "dragged Black along". He didn't.

Well to be fair, we don't know if he was as disregarding of Black (in as far as letting the stretcher bump along) or not. We are not given the details of the journey. But I still say he was willing to take Black to the castle because his head had cooled. This was similar to his escape from Hogwarts in HBP. Whenever Snape is in the heat of passion and dealing with people he hates and has the advantage, he loses it and his thoughts turn to killing. Perhaps it is due to his having been a death eater or it could be that he is simply that overwrought when he gets worked up. But since he was cooled, he did a more correct thing - however, he still hated both parties he was towing. Thus I have to doubt he was watching either Harry's or Sirius' stretcher with loving care on the way back.

I'm sorry, but I gotta laugh here. It's Voldemort who demanded unswerving loyalty/service, not Dumbledore. People loyal to Dumbledore, whether Hogwarts faculty or the Order or even Harry, have been shown time and again doing opposite of what they've been told to do by Dumbledore.

Have answered in the Albus Dumbledore thread.

I would dispute "respect" because I wholeheartedly believe that Snape never esteemed or honored Sirius Black in any way, shape, or form - even as a doggy. :lol: He loathed him. We can know that he put an unconscious man and two unconscious kids on stretchers. Was it compassion, as in deep sorrow and the desire to alleviate suffering? Regarding Black....IMO, nope, no way.

I am not denying that Snape loathed Severus, which actually makes his behaviour all the more admirable. Nor am I saying that Severus felt any respect for Sirius. What I am saying is that he treated him with respect. He conjurred a stretcher as he did for the other unconscious people there. He did not treat him differently because he was Sirius Black. Bearing in mind that Sirius was a) believed to be a mass murderer and b) was Snape's personal enemy I think this shows us something quite interesting about the character of Severus Snape. There are some who would have chained an escaped criminal up even if they were unconscious, and there are others that would have allowed there personal feelings to get the better of them and take the opportunity to kick and beat the defenceless Black (as Draco did to Harry in HBP) Even dear old Sirius showed less respect for the unconscious Severus than Snape did for the unconscious Black.

All this says to me that Severus loves to gloat. He loves rubbing his victory into the face of the defeated. It all comes down to his low self-esteem and his rather desperate need to prove himself, and his particularly desperate need to finally win against the marauders. Sirius doesn't have this need. He loathes Snape and treats his unconscious form with a total lack of care and respect. Snape however wants victory, and for him part of that victory is knowing that he has not taken unfair advantage of Black's unconscious state. For Severus it is about him having the upper hand, and Sirius (and to a lesser extent Remus) knowing that Severus has the upper hand. We also see this to a degree with Harry as Severus tries to get the upper hand over James through Harry.

I disagree with this, in the fact that IMO how characters were written and the answers given by Jo in interviews regarding character/behavior/personality show her intent. We don't have to agree with her, because we each have our interpretations that may or may not fall along the same lines.
Well I actually agree with you here. We don't have to agree with her. For example she has called Snape sadistic and I know there are posters who do not think that Snape's behaviour towards Harry was ever sadistic, so I agree that once the books are written people are quite entitled to their own opinions regarding the characters. But of course what it says about Jo is that she regards Snape as sadistic - just as she regarded him as redeemed at the end. As such her work of fiction has certain themes which she has explored from her own point of view encompassing her own personal beliefs and moral values. Good characters will have traits that she admires (for example, Harry is very brave and has a huge capacity to forgive) Some readers may not regard these traits as particularly admirable, but I beleive it adds to our understanding of the work as a whole. Jo deals with death in a particularly positive way that has helped a lot of bereaved readers. The fact that her mother died early on in the writing process was a huge influence on this aspect of her work. So I see knowing something of the author as an integral part of understanding their work. Sorry I did go on a bit there :whistle:

While it's nice to know that she has religious affiliations, not all Christians hold the same basic tenets of faith, specific beliefs vary significantly between established groups. I don't feel knowing she's Christian aids in understanding her characters anymore than knowing Phil Pullman is a proud atheist helps in understanding his intent regards to characters in The Golden Compass.
It's funny but I was going to mention "His Dark Materials" and the beliefs of Philip Pullman, but I haven't read it yet. (It's next on my list)

I'd feel much more comfortable leaving religion out of the discussion, especially since no specific beliefs were mentioned within the context of the stories themselves.
Fair enough. I can understand that religion makes some people uncomfortable.

Ah-ha...but you see, no one expects the Snapish Inquisition. :p:p

Also, the comment of his knowing more whatever than the 7th years combined should be taken with more than a few grains of salt, considering the source. :whistle:
I have always thought that too. For a start I don't think Sirius meant it literally - just that Snape knew a lot of Dark Curses. And then Sirius was just SO anti the Dark Arts and SO anti Snape I wouldn't regard his account as that reliable. Not that I think he is lying - like Snape I think he believed he was telling the truth, it's just that time and perspective can scatter the light of truth like a prism.

We do know from Jo that he was, well I guess enamored is the word, of the Dark Arts...the simplistic answer is that he wanted to be somebody...yet he wanted to be somebody so that a certain person would recognize his talent and see him in a new light, IMO.
Yes I agree. It's almost as if he wantd to rule the world so he could lay it at Lily's feet. Poor Severus indeed.

Um, just a precaution: let's not go down the Snape vs. Sirius - who was morally superior road (again).

I am not denying that Snape loathed Severus, which actually makes his behaviour all the more admirable. Nor am I saying that Severus felt any respect for Sirius. What I am saying is that he treated him with respect. He conjurred a stretcher as he did for the other unconscious people there. He did not treat him differently because he was Sirius Black. Bearing in mind that Sirius was a) believed to be a mass murderer and b) was Snape's personal enemy I think this shows us something quite interesting about the character of Severus Snape. There are some who would have chained an escaped criminal up even if they were unconscious, and there are others that would have allowed there personal feelings to get the better of them and take the opportunity to kick and beat the defenceless Black (as Draco did to Harry in HBP) Even dear old Sirius showed less respect for the unconscious Severus than Snape did for the unconscious Black.

All this says to me that Severus loves to gloat. He loves rubbing his victory into the face of the defeated. It all comes down to his low self-esteem and his rather desperate need to prove himself, and his particularly desperate need to finally win against the marauders. Sirius doesn't have this need. He loathes Snape and treats his unconscious form with a total lack of care and respect. Snape however wants victory, and for him part of that victory is knowing that he has not taken unfair advantage of Black's unconscious state. For Severus it is about him having the upper hand, and Sirius (and to a lesser extent Remus) knowing that Severus has the upper hand. We also see this to a degree with Harry as Severus tries to get the upper hand over James through Harry.


Well I actually agree with you here. We don't have to agree with her. For example she has called Snape sadistic and I know there are posters who do not think that Snape's behaviour towards Harry was ever sadistic, so I agree that once the books are written people are quite entitled to their own opinions regarding the characters. But of course what it says about Jo is that she regards Snape as sadistic - just as she regarded him as redeemed at the end. As such her work of fiction has certain themes which she has explored from her own point of view encompassing her own personal beliefs and moral values. Good characters will have traits that she admires (for example, Harry is very brave and has a huge capacity to forgive) Some readers may not regard these traits as particularly admirable, but I beleive it adds to our understanding of the work as a whole. Jo deals with death in a particularly positive way that has helped a lot of bereaved readers. The fact that her mother died early on in the writing process was a huge influence on this aspect of her work. So I see knowing something of the author as an integral part of understanding their work. Sorry I did go on a bit there :whistle:
.

I just wanted to say I completely agree with you. :tu: I'd like to really second the need Snape felt for victory. I think it all goes back to his need to prove he could be SOMEONE. Which is why I think the Dark Arts held so much appeal to him. In his own house he was no one. His father was too busy abusing his mother and his mother was probably too busy just trying to survive.

When he got to Hogwarts he likely found a place where he technically fit in, but I"m not so sure he ever FELT like he fit in. Even in Slytherin. His best friend as a Griffyndor and he wasn't pure blood.

I think the entirety of Snape's motivations were to prove that he wasn't a helpless little boy, crying in the corner like we saw in SWM.

Um, just a precaution: let's not go down the Snape vs. Sirius - who was morally superior road (again). *Salutes* Yessum.

I am not denying that Snape loathed Severus, which actually makes his behaviour all the more admirable. Nor am I saying that Severus felt any respect for Sirius. What I am saying is that he treated him with respect. He conjurred a stretcher as he did for the other unconscious people there. He did not treat him differently because he was Sirius Black.Snape loathed Severus...Freudian slip? :lol:

As we only see the conjuring of stretchers and the initial moving away, we cannot say with absolute 100% certainty that Snape didn't accidentally-on-purpose dump Sirius on the journey through the castle, that he didn't run the stretcher into objects, or that he didn't simply flip Black off the stretcher onto the stone floor like one flips a pancake {flapblacks :elaugh:}, once Sev had him contained within the little room where he was to be held until the Kiss could be performed.

Again, I gotta disagree with the statement that Snape treated Sirius with "respect" though I entirely admit his treatment of the unconscious Black was much more decent than what Black did to him and it rankles that no one {Harry/Hermione/Ron/Lupin} tried to prevent it. :grumble:

Was it the right thing to do, to put the unconscious Sirius on a stretcher rather than drag him along the ground? Sure. But respectful? Not in my opinion and truthfully perhaps my opinion is biased from all the coursework I've done in criminal justice regarding how some attackers will show kindness at some point while at other times raging entirely out of control. How they will cover their victims or drop them off in a spot near to their home {when they let them live}, which is not out of respect or because it is kind, but is generally an acknowledgement of remorse, feelings of guilt, or a sign that they identified with their victim, rather than continued to objectify them. I've even seen cases where people were pall bearers at funerals of crime victims, and then later turn out to have been the killer. That type of behavior is really all very odd and certainly difficult to discount.

Please do not misunderstand, I'm not equating Snape to a violent criminal, but neither am I equating his act of decency here to altruism or an over-abundance of wholesome goodness - especially in connection to Black.

I think his major objective was to get Harry {Ron and Hermione} inside. I also believe he'd never leave Black out there alone - because of the chance Black could come round and attempt escape or worse, make another attempt on Harry - not something that Sev was about to allow.

I do not believe that Sev would risk recalling the Dementors to perform the Kiss, simply because IMO he wasn't sure who'd made them back off or if he could keep them under control and away from the kids {again, Harry's safety being his primary objective at this point}. Not to mention he'd had time to cool down and certainly would have had the time to think of the ramifications it could have for him with Dumbledore. Once knowing he couldn't leave Sirius behind I believe the thought of 'appearances' {as in how cruel and unseemly he would appear {to staff/Minister/Dumbledore} was uppermost in his mind. What would happen, would he be believed, would he be trusted, if he literally dragged his known enemy, one Sirius Black, into the castle with utter disregard that he was unconscious and defenseless, despite that Black was thought to be a heinous and despicable murderer?

To me it is entirely possible that Snape, once coolly under control, weighed the consequences of whether the proper weight would be given to his "report" should he not constrain himself, especially knowing how Harry, Ron, Hermione {and Lupin once he'd became human again} would give identical versions of a story which wholly contradicted his own.

Snape loathed Severus...Freudian slip? :lol:
:rotfl: erm yes I did mean Sirius but er... he was full of self loathing too! :whistle:

As we only see the conjuring of stretchers and the initial moving away, we cannot say with absolute 100% certainty that Snape didn't accidentally-on-purpose dump Sirius on the journey through the castle, that he didn't run the stretcher into objects, or that he didn't simply flip Black off the stretcher onto the stone floor like one flips a pancake {flapblacks :elaugh:}, once Sev had him contained within the little room where he was to be held until the Kiss could be performed.

But Snape doing something bad to the unconscious Sirius isn't in the text so it is total speculation. The lack of Snape doing something bad to Sirius is probably more plot driven than character driven (we couldn't have Harry distracted at this point) but nevertheless it is there on the page and must IMO therefore be taken into account.

Again, I gotta disagree with the statement that Snape treated Sirius with "respect" though I entirely admit his treatment of the unconscious Black was much more decent than what Black did to him and it rankles that no one {Harry/Hermione/Ron/Lupin} tried to prevent it. :grumble:

I think decency is a good word for it. He did the decent thing. It may sound weird coming from a Snape fan but I can happily accept the whole Sirius-dragging-unconscious-Snape-through-the-tunnel-and-scraping-him-against-the-ceiling thing as comic relief. Sadly all to often Snape is the comic relief in the early books, but it is a clever disguise by Rowling. In the first 3 books he appears very much as the comic baddie - not really evil, just out to thwart the hero. In the last three books we don't really see Snape in this light anymore - he is a much more serious character

Please do not misunderstand, I'm not equating Snape to a violent criminal, but neither am I equating his act of decency here to altruism or an over-abundance of wholesome goodness - especially in connection to Black. Well I don't think it was altruistic, wholesome goodness that made Snape do it. More of a self-righteousness.

Once knowing he couldn't leave Sirius behind I believe the thought of 'appearances' {as in how cruel and unseemly he would appear {to staff/Minister/Dumbledore} was uppermost in his mind. What would happen, would he be believed, would he be trusted, if he literally dragged his known enemy, one Sirius Black, into the castle with utter disregard that he was unconscious and defenseless, despite that Black was thought to be a heinous and despicable murderer?

I don't think that he would be worried about what people would think had he dragged Sirius up bound and gagged. He was about to have the Kiss performed on him - probably the most inhumane thing imaginable so I don't think he was worried that the Ministry would think he was treating Black badly.

Again, I gotta disagree with the statement that Snape treated Sirius with "respect" though I entirely admit his treatment of the unconscious Black was much more decent than what Black did to him and it rankles that no one {Harry/Hermione/Ron/Lupin} tried to prevent it. :grumble:

Well taking the idea out of context I would agree. However, in context, JKR had Snape behaving in the shack with total disrespect for all involved, imo. He was not only unwilling to listen to anyone, (binding Lupin's mouth; using his power of position over the kids to try and silence them and holding his wand to Sirius' neck), but he also made derrogatory comments about the parties as well as Harry's parents. For example, Sirius knew that he'd convinced Lily and James to make the switch and he knew of the trust they all had for one another. So Snape's comment regarding James arrogantly trusting Sirius comes across for Sirius as referring to both of his beloved friends. It would be the same for Harry, imo. Snape threatened to send two of the members of the party to a state worse than death, without listening and was straightforward in telling them it was out of revenge. His very last statement was to threaten Harry, before the trio disarmed him.

When Snape lay unconscious and bleeding from the head, JKR had the normally ultra humanitarian Hermione, Harry and Lupin ignore his plight and have a rather long discussion. Sirius and Ron, who were also caring, but generally not as overboard, ignored Snape's situation as well. Much later, Lupin checked Snape and confirmed he was merely unconscious - which begs the question of whether they all may have considered Snape was dead and still did nothing about his situation. Nonetheless, he was then floated (not dragged) outdoors, his head bumping the wall along the way. The only person we are certain noticed was Harry - but he said nothing, despite the fact that Snape was still unconscious and bleeding from the head.

To me, it was a statement that spoke strongly to Snape's prior behavior. He had been harsh and unfair, unwilling to listen and judgmental, and I think by and through the actions of the others, they were simply treating Snape as he had treated them. In general, Snape behaves in this manner and there is little to no retribution for those who are wronged by him. I think this was written to be a bit of retribution, taken where possible. And Snape was fine in the end as without recognition for any injury to Snape, he continues to remain in the role of villain throughout the rest of the novel. But not villain in the sense of evil and good; rather in the sense of the individual against those the readers are cheering for. Hence Sirius escapes, the trio does not get sanctioned, Snape is dismissed from the room, noted by the minitster as crazy, and loses his medal, and despite his further revenge on Lupin, we discover Lupin is leaving anyway.

But the consequences of Snape's action are more far-reaching than the scene relays. Later, the DEs are aware of Lupin's lycanthropy and that has fatal consequences for him and his family. Snape's intervention also increased the time necessary for the revealing of Peter and due to the lateness of the hour, Remus transformed and Peter escaped - and as a result Sirius is still seen as guilty and he and Harry nearly are kissed by a swarm of hundreds of dementors.

So the scene to me is not one that was written to draw sympathy for Snape, but rather one in which both in the present and in hindsight speaks to the amount of regard due to Snape at that time, based on his behavior and mindset (in terms of fairness rather than humanitarian considerations), both in story and for the reader who feels that those who were in the right suffered grave injustices at Snape's hands, imo.

Perhaps the disagreement is over the type of respect. I don't think Snape was motivated by respect for Sirius the individual. He did not have any, and did not feel Sirius deserved any. He was perfectly willing to explain why to Sirius's face when the occasion arose. :)

However, there is this notion that one should treat all people with some minimum respect, our of respect for our common humanity if nothing else. That's what I think the stretchers show about Snape, that he did have that feeling.

Perhaps the disagreement is over the type of respect. I don't think Snape was motivated by respect for Sirius the individual. He did not have any, and did not feel Sirius deserved any. He was perfectly willing to explain why to Sirius's face when the occasion arose. :)

However, there is this notion that one should treat all people with some minimum respect, our of respect for our common humanity if nothing else. That's what I think the stretchers show about Snape, that he did have that feeling.

Agree with all of the above. :)

Perhaps the disagreement is over the type of respect. I don't think Snape was motivated by respect for Sirius the individual. He did not have any, and did not feel Sirius deserved any. He was perfectly willing to explain why to Sirius's face when the occasion arose. :)

I would respectfully, and fervently disagree. I think this view does Snape's character a grave disservice based on my interpretation of his evolution of being. I think it may have been true in POA, but not at the time when the occassion arose wherein Snape would have the opportunity to explain why to Sirius' face.

However, there is this notion that one should treat all people with some minimum respect, our of respect for our common humanity if nothing else. That's what I think the stretchers show about Snape, that he did have that feeling.

I agree, but only in that moment. Previously, he didn't have that feeling at all in the shack. Focusing only on Snape's ultimate behavior is akin to focusing only on Black kindly asking after Ron's health just before he escaped with Buckbeak. I do not feel that the conclusion is that either Snape or Black's characters are represented by those two moments in time - especially in light of all that had just taken place within the context of the storyline. To me, one has to take into account the totality of the circumstances.

Hence, it is not that Snape "did" have that feeling or Sirius "did", it is that both could show a more humanitarian side - at least facially. However, I can pick out a myriad of scenes to focus upon during the events of this scene and reach other feelings that both parties could show as well. That is why the overall conclusion for me cannot be that "Snape did the right thing in the end" (nor anyone else) - the intial point being made in this discussion. This was no where near the end, imo, but merely one piece of a far larger puzzle and when looked upon as a whole it does not stand out as a definitive marker indicative of a "most" relevant point being made, imo. This is clearly shown by the fact that despite what might come across as a humanitarian gesture on Snape's part, he is still bent on revenge - which he makes clear in the canon the next day, imo.

I think a better example of what is attempting to be shown (based on my understanding) is Snape's interaction with Draco in HBP or his attempt to save Lupin in DH. The scene above in POA simply does not give rise to the same indications relative to Snape, imo.

That is why the overall conclusion for me cannot be that "Snape did the right thing in the end" (nor anyone else) - the intial point being made in this discussion.You've lost me here - to what are you refering? Are you saying that Snape did not do the right thing in the end when he conjurred stretchers for Black et al? Or are you using the term "in the end" to mean at the end of the books - because I thought we were discussing this specific scene and how it shows a particular aspect of Snape's character - that aspect being that he was able to treat the unconscious Sirius Black with decency.

I don't see how anything else that occurs in the books changes this. Black and Snape continue to loathe each other; we are not told later that Snape was confunded at the time. So the incident remains one in which Snape treats someone he despises with a bit of common decency. While it may not be a moment that defines his character, it is a moment that adds to the depth and intricacies of his character and in hindsight can be seen as a clue to Snape's loyalties.

You've lost me here - to what are you refering? Are you saying that Snape did not do the right thing in the end when he conjurred stretchers for Black et al? Or are you using the term "in the end" to mean at the end of the books - because I thought we were discussing this specific scene and how it shows a particular aspect of Snape's character - that aspect being that he was able to treat the unconscious Sirius Black with decency.

I don't see how anything else that occurs in the books changes this. Black and Snape continue to loathe each other; we are not told later that Snape was confunded at the time. So the incident remains one in which Snape treats someone he despises with a bit of common decency. While it may not be a moment that defines his character, it is a moment that adds to the depth and intricacies of his character and in hindsight can be seen as a clue to Snape's loyalties.

I respect your view, however, in my view, independent of 'how' Snape managed what he was trying to do, "what he was doing" is more important and he was doing the wrong thing in that respect, imo. That is how I see it and why I disagree that Snape did the right thing in the end.

I respect your view, however, in my view, independent of 'how' Snape managed what he was trying to do, "what he was doing" is more important and he was doing the wrong thing in that respect, imo. That is how I see it and why I disagree that Snape did the right thing in the end.

All I can do is repeat my request for clarification - what is it that Snape is doing that you regard as "the wrong thing" and what do you mean by "in the end". I am very confused :yuhup:

All I can do is repeat my request for clarification - what is it that Snape is doing that you regard as "the wrong thing" and what do you mean by "in the end". I am very confused :yuhup:

:lol:. Sorry. Well what I meant was that I consider the whole scene. So I feel Snape, as he stated, wished for revenge against Black. Despite the fact that Sirius (and the others) told Snape that there were factors he was unaware of, he refused to listen and carried on with his intent - even after regaining consciousness and his head having cooled somewhat. Everyone was unconscious (and Lupes was a werewolf), so there was no means for anyone to attempt to tell the new information to the authorities who would have Black worse than killed with the kiss. Snape disclosed nothing, not even to Dumbledore. Further, when Harry awoke, stating the same factors as he had when he was supposedly confunded, Snape aggressively tried to oppose his words.

So his goal remained the same from the moment he entered the shack under the invisibility cloak and athough he had several opportunities to do the right thing, he chose to continue seeking revenge instead. Delivering Sirius back to the castle was right in line with that goal, imo, and it was wrong for Snape to do it without saying anything and, imo, he knew it. Interestingly, when Dumbledore stood up for Sirius, Snape did not *remind* Dumbledore that Sirius was the betrayer of the Potters and a murderer for helping to kill them, instead, he *reminded* Dumbledore that Sirius was an attempted murderer for trying to kill Snape at 16 years old [sic]. So I feel that taking everything into account, Snape never reached the point of doing the right thing.

I feel this Snape is totally distinguishable from the Snape near the end of his life, who actually tried to do the right thing, but made poor decisions, tainted by his grey character that has never been big on thinking in terms of consequences, and caused things to go wrong - like in choosing Sectumsepra to save Lupin from the DE and his whole decision to use his patronus to guide Harry to the sword at the bottom of a pool where the lad nearly drowns.

So I feel Snape, as he stated, wished for revenge against Black. Despite the fact that Sirius (and the others) told Snape that there were factors he was unaware of, he refused to listen and carried on with his intent - even after regaining consciousness and his head having cooled somewhat. Everyone was unconscious (and Lupes was a werewolf), so there was no means for anyone to attempt to tell the new information to the authorities who would have Black worse than killed with the kiss. Snape disclosed nothing, not even to Dumbledore. Further, when Harry awoke, stating the same factors as he had when he was supposedly confunded, Snape aggressively tried to oppose his words.I do not see anything wrong in Snape's behaviour in any of this. Not only did Sirius Black betray James and Lily but he killed Peter Pettigrew and numerous muggles in fromt of dozens of witnesses. That is a "truth" Snape has lived with for 12+ years. In these circumstances I don't think there are many people who would take Black seriously, and Snape's explanation - that Lupin is in league with Black and the children have been confunded is far more plausible than what Black and the others were saying in the shack. Snape had no reason to listen to them because as far as he was concerned he knew Black was guilty and had known that long before Harry came to Hogwarts. Perhaps he was being stubborn; there are plenty of people who cling to their own view of things when there is evidence that they are mistaken, Cornelius Fudge's refusal to believe that Voldemort was back is an obvious example from the books. So I do not see Snape's behaviour as unusual and I certainly could never see it as malicious. Yes he wanted revenge, but he wanted revenge for what he believed Black had done. It was not a case of Snape knowing that Black was innocent and wanting him kissed anyway, he truly believed that Black was guilty.

So his goal remained the same from the moment he entered the shack under the invisibility cloak and athough he had several opportunities to do the right thing, he chose to continue seeking revenge instead. Delivering Sirius back to the castle was right in line with that goal, imo, and it was wrong for Snape to do it without saying anything and, imo, he knew it.I completely disagree. I do not beleive it was wrong for Snape not to say anything. As far as he was concerned Black and Lupin had already tricked the children and were now trying to trick him. Sadly miscarriages of justice do occur in the real world; but the cries of the innocent are lost amongst all the other cries of innocence from the guilty. As I said above he is being stubborn in refusing to listen, but from a psychological point of view that is not really surprising given the loss he suffered and the psychological adjustment that would be required to accept that Black was innocent.
Interestingly, when Dumbledore stood up for Sirius, Snape did not *remind* Dumbledore that Sirius was the betrayer of the Potters and a murderer for helping to kill them, instead, he *reminded* Dumbledore that Sirius was an attempted murderer for trying to kill Snape at 16 years old [sic]. So I feel that taking everything into account, Snape never reached the point of doing the right thing.
It would make absolutely no sense whatsoever for Snape to *remind* Dumbledore that Black had betrayed the Potters resulting in their deaths, because this is a crime of which Black, Lupin and the trio are now claiming he is innocent.

The conversation would go something like this:
Black: I didn't betray the Potters. Pettigrew was the secret keeper. I didn't kill Pettigrew either; he's a rat animagus.
Snape: Might I remind you, headmaster, that Black showed he was a murderer when he betrayed the Potters to their Death.
Dumbledore: He just said he was innocent of that Severus.
Snape: Ah ... er. *thinks* Yes, but he showed that he was a murderer when he was fifteen - remember.

You see there is no point reminding Dumbledore of a crime for which Black is now contesting his guilt. The whole point of Snape bringing up the "Willow-Tree-Werewolf" incident is to indicate to Dumbledore that Black showed murderous tendancies even while he was still at school. Now while I disagree with Snape's opinion that Black tried to murder him on that occasion, it is fairly obvious why Snape brings it up, given that Dumbledore is now apparently questioning whether Black was guilty of the betrayal of the Potters and the death of Peter pettigrew and the muggles.

Given all of this I can only assert that Snape was definitely trying to do the right thing, just as much as Dumbledore was. Like Dumbledore he was trying to stop a miscarriage of justice. Snape's view of the betrayal of Lily Potter and her subsequent death is suffused with so much emotion that it clouds his judgement. It is not that he does not want to be reasonable, he is unable to be reasonable given the depth of emotions that are stirred up.

Dumbledore is completely disinterested and as such his judgement is objective.

I feel this Snape is totally distinguishable from the Snape near the end of his life, who actually tried to do the right thing, but made poor decisions, tainted by his grey character that has never been big on thinking in terms of consequences, and caused things to go wrong - like in choosing Sectumsepra to save Lupin from the DE and his whole decision to use his patronus to guide Harry to the sword at the bottom of a pool where the lad nearly drowns.I certainly do not regard Snape's attempt to save Lupin or his use of the patronus and the pool to pass the sword to Harry as "poor decisions" - and I am sure that Harry didn't either. I also think that to suggest that they were poor decisions simply because they had bad results is grossly unfair.

Harry's misadventure in the pool in the forest was directly attributal to the locket, not to Snape at all. It would perhaps have been wiser of Harry to take the locket off, but I can fully understand why he didn't. Harry was also ignorant of the full extent of the locket's malice. Both of these were factors that Snape was completely ignorant of, and given that the sword had to be gained through bravery (or whatever it was) there had to be a certain element of risk in whatever method Severus chose to "hand over" the sword.

I do not see anything wrong in Snape's behaviour in any of this. Not only did Sirius Black betray James and Lily but he killed Peter Pettigrew and numerous muggles in fromt of dozens of witnesses. That is a "truth" Snape has lived with for 12+ years. In these circumstances I don't think there are many people who would take Black seriously, and Snape's explanation - that Lupin is in league with Black and the children have been confunded is far more plausible than what Black and the others were saying in the shack. Snape had no reason to listen to them because as far as he was concerned he knew Black was guilty and had known that long before Harry came to Hogwarts. Perhaps he was being stubborn; there are plenty of people who cling to their own view of things when there is evidence that they are mistaken, Cornelius Fudge's refusal to believe that Voldemort was back is an obvious example from the books. So I do not see Snape's behaviour as unusual and I certainly could never see it as malicious. Yes he wanted revenge, but he wanted revenge for what he believed Black had done. It was not a case of Snape knowing that Black was innocent and wanting him kissed anyway, he truly believed that Black was guilty.

I was referring to his unwillingness to listen and wanting to have both Sirius and Lupin kissed anyway. Snape didn't wish to hear anything that might negate his belief. What difference would 2 minutes make, wherein Snape listened to enough to ascertain whether or not it was all hogwash? If it was headed down that road, he could carry on. Snape heard something about Pettigrew being a rat, and of course in our world that would be enough to ignore the guilty and carry on. In the magical world, it is of course a very good reason to continue to listen. McGonagall being a cat and Draco's experience at playing ferret tell us that this claim was not something necessarily wild and far-fetched.

Below you indicate that Snape wasn't being reasonable, and I agree, but that is what made his behavior wrongful, imo. Behaving unreasonably is a major element in many wrongs.

I completely disagree. I do not beleive it was wrong for Snape not to say anything. As far as he was concerned Black and Lupin had already tricked the children and were now trying to trick him. Sadly miscarriages of justice do occur in the real world; but the cries of the innocent are lost amongst all the other cries of innocence from the guilty. As I said above he is being stubborn in refusing to listen, but from a psychological point of view that is not really surprising given the loss he suffered and the psychological adjustment that would be required to accept that Black was innocent.

So if I understand correctly, Snape's refusal to listen was not wrong because he had suffered a loss and could not psychologically adjust to hearing that Black was innocent. And Snape's refusal to say anything was not wrong because he felt the confunded trio, Black and Lupin were trying to trick him into believing Black was innocent - a belief that he would not be able to psychologically adjust to believing? I am lost in the reasoning you provided. :lol:.

You see there is no point reminding Dumbledore of a crime for which Black is now contesting his guilt. The whole point of Snape bringing up the "Willow-Tree-Werewolf" incident is to indicate to Dumbledore that Black showed murderous tendancies even while he was still at school. Now while I disagree with Snape's opinion that Black tried to murder him on that occasion, it is fairly obvious why Snape brings it up, given that Dumbledore is now apparently questioning whether Black was guilty of the betrayal of the Potters and the death of Peter pettigrew and the muggles.

Well Dumbledore wasn't questioning it, he was believing it. Dumbledore wasn't confunded and I feel Snape knew the wise wizard could not be 'tricked' and still he brought up the old incident. My point was that Snape was not attempting to reassert Sirius' guilt, but rather discussing his character to establish him as murdererous, and even if he had been successful in doing so, it would prove nothing relevant to Sirius and the Potters.

Given all of this I can only assert that Snape was definitely trying to do the right thing, just as much as Dumbledore was. Like Dumbledore he was trying to stop a miscarriage of justice. Snape's view of the betrayal of Lily Potter and her subsequent death is suffused with so much emotion that it clouds his judgement. It is not that he does not want to be reasonable, he is unable to be reasonable given the depth of emotions that are stirred up.

Well we would have to agree to disagree on this point. I agree his judgment was clouded, but I feel that as a result, he was intentionally trying to get away with doing the wrong thing and his every action and word were geared toward doing so, imo. Snape wanted Sirius dead (or worse than dead) and he didn't care if a miscarriage of justice took place or if there were mistakes of fact involved - his goal never changed throughout, imo. I am not sure what miscarriage of justice you are talking about though - do you mean Sirius getting away with betraying the Potters? That was out of his hands, imo. That is my point - even when the matter was out of his hands he intentionally carried on trying to carry out injustice - right in the face of the not confunded Dumbldore a man who was not only wise, but not easily trickable. Snape knew this.

Dumbledore is completely disinterested and as such his judgement is objective.

I would respectfully disagree. Dumbledore was far from impartial, imo, rather he was merely reasonable. Same with Lupin.

I certainly do not regard Snape's attempt to save Lupin or his use of the patronus and the pool to pass the sword to Harry as "poor decisions" - and I am sure that Harry didn't either. I also think that to suggest that they were poor decisions simply because they had bad results is grossly unfair.

Ah you misunderstood me. I was speaking of Snape's decisions that caused the poor results, not his intent. As I said, there I believe Snape was trying to do the right thing.

Harry's misadventure in the pool in the forest was directly attributal to the locket, not to Snape at all. It would perhaps have been wiser of Harry to take the locket off, but I can fully understand why he didn't. Harry was also ignorant of the full extent of the locket's malice. Both of these were factors that Snape was completely ignorant of, and given that the sword had to be gained through bravery (or whatever it was) there had to be a certain element of risk in whatever method Severus chose to "hand over" the sword.

Like in the case of electing "sectumsempra" to use on the DE's hand, electing the particular means of delivering the sword was a poor decision on Snape's part, imo. If his character was such that he considered consequences of his actions, I believe he would have been able to make better decisions. However, Snape was, who he was and thus even when attempting to do the right thing, events generally turned out sour, imo. There is no 'grand success' had by Snape in the entire series, imo. Every single thing he set out to do, when attempting to do the right thing, turned out bad or significantly tainted. I feel that is merely the legacy of his character. For things to turn out okay, in every instance, others had to intercede, imo. JKR even had him fail miserably in his final act of delivering the message from Dumbledore - if Harry hadn't happened along and been willing to take memories from the man who'd helped kill his parents, killed Dumbledore and been a loyal extremist Death Eater fooling the goodsiders, then he would have failed in that. As it stands, Harry's behavior in helping Snape fulfill his duty boggles the mind, imo. But I can only assume JKR wished to reinforce how big of a man Harry was.

Draco's experience at playing ferret

Draco's experience as a ferrett took place at the beginning of fourth year, in GoF, and therefore hadn't occured at the time of Snape wanting Lupin and Sirius to experience the Dementor's Kiss, end of third year, PoA.

Draco's experience as a ferrett took place at the beginning of fourth year, in GoF, and therefore hadn't occured at the time of Snape wanting Lupin and Sirius to experience the Dementor's Kiss, end of third year, PoA.

Good nitpick, doesn't change the fact that animagi were well known in the WW and Snape knew that.

Indeed, I was going to add that it was irrelevant to the point being made - how could Snape work with McGonagall for years and be unaware of the existence of animagi - but why spoil a good nitpick with a boring thing like relevancy? :rotfl:

I was just speaking in terms of possibilities in the wizard world. I don't figure that was the first time that ever occurred. :lol:. Turning of cups into mice and so forth all speaks to this issue of transfiguration, animaguses, etc., being a normal part of wizard world life.

Ahem, topic?

Ahem, topic?

:lol:...it could get lost in there. The topic is that Snape had reason to know and understand that Peter being a rat, for some reason among many, was not something he should find extraordinary as a wizard.

I do not see anything wrong in Snape's behaviour in any of this. Not only did Sirius Black betray James and Lily but he killed Peter Pettigrew and numerous muggles in fromt of dozens of witnesses. That is a "truth" Snape has lived with for 12+ years. In these circumstances I don't think there are many people who would take Black seriously, and Snape's explanation - that Lupin is in league with Black and the children have been confunded is far more plausible than what Black and the others were saying in the shack. Snape had no reason to listen to them because as far as he was concerned he knew Black was guilty and had known that long before Harry came to Hogwarts.

I agree, there would be very few people in the Wizarding world who would have been prepared to stop and listen to Sirius, being as he was someone that they belieived to be a dangerous murderer.
Actually, I wonder just how the Aurors would have dealt with Sirius if they had found him.

It was not a case of Snape knowing that Black was innocent and wanting him kissed anyway, he truly believed that Black was guilty.

:agree:

Snape heard something about Pettigrew being a rat, and of course in our world that would be enough to ignore the guilty and carry on. In the magical world, it is of course a very good reason to continue to listen. McGonagall being a cat and Draco's experience at playing ferret tell us that this claim was not something necessarily wild and far-fetched.

Yes, animagi are not far fetched in the magical world, but still unusual and even more so for three teenage school boys. As Dumbledore said,' Sirius told me all about how they became Animagi last night.'....'An extraordinary achievement -'

electing the particular means of delivering the sword was a poor decision on Snape's part, imo. .

As, Cathy has pointed out, the sword had to be taken under valour and therefore had to have risks involved. Also, it was the fact that Harry was wearing the locket Horcrux that directly caused the misadventure in the lake. As Snape could not be aware that Harry had a Horcrux around his neck, I don't see how he can be held responsible for the consequences that followed due to the Horcrux.

Yes, animagi are not far fetched in the magical world, but still unusual and even more so for three teenage school boys. As Dumbledore said,' Sirius told me all about how they became Animagi last night.'....'An extraordinary achievement -'

But my point was, animagi were not the only time we see human/animal transfigurations. So voicing that sentiment in and of itself is not something extraordinary in the wizard world, imo. It could mean many things, not just animagi - transfirguration of other types too.

As, Cathy has pointed out, the sword had to be taken under valour and therefore had to have risks involved. Also, it was the fact that Harry was wearing the locket Horcrux that directly caused the misadventure in the lake. As Snape could not be aware that Harry had a Horcrux around his neck, I don't see how he can be held responsible for the consequences that followed due to the Horcrux.

That is not the aspect I am referring to. The entire means of sword delivery was flawed, imo. It was doomed on many fronts, but some of them worked out - the final bit, that should have actually worked out, did not. That portion was JKR causing Snape's plans to fail yet again - but the whole scenario was set up for failure, imo. JKR simply made it happen at the end and I agree at that point, the locket was responsible. However, if the plan had been a good one, that wouldn't have been a concern in the first place.

Below you indicate that Snape wasn't being reasonable, and I agree, but that is what made his behavior wrongful, imo. Behaving unreasonably is a major element in many wrongs.
Yes but my point is that there are mitigating circumstances so that while Snape's behaviour may be considered unreasonable it is however understandable. Strong emotions do tend to render people unreasonable.

So if I understand correctly, Snape's refusal to listen was not wrong because he had suffered a loss and could not psychologically adjust to hearing that Black was innocent. And Snape's refusal to say anything was not wrong because he felt the confunded trio, Black and Lupin were trying to trick him into believing Black was innocent - a belief that he would not be able to psychologically adjust to believing? I am lost in the reasoning you provided.
When Lily was targetted by Voldemort Snape was sufficiently afraid for her life to meet with Dumbledore. He dedicated himself to her protection, but that failed due to Black's apparent treachery. When Lily died Snape was suicidal. He wanted to die. The reason for his utter depsair was that Lily was dead, and the reason Lily was dead was firstly because Voldemort had killed her, secondly that Black had apparently betrayed her and thirdly that Snape told Voldemort about the prophecy. (And yes I have deliberately put them in that order) Snape blames Black (yes I know it was really Pettigrew) for Lily dying because if it hadn't been for the treachery of the secret keeper she would have been alright. He also blames himself, and eases this burden of guilt by focusing on Black's guilt. He has done this for 12+ years, and when Black escapes all the old memories, all the guilt, all his grief and all his hatred for the traitor is stirred up and brought to the fore. Snape is unable to listen to Black because he is beyond reason - he cannot even consider the possibility that Black is innocent because he has believed it and lived it for 12+ years. For Snape it is just not possible that Snape is innocent - and I would venture to say that this is probably the immediate reaction of most relatives of murder victims who are told 12 years after the event that actually the person that has been in prison for the murder of their loved one for 12 years is possibly innocent. So Snape dismisses the idea as implausible and ludicrous because to him that is what it is.

Well Dumbledore wasn't questioning it, he was believing it. Dumbledore wasn't confunded and I feel Snape knew the wise wizard could not be 'tricked' and still he brought up the old incident. My point was that Snape was not attempting to reassert Sirius' guilt, but rather discussing his character to establish him as murdererous, and even if he had been successful in doing so, it would prove nothing relevant to Sirius and the Potters.
Snape is trying to establish a precedent of murderous intent - yes. The point being to show the riculousness of the story being presented by the trio. Snape's point is "Surely you're not going to beleive this ridiculous story Dumbledore - Black showed that he was a murder when he was fifteen" It is obvious to me :shrug:

Snape's malice and vindictiveness towards Black is based on Black being the treacherous secret keeper guilt. The level of hatred that Snape felt for Black (which incidently I would never say was a good thing!) cannot be let go of just because new evidence has come to light - emotions don't work that way. It takes time for the new information to sink in and for the emotions to readjust themselves - it is a huge emotional upheaval, which is why Snape is not able to believe that Black is not guilty.

I am not sure what miscarriage of justice you are talking about though
When I say that both Dumbledore and Snape were trying to prevent a miscarriage of justice what I am saying is that Dumbledore wasm trying to stop Black being Kisse dbecause he believed he was innocent, while Snape was trying to ensure that Black was kissed because he beleived he was guilty. Both men are trying to do what they beleive is right.


That is my point - even when the matter was out of his hands he intentionally carried on trying to carry out injustice - right in the face of the not confunded Dumbldore a man who was not only wise, but not easily trickable. Snape knew this.On the contrary Snape believed that Dumbledore was making a mistake by listening to the trio and that Black had quite literally got away with murder, I see absolutely no evidence to support the idea that Snape was knowingly trying to carry out an injustice. For his to be trying to carry out an injustice he would have to have known that Black was innocent, but Snape won't even entertain the idea that Black is innocent. If Snape was impartial regarding the Potters then I would agree with you that he was being not just unreasonable but also unjust by not listening to what Black and the others had to say, but his emotional involvement in the situation means that he does not want to hear that Black is innocent.


I would respectfully disagree. Dumbledore was far from impartial, imo, rather he was merely reasonable. Same with Lupin. I don't see how Dumbledore was far from impartial - he had no particular attachment to the Potters that was greater than his attachment to Sirius Black. They were all members of the Order before the betrayal.
Lupin had lost not just the Potters but also he had lost Black as well - because his friend had ceased to be the person he thought he was.
Both Lupin and Dumbledore would have hated Black for betraying the Potters, but would have been glad to entertain the idea that Black might possibly be innocent - it would restore something back to them - the good character of Sirius Black. Therfore they are more emotionally open to the possibility of black being innocent - they are far more impartial.
Snape however had lost someone he loved very deeply to someone he absolutely loathed. In many ways Black had become Snape's scapegoat on which 12 years worth of if only's were placed.
I think it really comes down to how Black is perceived by these three characters and for Snape it is just too big a leap mentally and emotionally to accept that Black might be innocent. He is completely and utterly biaised against Black and nothing is going to shift him fromt hat position.

If his character was such that he considered consequences of his actions, I believe he would have been able to make better decisions. However, Snape was, who he was and thus even when attempting to do the right thing, events generally turned out sour, imo. There is no 'grand success' had by Snape in the entire series, imo. Every single thing he set out to do, when attempting to do the right thing, turned out bad or significantly tainted. I feel that is merely the legacy of his character. For things to turn out okay, in every instance, others had to intercede, imo. JKR even had him fail miserably in his final act of delivering the message from Dumbledore - if Harry hadn't happened along and been willing to take memories from the man who'd helped kill his parents, killed Dumbledore and been a loyal extremist Death Eater fooling the goodsiders, then he would have failed in that. As it stands, Harry's behavior in helping Snape fulfill his duty boggles the mind, imo. But I can only assume JKR wished to reinforce how big of a man Harry was.
I am sorry but I completely disagree with this. For a start you seem to be implying that Snape had no "grand sucess" even when he was trying to do the right thing because he made bad decisions. I would say that ultimately Snape's life was an absolute sucess because he accomplished what he set out to do - he protected Harry and he facilitated the demise of Voldemort.

I suppose it comes down to what you regard as a "grand sucess" and in my book that is exactly what Snape was in the end. Surely there is no greater sucess than achieving your goal, and I think given the circumstances Snape did extraordinarily well.

There are other people in the series who have no "grand sucess" but I would not say that this is a legacy of their character. I am a little disturbed by the implication that "Snape was a loser because he was a bad character" as if Jo is trying to show us some sort of moral lesson that "nice" people have "grand sucesses" whereas unpleasant people can't do anything right. I just don't beleive that Jo writes in such a naive and simplistic (and preachy) way.

Yes, animagi are not far fetched in the magical world, but still unusual and even more so for three teenage school boys. As Dumbledore said,' Sirius told me all about how they became Animagi last night.'....'An extraordinary achievement -'Doesn't Hermione look up the registered animagi at some point and discover that there have only been something like ten in the last century or something ? :hmm: So while everybody knew about animagi, they were actually pretty scarce and as Dumbledore says for schoolboys to learn to be animagi is an extraordinary achievment. Given that Peter Pettigrew did not seem to be particularly talented I can well understand why Snape wouldn't consider the idea that he was an animagus.

And another thought: Lupin had the advantage because he knew Pettigrew was an animagus. It was far easier for Lupin to work out what had really happened. Once Lupin believed Black then Harry was far more likely to listen to black because Harry trusted Lupin. Snape however did not trust Lupin. He sincerely beleived that Lupin was working with Black and had even suggested to Dumbledore that he had been unwise to hire Lupin. As such his refusal to listen to Lupin and Black in the shack makes perfect sense.

Yes but my point is that there are mitigating circumstances so that while Snape's behaviour may be considered unreasonable it is however understandable. Strong emotions do tend to render people unreasonable.


When Lily was targetted by Voldemort Snape was sufficiently afraid for her life to meet with Dumbledore. He dedicated himself to her protection, but that failed due to Black's apparent treachery. When Lily died Snape was suicidal. He wanted to die. The reason for his utter depsair was that Lily was dead, and the reason Lily was dead was firstly because Voldemort had killed her, secondly that Black had apparently betrayed her and thirdly that Snape told Voldemort about the prophecy. (And yes I have deliberately put them in that order) Snape blames Black (yes I know it was really Pettigrew) for Lily dying because if it hadn't been for the treachery of the secret keeper she would have been alright. He also blames himself, and eases this burden of guilt by focusing on Black's guilt. He has done this for 12+ years, and when Black escapes all the old memories, all the guilt, all his grief and all his hatred for the traitor is stirred up and brought to the fore. Snape is unable to listen to Black because he is beyond reason - he cannot even consider the possibility that Black is innocent because he has believed it and lived it for 12+ years. For Snape it is just not possible that Snape is innocent - and I would venture to say that this is probably the immediate reaction of most relatives of murder victims who are told 12 years after the event that actually the person that has been in prison for the murder of their loved one for 12 years is possibly innocent. So Snape dismisses the idea as implausible and ludicrous because to him that is what it is.

I totally see where you are coming from. But I think that despite all of the time we have conversed on this topic, my perspective is not clear. When I read this, I think: the reason James is not alive and suffering over Lily's demise, blaming himself for being alive and his wife dead, trying to deal with intense heart break of losing a loved one who loved you equally in return and able to raise his son and show him love, is because Voldemort, Snape and Peter's activities ensured he died as well. The reason Lily is not alive, suffering, blaming herself, trying to deal with that same intense pain of losing the love of her life, and lovingly raising her son and teaching him little things like how to fix his glasses so Hermione doesn't have to do it, is because she too died as a result of the actions of these three. And these are Harry's parents.

So I have on a different pair of glasses (metaphorically) when considering this matter. Does that make sense? So perhaps that explains a bit of why I expect more from the survivors - all of them - Harry, Sirius, Lupin...right down to and including Snape. I understand wallowing in pain, but alas, they are not the real victims are they?

Snape is trying to establish a precedent of murderous intent - yes. The point being to show the riculousness of the story being presented by the trio. Snape's point is "Surely you're not going to beleive this ridiculous story Dumbledore - Black showed that he was a murder when he was fifteen" It is obvious to me :shrug:

Yeah, I got that. And if he showed it? Dumbledore would still be faced with the ridiculous story which he believed. I think Snape recognized that.

Snape's malice and vindictiveness towards Black is based on Black being the treacherous secret keeper guilt. The level of hatred that Snape felt for Black (which incidently I would never say was a good thing!) cannot be let go of just because new evidence has come to light - emotions don't work that way. It takes time for the new information to sink in and for the emotions to readjust themselves - it is a huge emotional upheaval, which is why Snape is not able to believe that Black is not guilty.

Right, but ditto my original response to your post here...

When I say that both Dumbledore and Snape were trying to prevent a miscarriage of justice what I am saying is that Dumbledore wasm trying to stop Black being Kisse dbecause he believed he was innocent, while Snape was trying to ensure that Black was kissed because he beleived he was guilty. Both men are trying to do what they beleive is right.

I understood - but how long, with a cool head, can a man go on denying the truth of the matter? He didn't have all of the facts, he knew it, yet he aggressively persisted in his beliefs. Could that make sense to Snape?

On the contrary Snape believed that Dumbledore was making a mistake by listening to the trio and that Black had quite literally got away with murder, I see absolutely no evidence to support the idea that Snape was knowingly trying to carry out an injustice. For his to be trying to carry out an injustice he would have to have known that Black was innocent, but Snape won't even entertain the idea that Black is innocent. If Snape was impartial regarding the Potters then I would agree with you that he was being not just unreasonable but also unjust by not listening to what Black and the others had to say, but his emotional involvement in the situation means that he does not want to hear that Black is innocent.

I understand what you are saying and respect your perspective on it and interpretation. I simply am looking at the situation from the light I spoke of above - through those glasses. And so I can't mitigate for Snape on that basis and I cannot have any understanding either. But I respect the fact that you can.

I don't see how Dumbledore was far from impartial - he had no particular attachment to the Potters that was greater than his attachment to Sirius Black. They were all members of the Order before the betrayal.
Lupin had lost not just the Potters but also he had lost Black as well - because his friend had ceased to be the person he thought he was.
Both Lupin and Dumbledore would have hated Black for betraying the Potters, but would have been glad to entertain the idea that Black might possibly be innocent - it would restore something back to them - the good character of Sirius Black. Therfore they are more emotionally open to the possibility of black being innocent - they are far more impartial.
Snape however had lost someone he loved very deeply to someone he absolutely loathed. In many ways Black had become Snape's scapegoat on which 12 years worth of if only's were placed.
I think it really comes down to how Black is perceived by these three characters and for Snape it is just too big a leap mentally and emotionally to accept that Black might be innocent. He is completely and utterly biaised against Black and nothing is going to shift him fromt hat position.

Well I understood your point there as well. But again, I do not see Snape as anything even approximating a victim. He is not the great wronged one. In the case of Snape, in particular, I expect even more because he had responsibility in Lily and James death. But that aside, they are the victims, not Snape. I have no sympathy for his self imposed trauma - and thus, it seems wholly unreasonable to me for him to dwell upon it in excuse for his actions. If Harry didn't do it - he lost his parents - then Snape didn't have to do it either as I see it, because he lost much less. And yes, even from his perspective he lost much less, imo. I feel he just built up his loss in his own mind to the point where he truly believed that he had lost something - but we all know that is not true in the least. Snape lost nothing because he had nothing whatsoever to lose. What little Snape had, he lost long before he even thought about losing anything back at 16. His ignoring the victims and wallowing in self-pity, focusing upon some perceived loss he imagines and feeling sorry for himself - and acting out on it - is entirely self-centered to me. Snape is in the same position he was always in, there was nothing stopping him from carrying on with his unrequited feelings for someone he'd never have or speak to again - someone who held him in disdain and wished to have nothing more to do with him last he spoke to them. His part in the kill should have made him focus on the victims, not himself. So I really cannot look at his behavior being based on that idea as any type of justification or means of understanding his actions.

I am sorry but I completely disagree with this. For a start you seem to be implying that Snape had no "grand sucess" even when he was trying to do the right thing because he made bad decisions. I would say that ultimately Snape's life was an absolute sucess because he accomplished what he set out to do - he protected Harry and he facilitated the demise of Voldemort. I suppose it comes down to what you regard as a "grand sucess" and in my book that is exactly what Snape was in the end. Surely there is no greater sucess than achieving your goal, and I think given the circumstances Snape did extraordinarily well.

I respect your view on that.


There are other people in the series who have no "grand sucess"

Agreed, I didn't mean to imply Snape was the only one.

but I would not say that this is a legacy of their character. I am a little disturbed by the implication that "Snape was a loser because he was a bad character" as if Jo is trying to show us some sort of moral lesson that "nice" people have "grand sucesses" whereas unpleasant people can't do anything right. I just don't beleive that Jo writes in such a naive and simplistic (and preachy) way.

Which bad or grey characters had grand successes? None to my memory. I am not saying that was some moral point she was making, merely that she wrote it that way.

And another thought: Lupin had the advantage because he knew Pettigrew was an animagus. It was far easier for Lupin to work out what had really happened. Once Lupin believed Black then Harry was far more likely to listen to black because Harry trusted Lupin. Snape however did not trust Lupin. He sincerely beleived that Lupin was working with Black and had even suggested to Dumbledore that he had been unwise to hire Lupin. As such his refusal to listen to Lupin and Black in the shack makes perfect sense.

I'd opine that Lupin had even more advantage than that. Deep down, while he wouldn't admit it on the face - he had to reasonably have retained some doubt about Sirius because he had known him and of James/Sirius relationship. He also had a relationship with both himself. Further, his quiet reasoning showed he wanted to believe the impossible - again, likely based on his own previous relationship and trust with Sirius as a friend. He also had the advantage of being a werewolf that was universally hated or at best disdained by most - thus, he could more easily place himself in Sirius' shoes when he confronted him. Also, this was the only issue he had with Sirius - he had no reservations about him being a murderer or liar, a trickster or deceiver from their youth in relationship to himself - they had been friends, not enemies.

So yeah, he had many advantages over Snape. But my statement was not comparative - clearly Lupin was partial, but in an opposing direction in comparison to Snape - my statement was merely to indicate that you didn't have 'impartial' - but the only way anyone judging the situation could do so was by "reasoning". Dumbledore, Hermione, Harry, Ron, Lupin, all reasoned their way to their final beliefs. I don't mean Snape didn't reason at all, I merely am saying that his reasoning was unreasonable.

And another thought: Lupin had the advantage because he knew Pettigrew was an animagus. It was far easier for Lupin to work out what had really happened. Once Lupin believed Black then Harry was far more likely to listen to black because Harry trusted Lupin. Snape however did not trust Lupin. He sincerely beleived that Lupin was working with Black and had even suggested to Dumbledore that he had been unwise to hire Lupin. As such his refusal to listen to Lupin and Black in the shack makes perfect sense.

If I'm not mistaken, Harry had also seen Pettigrew's name on the map, so he would also be more open to listening. Snape doesn't have any proof when he arrives in the shack and he is also outnumbered. If he let himself get distracted even more than he already was then he could have been taken down, which he was anyway but not in the manner by which one would expect. However, entertaining what would appear to be nonsense by a couple of very guilty looking people before they are secured would be silly for someone in Snape's position. I feel an auror would want to apprehend them first and listen later as well. Snape would probably not believe what he hears without proof anyway, but he would be doing what the authorities would likely do as well. If he knew for a fact that Sirius was innocent and carried on by taking him back to the castle then that's a different story. It is not what happened though. He may not have carried out what an auror would do in the most professional manner because of the emotional aspects to the situation, but ultimately he'd be accomplishing the same task, IMHO.

Edit: Pretty much agree with quite a lot of what Treacle Tartlet and Cathy Weasley post above. :)

...entertaining what would appear to be nonsense by a couple of very guilty looking people before they are secured would be silly for someone in Snape's position. I feel an auror would want to apprehend them first and listen later as well.

I think therein lay much of the problem though. Snape didn't declare he was planning to apprehend Sirius and Lupin and listen later. He said he was going to have them immediately kissed and not listen at all...

Snape didn't have authority to do that, nor did he appear to be saying one thing and intending another. He would not let anyone speak on behalf of either Lupin or Sirius (including them) and he bound Lupin and grabbed the end of the ropes - making as if to keep his word to 'drag the werewolf' along with Sirius at wandpoint, to be kissed. I felt that is what provoked the trio to act.

Right, but ditto my original response to your post here...Meaning you don't understand my reasoning? Well it is quite a straight forward concept - someone has clung to an idea for so long that they cannot immediatley accept that it might be wrong. The idea that reasoning alone holds sway over our actions and decision making processes is incorrect. Reason actually has far less influence on our decisions than emotion.

I understood - but how long, with a cool head, can a man go on denying the truth of the matter? He didn't have all of the facts, he knew it, yet he aggressively persisted in his beliefs. Could that make sense to Snape?Of course it could! Do you think that all intelligent people with the same information always agree? Of course they don't - just open any serious scientific journal!

I have no sympathy for his self imposed trauma - and thus, it seems wholly unreasonable to me for him to dwell upon it in excuse for his actions. If Harry didn't do it - he lost his parents - then Snape didn't have to do it either as I see it, because he lost much less. And yes, even from his perspective he lost much less, imo. I feel he just built up his loss in his own mind to the point where he truly believed that he had lost something - but we all know that is not true in the least. Snape lost nothing because he had nothing whatsoever to lose. What little Snape had, he lost long before he even thought about losing anything back at 16. His ignoring the victims and wallowing in self-pity, focusing upon some perceived loss he imagines and feeling sorry for himself - and acting out on it - is entirely self-centered to me. Snape is in the same position he was always in, there was nothing stopping him from carrying on with his unrequited feelings for someone he'd never have or speak to again - someone who held him in disdain and wished to have nothing more to do with him last he spoke to them. His part in the kill should have made him focus on the victims, not himself. So I really cannot look at his behavior being based on that idea as any type of justification or means of understanding his actions.
Undoubtedly Harry lost the most when Lily and James died, because he lost his parents. His loss however was far more of a physical loss. He lost the people who should have been the ones to care for him, and he lost the love of his parents. This loss could have been minimised had the Dursleys treated him well. He was not old enough to remember his parents so the most serious emotional trauma he suffered would have been relatively short lived. Young children are very adaptable. However to suggest that Snape didn't loose anything when Lily died is just plain wrong. Suffice it to say that when someone we love (or have loved) dies we always loose something. If you really cannot understand that then I don't think that any words of mine could explain it to you.

I don't mean Snape didn't reason at all, I merely am saying that his reasoning was unreasonable. But my point is that reason takes a back seat to emotion. Harry et al listened because they trusted Lupin - that is a decision based on emotion not reason.

He may not have carried out what an auror would do in the most professional manner because of the emotional aspects to the situation, but ultimately he'd be accomplishing the same task, IMHO. :agree: Yes exactly!

Sorry to interrupt your discussion, but who created this poll? What does Monty Python and the Spanish Inquisition have to do with Severus Snape? :lol:

Meaning you don't understand my reasoning? Well it is quite a straight forward concept - someone has clung to an idea for so long that they cannot immediatley accept that it might be wrong. The idea that reasoning alone holds sway over our actions and decision making processes is incorrect. Reason actually has far less influence on our decisions than emotion.

No, I understood what you meant, but our emphasis when considering the matter differs. I agree that Snape clung to his reasoning - but note that everyone involved held that reasoning and Lupin felt betrayed on top of it. Only Snape refused to listen though.

As I said, I see no reason for Snape to receive preferential consideration here. Others too were suffering "loss" - greater than Snape's loss - and they listened.

Undoubtedly Harry lost the most when Lily and James died, because he lost his parents. His loss however was far more of a physical loss. He lost the people who should have been the ones to care for him, and he lost the love of his parents. This loss could have been minimised had the Dursleys treated him well. He was not old enough to remember his parents so the most serious emotional trauma he suffered would have been relatively short lived. Young children are very adaptable.

Agreed, but unfortunately it didn't go that way and so he was abused and left desparate for loving parents of his own. Still he listened.

However to suggest that Snape didn't loose anything when Lily died is just plain wrong. Suffice it to say that when someone we love (or have loved) dies we always loose something. If you really cannot understand that then I don't think that any words of mine could explain it to you.

But that was not my point; of course I understand loss. Snape had no relationship with Lily - everyone else suffering, actually did. Snape lost Lily's friendship 5 years prior to Lily's death - not upon her death. So as I said at the beginning of my last post, I understand people are sad and feel a loss when someone dies, but I went on to say that there was no reason in the world, imo, for Snape to be more emo than anyone else and indeed, reason for him to be less so. I feel that all of the others involved had suffered a greater loss than Snape because they lost their friends/family that they loved and who loved them back in addition to feeling the ordinary sense of loss felt by people when someone dies.

Yet Snape took on the role of emo king, as if his loss was far greater than anyone else's - when it was the smallest of all losses. He had no friendship or even acquaintance type relationship with Lily when she died. He had nothing. He still had nothing after she died, so his position remained the same. His loss was mental - and he built it up out of proportion, imo. So it wasn't that there was "no loss" - it is that he "lost nothing" - which are two very different things. And I feel the "loss" he felt, he exaggerated - based on his response in mistreating Harry for years, being jealous of her husband and being overly emo for years over the topic of Lily.

That is why I do not excuse any of his behavior - or even understand it in terms of Lily's death. Snape's loss was completely and utterly personal in the most selfish of terms possible, imo. He blamed himself (which I find selfish introspection when one acts out on it - especially after 12 years) and what other possible "loss" Snape felt is a mystery because he never said. However, we know that he had no relationship wtih Lily when she died, so it had nothing to do with her in a physical true sense, imo (interaction, talking, laughing, showing regard, etc.). Snape was still jealous - so he was mourning a loss that had nothing to do with her death as well (except in terms of her going off with her beloved husband forever and hence, forever out of his reach - but we don't know if that was a part of his thinking). But all of that is completely selfish and has nothing to do with Lily's death, imo. Whereas others could miss her laughter, her wit, the person she was, the love she showed them and they had been able to show her, and everything about her at the time she died. And of course losing one's parents is self-explanatory.

Just to clarify, it has nothing to do with when a person last saw and interacted with Lily - but rather that Snape's friendship with her definitively "ended" 5 years previous to her death. So any of the strong emotional "missing of Lily" he showed throughout the series, he should have already been feeling before she died, not just afterward. And further if he were feeling that way prior to her death, then he should have done something about it when she was alive - he had 5 whole long years to do so - but he didn't. So coming on so strongly at her death (stronger subsequently in his negative behavior in comparison to others who suffered a far greater loss) - when all he could possibly feel is the loss normal to everyone who must endure the death of someone they knew, is entirely false and selfish, imo. Do you see what I mean?

What it comes down to is the type of character Snape was, imo. He was a character that over-exaggerated the ordinary loss of someone you know and built it up to a level that surpassed what others, who had lost far more actually felt . In other words, Snape's reaction had little to do with any realities involved with truly losing something on a personal level when a person dies. He was faced only with a general sense of loss and selfishly flipped it into something grandiose - as if it were bigger than what Harry, Sirius and Lupin felt put together. I totally respect that people can relate to the type of person/character that reacts that way, but I cannot.

But my point is that reason takes a back seat to emotion. Harry et al listened because they trusted Lupin - that is a decision based on emotion not reason.

In the story, the trio actually stopped trusting Lupin and accused him of being Sirius' commrade. It wasn't until Lupin gave them all of the wands that they were willing to listen. But at that moment, they did have all of the power and could have refused to listen - but they did not.

Sorry to interrupt your discussion, but who created this poll? What does Monty Python and the Spanish Inquisition have to do with Severus Snape? :lol:Because after almost 2 years since the last book came out, the same people are discussing/debating the same topics over and over again, you gotta poke fun at it just a little. :rotfl:

Anyway, it's been a while since I've been here, and I've pretty much fallen off the fandom bandwagon due to new things happening in real life. Usually the announcement of a new book would light the fire back up and I'd be back stalking Harry Potter sites all over again, but....yea. :sad: Plus I think I've discussed everything I could that it gets tiring. I thought I'd visit the forums since I haven't been here for so long. I do miss the craziness of the fandom. So I give mad props to the guys still here who still have the desire to keep up the discussions.



Anyway, I thought this little thing here was one of the best replies yet:
I agree, but after that he declared he was going to have Lupin kissed
See, this is why fandom is bad for you. It took me at least 20 seconds to understand the proper meaning of this line. :rotfl:HAHAHAHA!!! :lol:

Actually, I wonder just how the Aurors would have dealt with Sirius if they had found him.

They would ahve had him kissed. The Ministry had given a standing order that Black was to be kissed on sight (Lupin tells Harry in POA) and if the Aurors had found him, Sirius would have have been kissed at once.

Snape probably knowing the Ministry's orders (Lupin knew them too) also threatened to do the same and I believe he was well within his rights to do so.

Snape had no right to try and have Lupin kissed no matter how you toss the dice. Lupin was not wanted, had not been judged and there was no order associated with feeding him to the dementors. On the other hand, Snape might get by with leaving Sirius in a place where the dementors would "find" him, but according to Dumbeldore in GoF, he'd have no authority to call upon them - only Ministry officials did. But with Sirius, Snape's error was more associated to his not listening to a man trying to proclaim his innocence and instead insisting on seeing to his death because he wanted revenge, imo.

Yet Snape took on the role of emo king, as if his loss was far greater than anyone else's - when it was the smallest of all losses. He had no friendship or even acquaintance type relationship with Lily when she died. He had nothing. He still had nothing after she died, so his position remained the same. His loss was mental - and he built it up out of proportion, imo. So it wasn't that there was "no loss" - it is that he "lost nothing" - which are two very different things. And I feel the "loss" he felt, he exaggerated - based on his response in mistreating Harry for years, being jealous of her husband and being overly emo for years over the topic of Lily.

Snape was in love with Lily and the fact that she did not return that love, does not in any way diminish the depth of feeling he had for her, or make his love for her any less real. I believe that the day Lily died Snape lost all hope. When the love you have for someone is unrequited you cling to a deseperate hope against all the odds, that one day you will be together. You have to go on believing this because the alternative is just too painful to bear. It may be unrealistic and illogical, but love is not a logical emotion. You can't stop loving someone any more easily than you can choose with whom you fall in love with. Love does not have to be returned in order to make it a real emotion and the loss of someone you love whether they were in your life or not is felt with the same depth of feeling.

Snape is such a complex character (OK, sorry, I know I'm stating the obvious), it's no wonder he gives rise to such strong feelings, pro and con.

I'm not too fond of the character myself, to tell you the truth. I feel sorry for his sad life and his horrid and lonely death, but in life he was not a pleasant man. A brave one, yes, but not a likeable one.

His love for Lily may redeem him a bit, but it was a very selfish love. He didn't love her enough to be happy at her happiness, or to be kind to her son. If his hatred of James was stronger than his love for Lily, it doesn't say much for that love, does it? More like an obsession. I'm not even sure he loved Lily herself, but the idea he had of her, and the memories, from childhood on.

Now I'll run and hide in my spaceship before the Snape fans tear me to shreds. :scared: :eeep:

Snape is such a complex character (OK, sorry, I know I'm stating the obvious), it's no wonder he gives rise to such strong feelings, pro and con.

I'm not too fond of the character myself, to tell you the truth. I feel sorry for his sad life and his horrid and lonely death, but in life he was not a pleasant man. A brave one, yes, but not a likeable one.

His love for Lily may redeem him a bit, but it was a very selfish love. He didn't love her enough to be happy at her happiness, or to be kind to her son. If his hatred of James was stronger than his love for Lily, it doesn't say much for that love, does it? More like an obsession. I'm not even sure he loved Lily herself, but the idea he had of her, and the memories, from childhood on.

Now I'll run and hide in my spaceship before the Snape fans tear me to shreds. :scared: :eeep:

I agree with your assessment. I think with a little more effort when he was younger and in a position to expand his emotional connection with Lily he could have had a romantic relaitionship with her. I think this is how the author wrote him, and it is how I have always read him. This was prevented from happening by his own shortcomings and that is Snape's tragedy, and IMO that is what he came to see at the end of his life. That his life was wasted because he hated James more than he loved Lily.

Snape is a fascinating character, yes not a pleasant one but very very complex. I agree that his love for Lily thought unrequited doesn't make it less valid. For me though, his great tragedy was his unfulfilled potential. While academically gifted (we see many many instances of that) he became a sour bitter individual - there's no reason at all that other people couldn't have been made to see him like Lily saw him before he dubbed her a mudblood. He was capable of great and humane things but he didn't always do it. A great pity in my view.

there's no reason at all that other people couldn't have been made to see him like Lily saw him before he dubbed her a mudblood.

I believe that many people did see Snape like Lily saw him before he dubbed her a mudblood. It is just that Lily was "pretending" and making excuses and other people were not (per her own words in DH). Those who didn't make excuses and liked his behavior (like Mulciber and Avery, Lucius and Bella), thought Snape was great. But those who didn't like his behavior felt distinctly. So to me, if anyone was going to be made to see Snape as Lily saw him before he called her a Mudblood, I think they would have to be "pretending" and making excuses also. I simply do not feel that Snape was ever shown to be a nice person. There are not even hearsay stories about him being nice or doing anything nice (for instance Peter becoming an Animagi for a friend we don't see, but we hear about). Starting with Petunia and Lily, then on the train, and later at Hogwarts - as a DE and finally as a professor - Snape seemed to have the same character and personality throughout, imo.

As I said, I see no reason for Snape to receive preferential consideration here.I am not giving Snape preferential treatment. I would be interested to know how you came to that conclusion.

Agreed, but unfortunately it didn't go that way and so he was abused and left desparate for loving parents of his own. Still he listened.But Harry did not remember his parents, so unlike Snape he had no painful memories to haunt him. Harry's loss may have been greater, but Snape's suffering was intense.

Snape had no relationship with Lily - everyone else suffering, actually did. Snape lost Lily's friendship 5 years prior to Lily's death - not upon her death. So as I said at the beginning of my last post, I understand people are sad and feel a loss when someone dies, but I went on to say that there was no reason in the world, imo, for Snape to be more emo than anyone else and indeed, reason for him to be less so. I feel that all of the others involved had suffered a greater loss than Snape because they lost their friends/family that they loved and who loved them back in addition to feeling the ordinary sense of loss felt by people when someone dies. To start with I don't think any person has the right to define the extent of someone else's loss and grief. No person can tell another person how they should feel.
Secondly it is widely known that one of the big influences on grief is regret. If we have a lot of regrets concerning the deceased person then it can make the grieving process more difficult.

That is why I do not excuse any of his behavior - or even understand it in terms of Lily's death.I am not excusing his behaviour. I do not think he did anything that required excusing.

You say you do not understand Snape's behaviour, but then go on to give your opinion on his character and motivations. Of course you are entitled to form your own opinion on any character and are certainly free to express it here, but I am at a loss to understand how you can form any clear opinion of a character that you confess to not understanding.


Snape had no right to try and have Lupin kissed That is incorrect: Snape didn't try to have Lupin kissed. He threatened to have Lupin kissed which is an entirely different thing. - Just as there is a huge difference between threatening to kill someone and actually trying to kill them or have them killed.


Snape was in love with Lily and the fact that she did not return that love, does not in any way diminish the depth of feeling he had for her, or make his love for her any less real. I believe that the day Lily died Snape lost all hope. When the love you have for someone is unrequited you cling to a deseperate hope against all the odds, that one day you will be together. You have to go on believing this because the alternative is just too painful to bear. It may be unrealistic and illogical, but love is not a logical emotion. You can't stop loving someone any more easily than you can choose with whom you fall in love with. Love does not have to be returned in order to make it a real emotion and the loss of someone you love whether they were in you life or not is felt with the same depth of feelling.:agree: Absolutely!! And this is why Voldemort saw it as a weakness - because you cannot control love.
Snape saw showing love as a weakness, which is why he ended up having such a miserable life.
Harry was able to love and show his love. For him it was his greatest strength and the weapon that enabled him to defeat Voldemort.

For me though, his great tragedy was his unfulfilled potential. While academically gifted (we see many many instances of that) he became a sour bitter individual - there's no reason at all that other people couldn't have been made to see him like Lily saw him before he dubbed her a mudblood. He was capable of great and humane things but he didn't always do it. A great pity in my view. :agree: I agree!! For me too his tragedy was his unfulfilled potential. He and Lily were very good friends. Good enough friends to survive 4+ years in differnt houses and remain best friends. It is undeniable that as Snape grew closer to his Slytherin buddies he grew further away from Lily, and there is a part of me that says "If only he had been put in Ravenclaw" but then he was ambitious and I think that was his undoing.

He was certainly capable of great things, and I could see him as a very talented healer.

What saddens me as well is that there are real-life Snape's out there; gifted people whose early experiences turn them into "angry young men"

And nice to see you around again Liselle :)

Regarding Snape's unfilfilled potential - I disagree. He accomplishments by the time of his death at the age of 38 are not to be sneezed at. (Head of House/Headmaster at Hogwarts, discovery of Potions and spells, phenomenal skill in Occlumency, etc.) If he'd been given the chance (that is, if he had survived the war), I believe he could have gone on to one of the careers people suggest he ought to have pursued. He did not feel free to do so while Voldemort remained a threat to Harry. This is a choice I find admirable.

But Harry did not remember his parents, so unlike Snape he had no painful memories to haunt him. Harry's loss may have been greater, but Snape's suffering was intense.

I think Harry's experiences with dementors in PoA prove that he has painful memories regarding his parents, and they do affect him.

I agree that Snape suffered, but I also think one of his major problems was holding his suffering to be more important than anyone elses.

As to Snape's love for Lily, I don't consider it any one thing at all times. I think it, like most things, had different phases and changed quite a bit over time. To say it was 100% obsession or 100% selfless wouldn't be accurate, IMO. At the point where he was OK with Harry and James dying if Lily would only be protected was probably a selfish phase, but keeping her son alive, whatever the risk is pretty darn selfless...especially since he didn't even like the person he was protecting.

Unlike characters as diverse as Remus Lupin (complaining about being a spy among the werewolves and about his worries regarding his son), Sirius Black (complaining about staying at 12 GP), and Albus Dumbledore (worrying about the unpleasant death he might receive at the hands of Death Eaters), we never see Snape speak of his suffering. So I don't really see how we would conclude he thinks his is more important than anyone else's.

Based on this conspicuous lack of mention, I tend to think Snape takes a stoical view. People suffer, and that's just the way things are, there is no point in complaining about it. People who are not "weak" go on and do what needs doing, regardless. So he'll run the risks of being a Death Eater spy, face the comtempt of his fellow teachers who believe him a murderer, etc. without complaining to anyone about it, but on the flip side, he likewise does not go out of his way to worry about whether others are suffering. (Though he can be moved to compassion, as his initial reason for killing Albus shows).

So I don't really see how we would conclude he thinks his is more important than anyone else.

Well, I was talking about suffering from loss. Snape is moved to do something to save Lily from death because she means something to him. He is foremost concerned with how terrible the loss is to himself. He doesn't show me that he cares how much that loss means to Lily, James, or Harry, or any of their friends who loved them.

I am not giving Snape preferential treatment. I would be interested to know how you came to that conclusion.

Oh, I did not mean you :lol:. I meant I don't give Snape or anyone else (with the exception of Lupin in werewolf form) preferential treatment in analysis. Werewolves under a full mooon are of course deserving, that goes without saying - okay, centaurs and vampires too. :rotfl:

But Harry did not remember his parents, so unlike Snape he had no painful memories to haunt him. Harry's loss may have been greater, but Snape's suffering was intense.

Well I think we have to take Harry's nightmares into account. Also his familiarity when he finds out about them.

To start with I don't think any person has the right to define the extent of someone else's loss and grief. No person can tell another person how they should feel. Secondly it is widely known that one of the big influences on grief is regret. If we have a lot of regrets concerning the deceased person then it can make the grieving process more difficult.

I respect your view on that.

I am not excusing his behaviour. I do not think he did anything that required excusing.

You say you do not understand Snape's behaviour, but then go on to give your opinion on his character and motivations. Of course you are entitled to form your own opinion on any character and are certainly free to express it here, but I am at a loss to understand how you can form any clear opinion of a character that you confess to not understanding.

I meant I do not have any "understanding" for him - meaning in terms of sympathy. I understand the character.

That is incorrect: Snape didn't try to have Lupin kissed. He threatened to have Lupin kissed which is an entirely different thing. - Just as there is a huge difference between threatening to kill someone and actually trying to kill them or have them killed.

Agreed. I was speaking only in terms of authority. The Ministry had not condemned Lupin to be kissed or even arrested.

As to Snape's love for Lily, I don't consider it any one thing at all times. I think it, like most things, had different phases and changed quite a bit over time. To say it was 100% obsession or 100% selfless wouldn't be accurate, IMO. At the point where he was OK with Harry and James dying if Lily would only be protected was probably a selfish phase, but keeping her son alive, whatever the risk is pretty darn selfless...especially since he didn't even like the person he was protecting.

I agree Snape behaved distinctly at various times. I also agree that his agreeing to protect Harry so Lily's death would not be in vain was a selfless gesture in and of itself. Because of his role in her death, however, it wasn't entirely selfless. But more importantly, when he undertook to carry out his promise, he ended up doing so in the most selfish way possible, mistreating the boy cruelly all the while. So while he kept the promise on a procedural like basis, he certainly did not keep the "spirit" of the promise - that is, he didn't keep it in substance, imo.

Well I think we have to take Harry's nightmares into account. Also his familiarity when he finds out about them.
Well at the beginning of PS he has no idea that the dreams he has about the green light are to do with real events - he has no memory of them. He later realises that he has memories of the might his parents were murdered, though he struggles to access them with his conscious mind.

Snape on the other hand has in his mind constant prescence of the memories of what he did amd what happened as a consequence. His memories torture him, as we see when Dumbledore drives home the memory of Lily's eyes. I do not see Harry's memories torturing him in this way, though he obviously finds them disturbing once h knows what they are all about.


I meant I do not have any "understanding" for him - meaning in terms of sympathy. I understand the character.Aah I see. I have a lot of sympathy for Snape. The situation he is in is entirely of his own making, and if he allowed himself to let go he could reduce his suffering - but I think that is what arouses my compassion. I can't help but want to reach out to Snape.

Unlike characters as diverse as Remus Lupin (complaining about being a spy among the werewolves and about his worries regarding his son), Sirius Black (complaining about staying at 12 GP), and Albus Dumbledore (worrying about the unpleasant death he might receive at the hands of Death Eaters), we never see Snape speak of his suffering. So I don't really see how we would conclude he thinks his is more important than anyone else's.

I would respectfully disagree, examples:

-"You used me! I lied for you spied for you...etc...You don't tell me anything! But you tell Harry everything!" complaint to Dumbles

"Maybe I don't want to keep my promise to you after all"

"how dare you use my spells against me, just like your filthy father, I am the halfblood prince!"; HBP

"Me a coward? I wonder what you'd call your father" "Don't call me a coward!"; HBP

Destroying property, stealing and crying at #12G over a picture and letter; DH
"You won't tell anyone what you saw" OOTP

Ignores Mr. Weasley fresh back from his escape with death and storms from #12 in silence - except to remind Harry of his appointment

"Potter had something to do with it, I am sure of it!" POA

"I hoped to be the one to catch you, I've been wanting revenge" POA

"A little talent on the Quidditch pitch...strutting around with your friends"

"I want to die!" DH

(All paraphrased)
--------

I could go on and on - Snape constantly spoke of his 'suffering' in a very real and verbal sense, imo, and I have left out numerous incidences where he behaved his in a cruel and vindictive manner on account of his emotions. Snape was a very arrogant man, imo, and took every opportunity to whine in a "poor me" sense - and the only reason he did not come out and state the underlying truth (his emotions for Lily, his hardships in spying) was because it was all a secret, and where it wasn't, nobody cared to hear it from him and he knew it, imo. So I feel he fashioned another way to vent his sufferings on the world, rather than discussing his very real concerns in a manner that others like Lupin and Sirius did.

Based on this conspicuous lack of mention, I tend to think Snape takes a stoical view. People suffer, and that's just the way things are, there is no point in complaining about it. People who are not "weak" go on and do what needs doing, regardless. So he'll run the risks of being a Death Eater spy, face the comtempt of his fellow teachers who believe him a murderer, etc. without complaining to anyone about it, but on the flip side, he likewise does not go out of his way to worry about whether others are suffering. (Though he can be moved to compassion, as his initial reason for killing Albus shows).

Well I believe the paraphrased quotes I gave above say just the opposite, although I respect your view. I feel that Snape was not stoic at all in those instances, he complained left and right. Snape could be as weak as the next guy and showed it on numerous occassions. He could also be very cowardly on occassion and he showed that as well, imo. I agree he had little to no compassion for others, Tonks, Harry and Arthur come to mind - but he did have the potential to show some (Dumbledore's hand), even if he bungled it (Draco in HBP) - and I think it was the same with the suffering. Snape had the potential to withstand playing at emo king (as your points indicate) - but he gave into it way more often than not, imo, as my quotes show - as well as the many, many incidents I left out (his incidents with the children, interactions with adults, the minister, ratting out Lupin, and more). I think that the occassions where Snape showed bravery, or compassion or interest or restraint, prove that he had the potential to be the type of person you describe. However, I don't feel that he came close to reaching that potential.

Snape could be as weak as the next guy and showed it on numerous occasions.

Such as --?

He could also be very cowardly on occassion and he showed that as well, imo.

Examples from canon? :huh: That hardly jives with Harry's assessment of him as "probably the bravest man I ever knew"! :whistle: :)

Snape is a bitter man and is at fault for taking out his ancient grudge against James on Harry. In his bitterness, he acts unfairly.

But, a coward he is not. And although he is often bitter, he can also be extremely stoic. Such as when Albus asks him tremulously if he is prepared (to go to the graveyard) and he nods grimly and silently. If that wasn't brave, offering himself up to Voldemort as the penitent Death Eater, come to plead for clemency (and everything depended on Snape being able to convince Voldemort that he was genuine), frankly I don't know what was.

Well at the beginning of PS he has no idea that the dreams he has about the green light are to do with real events - he has no memory of them. He later realises that he has memories of the might his parents were murdered, though he struggles to access them with his conscious mind.

Snape on the other hand has in his mind constant prescence of the memories of what he did amd what happened as a consequence. His memories torture him, as we see when Dumbledore drives home the memory of Lily's eyes. I do not see Harry's memories torturing him in this way, though he obviously finds them disturbing once h knows what they are all about.

Well I guess we just see this distinctly. I felt Harry's thoughts were way more daunting and horrifying for him. Snape did have memories, as did Sirius and Lupin, Dumbledore and many others, but none as potent, imo. The memories of Lily's eyes - as well as James' face, haunted Sirius far more, imo. But I wasn't really trying to make a competition out of it, merely saying that everyone had their bit to deal with and imo, all of them had the responsibility to recognize who the real victims had been within the framework of their suffering.


Aah I see. I have a lot of sympathy for Snape. The situation he is in is entirely of his own making, and if he allowed himself to let go he could reduce his suffering - but I think that is what arouses my compassion. I can't help but want to reach out to Snape.

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I think your sympathy (and everyone else's) is an admirable trait. I can truly respect it. I simply don't play my sympathy card in the same way. My favorite character in the world, Vader, get's not an ounce of sympathy from me, so it is just that we see it distinctly. Its all good though.

Such as --?
Examples from canon? :huh: That hardly jives with Harry's assessment of him as "probably the bravest man I ever knew"! :whistle: :)

Snape is a bitter man and is at fault for taking out his ancient grudge against James on Harry. In his bitterness, he acts unfairly.

But, a coward he is not. And although he is often bitter, he can also be extremely stoic. Such as when Albus asks him tremulously if he is prepared (to go to the graveyard) and he nods grimly and silently. If that wasn't brave, offering himself up to Voldemort as the penitent Death Eater, come to plead for clemency (and everything depended on Snape being able to convince Voldemort that he was genuine), frankly I don't know what was.

I neither called him a coward nor stated he could not be stoic. I was merely pointing out that while he may have evidenced bravery and stoicism on occassion, on many occassions he also showed the opposite, imo. I gave examples in canon of both.

Hmm... I can't help but wonder what Jo thinks about the bad boy Snape provoking such interest - if memory serves me well, she wanted her bad guys... well, bad.

However...

I found wickedwickedboy's comment on people's perception of Snape most enlightening - is it so different from our own everyday experience that a bullied misfit might turn to, so to speak, the wrong side of the fence for support and acceptance?

One thing I was always curious about: that worst memory, in broad daylight, with at least a dozen students there... and Sirius never mentioning any consequences, if only to ease Harry's conscience? :hmm:

Does it stand to reason that a teenager with history of abuse would set it as his priority, the first chance he gets, to assure he's capable of fighting back? And it's not like Jo offered him any other options out there...

Lilly was too young, probably, even if she was a childhood friend, to see his lashing out as an attempt to remove her from the scene of his impending utter humiliation. The bad company she insisted he kept? Well, was there any other offering on the horizon? And by the time the things escalated, it wasn't it already too late to turn back - what hope was there of reentering the society where one had been pegged an outcast from the very start?

The moment Snape does turn his back on the whole DE scheme, however, he offers "Anything" in exchange for Lilly's safety - had the plan worked (and I do not believe for a second he expected her to be grateful, run tearfully into his arms, or anything of the similar, melodramatic sort), he would have had one saving grace for a lifetime of misery, someone who carried positive memories of him from the time before the entire Voldemort business - and, unsurprisingly, Dumbledore takes him up on his offer. And then some.

Why was he so certain Snape would not suffer a change of heart in those two decades? Had he been, so to speak, in his shoes once upon a time?

Whether Snape comes to bemoan his fate and his choices in the years to come is completely beside the point for me. Fact is, he delivers what he had promised, no more and no less: to keep Lilly's son alive, not to treat him as his own. (A point to be considered: think of the Privet Drive party and their motives and deeds)

That, I think, given the circumstances, is all one can hope to do.

Hmm... I can't help but wonder what Jo thinks about the bad boy Snape provoking such interest - if memory serves me well, she wanted her bad guys... well, bad.

However...

I found wickedwickedboy's comment on people's perception of Snape most enlightening - is it so different from our own everyday experience that a bullied misfit might turn to, so to speak, the wrong side of the fence for support and acceptance?

Not at all, however, I don't feel that is what occurred in Snape's storyline. What JKR showed was a young boy of 11 who was already bent on being placed in Slytherin, already made an exploration of dark curses and learned them, already held prejudice against Muggles and saw them as inferior just for not being magically born, and already willing and able to stand up for himself against anyone who disagreed with his values and at the same down denounce theirs. (Deathly Hallows) So while I agree that your proposition is one that stands up to our normal understanding of how people tick, that was not what made Snape tick, imo. Snape was not shown to be a bullied misfit when he displayed the above and while he was later shown to be both, he was simultaneously shown to be a bullying young man who carried deep prejudices against others and enjoyed a level of cruelty against others that was no greater than that which he received, imo (dark magic against Mary - just a laugh - Deathly Hallows).

One thing I was always curious about: that worst memory, in broad daylight, with at least a dozen students there... and Sirius never mentioning any consequences, if only to ease Harry's conscience? :hmm:

What type of consequences are you referring to?

Does it stand to reason that a teenager with history of abuse would set it as his priority, the first chance he gets, to assure he's capable of fighting back? And it's not like Jo offered him any other options out there...

Well again, I think that whatever level of abuse he may have felt from his homelife may have impacted his decisions - but I am truly uncertain that he pursued his dark interests with an eye to getting back at his father. His father was a Muggle, he could get back at him via learning ordinary magic and indeed he knew dark curses, so I assume he knew some light ones also. But that did not stop him from continuing to pursue his interests and we don't hear of him ever attacking his father. So I am not certain that reasoning stands up for Snape.

Lilly was too young, probably, even if she was a childhood friend, to see his lashing out as an attempt to remove her from the scene of his impending utter humiliation. The bad company she insisted he kept? Well, was there any other offering on the horizon? And by the time the things escalated, it wasn't it already too late to turn back - what hope was there of reentering the society where one had been pegged an outcast from the very start?

Snape had troubles and issues, I don't think anyone would argue that. However, I wouldn't be quick to toss responsibility for his actions and behavior around on circumstances and events about him - or other people. Neville too was a bit of an outcast, timid, laughed at, faced the exasperation of others and humiliated openly by professors - in addition to being picked on by Draco and his mates. Yet he did not seek retaliation in the form of dark magic - and understand that dark magic is distinct from "Voldemort" who wished to destroy the world. Dark magic would be a powerful means for Neville to get back at everyone - including Voldemort who had harmed his parents.

So I do not agree that Snape had no avenues available to him except the one he took. To me that is a very narrow view of life, especially in terms of the wizard world. His enemies too wished to get back at him for the harms they perceived they had sustained at his hands, but they did not turn to dark magic to do so. And Neville, Luna, and other outcasts did not zoom to Voldemort's side merely because their housemates, enemies, professors or others humiliated, denounced, made fun of and teased, had their things stolen and hidden from them, or otherwised caused their lives to be a horrible experience. Everyone is distinct in how they respond to life and Snape was also distinct. He found an interest in the dark side of things early on in life and we don't know why and can only speculate. But he never turned from that interest - however, to say that he was influenced into that interest is incorrect, imo. Although naturally his housemates and he likely encouraged one another's interest, that is normal. Lily discouraged it and he ignored her. I don't think the rest of the student body had much influence on him at all in terms of his interest, although using it against them was something he partook in (calling others mudblood, creating dark curses for his enemies, etc.)

The fact is, if we determine that everything in Snape's life was responsible for his turn down the dark path and it was not a freely made and desired choice; in my judgment, we would also have to say that his choosing to reject evil was made because of all of those same things. In otherwords, I do not believe in the idea that people are wholly influenced to do bad as a result of having no alternatives and the influences around them, - but then make free and autonomous choices to do good that are completely and wholly personal choices - despite being surrounded by all of those horrible influences. That reasoning would be totally flawed, imo. That is the case with Snape - when he chose to jump to the good side, his influences were all awful at the time, a bunch of death eaters with subversive ideas, actions and intent - surely no one would try to say that those influences caused him to jump sides. And yet, we are to believe that such influences could make him fall to the bad side - that to me is unreasonable. In both cases he had the opposing influence of Lily, so that doesn't help matters, imo.
Whether Snape comes to bemoan his fate and his choices in the years to come is completely beside the point for me. Fact is, he delivers what he had promised, no more and no less: to keep Lilly's son alive, not to treat him as his own. (A point to be considered: think of the Privet Drive party and their motives and deeds)

I would respectfully disagree - in part. As I say, I think Snape kept his promise to keep Harry safe from Voldemort, through his spying and following other orders by Dumbledore. However, he did not keep the "spirit" of his promise in that Snape rendered Harry in need of protection from him - and that was not a part of the bargain or even a contemplated outcome, imo. Snape's cruel mistreatment of Harry cannot be shoved under the carpet in the framework of the story, imo, especially in light of his mantra: "I'm doing it all for Lily". His treatment of Harry showed that his jealousy and dislike of Harry's father was greater than any purported love he had for Harry's mum, imo, so I do not see his efforts as at benevolent in nature, merely a selfish means of keeping a promise.

It is interesting you bring up those folks at Privet Drive because I feel that Snape stood right in their shoes when Harry was at Hogwarts, ensuring that Harry continued to recieve the same mistreatment he was receiving at home. And it is ironic that Petunia and Snape, enemies in their own right, each selected a parent to hate and vent their hatred on the son - two people who one would think would be the very last people on earth to mistreat that child, imo.

First I want to take a sec to applaud Cathy Weasley. I'm gonna go set up camp over there, and serve sandwiches! :clap:



Does it stand to reason that a teenager with history of abuse would set it as his priority, the first chance he gets, to assure he's capable of fighting back? And it's not like Jo offered him any other options out there...

Lilly was too young, probably, even if she was a childhood friend, to see his lashing out as an attempt to remove her from the scene of his impending utter humiliation. The bad company she insisted he kept? Well, was there any other offering on the horizon? And by the time the things escalated, it wasn't it already too late to turn back - what hope was there of reentering the society where one had been pegged an outcast from the very start?

The moment Snape does turn his back on the whole DE scheme, however, he offers "Anything" in exchange for Lilly's safety - had the plan worked (and I do not believe for a second he expected her to be grateful, run tearfully into his arms, or anything of the similar, melodramatic sort), he would have had one saving grace for a lifetime of misery, someone who carried positive memories of him from the time before the entire Voldemort business - and, unsurprisingly, Dumbledore takes him up on his offer. And then some.

Why was he so certain Snape would not suffer a change of heart in those two decades? Had he been, so to speak, in his shoes once upon a time?

Whether Snape comes to bemoan his fate and his choices in the years to come is completely beside the point for me. Fact is, he delivers what he had promised, no more and no less: to keep Lilly's son alive, not to treat him as his own. (A point to be considered: think of the Privet Drive party and their motives and deeds)

That, I think, given the circumstances, is all one can hope to do.

Two fantastic points here... were there any other friends in the offing? Had James and Siruis done their best, as soon as hitting Hogwarts grounds, to make sure Snape was set up as an outcast. Did Snape's own perception of himself set him apart?

And second, I think it's a very valid point that Snape was supposed to keep Harry alive. There was no mention about accepting him as he would one of his own or treating him as such. Even though we don't really see how Snape treated other houses, was harry really treated all that much differently than how he treated the rest of the Gryffindors? We don't get to see how he treats another Gryffindor in detention for example. So while I doubt he'd have another kids' father to harp on as he did with Harry we don't know that he gave those students better treatment than he did Harry. How would our perceptions of Snape change if the story hadn't been told from Harry's POV?

How would our perceptions of Snape change if the story hadn't been told from Harry's POV?

How different would our perceptions of Harry be if told from Draco's POV? I feel that Snape's character came across perfectly in the framework of the actual story we got, not one we may have gotten if JKR had written him or the story distinctly. Indeed, speculation on Snape's feelings is interesting, but in terms of canon, we have no idea what he was thinking, we can only base our interpretations on what was given in canon and there he was shown, imo, to behave in a cruel, vindictive, prejudiced, bullying manner from start to finish. There is more to his character than that of course, but I won't ignore that aspect when considering his overall character and focus only upon his bravely spying or those moments when he was honorably attempting to carryout Dumbledore's plan. I respect that others interpret him distinctly, but I can only go by what I saw on page.

What JKR showed was a young boy of 11 who was already bent on being placed in Slytherin, already made an exploration of dark curses and learned them...

And what exactly are the dark curses? I was always curious about that (apart from the Unforgivables, of course). And somehow I fail to see how a potentially feisty student would get dubbed "Snivellus" by his peers... Then again, maybe I have selective memory when it comes to the proverbial underdogs. (OK, so Snape is turning in his grave now because of the canine reference). :lol:

What type of consequences are you referring to?

Like, I don't know... Someone reporting the bullying and James&Co getting detention? ;)

Everyone is distinct in how they respond to life and Snape was also distinct.

I couldn't agree more. I was just making a point that it is, from a purely human point of view, understandable. The influences point (because it's 3:30 AM here and I'm too tired to quote properly)? Yeah: same influences, free will choice. A point in my book here.

...I do not see his efforts as at benevolent in nature, merely a selfish means of keeping a promise.

I agree on the James point, and it is too bad, but would've interpret "selfish" to mean "why would he give a damn about a promise given at a time of emotional distress, when he can simply run for it".

As for extracting revenge on his father, I was actually thinking along the lines of "being able to defend himself in general, seeing as he tended to attract a lot of unwanted attention wherever he went" :lol:

I hope you understand I'm not trying to overlook the bad parts, I'm just trying to get them into a perspective.

And what exactly are the dark curses? I was always curious about that (apart from the Unforgivables, of course). And somehow I fail to see how a potentially feisty student would get dubbed "Snivellus" by his peers... Then again, maybe I have selective memory when it comes to the proverbial underdogs. (OK, so Snape is turning in his grave now because of the canine reference). :lol:

Well we could likey write a book on the various ways "dark curse" is interpreted. :lol:. But wizards differentiate them - whatever basis upon one wishes to figure it.

Like, I don't know... Someone reporting the bullying and James&Co getting detention? ;)

Oh retribution. Well I don't really think that would have made Harry feel better at all. His only concern was that his father had been a horrible person who would force his mother to marry him and crush all of humanity in his path. His papa got zapped by Voldemort in the end, so he could have just thought "he got his in the end" and been satisfied in terms of retribution, but that isn't what concerned him. Sirius was only addressing the issue of Harry's dad having been a berk kid that grew up - that was what Harry needed to hear. Harry was hesitant to let go of his old thoughts of a saintly papa who had done no wrong - ever. But he worked it out, he was back to defending his papa against Snape at the end of the book. But at the time, he was unwilling to appreciate the fact that his father had once been a kid too. Much as he figured out about himself after the sectumsempra incident. Harry's response to SWM was immature in that most kids of 15 don't make overblown generalizations based on so little evidence, but in terms of getting Harry to grow up before our eyes, it was a workable idea on JKR's part.

I couldn't agree more. I was just making a point that it is, from a purely human point of view, understandable. The influences point (because it's 3:30 AM here and I'm too tired to quote properly)? Yeah: same influences, free will choice. A point in my book here.

:lol: Well as I was pointing out to Cathy earlier, my sympathy card - or my "understanding" nature, is not drawn out by characters like Snape. But I can understand that some people are drawn to sympathy by his character. I don't see a problem in that - we are all different and it is cool.

I agree on the James point, and it is too bad, but would've interpret "selfish" to mean "why would he give a damn about a promise given at a time of emotional distress, when he can simply run for it".

Dumbledore's alternative was way better than running for it, imo. I think Snape was intelligent enough to realize that. Besides, he was vulnerable when it came to Lily because he blamed himself for his part in her death. He made a free choice there, based on his alternatives, his emotions, etc. I think it was a good one. I just don't think he carried it out in the spirit in which it was asked.

As for extracting revenge on his father, I was actually thinking along the lines of "being able to defend himself in general, seeing as he tended to attract a lot of unwanted attention wherever he went" :lol:

But who was giving him unwarranted attention at that time? We know his dad may have intimidated him. But he needed no defense against Petunia or other muggle born children in the neighborhood. So that is why I figured if anyone, it would be his papa - but even his papa was a muggle. That leads me to believe Snape wasn't thinking in terms of defense when learning spells. Perhaps he was thinking offense - or merely being able to show them off - or merely learned them because as JKR put it, the dark arts fascinated him.

*will refrain from raising the further point of "who-and-how" of learning the dark arts before school, as its' nearly 5AM and she's unintelligible to all by herself*

And you didn't comment on his nickname, you know... I expect some book-thumping, wand-wielding arguments when I'm back tomorrow! ;)

And what exactly are the dark curses? I was always curious about that (apart from the Unforgivables, of course). And somehow I fail to see how a potentially feisty student would get dubbed "Snivellus" by his peers... Then again, maybe I have selective memory when it comes to the proverbial underdogs. (OK, so Snape is turning in his grave now because of the canine reference). :lol:

Ah sorry, I got carried away by the other interesting point you raised. Well the name Snivellus, as you may recall, was bestowed after about a 20 minute meeting between 11 year olds (DH, The Prince's Tale). So either James or Sirius (the text is not clear who) invented a not nice nickname for someone they were quarreling with which is pretty normal for kids to do. It was not a name with meaning to be associated with his character, imo, because he was not sniveling in that conversation, but rather aggressively behaving in a similar manner to those he was speaking with. I rather believed that it was derived from his name by the kid who came up with it. Lily had just called him "Severus" and the speaker simply changed it up a bit as kids will, with a similar sound in cadence and syllables. Sni-vel-us - Se-ver-us. I recall my name being distorted from Marcus to Mucus when I was young and I had no sinus trouble, it was just a convenient similar sounding word that no enemy could resist. :lol:

Ah sorry, I got carried away by the other interesting point you raised.
If I hadn't known better I would've taken that as a compliment, mate. ;)

...he was not sniveling in that conversation, but rather aggressively behaving in a similar manner to those he was speaking with.
With all due respect... Condescending, perhaps. Agressive? Nope. Haven't seen Snape tripping anyone in that particular scene. :p

I recall my name being distorted from Marcus...
Nice to meet you, Marcus. *nods* It's Maria. Fair exchange, I hope.

Namecalling here works a bit differently with kids, so I suppose that's why it didn't make sense to me. Even so, I see no reason why it would stick (there are so many things that could be as hurtful) unless someone was trying to capitalize on Snape's... err... inability to best his antagonists. I don't see why anyone would keep calling a person they think represents any danger whatsoever "Snivellus". Just my two cents, though...

We could go on doing adult character profiles of abused/insecure children (and don't draw Neville or Luna on me again, I'll trump you with the fact they both had someone loving - family, even - to turn to when everything else went awry), but fact remains Snape is Jo's character and it was her choice to leave him the way he was throughout the series. :)

As for myself, as a reader I reserve my right to glower at the following excerpt:

"I wish... I wish I were dead..."
"And what use would that be to anyone?" said Dumbledore coldly.

Regardless of all said and done, under those particular circumstances, I'd do my darnedest to hex the man silly and to Forbidden Forest with the consequences! So at least Snape's a better man (make that "person") than I am... :lol:

One thing struck me last night after you drew the parallel between Petunia and Severus: isn't it Riddle we're supposed to compare Snape to?

If I hadn't known better I would've taken that as a compliment, mate. ;)

:rotfl: truly I am not a monster.

With all due respect... Condescending, perhaps. Agressive? Nope. Haven't seen Snape tripping anyone in that particular scene. :p

Well since neither of our responses is 'sniveling' we are cool on this one. In that the name didn't designate character.

Nice to meet you, Marcus. *nods* It's Maria. Fair exchange, I hope.

Hallo Maria.

Namecalling here works a bit differently with kids, so I suppose that's why it didn't make sense to me. Even so, I see no reason why it would stick (there are so many things that could be as hurtful) unless someone was trying to capitalize on Snape's... err... inability to best his antagonists. I don't see why anyone would keep calling a person they think represents any danger whatsoever "Snivellus". Just my two cents, though...

Well first, I don't think Snape's enemies perceived him as a danger any more than he perceived them as a danger. So I don't think that factored into it. And in my experience Nicknames last a very long time. My grade school enemy used it when he pleased for a couple of years until he became my best mate. :lol:. But I am sure they naturally fade out anyway - eventually. Like Draco calling Harry "pottyface" or whatever it was, that didn't last much beyond their initial years if memory serves. I don't think everyone considers names hurtful in that circumstance, because they generally come from someone you have taken a disliking to and they just make you angry - unless you refer to the name caller, because yeah, it can be hurtful to them when the person punches them out for calling them that. But in a psychological sense, negative words from enemies generally have little effect as they are expected.


We could go on doing adult character profiles of abused/insecure children (and don't draw Neville or Luna on me again, I'll trump you with the fact they both had someone loving - family, even - to turn to when everything else went awry), but fact remains Snape is Jo's character and it was her choice to leave him the way he was throughout the series. :)

I agree Jo kept Snape's character the same. But I don't agree with the assumption that Snape had no loving family to turn to. I felt that his mother was loving based on the fact that she escorted him to Hogwarts, we never saw her yelling at him or anything - and he proudly adopted her family name "Prince" when he created his title, 'halfblood prince'. I doubt he'd do the latter if he felt unloved by her. It would be like Harry adopting the name "Denizen Dursley" or something, :lol:.

As for myself, as a reader I reserve my right to glower at the following excerpt:

"I wish... I wish I were dead..."
"And what use would that be to anyone?" said Dumbledore coldly.

Regardless of all said and done, under those particular circumstances, I'd do my darnedest to hex the man silly and to Forbidden Forest with the consequences! So at least Snape's a better man (make that "person") than I am... :lol:

Why does that make you glower? I thought Dumbledore was rather brilliantly manipulating Snape over to the good side throughout the conversation. He said a lot of things that were not nice, but Snape wasn't a person that would respond to being treated nicely at that period in his life in my judgment. Dumbledore likely felt it necessary to use strong language and behavior to break through the Death Eater levels and reach the person beneath the belief system if possible.

One thing struck me last night after you drew the parallel between Petunia and Severus: isn't it Riddle we're supposed to compare Snape to?

Riddle? When it comes to their respective treatment of Harry, you mean? I don't know if we really wish to drive down that road...I see stop signs and red lights flashing. :lol:. But if you have something specific in mind, we can discuss it. :tu:.

:rotfl: truly I am not a monster.

No, but I just might be. :relax:

But in a psychological sense, negative words from enemies generally have little effect as they are expected.

I somehow think "Snivellus" would tend to have a bit more affect than some, given Snape's personality. *shrugs* In any case, it was a good shot by the boys.. *chalks up points for Gryffindors*

But I don't agree with the assumption that Snape had no loving family to turn to. It would be like Harry adopting the name "Denizen Dursley" or something, :lol:.

I'm not disputing the fact that his mother didn't seem to harbor negative feelings towards him. I'm pointing out my belief he had no one to turn to. And he might have been betting on the Prince name for blood purity or sense of grandeur, for all I know; I wouldn't put it past Professor.

"Denizen Dursley" is just so... wrong! *has mental flashes of Dustin Hoffman*

Dumbledore likely felt it necessary to use strong language and behavior to break through the Death Eater levels and reach the person beneath the belief system if possible.

Appeal to his sense of... what, exactly? I've always wondered about that - duty and honor rarely figure in conversations bent on one Severus Snape. :lol:

Riddle? When it comes to their respective treatment of Harry, you mean.

Nah. I was actually thinking about the character traits that developed from being an outsider. But that would be one long-winded discussion and no fun at all.

But I wasn't really trying to make a competition out of it, merely saying that everyone had their bit to deal with and imo, all of them had the responsibility to recognize who the real victims had been within the framework of their suffering.
As I recall wick you were the one who compared Snape's suffering to others and claimed that it wasn't as severe as others. I was merely replying to your point with evidence to back up my opinion. I agree they all had issues to deal with when James and Lily died - and that includes Snape.


Hmm... I can't help but wonder what Jo thinks about the bad boy Snape provoking such interest - if memory serves me well, she wanted her bad guys... well, bad.I think what Jo didn't want was all the teenage girls falling in love with bad boy Draco Malfoy because the actor who played him is good looking. She also didn't want girls to believe that they could change a bad boy. I also think that in Jo's work the distinction between bad and good characters is deliberately unclear. Most characters are shades of grey. Snape was as it turned out working for the order, and as such I suppose he can be classified as a good guy - he wasn't nice though. I personally think that Jo is quite pleased at the amount of interest in Snape - he was the big question mark in the series, and that he remained ambiguous until the last book is a credit to her writing.

what hope was there of reentering the society where one had been pegged an outcast from the very start?Exactly! :agree:

Snape was not shown to be a bullied misfit
But that is exactly what Snape is shown to be - he is unpopular (as Harry notices during SWM) Sirius describes him as and "oddball", and he is shown being bullied. I am sorry but I cannot see how you can say he was not shown to be a bullied misfit.

Well again, I think that whatever level of abuse he may have felt from his homelife may have impacted his decisions - but I am truly uncertain that he pursued his dark interests with an eye to getting back at his father. His father was a Muggle, he could get back at him via learning ordinary magic and indeed he knew dark curses, so I assume he knew some light ones also. But that did not stop him from continuing to pursue his interests and we don't hear of him ever attacking his father. So I am not certain that reasoning stands up for Snape.Children who are abused by their parents (or a parental figure) rarely "get back at them" or attack them physically as they are generally to terrified of them. They do however frequently display violent behaviour towards others, and are often bullied misfits as Snape was.

First I want to take a sec to applaud Cathy Weasley. I'm gonna go set up camp over there, and serve sandwiches! Thank you! :blush:

Namecalling here works a bit differently with kids, so I suppose that's why it didn't make sense to me. Even so, I see no reason why it would stick (there are so many things that could be as hurtful) unless someone was trying to capitalize on Snape's... err... inability to best his antagonists. I don't see why anyone would keep calling a person they think represents any danger whatsoever "Snivellus". Just my two cents, though...Exactly! It is a belittling name - similar to the ones Draco uses for Harry and Ron (Potty and the Weasle) - and name calling is of itself bullying.

I agree Jo kept Snape's character the same. But I don't agree with the assumption that Snape had no loving family to turn to. I felt that his mother was loving based on the fact that she escorted him to Hogwarts, we never saw her yelling at him or anything - and he proudly adopted her family name "Prince" when he created his title, 'halfblood prince'. I doubt he'd do the latter if he felt unloved by her. It would be like Harry adopting the name "Denizen Dursley" or something,
We never see Eileen be affectionate towards her son, which I think is a far more relevant point. Children need more than anything to be loved by their mothers and Eileen's lack of affection would have been very damaging. Snape's use of his mothers name does not automatiacally indicate that he felt loved by her - it expresses IMO his desire not to have a muggle name which would have been a severe handicap in Slytherin house. And lastly your comparison with Harry adopting the Dursley name does not work because the Dursleys are not his parents - Harry knows he is an orphan, so his rejection by the Durlseys is not the same as rejection by his parents - not by a long shot!

Appeal to his sense of... what, exactly? I've always wondered about that - duty and honor rarely figure in conversations bent on one Severus Snape. :lol:

Um...not appeal to his sense of anything. Rather try to speak in such a way that Snape would not have to muddle through his belief system in dealing with decisions and responses. He was moaning that he wished to die, so Dumbledore capitalized on an issue which was not directly related to Death Eaterism. Thus, Snape did not have to make a decision on whether to give up all of his beliefs, plans, hopes and outlook in as far as "good v. evil" in that moment. Instead, he just reeled him in by the feet as it were, on pretenses having nothing to do with that particular topic. Dumbledore had plans for Snape, so I am not trying to say his motive was pure or benevolent. Merely that Snape wasn't exactly in the mood for hearing philosophy related to why the good side was better than the evil side in that moment, if you know what I mean.

Dumbledore had plans for Snape, so I am not trying to say his motive was pure or benevolent.
Hang on... *eyes slitted with suspicion* You're trying to tell me that Dumbledore's intent actually wasn't mirroring the spirit of his invitation?

:lol:

I know exactly what you mean about listening to philosophy at that moment. But I must admit I'm mightily amused by Dumbledore's decision to plan anything with Snape. He either liked his bets high and risky, or he knew something no one else did... in which case I'd like to know why he failed to play Jiminy Cricket sooner than later.

Not that I dislike scheming old conjurers per se, I'm just curious like that... *shrugs*

As I recall wick you were the one who compared Snape's suffering to others and claimed that it wasn't as severe as others. I was merely replying to your point with evidence to back up my opinion. I agree they all had issues to deal with when James and Lily died - and that includes Snape.

Well that wasn't exactly what I said. I think he behaved in a manner that indicated he was suffering more than anyone else, but I feel he had less reason to do so. But I do feel that is because his thoughts were centered on himself - rather than the victims. I believe we disagree on this, so we can just agree to disagree if you like. :)

I think what Jo didn't want was all the teenage girls falling in love with bad boy Draco Malfoy because the actor who played him is good looking. She also didn't want girls to believe that they could change a bad boy. I also think that in Jo's work the distinction between bad and good characters is deliberately unclear. Most characters are shades of grey. Snape was as it turned out working for the order, and as such I suppose he can be classified as a good guy - he wasn't nice though. I personally think that Jo is quite pleased at the amount of interest in Snape - he was the big question mark in the series, and that he remained ambiguous until the last book is a credit to her writing.

Actually JKR said the same thing about both Draco and Snape in that regard. She didn't wish her fans to fall in love with characters of that type in the sense of seeing them as 'bad boys'. However, I agree she is likely pleased that both Draco and Snape garner interest in terms of characters.

But that is exactly what Snape is shown to be - he is unpopular (as Harry notices during SWM) Sirius describes him as and "oddball", and he is shown being bullied. I am sorry but I cannot see how you can say he was not shown to be a bullied misfit.

Well you cut off my statement. I said: "Snape was not shown to be a bullied misfit when he displayed the above" - which referred to when he was 9-10 years old before Hogwarts. I went on to say: "while he was later shown to be both, he was simultaneously shown to be a bullying young man who carried deep prejudices against others and enjoyed a level of cruelty against others that was no greater than that which he received, imo (dark magic against Mary - just a laugh - Deathly Hallows)."

So I agree he was later a bullied misfit, but he was also a bullying misfit, imo. Again, very like Draco in being both a bully and bullied. Draco too was a misfit, but of a very different sort as he could simultaneously be the envy of others due to his wealth, Quidditch talent and intelligence. But no one liked him or befriended him except some in his own house, they would only admire his 400 Galleon hair cut and the fact that he dressed to the 9's with the latest broom in hand from afar. Snape didn't have those added benefits, which spoke to power in a way that Snape likely appreciated. That is because people looked at Snape in askance due to his poor appearance and hygiene and he was not athletically talented - but he shared the misfit part where he was disliked by all but some in his house. So he'd likely feel more of an outcast as he'd never even get the admirable looks for a nice fine coat, shiny hair or a cool Quidditch play. Too, it is possible that some in Snape's house looked at him in askance for his appearance and hygiene (Lucius and Bella come to mind) - so their acceptance of him would likely also be accompanied by disparaging looks now and again.

We never see Eileen be affectionate towards her son, which I think is a far more relevant point. Children need more than anything to be loved by their mothers and Eileen's lack of affection would have been very damaging. Snape's use of his mothers name does not automatiacally indicate that he felt loved by her - it expresses IMO his desire not to have a muggle name which would have been a severe handicap in Slytherin house. And lastly your comparison with Harry adopting the Dursley name does not work because the Dursleys are not his parents - Harry knows he is an orphan, so his rejection by the Durlseys is not the same as rejection by his parents - not by a long shot!

I don't feel that we were shown Eileen rejected Snape - or his father for that matter. There was abuse between the parents that I think would affect Snape mentally - but that is as much as we saw in as far as his parents were concerned. I think if Snape was abused and rejected he would have been the one to get the story about running away from home instead of Sirius. It is Sirius who I feel was likely abused and canon tells us he was rejected. But there is no similar story for Snape - he was just in a home where the parents waring would have a negative affect on him from what we know. I think that leaves room for Eileen to have shown some love.

JKR could have had Snape's mum dump him off at the Hogwarts station and leave as the Dursleys did Harry - but she stayed at his side while he boarded. I think there is evidence that she wasn't a complete deadbeat mum.

Hang on... *eyes slitted with suspicion* You're trying to tell me that Dumbledore's intent actually wasn't mirroring the spirit of his invitation?

:lol:

I know exactly what you mean about listening to philosophy at that moment. But I must admit I'm mightily amused by Dumbledore's decision to plan anything with Snape. He either liked his bets high and risky, or he knew something no one else did... in which case I'd like to know why he failed to play Jiminy Cricket sooner than later.

Not that I dislike scheming old conjurers per se, I'm just curious like that... *shrugs*

Well as he told Snape, he knew Voldemort would return. He would definitely need a spy in his pocket when the time came. But first he had to win Snape over to the good side - as Rome is not built in a day - that would take some time. But to lay it all on him in that moment - well, I don't think would have been a very effective way to go about things. Snape wasn't ready for it, and I figure that Dumbledore slowly led him toward the lake until Snape finally drank. Snape would have had a lot of thoughts that were off kilter - recall he said that he used to watch those die he could save, and that he felt muggle borns were inferior and that he had a great amount of disrespect for at least part human magical beings which he considered 'dark creatures'. So all of these things would take time in changing and if Dumbledore was going to get a loyal spy out of the deal, it would be worth it to take the time and energy necessary to help Snape see the light.

I don't feel that we were shown Eileen rejected Snape - or his father for that matter. There was abuse between the parents that I think would affect Snape mentally - but that is as much as we saw in as far as his parents were concerned. I think if Snape was abused and rejected he would have been the one to get the story about running away from home instead of Sirius. It is Sirius who I feel was likely abused and canon tells us he was rejected. But there is no similar story for Snape - he was just in a home where the parents waring would have a negative affect on him from what we know. I think that leaves room for Eileen to have shown some love.

I think there is more evidence to tell us that Snape was neglected as a child. In The Prince's Tale, the nine year old Snape is described as, "dirty-haired" and wearing, "too short jeans, a shabby, overlarge overcoat that might have belonged to a grown man, an odd smock-like shirt." All this, strongly suggests to me that he was not cared for in a loving manner by either of his parents. As the saying goes; "A picture paints a thousand words."

I must admit I'm mightily amused by Dumbledore's decision to plan anything with Snape. He either liked his bets high and risky, or he knew something no one else did


I'm of the view that Dumbledore believed Severus's remorse after the Potter’s death because he saw it mirroring his own on Arianna’s death. He would have understood the way love and death can destroy even the most ardent interest jmho :)

Thank you, TTarlet. *nods*

Martin, why would Dumbledore want to risk it with Snape on his side in the first place? I can't see him being that sure of his charm not to consider that he might not be able to keep Severus in line until the end. :hmm:

Too many inexplicable things there... Unless, of course, you take the whole "Love" business seriously. Which - and pardon me for sounding like a cynical old bat here - I am too old to do.

And now that we've successfully scared every single teenage student from participating in this discussion, I will humbly take my leave for the time being. :lol:

So I agree he was later a bullied misfit, but he was also a bullying misfit, imoThere is no evidence that Snape was a bully while he was a schoolboy - none whatsoever.
Draco too was a misfit, I don't see that at all :no:

I would also say that Snape would not have been all that popular in Slytherin house because unlike Draco he did not have a wizarding name. As such it would have been widely known within the house that he was not a pure-blood and this would have set him apart from at least some of his fellow Slytherins. I think this would have been far more important than poor hygiene - which in my experience of teenage boys they couldn't care less about.

I don't feel that we were shown Eileen rejected Snape Okay so may be "rejection" is too strong a word for Snape's mother, but my point remains the same. When he was at Hogwarts Harry knew that his parents had loved him even though
they were dead - in fact they had died for him! Snape's parents were at best neglectful and at worst abusive - and I maintain that Snape using his mother's maiden name in his nickname does not imply in anyway that he had a good relationship with her; it only implies that he had a better relationship with his mother then he did with his father which given the evidence is not saying much.

JKR could have had Snape's mum dump him off at the Hogwarts station and leave as the Dursleys did Harry - but she stayed at his side while he boarded. I think there is evidence that she wasn't a complete deadbeat mum.But the care and attention lavished on other children by their parents (eg the Weasleys) at King's Cross is conspicuously lacking in the scene we see with Snape and his mother. Jo only has a limited amount of pagespace to get across Snape's history, and as such I think we can take the lack of affection shown here as the norm.


Well as he told Snape, he knew Voldemort would return. He would definitely need a spy in his pocket when the time came. But first he had to win Snape over to the good side Snape had already been working for the good side for some months before the Potters died.

Too many inexplicable things there... Unless, of course, you take the whole "Love" business seriously. Which - and pardon me for sounding like a cynical old bat here - I am too old to do.Age has nothing to do with it! *points to age*
There is nothing I take more seriously than love!


I think Dumbledore did exactly the right thing for Snape when Snape expressed the wish to be dead - he gave him a goal and a reason to stay alive. He sounded harsh but I think this was a good thing. He gave him a sort of mental slap - and IMHO could well have saved Severus's life by doing so.

There is no evidence that Snape was a bully while he was a schoolboy - none whatsoever.
I don't see that at all :no:

I respect your view, we'd have to just agree to disagree on this.

I would also say that Snape would not have been all that popular in Slytherin house because unlike Draco he did not have a wizarding name. As such it would have been widely known within the house that he was not a pure-blood and this would have set him apart from at least some of his fellow Slytherins. I think this would have been far more important than poor hygiene - which in my experience of teenage boys they couldn't care less about.

Oh I agree with you on that. That is why I named a couple of specific people that were portrayed as rather hoity-toity (Lucius and Bella). Like Draco with Lupin's clothes, that set might look down on a person for such things. But his status may have also played a role for some. But you know, there were other half bloods and according to JKR even a muggleborn could slip into Slytherin. I don't think that mattered as much because Voldy was very popular at Hogwarts and he too had 'no name' when it came to his last name. Both Snape and Voldy had a magical family name though through their mums. Snape's dark interests would be enough to keep him accepted by the gang, imo.

Snape had already been working for the good side for some months before the Potters died.

Yes, but with a purpose because Lily was still alive. With his incentive gone, Dumbledore would have to help him discover a new one. Protecting Harry was a nice start because it incorporated Snape's old reason. But it was more important to get Snape to readjust his values in the long run, imo. Protecting Harry does not equal redemption.

Okay so may be "rejection" is too strong a word for Snape's mother, but my point remains the same. When he was at Hogwarts Harry knew that his parents had loved him even though
they were dead - in fact they had died for him! Snape's parents were at best neglectful and at worst abusive - and I maintain that Snape using his mother's maiden name in his nickname does not imply in anyway that he had a good relationship with her; it only implies that he had a better relationship with his mother then he did with his father which given the evidence is not saying much.

But the care and attention lavished on other children by their parents (eg the Weasleys) at King's Cross is conspicuously lacking in the scene we see with Snape and his mother. Jo only has a limited amount of pagespace to get across Snape's history, and as such I think we can take the lack of affection shown here as the norm.

To add to this and what Treacle Tartlet mentioned earlier, one should take into account the comparison drawn between Severus and James on the train. James had the air of being well cared for that Severus so conspicuously lacked. I'm paraphrasing, but that's more or less what it says in that section. IMHO, it's pretty clear that Snape was not well cared for as a child. I think there is evidence (most of which has been recently brought up) that his emotional, physical, social and perhaps intellectual needs were not sufficiently met.

I think Dumbledore did exactly the right thing for Snape when Snape expressed the wish to be dead - he gave him a goal and a reason to stay alive. He sounded harsh but I think this was a good thing. He gave him a sort of mental slap - and IMHO could well have saved Severus's life by doing so.

I completely agree. And IMHO, in the years that followed Severus learned to value all human life and to believe in the side that he was fighting on...

Protecting Harry does not equal redemption.

I'm pretty sure this was repeated back in v.2 of this thread, but since Snape's redemption is being mentioned again, I'll get back into it. We can debate his actions all we want as to whether they do redeem him or not, but I think JKR did it herself through Harry and the epilogue. Harry had went on to defend Snape against Voldy during the final battle, made sure his portrait was up in the headmaster's office, made sure the truth about Snape and what he did as spy was heard, and even named his son after him.

Like I said, we can debate Snape's actions all we want, but I think we're forgetting that this is also a book. There are things outside of a character's own actions that communicate what had become of that character if you analyze the story. Harry naming his son Albus Severus IMO is very good example of that. (Besides, with the way Snape died and him being dead, everything about him had to be revealed else wise.) That this character is someone that achieved something and deserved to be honored. JKR has criticized Snape many times, as she should. But I don't think JKR would have chosen for Harry to do such things in Snape's name if honoring Snape wasn't what she wanted to communicate. As JKR said in her Carnegie Hall interview "right at the very very end, he did, as your question acknowledges, acheive a kind of peace together and I tried to show that in the epilogue." I think that serves as some form of redemption right?

Then again, it's not like we have to follow that. We're all entitled to judge a character the way we want to. But I'm gonna go with what JKR intented, and I think she did a good job of showing what she intended.

I'm pretty sure this was repeated back in v.2 of this thread, but since Snape's redemption is being mentioned again, I'll get back into it. We can debate his actions all we want as to whether they do redeem him or not, but I think JKR did it herself through Harry and the epilogue. Harry had went on to defend Snape against Voldy during the final battle, made sure his portrait was up in the headmaster's office, made sure the truth about Snape and what he did as spy was heard, and even named his son after him.

Like I said, we can debate Snape's actions all we want, but I think we're forgetting that this is also a book. There are things outside of a character's own actions that communicate what had become of that character if you analyze the story. Harry naming his son Albus Severus IMO is very good example of that. (Besides, with the way Snape died and him being dead, everything about him had to be revealed else wise.) That this character is someone that achieved something and deserved to be honored. JKR has criticized Snape many times, as she should. But I don't think JKR would have chosen for Harry to do such things in Snape's name if honoring Snape wasn't what she wanted to communicate. As JKR said in her Carnegie Hall interview "right at the very very end, he did, as your question acknowledges, acheive a kind of peace together and I tried to show that in the epilogue." I think that serves as some form of redemption right?

Then again, it's not like we have to follow that. We're all entitled to judge a character the way we want to. But I'm gonna go with what JKR intented, and I think she did a good job of showing what she intended.

Ya, but she also said that Harry understood that Snape loathed him unfairly to the end and despite that, she wanted forgiveness from Harry for Snape and redemption for Snape. So that is incorporated in that 'peace' you spoke of. I interpret that to mean that Snape reached a place where he acknowledged that Lily loved James and they expressed their love through their son - hence he could look in "james" face to see "lily's" eyes for the first time - if only for a second. From Harry's POV he would see it was something that Snape could do, if the circumstances were pressing enough (like his exiting the earthly wizard world unsure where he might be headed) - but something he hadn't achieved in actual life. But the man had tried to honor his mother, and although he failed miserably, he did try and since it was obvious (to me) that his jealousy made him hate Harry's dad more than he loved Lily, it was pretty good, from Harry's view, that Snape was able to accomplish the good he did within the framework of Snape's overall negative character. In honoring Snape's spying effort which benefited Harry, Harry is also honoring his parents' sacrifices.

But to me - all of that is about Harry. It has nothing to do with Snape's redemption. Snape has to earn redemption for his personal wrongs and sins. Harry cannot bestow redemption on him - nor can anyone else, imo. Snape had to obtain that for himself. Readers have to decide for themselves within the scope of the story whether or not they feel he was redeemed. We know JKR wanted it - she said so - the question remains whether or not she supplied it. I don't think about it much any more - I just determined he wasn't redeemed and I'm happy with that decision. I think others have reached their own decisions about it by now also.

So that is incorporated in that 'peace' you spoke of.Just to clarify completely, that wasn't me. That was JKR's quote. You'll find it literally in the very last sentence of her interview here. Carnegie Hall Interview (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/10/20/j-k-rowling-at-carnegie-hall-reveals-dumbledore-is-gay-neville-marries-hannah-abbott-and-scores-more)
But the man had tried to honor his mother, and although he failed miserably, he did try and since it was obvious (to me) that his jealousy made him hate Harry's dad more than he loved Lily, it was pretty good, from Harry's view, that Snape was able to accomplish the good he did within the framework of Snape's overall negative character. In honoring Snape's spying effort which benefited Harry, Harry is also honoring his parents' sacrifices.Well, that could be your interpretation. I don't think Harry honoring Snape had anything to do with him honoring his parents. My interpretation of Harry was that he understood what happened, what Snape did for the Order and in Lily's name, and thought it as something that deserved honor. He already honored his parents in different ways, so honoring Snape just to indirectly honor his parents would be pointless I think. I also don't think it makes much sense.

But to me - all of that is about Harry. It has nothing to do with Snape's redemption. Snape has to earn redemption for his personal wrongs and sins. Harry cannot bestow redemption on him - nor can anyone else, imo. Snape had to obtain that for himself. Readers have to decide for themselves within the scope of the story whether or not they feel he was redeemed. We know JKR wanted it - she said so - the question remains whether or not she supplied it. Well the issue of whether or not Snape was redeemed is stil being talked about almost 2 years after the books are done, so obviously it's still up for debate at least for us. Like I said, we can judge Snape's actions all we want. But we never find out the full truth of what he did for the Order and why till after he died. So I don't see how he would have had the chance to make up for anything. If that's the case, should we fault the author for not giving him the chance to do so because she killed him off too soon? This is why I'm relying more on the symbolism in the books on whether or not Snape was redeemed, because the man is already gone. JKR chose his death to be what it was, but I don't think she would have done it with the impression that Snape went to hell or something of that sort. Which is why I think she had to communicate it through Harry, since he is the only one who knows the truth right after Snape's death (and he's the main character). Again, through Harry, I think she does a good job of it. Naming his son after him I think is obvious.
I don't think about it much any more - I just determined he wasn't redeemed and I'm happy with that decision.Analyzing the story and what the author tries to communicate goes along with analyzing the character. Like I said, this is a book. Things can be communicated through other ways and there's writing styles and what not to do it.

Again, through Harry, I think she does a good job of it. Naming his son after him I think is obvious.This points to Harry's overall forgiving nature and not necessarily to Snape's being 'redeemed', though.

Just to clarify completely, that wasn't me. That was JKR's quote. You'll find it literally in the very last sentence of her interview here. Carnegie Hall Interview (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/10/20/j-k-rowling-at-carnegie-hall-reveals-dumbledore-is-gay-neville-marries-hannah-abbott-and-scores-more)
Well, that could be your interpretation. I don't think Harry honoring Snape had anything to do with him honoring his parents. My interpretation of Harry was that he understood what happened, what Snape did for the Order and in Lily's name, and thought it as something that deserved honor. He already honored his parents in different ways, so honoring Snape just to indirectly honor his parents would be pointless I think. I also don't think it makes much sense.

Oh, that is what I meant - that you had referred to what JKR said, the "peace" spoken about. I was just giving my interpretation of her words, together with her other quote. In my view, Harry knew a lot of brave people that did great things for the Order and the wizard world. The difference with Snape wasn't that he did something better or greater than anyone else, it was that he claimed he was doing it to honor Lily's sacrifice. In my opinion, he did a poor job of it - but Harry forgave him for those things I don't forgive him for (like mistreating Harry and the other kids). So he could honor the spying Snape did.

It was Snape who agreed to do it so Lily's death would not be in vain. So that is what Snape was attempting to do, imo. Thus, that is what Harry wished to honor. But from Harry's view, it would be that the spying was to his benefit, so it honored both of his parents sacrifices - it isn't like either of his parents would have told Snape not to do it on his behalf. :lol:. But I can respect the fact that you see it distinctly.

Well the issue of whether or not Snape was redeemed is stil being talked about almost 2 years after the books are done, so obviously it's still up for debate at least for us. Like I said, we can judge Snape's actions all we want. But we never find out the full truth of what he did for the Order and why till after he died. So I don't see how he would have had the chance to make up for anything. If that's the case, should we fault the author for not giving him the chance to do so because she killed him off too soon? This is why I'm relying more on the symbolism in the books on whether or not Snape was redeemed, because the man is already gone. JKR chose his death to be what it was, but I don't think she would have done it with the impression that Snape went to hell or something of that sort. Which is why I think she had to communicate it through Harry, since he is the only one who knows the truth right after Snape's death (and he's the main character). Again, through Harry, I think she does a good job of it. Naming his son after him I think is obvious.

Actually until you brought it up, it hadn't been discussed in quite some time in this thread anyway. But I do feel there might be people that are still trying to figure it out. I myself have it all figured - and it sounds like you do too. :tu:.

I agree JKR was hoping that she had written enough to allow people to find redemption - after all, she said she wanted it for Harry, and I figure she'd like at least some readers to agree with Harry. But for my part, she didn't achieve her goal. The two points she failed to address dealing with Snape's remorse and repentance were very important to me. So I simply don't find him redeemed. But if those points are not important to others, then they can perhaps allow for redemption for Snape. I cannot allow for it as Snape was written on page, but I respect the fact you do. :)

Analyzing the story and what the author tries to communicate goes along with analyzing the character. Like I said, this is a book. Things can be communicated through other ways and there's writing styles and what not to do it.

Well I think it depends on who you are conversing with. Some people take her words as canon and other people do not. I consider her words canon myself, but she didn't say Snape was redeemed, she said she 'wanted forgiveness and redemption' for Harry - and so I assume he forgave and saw Snape as redeemed. But she also said not everyone in the wizard world would see it that way - Rita would write an article along the lines of 'angel or devil' or some such. So I feel she understood that some people would not see Snape as redeemed based on the way she wrote him. I am one of those people. I don't really think it matters all that much though.

This points to Harry's overall forgiving nature and not necessarily to Snape's being 'redeemed', though.

IMHO, it indicates both. It points towards Harry being capable of forgiving and Snape being worthy (can't think of a better word at the moment) of that forgiveness. It says to me that Harry forgave the bad but he chose to honor the good in naming his child after Snape.

I honestly think that if Harry just wanted to forgive Snape and did not see him as being redeemed or did not want to honor him then he would not have named his son after him. I don't believe he did that to show how forgiving he was or to honor his parents. He named his other children after his parents in order to honor them.

I honestly think that if Harry just wanted to forgive Snape and did not see him as being redeemed or did not want to honor him then he would not have named his son after him. I don't believe he did that to show how forgiving he was or to honor his parents. He named his other children after his parents in order to honor them.

I agree. Naming one's child is a big deal. There are many things to consider in the process, and even if Harry did want to name his son after someone who was entirely unredeemed (a long shot), the child's mother does not have her husband's forgiving streak. Ginny would have objected on the grounds that the man Harry was suggesting they name their son after was not worthy of such an honor. But Ginny did not object (if she had, Albus Severus would not be named what he was). She must have seen there was some merit to the idea-- that Snape did deserve to be honored. And of course, she'd be right.

I honestly think that if Harry just wanted to forgive Snape and did not see him as being redeemed or did not want to honor him then he would not have named his son after him. I don't believe he did that to show how forgiving he was or to honor his parents. He named his other children after his parents in order to honor them.
Same here. And like I said, I also thought this was JKR way's of communicating Snape achieved some sort of peace, as she said in the Canegie hall interview. Besides, isn't the main character one of the main outlets the author communicates what they want anyway?

I agree. Naming one's child is a big deal. There are many things to consider in the process, and even if Harry did want to name his son after someone who was entirely unredeemed (a long shot), the child's mother does not have her husband's forgiving streak. Ginny would have objected on the grounds that the man Harry was suggesting they name their son after was not worthy of such an honor. But Ginny did not object (if she had, Albus Severus would not be named what he was). She must have seen there was some merit to the idea-- that Snape did deserve to be honored. And of course, she'd be right.
Good point! :)

I agree. Naming one's child is a big deal. There are many things to consider in the process, and even if Harry did want to name his son after someone who was entirely unredeemed (a long shot), the child's mother does not have her husband's forgiving streak. Ginny would have objected on the grounds that the man Harry was suggesting they name their son after was not worthy of such an honor. But Ginny did not object (if she had, Albus Severus would not be named what he was). She must have seen there was some merit to the idea-- that Snape did deserve to be honored.
And of course, she'd be right.

I agree. I also have to look at the passage of time here. He was named long after the events at Hogwarts. It says to me that after all of those years Harry still considered those two men important to him personally. And as you said Ginny would have to either agree or understand the reasoning behind Harry's thought process.

Same here. And like I said, I also thought this was JKR way's of communicating Snape achieved some sort of peace, as she said in the Canegie hall interview. Besides, isn't the main character one of the main outlets the author communicates what they want anyway?


True, and earlier in the books I think the reader (many of them anyway) is also meant to be misled by the main character as he is misled by his misconceptions, assumptions, personal feelings, ect. By the end though I think as far as Harry (and likely Ginny) is concerned Snape stands redeemed and I found that a touching moment.

I don't think that mattered as much because Voldy was very popular at Hogwarts and he too had 'no name' when it came to his last name. Both Snape and Voldy had a magical family name though through their mums. Snape's dark interests would be enough to keep him accepted by the gang, imo.But there are Slytherins for whom this is most definitely a big deal - Bella for example makes some reference to Harry being a "filthy half-blood" so I think it did matter a lot. Pure-bloods were accepted without question. Others had to prove themselves and I get the feeling were never "quite one of us". Voldemort was such a powerful wizard and personality that he became 'leader of the gang' as it, were based on that. He also acquired a strong prejudice against muggles and muggleborns to the extent that at 16 he was trying to kill them! Snape however did not have Riddles charm or force of personality. He was a half-blood, with a muggleborn best friend. All he had to recommend him to his fellow Slytherins was an interest in the Dark Arts.

IMHO, it indicates both. It points towards Harry being capable of forgiving and Snape being worthy (can't think of a better word at the moment) of that forgiveness. It says to me that Harry forgave the bad but he chose to honor the good in naming his child after Snape.

I honestly think that if Harry just wanted to forgive Snape and did not see him as being redeemed or did not want to honor him then he would not have named his son after him. I don't believe he did that to show how forgiving he was or to honor his parents. He named his other children after his parents in order to honor them.

I feel since JKR said she wanted forgiveness and redemption in relation to Harry - that is how he necessarily saw things. He likely explained his opinion to his wife and she agreed with him. Readers too can take that view and agree with Harry, but the only thing Harry told us about his view was that he thought Snape was brave.

Well that is not enough to go on as I see it - even just in relation to Harry. Snape still helped to murder his parents, still adopted Dumbledore's plan and helped manipulate Harry (willing for him and his dad to die on the hill; willing for Harry to die at the end - where is the growth?), still mistreated Harry throughout their whole relationship as well as other children. He was still not nice to many of his peers and he still showed disrespect for Harry's family - the majority of which he helped to kill.

So if Harry wants to forgive all of that, cool. But I don't forgive any of it. Also if Harry wants to see Snape as redeemed, that is great also. But redemption to me has nothing to do with Harry's forgiveness - for me. First because I don't forgive what he did to Harry and others. Second because redemption to me requires remorse and repentance, elements I feel are missing for Snape on a couple of fronts for his deeds associated with evil. I don't accept the idea of imputing these things on others - they can either state them or forget about it.

But there are Slytherins for whom this is most definitely a big deal - Bella for example makes some reference to Harry being a "filthy half-blood" so I think it did matter a lot. Pure-bloods were accepted without question. Others had to prove themselves and I get the feeling were never "quite one of us". Voldemort was such a powerful wizard and personality that he became 'leader of the gang' as it, were based on that. He also acquired a strong prejudice against muggles and muggleborns to the extent that at 16 he was trying to kill them! Snape however did not have Riddles charm or force of personality. He was a half-blood, with a muggleborn best friend. All he had to recommend him to his fellow Slytherins was an interest in the Dark Arts.


Right, but Bella was in love with Riddle - a name that didn't make it onto any of her old family trees. So the 'filthy half blood' to me was similar to "blood traitor". That is, those half bloods and pure bloods who did not go for all the blood purist ideas and side with Voldy got these titles. That was not the case for Snape.

I feel since JKR said she wanted forgiveness and redemption in relation to Harry - that is how he necessarily saw things. He likely explained his opinion to his wife and she agreed with him. Readers too can take that view and agree with Harry, but the only thing Harry told us about his view was that he thought Snape was brave.

Which is no small compliment from a Gryffindor, first of all. Second of all, that was just one moment in time in which he was trying to indicate to his son that one could be brave and still be in Slytherin, since the concern about sorting was the topic of conversation. And lastly, I still think there was more to naming his son after the man than admiration for his bravery, even though I don't look at it as a small compliment for Harry to make. Just naming his son after him is a huge honor and compliment to the man, as well as an indicator of forgiveness towards past misdeeds either real or perceived, IMHO.

Well that is not enough to go on as I see it - even just in relation to Harry. Snape still helped to murder his parents, still adopted Dumbledore's plan and helped manipulate Harry (willing for him and his dad to die on the hill; willing for Harry to die at the end - where is the growth?), still mistreated Harry throughout their whole relationship as well as other children. He was still not nice to many of his peers and he still showed disrespect for Harry's family - the majority of which he helped to kill.

I disagree on your perception of many of these things. And I think it likely that Harry would as well.

So if Harry wants to forgive all of that, cool. But I don't forgive any of it.

Snape isn't real so any forgiving should be shown through the characters of the story and we are to make of that what we will.


Also if Harry wants to see Snape as redeemed, that is great also. But redemption to me has nothing to do with Harry's forgiveness - for me. First because I don't forgive what he did to Harry and others. Second because redemption to me requires remorse and repentance, elements I feel are missing for Snape on a couple of fronts for his deeds associated with evil. I don't accept the idea of imputing these things on others - they can either state them or forget about it.

Well I do not base my feelings of Snape's redemption solely on Harry, as I stated earlier. However, we don't look at Snape actions and words and feelings in the same way so I think that's why Harry's words to Albus Severus and the name of the boy were just an extension of what I already took from the text.

Right, but Bella was in love with Riddle - a name that didn't make it onto any of her old family trees. So the 'filthy half blood' to me was similar to "blood traitor". That is, those half bloods and pure bloods who did not go for all the blood purist ideas and side with Voldy got these titles. That was not the case for Snape.

I think it would matter to people like Bella because to a crazed blood purist a half-blood would have dirty blood, and as such would likely be inferior. I think Snape would be aware that he likely didn't quite measure up to wealthy friends with pure blood. I think what made him useful was his interest in the Dark Arts and his intelligence in various type of magic. Even if he was accepted by these people I think it's well within his character at the time to believe he didn't have the same status as those with purer blood, and IMHO, he'd be right.

Even though this is straying from the topic, but would Bella have known that Riddle was Voldemort's name and that he was a half-blood? I was under the impression that she did not know this and since she went to the school at a different time than Voldemort then she would be even less likely to know. I could be wrong though.

Which is no small compliment from a Gryffindor, first of all. Second of all, that was just one moment in time in which he was trying to indicate to his son that one could be brave and still be in Slytherin, since the concern about sorting was the topic of conversation. And lastly, I still think there was more to naming his son after the man than admiration for his bravery, even though I don't look at it as a small compliment for Harry to make. Just naming his son after him is a huge honor and compliment to the man, as well as an indicator of forgiveness towards past misdeeds either real or perceived, IMHO.

Well I don't really see it being a great compliment from a Gryffindor as explaining anything more than that. Was Dumbledore not brave? Was Tom Riddle not brave? Was Bella not brave? Was Sirius not brave? What about Hermione? Neville? So while I think it a great compliment as you do, it describes lots of people that Harry knew in my estimation, thus, I don't think it explains anything at all.

I disagree on your perception of many of these things. And I think it likely that Harry would as well.

Quite possibly, but they are my perceptions and Harry's disagreement wouldn't change that. I can respect his view, yours and everyone else's, but I cannot hold them if they do not mesh with my perceptions of the story. To be honest, I have no idea what Harry's views are because he never told us.

Snape isn't real so any forgiving should be shown through the characters of the story and we are to make of that what we will.

I don't understand. I was explaining that I don't forgive. The only person we know that forgave was Harry in the story (and I would agree that Ginny likely did too). But for all we know, no one else did. So I feel it is altogether probable that my view encompasses some of the views of the other characters in the storyline in terms of forgiveness and redemption relative to Snape.

Well I do not base my feelings of Snape's redemption solely on Harry, as I stated earlier. However, we don't look at Snape actions and words and feelings in the same way so I think that's why Harry's words to Albus Severus and the name of the boy were just an extension of what I already took from the text.

Agreed. I feel the same way - but I just feel Harry looks at it a bit differently than you do I think - at least based on our previous conversations. I can buy into the idea that Harry is messiah like, but only up to the point where he was shown to be so in the story. He will sacrifice himself, but he will attack Carrow with crucio too - if you see what I mean. So he was not perfectly messiah like.

But there are many other factors. For example, JKR also said that Harry knew that Snape loathed him to the end, unfairly - and forgave him anyway. She said he recognized that Snape was the same person he'd always been characterwise and forgave him that too (the cruel, bullying bit she added). So I do accept these facts in terms of Harry's overall reasoning. Well that does not mesh with Harry believing Snape to be a brave saint like person, purely and only deserving of the highest honors, imo. To me it is Harry recognizing many sides to Snape and through his forgiveness and deciding that Snape was not evil and tried (and failed) to honor his mum, he wished to return an honor, like a thanks from his whole family for attempting to honor Lily's sacrifice (and thereby James' as well) in spying to benefit Harry in the end - and even though Snape believed the "benefit" would not pan out and Harry would die - at least he was working for the good side, so Harry could forgive that too. That is all I can conclude on the basis of all of JKR's comments - all of them - not just the one's that jive with my textual ideas.

As I said many times before, if I was going to go with simply my own idea, then I would conclude Harry was confunded when he decided on and convinced Ginny to do the naming. But JKR discounted that idea and I accept it.


I think it would matter to people like Bella because to a crazed blood purist a half-blood would have dirty blood, and as such would likely be inferior. I think Snape would be aware that he likely didn't quite measure up to wealthy friends with pure blood. I think what made him useful was his interest in the Dark Arts and his intelligence in various type of magic. Even if he was accepted by these people I think it's well within his character at the time to believe he didn't have the same status as those with purer blood, and IMHO, he'd be right.

Even though this is straying from the topic, but would Bella have known that Riddle was Voldemort's name and that he was a half-blood? I was under the impression that she did not know this and since she went to the school at a different time than Voldemort then she would be even less likely to know. I could be wrong though.

Well I simply think she cannot be both things. On the one hand, a crazed blood purist who takes it all highly seriously, and determines what everyone is in order to judge them (i.e., Snape) and at the same time meek and mellow when it comes to the man she decides to fall in love with and follow - uncaring what his birthright is. Either she is manic or not. If she is, she would reserve her decision to love and follow until she definitively learned of Voldemort's background, imo.

As for your question in general, I do not see how everyone in the wizard world would not know after GoF and the graveyard scenario. Wormtail knew, and everyone who showed up - and while it is possible that they all kept it to themselves and didn't share it with the other DEs once they escaped Azkaban, is a little too much to swallow for me. There was also leaks on the good side; the trio, Ginny, all of the Weasleys, Sirius, Remus, Tonks and many others definitely knew. Harry didn't seem to keep it a secret either. At the Ministry, Moody, Kingsley and others knew. So there was just too numerous a group for it to be kept secret, especially from Bella who would want to know if she was crazed on the topic.

But assuming somehow Bella never got in the loop and somehow didn't know, then I would see that as reason to understand that she did not consider halfbloods who followed Voldy to be "filthy" - because Voldemort's own birthright would ever be in question for her. She never called Snape a filthy half blood or even referred to his status when she was angrily giving him the 3 degree at Spinner's End. So I just don't believe that was an issue back at Hogwarts. I do feel that she would hold him in askance for his hygiene and appearance though, because Draco showed us that is how the Malfoy's carried on and I feel Bella was similar in that way.

But there are Slytherins for whom this is most definitely a big deal - Bella for example makes some reference to Harry being a "filthy half-blood" so I think it did matter a lot. Pure-bloods were accepted without question. Others had to prove themselves and I get the feeling were never "quite one of us". Voldemort was such a powerful wizard and personality that he became 'leader of the gang' as it, were based on that. He also acquired a strong prejudice against muggles and muggleborns to the extent that at 16 he was trying to kill them! Snape however did not have Riddles charm or force of personality. He was a half-blood, with a muggleborn best friend. All he had to recommend him to his fellow Slytherins was an interest in the Dark Arts.

While I don't disagree with most of this I have to say that I believe that Tom Riddle's 'little gang of Slytherins' all knew that he was a direct decendant of Salizar Slytherin [sp?] as he proved by opening the Camber of Secrets and it was this knowledge of his status as The heir of Slytherin that cemented his power and authority with this group, who late became the first Death Eaters :)

The fact that a group of people all from pureblood families all support and are deferential to Lord Voldemort gives him somewhat of an atomatic pass into pure blood society - after all who would question the likes of Rosier Snr, Nott, Mulciber Snr, Lestrange Snr, Dolohov, Avery Snr, especially on mass??? Which would/could explain why many people believed him to be pureblood himself or prehaps it was the prestigious nature of his wizard blood that tipped the balance. :)

She never called Snape a filthy half blood or even referred to his status when she was angrily giving him the 3 degree at Spinner's End. So I just don't believe that was an issue back at Hogwarts.

Well considering he was seen as the dark lords 'most trusted' zat that point it would have been rather a foolish move, also I don't see how her using a particular insult against one half blood but not against another really shows that she would not have used it when she was at school? :hmm:

Well considering he was seen as the dark lords 'most trusted' zat that point it would have been rather a foolish move, also I don't see how her using a particular insult against one half blood but not against another really shows that she would not have used it when she was at school? :hmm:

Oh I think she 100% would have used it - against any half blood that was not in agreement that Voldemort was the hottest thing since skimmed milk and agreed that Muggles and Muggleborns should be wiped out. She would use a similarly nasty term for purebloods that didn't hold those correct beliefs [sic] - "blood traitor". No one was safe from the tongues of the budding Death Eaters, imo, if they held opposing views. Just like Draco used the terms on Hermione and Ron. But half bloods - and I daresay even muggleborns - who accepted the Death Eater call - would not be called by those terms, imo. Kids know better than anyone you don't build up your gang ranks by disparaging those within the group as being equivalent to outsiders and held in equal disdain. Snape was a power hungry lad and I sincerely doubt he'd follow a road to glory that was lined with individuals degrading his every step. He was simply not that foolish. Indeed, if he were degraded for his birthright, I think he'd have had much more sympathy for others and not called them Mudbloods - something he did - something he believed about and called Lily, a girl he had emotions for.

IMHO, it indicates both. It points towards Harry being capable of forgiving and Snape being worthy (can't think of a better word at the moment) of that forgiveness. It says to me that Harry forgave the bad but he chose to honor the good in naming his child after Snape.

I honestly think that if Harry just wanted to forgive Snape and did not see him as being redeemed or did not want to honor him then he would not have named his son after him. I don't believe he did that to show how forgiving he was or to honor his parents. He named his other children after his parents in order to honor them.Harry is not the only character in the series, nor is his point of view necessarily believed or even universally accepted. Yes, he forgave Snape despite the fact that Snape hated him unfairly until the very end. That's what I meant by naming Albus speaking more towards Harry's forgiving nature rather than a true 'redemption' of Snape's character.

If he was wholly and truly redeemed as a character, then why would Ginny pretend to ignore Harry using their son's middle name, almost embarrassedly so? That is an implication, IMO, that even after all those years "Severus Snape" was still an ambiguous character despite Harry's championing his portrait being placed at Hogwarts and his brave deeds and sacrifices being known.

She never called Snape a filthy half blood or even referred to his status when she was angrily giving him the 3 degree at Spinner's End. So I just don't believe that was an issue back at Hogwarts.



'He lives here.' asked Bella in a voice of comtempt.'Here? In this Muggle dunghill? We must be the first of our kind ever to set foot -'

Bella may not have directly called Snape a Half- Blood, but her choice of the words, "first of our kind" suggests to me that Bella does not consider Snape as one of her kind and is drawing attention to his Half-Blood status. In short I feel that she considers both herself and Narcissa as superior on the basis of blood.

Harry is not the only character in the series, nor is his point of view necessarily believed or even universally accepted. Yes, he forgave Snape despite the fact that Snape hated him unfairly until the very end. That's what I meant by naming Albus speaking more towards Harry's forgiving nature rather than a true 'redemption' of Snape's character.

If he was wholly and truly redeemed as a character, then why would Ginny pretend to ignore Harry using their son's middle name, almost embarrassedly so? That is an implication, IMO, that even after all those years "Severus Snape" was still an ambiguous character despite Harry's championing his portrait being placed at Hogwarts and his brave deeds and sacrifices being known.

Very good point. I agree. :tu:

Well I don't really see it being a great compliment from a Gryffindor as explaining anything more than that. Was Dumbledore not brave? Was Tom Riddle not brave? Was Bella not brave? Was Sirius not brave? What about Hermione? Neville? So while I think it a great compliment as you do, it describes lots of people that Harry knew in my estimation, thus, I don't think it explains anything at all.

I think it is a high compliment because he is a Gryffindor and bravery is an important trait to them and because he had previously called Snape a coward. And because he indicated that Snape was probably the bravest of them all, in his opinion. We can all feel free to agree or disagree, of course.

Quite possibly, but they are my perceptions and Harry's disagreement wouldn't change that. I can respect his view, yours and everyone else's, but I cannot hold them if they do not mesh with my perceptions of the story. To be honest, I have no idea what Harry's views are because he never told us.

I didn't mean that you need to hold my view or anyone else's view. However, from the text (and I don't need explicitly stated things to make an inference that makes sense to the story and characters) I personally think that it makes more sense that once he forgives the bad think then as a result he does not focus on them or even looks at them in the way you express them because then it's my feeling he would not have forgiven Snape and he would not have named his son after him.

I don't understand. I was explaining that I don't forgive. The only person we know that forgave was Harry in the story (and I would agree that Ginny likely did too). But for all we know, no one else did. So I feel it is altogether probable that my view encompasses some of the views of the other characters in the storyline in terms of forgiveness and redemption relative to Snape.

I'm not saying that there is no room for your view. You can feel differently about the characters than I do, of course. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I can't vehemently hate a character or feel the need to forgive them or whatever, because of the way I look at characters and stories. They are simply literary characters that I can analyze and take something from reading about them, but I don't look at them like I would a real person, so I don't feel the need to forgive any of these characters because they have not done anything to me personally.

Agreed. I feel the same way - but I just feel Harry looks at it a bit differently than you do I think - at least based on our previous conversations. I can buy into the idea that Harry is messiah like, but only up to the point where he was shown to be so in the story. He will sacrifice himself, but he will attack Carrow with crucio too - if you see what I mean. So he was not perfectly messiah like.

I don't feel that he's messiah like in the slightest, actually. I don't think being able to forgive someone and understand their life story or be sensitive to it is a quality that is otherworldly...

But there are many other factors. For example, JKR also said that Harry knew that Snape loathed him to the end, unfairly - and forgave him anyway. She said he recognized that Snape was the same person he'd always been characterwise and forgave him that too (the cruel, bullying bit she added). So I do accept these facts in terms of Harry's overall reasoning. Well that does not mesh with Harry believing Snape to be a brave saint like person, purely and only deserving of the highest honors, imo. To me it is Harry recognizing many sides to Snape and through his forgiveness and deciding that Snape was not evil and tried (and failed) to honor his mum, he wished to return an honor, like a thanks from his whole family for attempting to honor Lily's sacrifice (and thereby James' as well) in spying to benefit Harry in the end - and even though Snape believed the "benefit" would not pan out and Harry would die - at least he was working for the good side, so Harry could forgive that too. That is all I can conclude on the basis of all of JKR's comments - all of them - not just the one's that jive with my textual ideas.


I like to stick to the text rather than JKR's interviews, unless absolutely necessary. I think the text stands on its own well enough. However, I do agree with bits of what you say above and I feel that it's supported in the text, if not explicitly stated. However, I don't think Harry thinks Snape a saint-like person, and I don't think I've ever suggested or hinted that. I simply believe that Harry forgave Snape for the bad things and honored the good and just understood the man in the end. And I don't think one needs to have saint-like abilities in order to be able to do that. So I still disagree with him honoring his mother or both his parents by naming his son after Snape. I don't see anything supporting that from JKR, from what you posted above.

As I said many times before, if I was going to go with simply my own idea, then I would conclude Harry was confunded when he decided on and convinced Ginny to do the naming. But JKR discounted that idea and I accept it.

OK, if she made you feel better about the whole thing that's cool, even though I didn't get the same thing out of the text or her interviews that you did. I also disagree with her on a couple of things because I feel that they contradict my feeling from reading the text.

As for Bella knowing or not knowing about Voldemort's background... as I said, I'm not sure. I just had the impression that she didn't know, for some reason. I don't have any recollection why though, so that's why I'm uncertain. She isn't the topic anyway, so I'd rather not go on about that...

Harry is not the only character in the series, nor is his point of view necessarily believed or even universally accepted. Yes, he forgave Snape despite the fact that Snape hated him unfairly until the very end. That's what I meant by naming Albus speaking more towards Harry's forgiving nature rather than a true 'redemption' of Snape's character.

I know his POV isn't universally accepted. So I'm guessing that you're saying that for those who don't feel that Snape is redeemed then the conclusion is that Harry's simply very forgiving and that's it? If that's the case, then what I said before stands. I was just disagreeing with that view, because I got something differently from the text, from the epilogue as well as the preceding chapters and the series in general... Also, I would like to reiterate that I like to look at the text when analyzing rather than relying on JKR's interviews, except for the more straightforward things like who married who, ect. So forgive me if I don't look at some of JKR's comments as being as important as the text.

If he was wholly and truly redeemed as a character, then why would Ginny pretend to ignore Harry using their son's middle name, almost embarrassedly so? That is an implication, IMO, that even after all those years "Severus Snape" was still an ambiguous character despite Harry's championing his portrait being placed at Hogwarts and his brave deeds and sacrifices being known.

I didn't get that at all from that moment. I did not get the sense that Ginny was embarrassed. Just that she was allowing a moment between father and son. He whispered his fear so his father alone could hear. It was a private conversation, and Ginny tried to let it appear to be so to Albus even though she was being tactful and pretended not to hear. That was what I got out of it pretty much.

'He lives here.' asked Bella in a voice of comtempt.'Here? In this Muggle dunghill? We must be the first of our kind ever to set foot -'

Bella may not have directly called Snape a Half- Blood, but her choice of the words, "first of our kind" suggests to me that Bella does not consider Snape as one of her kind and is drawing attention to his Half-Blood status. In short I feel that she considers both herself and Narcissa as superior on the basis of blood.

I respect your interpretation. However, it is an assumption that Bella referred to her blood status. When I read that, that was the furthest thing from my mind. I totally felt she was speaking about wizards. At the furthest stretches of my imagination I might include 'wealthy'. In other words, where Snape lived, no wizard in his right mind (according to Bella) would ever choose to live.

Again, this goes back to Bella's socioeconmic status and everything that goes with it, in my judgment. She and her sister wore fine clothes, had fine hair styles and had the best of accessories in every category. They were meticulous about their hygiene and appearance - and at Hogwarts, the fact that Snape was not concerned about those things would see them turning their noses down at him, imo. But as for blood status, half bloods, while lacking the refined qualities of purebloods, were equally accepted - quite obviously to me as there was no special term designated to them, nor were they to be eradicated from the earth. There were too many "steps" - 7/8th bloods, 3/4 bloods, 1/4 quarter bloods, etc. It would be impossible to differentiate among them, so they just get lumped into their own category and their belief system became the most important factor.

Also, I would like to reiterate that I like to look at the text when analyzing rather than relying on JKR's interviews, except for the more straightforward things like who married who, ect. So forgive me if I don't look at some of JKR's comments as being as important as the text.:huh: I don't recall once mentioning Jo's interview comments. I too am relying on book analysis.
It was a private conversation, and Ginny tried to let it appear to be so to Albus even though she was being tactful and pretended not to hear.I disagree, Harry said his child's name deliberately yet quietly so that no one except Ginny would overhear and she "pretended" to not do so, instead is seen waving goodbye to her niece. To me, this gives a different connotation than a mother trying not to intrude on a private conversation or a father trying to solely reassure their child, but seems to imply a certain furtiveness on the part of both Ginny and Harry.
"Albus Severus," Harry said quietly, so that nobody but Ginny could hear, and she was tactful enough to pretend to be waving to Rose, who was now on the train...
*shrugs* Just my interpretation.

I think it is a high compliment because he is a Gryffindor and bravery is an important trait to them and because he had previously called Snape a coward. And because he indicated that Snape was probably the bravest of them all, in his opinion. We can all feel free to agree or disagree, of course.

I think it is a compliment too. I just don't see what it has to do with anything about Harry's view of Snape. I betcha he thought Snape was a darn good Occlucmens too - maybe the best he'd ever known. And if he had said that, I may or may not agree, but it really would not tell me a single thing about what "else" Harry thought. That is my only point. So if Harry thinks Snape was probably braver than Dumbledore - and? What possible conclusion can one reach from that?

I didn't mean that you need to hold my view or anyone else's view. However, from the text (and I don't need explicitly stated things to make an inference that makes sense to the story and characters) I personally think that it makes more sense that once he forgives the bad think then as a result he does not focus on them or even looks at them in the way you express them because then it's my feeling he would not have forgiven Snape and he would not have named his son after him.

Right, I have never been big on examples - it is just that many people request them, so you don't have to worry about that with me - I mean unless you wish to speak about contradictions in canon :lol:.

Well this is difficult to explain for me. I agree 100% that the best thing for Harry to do, from a psychological standpoint, is to forgive. Forgiveness releases the forgiver from feelings of hate, anger and pain and they can truly heal over the worst of things if they learn to forgive. It allows one to move on and have the happiest of lives. So I feel Harry did the best thing in that regard.

Then Harry got carried away in a real world sense, and that is why it requires that one make sense of it - all my opinion. So I have made sense of it from his point of view - so that I can understand Harry's character relative to his thoughts on Snape, his love for his parents, his love for his family and friends and his children. I have a very difficult time thinking in terms of "Harry and Snape the end" - if that makes sense. It seems others don't have a problem with that at all. They suggest all kinds of things about Harry, but never seem to take those other factors into account and that is why I have a very difficult time relating to those opinions. Unlike some readers, Harry truly loved his parents, himself and his friends. Thus, I cannot simply disregard that in coming up with a view about his perspective of Snape. Does that make sense?

I'm not saying that there is no room for your view. You can feel differently about the characters than I do, of course. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I can't vehemently hate a character or feel the need to forgive them or whatever, because of the way I look at characters and stories. They are simply literary characters that I can analyze and take something from reading about them, but I don't look at them like I would a real person, so I don't feel the need to forgive any of these characters because they have not done anything to me personally.

Ah! You misunderstand me. I don't have anything to forgive Snape for either. :rotfl:. I don't forgive him on Harry's behalf. I don't know if you understand what I mean by that - but if not, let me know and I will explain. :)

I don't feel that he's messiah like in the slightest, actually. I don't think being able to forgive someone and understand their life story or be sensitive to it is a quality that is otherworldly...

Well I would disagree only because of the sacrificing himself bit. :lol:. I feel you are very correct in that forgiveness is not something that requires a messiah. However, in terms of the storyline and all of the things I spoke of, it would take a very saintly person to forgive Snape if they were in Harry's shoes, imo.

I like to stick to the text rather than JKR's interviews, unless absolutely necessary. I think the text stands on its own well enough. However, I do agree with bits of what you say above and I feel that it's supported in the text, if not explicitly stated. However, I don't think Harry thinks Snape a saint-like person, and I don't think I've ever suggested or hinted that. I simply believe that Harry forgave Snape for the bad things and honored the good and just understood the man in the end. And I don't think one needs to have saint-like abilities in order to be able to do that. So I still disagree with him honoring his mother or both his parents by naming his son after Snape. I don't see anything supporting that from JKR, from what you posted above.

What was he honoring then? Within the contours of their personal relationship (Snape-Harry), what would he possibly have to honor Snape for? For being brave and a person that he could understand? And if so, what did he come to understand that was worth honoring that had only to do with his personal relationship?

OK, if she made you feel better about the whole thing that's cool, even though I didn't get the same thing out of the text or her interviews that you did. I also disagree with her on a couple of things because I feel that they contradict my feeling from reading the text.

Ah ya, I can understand. I just go with her on the facts - but I don't always agree with her opinions.

Err... Forgive me for interrupting (again), but I was under the impression that we were here to analyze Snape's character, not offer or withdraw absolution. :p

Harry might have been off his rocker when he named his child after Snape (rather than, for example, uncle Bilius) but that's what he did and we just have to live with it. And while I'm at it, let me add more fuel to the pyre by asking you whose eyes the young Albus Severus has has... ;)

Jo herself seemed to have mixed feelings about Snape. Remember the Edinburgh Book Festival Interview (it's on her website)? "Apart from Harry, Snape is my favourite character because he is so complex and I just love him.... But you must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater. He will have seen things that… Why do you love him? Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this."

Well, obviously Mrs. Rowling, for the very same reason you do! :lol:

:huh: I don't recall once mentioning Jo's interview comments. I too am relying on book analysis.

Sorry, I assumed you were referring to JKR's comments about Snape hating Harry until the end because what you said was very much like what she said, and those precise words were not used in the text. Sorry if I misunderstood.


I disagree, Harry said his child's name deliberately yet quietly so that no one except Ginny would overhear and she "pretended" to not do so, instead is seen waving goodbye to her niece. To me, this gives a different connotation than a mother trying not to intrude on a private conversation or a father trying to solely reassure their child, but seems to imply a certain furtiveness on the part of both Ginny and Harry.
"Albus Severus," Harry said quietly, so that nobody but Ginny could hear, and she was tactful enough to pretend to be waving to Rose, who was now on the train...
*shrugs* Just my interpretation.

The way I read it was that he spoke the entire sentence quietly... and not just his name, in response to how Albus started the conversation. I feel that one needs to take into account that Albus whispered his fear to his father so that Harry alone would hear. It would have been very rude to her already insecure son, and thus not tactful if Ginny was obviously eavesdropping, so she pretended to be otherwise occupied by waving to Rose. I don't feel that Ginny and/or Harry would be embarrassed at having named their son after Dumbledore and Snape. They wouldn't have named him that in the first place, IMHO.

I think it is a compliment too. I just don't see what it has to do with anything about Harry's view of Snape. I betcha he thought Snape was a darn good Occlucmens too - maybe the best he'd ever known. And if he had said that, I may or may not agree, but it really would not tell me a single thing about what "else" Harry thought. That is my only point. So if Harry thinks Snape was probably braver than Dumbledore - and? What possible conclusion can one reach from that?

I don't think I indicated that one can reach a conclusion about all of Harry's feelings about Snape from that one comment. I'm saying that it was a high compliment and that it was a direct reference to Harry having called him a coward in the past. I was saying that naming the child after him is a big deal and he would have to have done so for more than the reason of him thinking Snape was brave, since I believe he named the boy after him because he wanted to honor Snape and not Harry's parents.

Right, I have never been big on examples - it is just that many people request them, so you don't have to worry about that with me - I mean unless you wish to speak about contradictions in canon :lol:.

I don't have time to go through little details unless one brings them up. I spent way too much time on here today already and I didn't bring up lots of examples. :)

Then Harry got carried away in a real world sense, and that is why it requires that one make sense of it - all my opinion. So I have made sense of it from his point of view - so that I can understand Harry's character relative to his thoughts on Snape, his love for his parents, his love for his family and friends and his children. I have a very difficult time thinking in terms of "Harry and Snape the end" - if that makes sense. It seems others don't have a problem with that at all. They suggest all kinds of things about Harry, but never seem to take those other factors into account and that is why I have a very difficult time relating to those opinions. Unlike some readers, Harry truly loved his parents, himself and his friends. Thus, I cannot simply disregard that in coming up with a view about his perspective of Snape. Does that make sense?

I have made sense of it too and I do take into account that Harry loved his parents and friends. And he also wanted to honor Snape, IMHO. I haven't disregarded any of Harry's feelings for other people...

Ah! You misunderstand me. I don't have anything to forgive Snape for either. :rotfl:. I don't forgive him on Harry's behalf. I don't know if you understand what I mean by that - but if not, let me know and I will explain. :)

Well you said you cannot forgive Snape for the things he's done to Harry, so I was going by that. So yeah, I'm confused. :)

Well I would disagree only because of the sacrificing himself bit. :lol:. I feel you are very correct in that forgiveness is not something that requires a messiah. However, in terms of the storyline and all of the things I spoke of, it would take a very saintly person to forgive Snape if they were in Harry's shoes, imo.

Well it's true about him sacrificing himself, but I still can't view him as a saint or a god. He's still very human. He's very brave and very selfless at times, but I don't view him as a saint, even in regards to forgiving Snape. :) I'm kind of a forgiving person though, so maybe that's why I can see it as possible for regular people.


What was he honoring then? Within the contours of their personal relationship (Snape-Harry), what would he possibly have to honor Snape for? For being brave and a person that he could understand? And if so, what did he come to understand that was worth honoring that had only to do with his personal relationship?

He honored him for what he did for the entire wizarding world. IMHO, he began to fight for the right side for Lily's safety, but it went beyond that as the years went by. I'm not going to say much beyond that because I'm in the middle of stuff and I really shouldn't be on here at all. Maybe others will pick up on this and leave their thoughts. I doubt you would agree with most of what I'd say anyway. :)

Ah ya, I can understand. I just go with her on the facts - but I don't always agree with her opinions.

I hear ya. :) I can see using her quotes to sort of support one's opinion... sorta like, "See JKR agrees with me." but using her opinions as facts I just disagree with. Still... I may use a quote of hers in my sig at one point. You can laugh at me if I do. ;)



Jo herself seemed to have mixed feelings about Snape. Remember the Edinburgh Book Festival Interview (it's on her website)? "Apart from Harry, Snape is my favourite character because he is so complex and I just love him.... But you must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater. He will have seen things that… Why do you love him? Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this."

Well, obviously Mrs. Rowling, for the very same reason you do! :lol:

:lol: That's great. :lol:

Yes, he forgave Snape despite the fact that Snape hated him unfairly until the very end.

Is that really a fact, though? I never got the impression that Snape hated Harry at all. Disliked him a lot? Yes. Treated him unfairly? Sure. But hated? No, that never really clicked. Hate's just too strong a thing to feel for someone who you not only save multiple times, but who is also a physical combination of your greatest love and worst enemy. My impression was that the only people Snape really hated were Voldemort (and possibly James and Peter). When it comes to Harry, Snape is so mixed up inside, so full of fears, prejudices, and the pain of seeing a Lily/James combo that, IMHO, there's no room for something as huge and unyielding as pure hatred.

Is that really a fact, though? I never got the impression that Snape hated Harry at all. Disliked him a lot? Yes. Treated him unfairly? Sure. But hated? No, that never really clicked. Hate's just too strong a thing to feel for someone who you not only save multiple times, but who is also a physical combination of your greatest love and worst enemy. My impression was that the only people Snape really hated were Voldemort (and possibly James and Peter). When it comes to Harry, Snape is so mixed up inside, so full of fears, prejudices, and the pain of seeing a Lily/James combo that, IMHO, there's no room for something as huge and unyielding as pure hatred.:) I respect your opinion, Ignisia, but I disagree that hatred is not applicable or is too forceful a word for what Snape felt towards Harry. Snape worked towards helping Harry for Lily's sake. He had no care for her child beyond that, IMO.

We see how he treats Harry and no, not all or even most of his behavior is to keep his cover as spy, IMO. Extreme dislike, ill will, malevolence, enmity, animosity, rancor, loathing - these are all words that are applicable to Sev's treatment of Harry throughout the series and all are descriptors of "hatred".