Severus Snape: Character Analysis v.12

I'm not sure I agree with this definition of Legilimency. I thought it was more to do with picking up on memories and feelings (or memories connected to certain feelings)

I think it's the ability to delve (which is the word Books use) deep into the mind if necessary, to pull out whatever memory we wish to see. By which I understood that a good Legillimens could basically see anything he wanted too; both memories and the feelings associated with it.

If one can extract memories and feelings; and if one must delve into the mind to do that, in order to search for a memory for instance, then I think the a good Legillimens can go anywhere into the mind of the other person to search for what he wants, making him totally vulnerable. The Legillimens can know his deepest secrets and thoughts which by right should remain his own only and if he is someone like Voldemort, can misuse it or exploit it too IMO.

Bringing this to Snape, this is another reason why I felt Snape had to show the feeling of hate along with the memories of his interaction with Harry, and felt that Snape used his hatred of James and connected it with Harry, since I had always felt that Snape could not get hatefully angry with Harry, whatever the provocation.

But he could get angry and feel quite a lot of hatred for James and one reason I think Snape attacked James so much was to fuel his hatred to match his memories, so that when Voldemort after GOF mind raped Snape and sifted through memories of 16 years, there was enough hatred to go along with his less than friendly attitude with the BWL, who had silenced Voldemort for 13 years.

From Snape's point of view, he not only had to show that he was not very friendly with the BWL, he also had to show feelings to match, else Voldemort could always ask Snape to bring Harry to him. Where I think his feelings for James came in.

'What's that? Sir?'

'It's the ability to extract feelings and memories from another's mind -'

.......

'The mind is a complex and many layered thing, Potter, - or at least most minds are.' He smirked. 'It is true, however, that those who have mastered Legilimency are able, under certain conditions, to delve into the minds of their victims and to interpret their findings correctly. The DL for instance, almost always knows when someone is lying to him. Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so can utter falsehoods in his presence without detection.'

I would agree that everyone defines words distinctly, but I think that Snape's treatment of Neville, resulting in his becoming Neville's greatest fear (beyond dementors, DEs, Voldemort, and all the creatures that caused fright for everyone else), is indicative of the grave degree of mistreatment that Neville received at his hands. I did feel that Snape's behavior rose to the level of torture in HBP when he whipped Harry across the face (Flight of the Prince); that is the type of treatment I imagined the students suffered at the hands of the Carrows in DH (imo).



I totally agree, Snape's treatment of Harry and Neville, imo, was a bit cruel and inexcusable, at least in Harry's case it could be understandable, because of whatever feelings Snape might have for Harry and James, but I can't really see why he would bully Neville that much, in canon there is nothing that refers to an earlier relationship between Snape and the Longbottoms. I can't see what this treatment to Neville might be based on ?

but I can't really see why he would bully Neville that much, in canon there is nothing that refers to an earlier relationship between Snape and the Longbottoms. I can't see what this treatment to Neville might be based on ?

Snape was taking Potions, a class IMO that had ingredients which if combined wrongly would cause great harm (the very first Potions class we see an example when Neville's potion explodes causing boils to everyone who was splashed with it). I think he was very strict and even slightly fearful to all students because he needed them to concentrate and stay on their toes and not do anything foolish and hurt themselves. Unfortunately, for some students like Neville, who were clumsy and rather timid, this rebounded and they became more scared and so were prone to make more mistakes IMO.

Ideally students like Neville would have benefited by teaching them separately and slowly. But since Hogwarts did not have such a feature, students like Neville were forced to take classes with the rest, where Snape's strictness was very necessary IMO.

but I can't really see why he would bully Neville that much, in canon there is nothing that refers to an earlier relationship between Snape and the Longbottoms. I can't see what this treatment to Neville might be based on ?

You are right that there is nothing indicating that the past has anything to do with it.
It's suggested that Snape is impatient with Neville's incompetence at Potions, which creates many hazards in the classroom and destroys a great deal of property. In PoA, before using Trevor as a guinea pig to scare Neville, he asks "What do I have to do to make you understand, Longbottom?"
I think he believes that by provoking Neville, he will see improvement in the boy's potionmaking.

You are right that there is nothing indicating that the past has anything to do with it.
It's suggested that Snape is impatient with Neville's incompetence at Potions, which creates many hazards in the classroom and destroys a great deal of property. In PoA, before using Trevor as a guinea pig to scare Neville, he asks "What do I have to do to make you understand, Longbottom?"
I think he believes that by provoking Neville, he will see improvement in the boy's potionmaking.

I feel that it was still Snape's election to behave in a cruel and bullying manner with Neville, rather than to exercise patience and kindness in his teaching method. JKR made a point of the fact that Neville performed better when Snape was not supervising him (in OWLS), OOTP. I do not find Neville's lack of talent, which in my judgment was worsened by Snape's behavior, to support Snape's treatment of him in the classroom - or outside of the class like when he spoke to Lupin about him (and Hermione) in front of Lupin and the entire class in POA. In my view, under no circumstances should Snape have behaved in a manner in which he would become Neville's greatest fear - beyond even evil forces like Voldemort and the Dementors (imo).

While Severus may well have been a nasty teacher who abused his position he didn't torture anybody. We are given an example of a teacher torturing students in Umbridge and as we see Dumbledore objects to his students being harmed. Dumbledore does not object to Snape's treatment of the student and Jo has indicated in interviews that Dumbledore believed that learnign to deal with people like Snape would be a useful life lesson for the students.

Really? Do you have an interview that implies that? I haven't read an interview in AGES, so I really don't know anything J.K. has said. Thanks in advance! :)

Also, with my use of torture, I meant mentally. Neville was terrified of Snape. I would be too if the life of my pet depended on my grade in a class I was horrible in. (That would be art, for me :P)


There is a lot I could say ... but I won't! :angel:
Please do! I love hearing other's opinions. :tu:


I don't recall that. Do you have the quote?
Yes I do! (Gah, I'm such a nerd!)

"'Well,' said Lupin slowly, 'Snape was a special case. I mean, he never lost an opportunity to curse James, so you couldn't really expect James to take that lying down, could you?'"

I can't see how Snape can be called cowardly - Harry Potter says he is the bravest man he ever knew. And vain? :huh:

Well, Harry is a bit more forgiving (and was probably, a little bit, trying to make Albus feel better,) and a better person than I am.
He is, IMHO, slightly vain. His "brew power, stopper death" (abbr. quote) seems a bit conceited to me, but it could be read either way, I guess.

For cowardly, I think I have a slightly different definition. I see cowardly as when you are feeling even slightly threatened, you retaliate with aggression/violence. In my honest opinion, Snape fits this in the following scene:

"But too late; Snape had directed his wand straight at James; there was a flash of light and a gash appeared on the side of James's face, spattering his robes with blood."

The only spells James had cast were Expelliarmus (no pain), Scourgify, (to wash Snape's mouth out after he cussed up a storm,) and Impedimenta, which tripped him as he was going for his wand. But when James turned his back, Snape cast a curse that "spattered" James's robe with blood.

But that's just how I see it.
EDIT:
Oh! I just thought of something! Maybe the curse Snape used was a forerunner to Sectumsempra? Any thoughts?

You are right that there is nothing indicating that the past has anything to do with it.
It's suggested that Snape is impatient with Neville's incompetence at Potions, which creates many hazards in the classroom and destroys a great deal of property. In PoA, before using Trevor as a guinea pig to scare Neville, he asks "What do I have to do to make you understand, Longbottom?"
I think he believes that by provoking Neville, he will see improvement in the boy's potionmaking.

But he doesn't actually help him improve in any way, Hermione helps him and they lost their house some points.
I've been thinking that Snape's attitude toward Neville was based on the fact that Voldemort had chosen to hunt the Potters instead of the Longbottoms? Snape is not known for his forgiving nature, he doesn't forget people's faults.

Snape was taking Potions, a class IMO that had ingredients which if combined wrongly would cause great harm (the very first Potions class we see an example when Neville's potion explodes causing boils to everyone who was splashed with it). I think he was very strict and even slightly fearful to all students because he needed them to concentrate and stay on their toes and not do anything foolish and hurt themselves. Unfortunately, for some students like Neville, who were clumsy and rather timid, this rebounded and they became more scared and so were prone to make more mistakes IMO.

Ideally students like Neville would have benefited by teaching them separately and slowly. But since Hogwarts did not have such a feature, students like Neville were forced to take classes with the rest, where Snape's strictness was very necessary IMO.
I can understand Snape's need to be strict, but I see no reason why he had to be, as I see it, bullying towards Neville. Snape snarling at Neville, "Idiot boy!" after Neville's potion seeped onto the floor is simply cruel, in my opinion - especially from a teacher's standpoint. I do not think it is an attempt by Snape to boost Neville's potion-making ability - he is purely insulting Neville by calling him an "idiot". I do not think Snape believed that by insulting his students they would be more competent in the subject (and if he did, I feel he was deluded). I see Snape's negative remarks to Neville and Harry as purely insulting; we do not see Snape saying those things to Crabbe and Goyle, who were likely equally poor in the subject. To me, Snape specifically targeted certain students to bully in his classes (Neville being at the top of the list), to a point where, in Neville's case, Snape was feared by the student, whereas he favored other students in the same classes (almost exclusively Slytherins, from what the books provide).

Really? Do you have an interview that implies that? I haven't read an interview in AGES, so I really don't know anything J.K. has said. Thanks in advance! :)

I think this is the interview that Cathy was talking about.:)

lhhicks99 asks: Why does Professor Dumbledore allow Professor Snape to be so nasty to the students (especially to Harry, Hermione, and Neville)?
jkrowling: Dumbledore believes there are all sorts of lessons in life...
jkrowling: horrible teachers like Snape are one of them!

Source: http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-livechat-barnesnoble.html

Draco was good at Occlumency, that's probably why he realised Snape was using Legilimency on him.

IMO Draco's attempt at Occlumency was rather clumsy, as Snape recognized it immediately.

But he doesn't actually help him improve in any way, Hermione helps him and they lost their house some points.
I've been thinking that Snape's attitude toward Neville was based on the fact that Voldemort had chosen to hunt the Potters instead of the Longbottoms? Snape is not known for his forgiving nature, he doesn't forget people's faults.

:lol: No, he really doesn't, does he?

Well, as you mentioned before, there nothing in canon that states it had anything to do with the past. The only indication given is an academic one, which leads me to think it was Neville's failure at the subject. If Snape was really hung up on the Longbottoms not being targeted, he probably would have hinted at it the way he showed Harry that he was still bitter about James by ranting on about the man. But we don't see much reaction from Snape at all about the family that wasn't chosen. Not even a passing reference in TPT. :hmm: Young Snape could have said something like "Why Lily? Why not the Longbottoms?", which would have been in keeping with the sort of man he was at 21, focused only on Lily.

Snape took off points because Hermione was helping Neville when he asked her not to. I think he wanted Neville to fail there because he thought that feeding the potion to hte toad, waiting a while to let Neville squirm, and then giving it the antidote would have, in his mind, been a sufficiently traumatizing experience that would get Neville to improve. It's a terrible and stupid idea, but considering the way Snape usually views his students and the way he grew up knowing the power of emotions such as anger and fear, likely.

:
Snape took off points because Hermione was helping Neville when he asked her not to. I think he wanted Neville to fail there because he thought that feeding the potion to hte toad, waiting a while to let Neville squirm, and then giving it the antidote would have, in his mind, been a sufficiently traumatizing experience that would get Neville to improve. It's a terrible and stupid idea, but considering the way Snape usually views his students and the way he grew up knowing the power of emotions such as anger and fear, likely.

Somehow this theory does not lead me to view Snape favourably.

Somehow this theory does not lead me to view Snape favourably.

Good, because that wasn't my goal. :D
I wanted to point out a possible reason Snape had for doing what he did and thought that one the most likely from the evidence we have in the books.

I wanted to point out a possible reason Snape had for doing what he did and thought that one the most likely from the evidence we have in the books.

I still think this made him a really crappy teacher. :cool::relax:

I still think this made him a really crappy teacher. :cool::relax:

I wouldn't agree with that. It certainly made him a very unpleasant and scary teacher, but his students achieved their grades so he was a successfull teacher in that regard.

I still think this made him a really crappy teacher. :cool::relax:

I guess it all depends on how you rate someones ability to teach. Admittedly a lovely cuddely teacher who also manages to get thier students to learn lots and get great grades is the ideal, but if you're only going to get one or the other I think I can live without the fluffyness ;)

I think we need to remember that teachers are human. Severus didn't have much compassion in his life it isn't surprising to me that he struggles to show it to others but it is cannon that his students were getting good grades and were quite advanced considering thier age/year. Dumbledores reasoning for allowing Snape's teaching methods (kids need to learn to deal with harsh people) to me seems to fit into a general theme in the HP series/universe about the dangers of over protecting children (Dudley, Beatrix Bloxam etc). There are truely bad and evil things in the HP universe but a mean teacher isn't one of them as far as I can see. :)

I'm not saying you have to like him, or that his behaviour was great when he was teaching just that I don't think that his behaviour as a teacher was on a par with people like Umbridge or Voldemort.

I guess it all depends on how you rate someones ability to teach. Admittedly a lovely cuddely teacher who also manages to get thier students to learn lots and get great grades is the ideal, but if you're only going to get one or the other I think I can live without the fluffyness ;)

I think we need to remember that teachers are human. Severus didn't have much compassion in his life it isn't surprising to me that he struggles to show it to others but it is cannon that his students were getting good grades and were quite advanced considering thier age/year. Dumbledores reasoning for allowing Snape's teaching methods (kids need to learn to deal with harsh people) to me seems to fit into a general theme in the HP series/universe about the dangers of over protecting children (Dudley, Beatrix Bloxam etc). There are truely bad and evil things in the HP universe but a mean teacher isn't one of them as far as I can see. :)

I'm not saying you have to like him, or that his behaviour was great when he was teaching just that I don't think that his behaviour as a teacher was on a par with people like Umbridge or Voldemort.


I agree with all of this completely, Kitt! :tu:

I think you make a very good point about the theme of the dangers of over protecting children. It's about getting a balance.

I guess it all depends on how you rate someones ability to teach. Admittedly a lovely cuddely teacher who also manages to get thier students to learn lots and get great grades is the ideal, but if you're only going to get one or the other I think I can live without the fluffyness ;)

The teachers I learned most from were the ones who not only loved their subject, they taught it well and with enthusiasm. In addition, they were nice. They knew how to keep discipline, and they weren't afraid to tell us off if we misbehaved, but they were NICE. They are the ones I respected, and they are the ones I remember.

The teachers who humiliated pupils in the classroom -- forget it. :shrug:

I love Snape as a character :) but I'd find him a bit of a nightmare in RL. :yuhup:

I think we need to remember that teachers are human. Severus didn't have much compassion in his life it isn't surprising to me that he struggles to show it to others but it is canon that his students were getting good grades and were quite advanced considering thier age/year.

That is true.

I think you'd have to be pretty tough to survive Snape's teaching methods. :whistle: (Which could be one reason why he's so hard on Harry, of course ... since this kid is supposed to be taking on Voldemort).

Dumbledore's reasoning for allowing Snape's teaching methods (kids need to learn to deal with harsh people) to me seems to fit into a general theme in the HP series/universe about the dangers of over protecting children (Dudley, Beatrix Bloxam etc). There are truely bad and evil things in the HP universe but a mean teacher isn't one of them as far as I can see. :)

If I think about this at all, I tend to attribute it to the Hogwartian 1950s type attitudes. :whistle:

I'm not saying you have to like him, or that his behaviour was great when he was teaching just that I don't think that his behaviour as a teacher was on a par with people like Umbridge or Voldemort.

That is certainly true, IMO. Both those characters are clearly Jo's ultimate villains.

On another note, I would like to know more about how Snape got on as a Head of House with the Slytherin kids, since they all seem quite fond of him. :)

I don't see Slytherin House as a house for wusses, I might add. :whistle: :lol:

On another note, I would like to know more about how Snape got on as a Head of House with the Slytherin kids, since they all seem quite fond of him.

We only see them cheer Snape on in class when he's picking on the Gryffindors, so we can't really tell if it's because they like him or because they like what he's saying to their rivals. :hmm: We see Draco sucking up to him in CoS, but that's also suspect because he's only one of about 50 Slytherins and he's probably looking for personal gain rather than being genuinely appreciative of Snape.

I also want to know more about his relationship with his Slytherins though. We only see him one-on-one with Draco in HBP, but even then, tensions were high and Snape was still in spy mode, trying to get information from Draco. :sigh:

I guess it all depends on how you rate someones ability to teach. Admittedly a lovely cuddely teacher who also manages to get thier students to learn lots and get great grades is the ideal, but if you're only going to get one or the other I think I can live without the fluffyness ;)

I respect your view, but I think both extremes (over cuddily or bullying) are equally bad. I feel Snape was portrayed as a bullying professor and I feel that is inappropriate and wrongful behavior.

I think we need to remember that teachers are human. Severus didn't have much compassion in his life it isn't surprising to me that he struggles to show it to others

Agreed, but compassionate professors are human too. I don't feel that being human gives a professor the right to bully his students.

but it is cannon that his students were getting good grades and were quite advanced considering thier age/year. Dumbledores reasoning for allowing Snape's teaching methods (kids need to learn to deal with harsh people) to me seems to fit into a general theme in the HP series/universe about the dangers of over protecting children (Dudley, Beatrix Bloxam etc). There are truely bad and evil things in the HP universe but a mean teacher isn't one of them as far as I can see. :)

Dumbledore's reasoning, based on the quote, was not that Snape was a harsh teacher, but a horrible one, which is quite distinct, imo. I feel that covers the cruel and bullying manner in which he taught the students. I disagree with Dumbledore assuming he knew the extent of Snape's methodology. I feel harsh and strict are not great, but tolerable; however, to me, Snape went beyond that line in his teaching methods. In my judgment, strict is not equivalent to cruel behavior which is what I feel insulting and humiliating students includes - nor to me does it including bullying behavior, which I think Snape's methods also included.

I didn't feel that a theme in HP was the dangers of over protecting children. I do think 'spoiling' children was shown to negatively affect their behavior - but I didn't see that as a message against protecting your children from harm - including the harm of professors who behave in a bullying manner toward them.

I'm not saying you have to like him, or that his behaviour was great when he was teaching just that I don't think that his behaviour as a teacher was on a par with people like Umbridge or Voldemort.

Well Voldemort didn't teach, iirc. I disagree that Snape's methods were not on par with Umbridge's methods though. I feel that his verbal bullying was equal to hers and most of his other behavior was worse (like breaking flasks, calling students idiots, nasty and know it alls, making fun of their teeth, using a student's beloved pet for a science experiment in class and so forth - Umbridge was not guilty of this type of in classroom behavior, iirc). I would agree that Umbridge's detention of Harry was torture and beyond the worst detention by Snape, but Snape was too guilty of a pretty devastating detention in my view in HBP - although mental instead of physical harm, imo.

I can understand Snape's need to be strict, but I see no reason why he had to be, as I see it, bullying towards Neville. Snape snarling at Neville, "Idiot boy!" after Neville's potion seeped onto the floor is simply cruel, in my opinion - especially from a teacher's standpoint. I do not think it is an attempt by Snape to boost Neville's potion-making ability - he is purely insulting Neville by calling him an "idiot". I do not think Snape believed that by insulting his students they would be more competent in the subject (and if he did, I feel he was deluded). I see Snape's negative remarks to Neville and Harry as purely insulting; we do not see Snape saying those things to Crabbe and Goyle, who were likely equally poor in the subject. To me, Snape specifically targeted certain students to bully in his classes (Neville being at the top of the list), to a point where, in Neville's case, Snape was feared by the student, whereas he favored other students in the same classes (almost exclusively Slytherins, from what the books provide).

I agree with you :agree: Neville was never the student who improved by cruelty or any kind of behaviour Snape showed him, he was a child who improved by praise and showing confidence in him, judging by his performance in DADA classes with Lupin, smart as Snape was, he should've realised Neville's needs, also I think that Snape shouldn't have been so strict from the very first potions class, that's if he'd been really aiming at strictness. In a subject as difficult as potions Snape should've expected some students to mess things up, imo, he probably should've started with something simple and basic, for instance "how to handle and deal with cauldrons and potion ingredients" and then proceed to practical lessons, doing so he could've avoided all that mess, and what about him taking points from Harry a moment later, this imo was really injustice, and pure bullying.
Like you've pointed out there were many students who were bad at potions probably worse than Harry and Neville, and they were never bullied like that, Ron comes to mind, and he was a Gryffindor.

I think this is the interview that Cathy was talking about.:)

lhhicks99 asks: Why does Professor Dumbledore allow Professor Snape to be so nasty to the students (especially to Harry, Hermione, and Neville)?
jkrowling: Dumbledore believes there are all sorts of lessons in life...
jkrowling: horrible teachers like Snape are one of them!

Source: http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-livechat-barnesnoble.html

TYVM! :tu: That was quite interesting.

We only see them cheer Snape on in class when he's picking on the Gryffindors, so we can't really tell if it's because they like him or because they like what he's saying to their rivals. :hmm: We see Draco sucking up to him in CoS, but that's also suspect because he's only one of about 50 Slytherins and he's probably looking for personal gain rather than being genuinely appreciative of Snape.

I also want to know more about his relationship with his Slytherins though. We only see him one-on-one with Draco in HBP, but even then, tensions were high and Snape was still in spy mode, trying to get information from Draco. :sigh:

I know. :shrug:

We see a different side to Snape in The Prince's Tale, and this is definitely one aspect of his life I would like to know more about ...

I'm not saying you have to like him, or that his behaviour was great when he was teaching just that I don't think that his behaviour as a teacher was on a par with people like Umbridge or Voldemort.

IMO this is not the greatest argument. Snape stands or falls as a teacher on how he teaches, not how bad Umbridge and Volemort are as human beings. I don't see their failings serve as an excuse for Snape failing to teach Neville in a competent manner. Neville failed in Snape's class not because he was unable to learn, but because Snape did not teach him well. We know this because away from Snape Neville did learn and eventually suceeded in becoming a teacher as well. Quite apart from his role as a spy Snape had another role and that was as Potions master. IMO the mark of a good teacher is not in how he teaches the best or even the middle ground students, but in how he teaches his worst student. I can't cut him any slack here, after all what slack did he give Neville.

IMO this is not the greatest argument. Snape stands or falls as a teacher on how he teaches, not how bad Umbridge and Volemort are as human beings. I don't see their failings serve as an excuse for Snape failing to teach Neville in a competent manner. Neville failed in Snape's class not because he was unable to learn, but because Snape did not teach him well. We know this because away from Snape Neville did learn and eventually suceeded in becoming a teacher as well. Quite apart from his role as a spy Snape had another role and that was as Potions master. IMO the mark of a good teacher is not in how he teaches the best or even the middle ground students, but in how he teaches his worst student. I can't cut him any slack here, after all what slack did he give Neville.
I'll just point out that Neville's problems predated being in Snape's classroom, and have more to do with Neville's upbringing since his family treated him like a Squib for most of his life before Hogwarts. Also, Neville had trouble in nearly all of his classes except Herbology. I would no more blame Snape for that than blame McGonagall, who is just as harsh to Neville, in my opinion.

In a class that Neville actually liked, he didn't have a problem with Snape as a teacher. During DADA class with Snape in HBP, Harry never mentions Neville having a single problem with Snape.

I can understand Snape's need to be strict, but I see no reason why he had to be, as I see it, bullying towards Neville. Snape snarling at Neville, "Idiot boy!" after Neville's potion seeped onto the floor is simply cruel, in my opinion - especially from a teacher's standpoint.

I think that was merely an irritated comment, because of the exploding potion. Snape was expressing his irritation there and I think this explosion and danger was what Snape wanted to avoid, especially when students got to higher classes, where they would be dealing with more combustible potions. Snape wanted to make sure that the students understood the dangers of careless potion making very early IMO.

I do not think it is an attempt by Snape to boost Neville's potion-making ability - he is purely insulting Neville by calling him an "idiot". I do not think Snape believed that by insulting his students they would be more competent in the subject (and if he did, I feel he was deluded). I see Snape's negative remarks to Neville and Harry as purely insulting; we do not see Snape saying those things to Crabbe and Goyle, who were likely equally poor in the subject. To me, Snape specifically targeted certain students to bully in his classes (Neville being at the top of the list), to a point where, in Neville's case, Snape was feared by the student, whereas he favored other students in the same classes (almost exclusively Slytherins, from what the books provide

I think it was an attempt to show to both Neville and the class that carelessness could be dangerous. Snape could not say those words to Crabbe and Goyle, because in addition to being a teacher he was also a spy, a DE in the eyes of the Slytherins and he had a role to play IMO.


I guess it all depends on how you rate someones ability to teach. Admittedly a lovely cuddely teacher who also manages to get thier students to learn lots and get great grades is the ideal, but if you're only going to get one or the other I think I can live without the fluffyness ;)

I think we need to remember that teachers are human. Severus didn't have much compassion in his life it isn't surprising to me that he struggles to show it to others but it is cannon that his students were getting good grades and were quite advanced considering thier age/year. Dumbledores reasoning for allowing Snape's teaching methods (kids need to learn to deal with harsh people) to me seems to fit into a general theme in the HP series/universe about the dangers of over protecting children (Dudley, Beatrix Bloxam etc). There are truely bad and evil things in the HP universe but a mean teacher isn't one of them as far as I can see. :)

I'm not saying you have to like him, or that his behaviour was great when he was teaching just that I don't think that his behaviour as a teacher was on a par with people like Umbridge or Voldemort.

Excellent post! :tu:

IMO this is not the greatest argument. Snape stands or falls as a teacher on how he teaches, not how bad Umbridge and Volemort are as human beings. I don't see their failings serve as an excuse for Snape failing to teach Neville in a competent manner. Neville failed in Snape's class not because he was unable to learn, but because Snape did not teach him well. We know this because away from Snape Neville did learn and eventually suceeded in becoming a teacher as well. Quite apart from his role as a spy Snape had another role and that was as Potions master. IMO the mark of a good teacher is not in how he teaches the best or even the middle ground students, but in how he teaches his worst student. I can't cut him any slack here, after all what slack did he give Neville.

I see how good Snape was as a teacher; and if he was a bully or not taking Molly Weasley as the yardstick.

In the Books, Molly is this woman, who loves her children passionately and will do anything for them, to the extent of even killing another person, if they would dare to harm her kids.

She never ever says a word, either about Snape's teaching nor about his bullying, which shows me that Snape was neither. He was a strict, harsh no nonsense teacher, who along with his teaching had other duties as well IMO.

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

A change of subject, in case anyone is interested. :)

This is from the HBP and from the chapter Sectumsempra.

'Bring me your schoolbag,' said Snape softly, 'and all of your school books. All of them. Bring them to me here!'

There was no point arguing. Harry turned at once and splashed out of the bathroom. Once in a corridor, he broke into a run towards Gryffindor Tower. Most people were walking the other way and they gaped at him, drenched in water and blood, but he answered none of the questions fired at him as he ran past.

He felt stunned; it was as though a beloved pet had turned suddenly savage. What had the Prince been thinking, to copy such a spell into his books? And what would happen when Snape saw it? Wold he tell Slughorn - Harry's stomach churned - how Harry had been achieving such good results in Potions all year? Would he confiscate or destroy the Book that had taught Harry so much ... the book that had become a guide and friend? Harry could not let it happen ... he could not ....

......

'Do you know what I think you are Potter?' said Snape very quietly. 'I think you are a liar and a cheat and that you deserve detention with me every Saturday, until the end of term. What do you think Potter?'

Some questions

1) Was Harry's thinking about the Book a reflection of his opinion about the Book's owner?

2) The reason for Snape's punishment? Form the words in the text, was it for the sectumsempra or was it for hiding the Book? Or both?

Snape calls him a liar and a cheat before he awards the punishment. For which incident was this punishment for? If it was for hiding the book and lying to Snape, then why did not Snape punish Harry for the sectumsempra?

3) Why did not Snape force Harry to hand over the Book to him?

4)Was the sectumsempra copied into the book as Harry thinks or was it created by Snape? (in the Flight of the Prince, Harry uses both the sectumsempra and Levicorpus, so Snape could have been talking about the Levicorpus instead of the sectumsempra as his spells used against him.)

I see how good Snape was as a teacher; and if he was a bully or not taking Molly Weasley as the yardstick.

In the Books, Molly is this woman, who loves her children passionately and will do anything for them, to the extent of even killing another person, if they would dare to harm her kids.

She never ever says a word, either about Snape's teaching nor about his bullying, which shows me that Snape was neither. He was a strict, harsh no nonsense teacher, who along with his teaching had other duties as well IMO.
Yes, because no one can say that Molly didn't know Snape that well since every one of her children had him as a teacher year after year. :agree: If she still respected him even though Bill and the Twins didn't like him, then that's a sign that she was still satisfied with the progress the kids made in his class. Even Ron did pretty well although he hardly cared about Potions at all.

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

A change of subject, in case anyone is interested. :)

This is from the HBP and from the chapter Sectumsempra.

'Bring me your schoolbag,' said Snape softly, 'and all of your school books. All of them. Bring them to me here!'

There was no point arguing. Harry turned at once and splashed out of the bathroom. Once in a corridor, he broke into a run towards Gryffindor Tower. Most people were walking the other way and they gaped at him, drenched in water and blood, but he answered none of the questions fired at him as he ran past.

He felt stunned; it was as though a beloved pet had turned suddenly savage. What had the Prince been thinking, to copy such a spell into his books? And what would happen when Snape saw it? Wold he tell Slughorn - Harry's stomach churned - how Harry had been achieving such good results in Potions all year? Would he confiscate or destroy the Book that had taught Harry so much ... the book that had become a guide and friend? Harry could not let it happen ... he could not ....

......

'Do you know what I think you are Potter?' said Snape very quietly. 'I think you are a liar and a cheat and that you deserve detention with me every Saturday, until the end of term. What do you think Potter?'

Some questions

1) Was Harry's thinking about the Book a reflection of his opinion about the Book's owner?

Yes, I think he was very fond of the Prince and was shocked that he could be steered wrong by his "beloved pet."

That phrase makes me laugh because it sounds more like Hagrid and Buckbeak instead of Harry and Snape. But of course a "pet" can mean a favorite or cherished person. It also reminds me of what Lupin says about James thinking of the werewolf as a "furry little problem."

I like the fact that he saw the Prince as both a "guide" and a "friend," too. And as it turned out in DH, that's what Snape really was, in my opinion.

2) The reason for Snape's punishment? Form the words in the text, was it for the sectumsempra or was it for hiding the Book? Or both?

Snape calls him a liar and a cheat before he awards the punishment. For which incident was this punishment for? If it was for hiding the book and lying to Snape, then why did not Snape punish Harry for the sectumsempra?


I think it was both, but for Snape it was mainly the fact that Harry lied about the book.

I don't think Snape told anyone about the book the way Harry feared. In the book it says that McGonagall agreed with his punishment, which means that she thought it was just for the attack on Draco. But just between Snape and Harry it was for both things.

3) Why did not Snape force Harry to hand over the Book to him?
I really don't know. :huh:

4)Was the sectumsempra copied into the book as Harry thinks or was it created by Snape? (in the Flight of the Prince, Harry uses both the sectumsempra and Levicorpus, so Snape could have been talking about the Levicorpus instead of the sectumsempra as his spells used against him.)
I agree with you that it's a bit unclear which spell Snape is talking about. I'm not sure about whether Snape invented Sectumsempra or whether he might have found it in the restricted section and copied in there as Harry thought.

In DH, Lupin knew about Sectumsempra and said that Snape was known for being good with it. Does that mean they both learned it at Hogwarts? But then, Lupin and James also knew about Levicorpus, and Snape implies that he invented that spell. I wish we knew more about the spells in the book and why they somehow became trendy at Hogwarts. How did James learn Levicorpus? How did Lupin know about Sectumsempra? It's a mystery.

I think that was merely an irritated comment, because of the exploding potion. Snape was expressing his irritation there and I think this explosion and danger was what Snape wanted to avoid, especially when students got to higher classes, where they would be dealing with more combustible potions. Snape wanted to make sure that the students understood the dangers of careless potion making very early IMO.

IMO, there were other ways to show the students the dangers of dealing with potions other than bullying and terrifying an innocent child on his first school day.

I think it was an attempt to show to both Neville and the class that carelessness could be dangerous. Snape could not say those words to Crabbe and Goyle, because in addition to being a teacher he was also a spy, a DE in the eyes of the Slytherins and he had a role to play IMO.

I think it had nothing to do with DEs, Snape was not nice with Harry when they were having Occlumency lessons on their own, also the DEs before Voldemort came believed that Snape had really gone to the other side, they didn't know he was a spy untill Voldemort came back.


I see how good Snape was as a teacher; and if he was a bully or not taking Molly Weasley as the yardstick.

In the Books, Molly is this woman, who loves her children passionately and will do anything for them, to the extent of even killing another person, if they would dare to harm her kids.

She never ever says a word, either about Snape's teaching nor about his bullying, which shows me that Snape was neither. He was a strict, harsh no nonsense teacher, who along with his teaching had other duties as well IMO.

Snape never bullied any of the Weasleys as much as bullied Harry and Neville, imo, Molly wouldn't have been too Happy if she knew how Harry and Neville were treated.


2) The reason for Snape's punishment? Form the words in the text, was it for the sectumsempra or was it for hiding the Book? Or both?

Snape calls him a liar and a cheat before he awards the punishment. For which incident was this punishment for? If it was for hiding the book and lying to Snape, then why did not Snape punish Harry for the sectumsempra?
IMO, Harry never really recieved enough punishment for using such a spell, so I think that this punishment was just for lying whatever Snape had intended.

3) Why did not Snape force Harry to hand over the Book to him?


I think because damage was already done, Harry had learnt a lot of spells and had used one of the most dangerous ones, but Snape's behaviour made me wonder, if he no more cared about that book?

I'll just point out that Neville's problems predated being in Snape's classroom, and have more to do with Neville's upbringing since his family treated him like a Squib for most of his life before Hogwarts. Also, Neville had trouble in nearly all of his classes except Herbology. I would no more blame Snape for that than blame McGonagall, who is just as harsh to Neville, in my opinion.

In a class that Neville actually liked, he didn't have a problem with Snape as a teacher. During DADA class with Snape in HBP, Harry never mentions Neville having a single problem with Snape.

I don't remember Mcgonagall ever being harsh with any of the students, I call Mcgonagall treatment to the students as strictness, she never bullies, insults or take points from some kids because others have failed to do their work. (imo).

That phrase makes me laugh because it sounds more like Hagrid and Buckbeak instead of Harry and Snape. But of course a "pet" can mean a favorite or cherished person.

LOL! I think the Book was a very cherished object to Harry and he grew to trust it. :agree:

I like the fact that he saw the Prince as both a "guide" and a "friend," too. And as it turned out in DH, that's what Snape really was, in my opinion.

:agree:

I think it was both, but for Snape it was mainly the fact that Harry lied about the book.

I thought so too, and I wonder if Snape felt that Harry's shock at nearly killing Draco was punishment enough.

I really don't know. :huh:

I think Snape must have felt amused and just a little touched that Harry would want his book and that he was prepared to go to such lengths to keep it.

The most important reason I can think of for Snape for allowing Harry to have his Book, is that apart from Sectumsempra there were no other dark spells. As far as sectumsempra was concerned, I think Snape knew Harry had learnt his lesson and that he would not use it so easily the next time and Snape also knew that the book contained no more dark or harmful spells and so I think he deemed it safe for Harry to keep it.

Later on I would not be surprised if Snape had a laugh about it, wondering what Harry would have done had he known it was Snape's book he had been so protective about. :)

In DH, Lupin knew about Sectumsempra and said that Snape was known for being good with it. Does that mean they both learned it at Hogwarts?

I think this is possible. Perhaps they did in DADA in 7th year, when their teacher gave them examples of dark spells for enemies and Snape may have looked it up and learnt the counter?

But then, Lupin and James also knew about Levicorpus, and Snape implies that he invented that spell. I wish we knew more about the spells in the book and why they somehow became trendy at Hogwarts. How did James learn Levicorpus? How did Lupin know about Sectumsempra? It's a mystery.

I just don't know, unless the Marauders' forced Snape to tell them the spell, when he cast it on one of them or if they took his book without his knowledge and read it. Both are merely speculation though.

TGW: Thanks for posting such a great reply about legilimency. I'm not sure I see it the same way as you. I agree that it is in a way an invasion of privacy, but I'm not sure that we see anyone other than Voldemort use it in this sort of way. Generally I think Snape and Dumbledore use it to get to the bottom of fights and rule breaking, and for students own safety. As such I am sure there are many teachers who wished they could perform legilimency.

Also, with my use of torture, I meant mentally. Neville was terrified of Snape. I would be too if the life of my pet depended on my grade in a class I was horrible in. (That would be art, for me :P)Snape's bark is always worse than his bite. He threatens to do a lot of things which he never actually follows through on. I am not defending or excusing him by saying this. But there are few examples of him threatening to do something bad to someone and then actually doing it. He doesn't poison Trevor - he doesn't get Sirius or Lupin kissed by the dementors - he doesn't get Harry expelled. To me the idea that he actually intended to do these things just doesn't make any sense.

Please do! I love hearing other's opinions.
Unfortunately talking about the marauders in here tends to upset the mods.

Well, Harry is a bit more forgiving (and was probably, a little bit, trying to make Albus feel better,) and a better person than I am.I don't buy the trying to make Albus feel better interpretation simply because I don't think that Jo included the epilogue just to show the one big happy Weasley family. While she may well have wanted to show us Harry having a happy future given that the last chapter ended so abruptly, the epilogue is IMO undoubtedly there so that we can have Harry's view of Snape having digested everything he learnt in TPT. There was not time to address this in the last chapters of the book. Harry going into a long contemplation on the character of Severus Snape would have ruined the end of the book, so it in the epilogue that we see this loose end (Harry and Snape's relationship) tied up. Harry gives the reader his opinion of Severus Snape now that he is a mature adult in full possession of all the facts of Snape's life. Harry is very forgiving and that is what makes him so powerful. Forgiveness is a very necessary part of love which is Harry's greatest strength.

He is, IMHO, slightly vain. His "brew power, stopper death" (abbr. quote) seems a bit conceited to me, but it could be read either way, I guess.
I certainly didn't view that speech as an illustration of his conceit. To me he was trying to get the classes attention and interest in a subject that some might see as boring difficult and not very magical. Certainly I don't think he was boasting - he was telling the students what a good potioneer could do - in much the same was as McGonagall turning the table into a pig in her first lesson showed the students what they could achieve in transfiguration of the applied themselves.

I think this is the interview that Cathy was talking about.Yes! Thanks for posting that quote TT! RL is a bit manic at the moment :yuhup:

I wanted to point out a possible reason Snape had for doing what he did and thought that one the most likely from the evidence we have in the books.
Exactly! We are not here to excuse Snape but ti discuss his character - warts and all.

I think we need to remember that teachers are human. Severus didn't have much compassion in his life it isn't surprising to me that he struggles to show it to others but it is cannon that his students were getting good grades and were quite advanced considering thier age/year. Dumbledores reasoning for allowing Snape's teaching methods (kids need to learn to deal with harsh people) to me seems to fit into a general theme in the HP series/universe about the dangers of over protecting children (Dudley, Beatrix Bloxam etc). There are truely bad and evil things in the HP universe but a mean teacher isn't one of them as far as I can see.
:tu: Well said!

I think the reason why some people have a problem with Snape's teaching methods is a generational thing. When I was at school (and I am about the same age as Jo) the rules on what was acceptable behaviour from a teacher were far less strict than they are now. When I was at primary school we still had corporal punishment. I certainly was called an idiot by at least one teacher. Snape's idea of insulting and threatening pupils to make them improve was not unknown, abnd is still one that is very much approved of by my mother (though not by me)So while I might think that Snape was a nasty teacher I do not think he was a bad teacher or that his behaviour was "evil"

I don't remember Mcgonagall ever being harsh with any of the students, I call Mcgonagall treatment to the students as strictness, she never bullies, insults or take points from some kids because others have failed to do their work. (imo). As I recall McGonagall was just a harsh with Neville as Snape was at times. The writing down the passwords incident for example.
"Which person," she said, her voice shaking, "which abysmally foolish person wrote down this week's passwords and left them lying around?"

I think the reason why some people have a problem with Snape's teaching methods is a generational thing. When I was at school (and I am about the same age as Jo) the rules on what was acceptable behaviour from a teacher were far less strict than they are now. When I was at primary school we still had corporal punishment. I certainly was called an idiot by at least one teacher. Snape's idea of insulting and threatening pupils to make them improve was not unknown, abnd is still one that is very much approved of by my mother (though not by me)So while I might think that Snape was a nasty teacher I do not think he was a bad teacher or that his behaviour was "evil"

:tu:


As I recall McGonagall was just a harsh with Neville as Snape was at times. The writing down the passwords incident for example.
"Which person," she said, her voice shaking, "which abysmally foolish person wrote down this week's passwords and left them lying around?"

Another example:

'Longbottom, kindly do not reveal that you can't even perform a simple Switching Spell in front of anyone from Durmstrang!' Professor McGonagall barked at the end of one particularly difficult lesson, during which Neville had accidentally transplanted his own ears onto a cactus.

TGW: Thanks for posting such a great reply about legilimency.

You are welcome. :)

I agree that it is in a way an invasion of privacy, but I'm not sure that we see anyone other than Voldemort use it in this sort of way.

:agree:

Generally I think Snape and Dumbledore use it to get to the bottom of fights and rule breaking, and for students own safety.

I think they used it when they felt a student was exceeding his limits in a very wrong way and then I think those with the knowledge of Legilimency used it to get to the bottom of things. The years we have the Books for were about Voldemort's second rising and his eventual defeat so that would also be playing on the minds of Snape and Dumbledore, who were the ones we know who could use Legilimency effortlessly. I don't think anyone else could do this, apart from Harry peeping into Voldemort's mind that last year.

As such I am sure there are many teachers who wished they could perform legilimency.

Yes; it does seem an easy way to know the truth, but in a way I like how exclusive it is and how those on the Light side who knew it, did not abuse it IMO.

I wonder if Snape felt that Harry's shock at nearly killing Draco was punishment enough.

I think you have an interesting interpretation of Snape. :lol: As I recall (I'm re-reading my way through, so it's not a fresh memory), Snape was none too pleased with Harry after that, and I, like others here, believe it was poor punishment considering Harry's actions. I don't feel Snape is the kind to believe that personal regret is punishment enough...especially regarding Harry.

I think this is possible. Perhaps they did in DADA in 7th year, when their teacher gave them examples of dark spells for enemies and Snape may have looked it up and learnt the counter?

I always had the impression this was another of Snape's creation. It was handwritten, notated with for enemies in his journalised school book. I believe it would have become known to others, even to teachers, but I think it's a Snape original.

I think the reason why some people have a problem with Snape's teaching methods is a generational thing. When I was at school (and I am about the same age as Jo) the rules on what was acceptable behaviour from a teacher were far less strict than they are now. When I was at primary school we still had corporal punishment. I certainly was called an idiot by at least one teacher. Snape's idea of insulting and threatening pupils to make them improve was not unknown, abnd is still one that is very much approved of by my mother (though not by me)So while I might think that Snape was a nasty teacher I do not think he was a bad teacher or that his behaviour was "evil"

:tu: Completely agree. While at times overly personal, I never read them as excessively harsh...but then I was taught by some pretty fierce nuns...:p

I think it had nothing to do with DEs, Snape was not nice with Harry when they were having Occlumency lessons on their own, also the DEs before Voldemort came believed that Snape had really gone to the other side, they didn't know he was a spy untill Voldemort came back.

Snape never made mocking comments about what he saw in Harry's memories; he also never spoke about them anywhere else, except maybe to Dumbledore IMO. He was pretty much okay I felt during the lessons.

Snape never bullied any of the Weasleys as much as bullied Harry and Neville, imo, Molly wouldn't have been too Happy if she knew how Harry and Neville were treated.

I think Molly would have had words to say had Snape bullied Harry. I think she regarded Harry as her own; she even fought Sirius because she felt he was telling Harry way too much. Had Snape really bullied Harry, I am sure he would have heard it from her. Instead she asks Harry to respect Snape (by calling him Professor), which I feel she would not do, unless she was sure Harry and her kids were not bullied by Snape.

I think because damage was already done, Harry had learnt a lot of spells and had used one of the most dangerous ones, but Snape's behaviour made me wonder, if he no more cared about that book?

I think it was because the book did not have dark spells except the sectumsempra.

I think you have an interesting interpretation of Snape. :lol: As I recall (I'm re-reading my way through, so it's not a fresh memory), Snape was none too pleased with Harry after that, and I, like others here, believe it was poor punishment considering Harry's actions.

I too thought the punishment was for the sectumsempra, but while I was writing the passage today, I saw that Snape accused Harry of lying and cheating (both for the HBP book) and then awarded him the punishment. There was no mention about the sectumsempra, so I wondered.

I don't feel Snape is the kind to believe that personal regret is punishment enough...especially regarding Harry

I would have thought Snape was the perfect candidate; he would, more than anyone know how easy it is to make mistakes and how terrifying those the results of those mistakes can become.

Personally I think Snape was showing a lot of understanding, for Harry was genuinely scared at what he'd done, but I think he did not know how to express it, he veered away to the book, snarked about it and gave Harry detention, to keep him away from Malfoy. :)

I always had the impression this was another of Snape's creation. It was handwritten, notated with for enemies in his journalised school book. I believe it would have become known to others, even to teachers, but I think it's a Snape original.

It could go either way IMO.

His inability to move on...though admittedly it has both helped and hindered him in this case.
For example, his hatred of Harry's father and his friends, caused this immediate rift between Harry and Snape, and has most likely been the key issue in preventing these two bonding, or even having any kind of normal teacher-student relationship. I think had Snape took Harry for a seperate person and not James Potters' son, then they might have some kind of a normal relationship.

However his inability to move on has also helped Harry greatly, as we now know all these years Snape had been working to protect Harry, out of love for Lily. And if it weren't for Snape protecting Harry, he would never have gotten the sword, not to mention what he would have done if he truly had moved on and gone back to Voldemort.

I think both extremes (over cuddily or bullying) are equally bad. I feel Snape was portrayed as a bullying professor and I feel that is inappropriate and wrongful behavior.

I was not saying one was bettter or worse than the other - I was saying that the most important ability of a teacher is thier ability to teach and that was what I said was the more important thing.

IMO this is not the greatest argument. Snape stands or falls as a teacher on how he teaches, not how bad Umbridge and Volemort are as human beings.

I was not make the comparison with Umbridge and Volemort to show Severus was a great teacher or a nice guy – the fact that I said ‘I'm not saying you have to like him, or that his behaviour was great when he was teaching’ should illustrate that. I was pointing out that there is a difference between a mean teacher and an evil person/teacher and that perhaps we should moderate our feeling of dislike, where they exist, before we label someone as being evil; something I strongly believe Severus Snape is not.

I don't see their failings serve as an excuse for Snape

I was not making excuses for Severus Snape. I have often said that I do not believe that an analysis thread is a court where we should either be prosecuting or defending any character, analysis is I believe about trying to understand a character, what makes them tick, why they act in the way they do therefore I neither excuse or try to damn characters.

If I think about this at all, I tend to attribute it to the Hogwartian 1950s type attitudes. :whistle:

I think I have always seen that – I can’t compare Hogwarts to any normal school. Normal schools don’t put 11 year olds in a situation where they can easily have a major fall from a great height nor can they re-grow missing bones, reattach missing body parts etc etc etc.

I think we have to assess the dangers very differently in the HPverse and we have to look at the social contracts differently because the base expectations are much more in keeping with mores of KJR’s childhood & childhood books that with modern ones.

We only see them cheer Snape on in class when he's picking on the Gryffindors, so we can't really tell if it's because they like him or because they like what he's saying to their rivals. :hmm:

IIRC I would have to disagree with you Iggi, I’m sure I remember harry making mention of how the Slytherin table were very pleased when Severus was made DADA teacher – didn’t they applaud him quite loudly. :hmm: I was always under the impression that they appreaciated their head of house anyway. :)

Shall we throw the perceptions of Snape's own mother into this Freudian analysis? What about Eileen?

Hmm… Eileen, Tobias & Sev … Oedipal anyone??? :lol:

No seriously, joking aside, I think if one is going to believe in the Oedipal struggle as a normal stage of growing up Sev has some very good reasons for wanting to ‘kill’ (NB in the metaphorical sense) his father.

Initially when I thought of Eileen I remember a dower faced woman who saw Sev off at King’s Cross. She seems remote and distant. My impulse initially was to assume that this is the way she is as a mother, it seemed to fit with what I saw in the protego memory flashback in OotP.

But actually if we look at the characters timeline the first thing we hear about Eileen is little Sev saying to Lily ‘You are a witch. I’ve been watching you for a while. But there’s nothing wrong with that. My mum’s one,’

This implies that his mother inhabits the role of good parent in Sev’s mind. He seems to rejoice in his likeness to her – they are both magical and they are good; or at least benign.

This makes me rethink the situation on King’s Cross perhaps she is not remote and distant with him normally. It seems likely to me that there was a time when she was actively a good mother – certainly good enough for ‘little Sev’ to mark her as an indicator of goodness.

This leaves two possibilities in my mind (of course there maybe others that I have not yet considered ;))
1) Eileen was once available emotional/mentally to her son but ceased to be so (I assume because of the strain of her les than perfect marriage)
2) Eileen was still available emotional/mentally to her son but was withdrawn because of his imminent departure a situation that she is likely, in this scenario, to have mixed feelings about; on the one hand her son was about to go somewhere safe where his inheritance as a wizard would be nurtured and his escape to permanent safety was being readied, on the other hand she was losing what was probably her only remaining link with kindness, love and magic.

I’m not sure which of these I think is correct, they both have merit imo – but what does this tell us about Severus?

I think it is clear that Severus has made a link between magical = good, non magical = something negative (given his reaction when lily asks about his dad in TPT). I’m not saying what exactly – I think needs more investigation it could range form a simple non-magical = bad to just rejecting or something in between. However I think here is one of the points leading to his later becoming enamoured with people who believe in the rightness of a magical over muggle ideology.

In the case of either option I think it could be possible that Severus would have learnt early on that loving feeling could not be openly expressed, while his mother may have been accepting of such overtures it seems likely to me that they would have been unwise in front of his father and rejection, either real or pretended, seems a real possibility to me. This leaves me understanding both why Severus seems to have been so aware of any affection shown him (his reaction to Lily using his name for example) and so reluctant to actually tell Lily how he felt about her.

I think it also underlines the points sweetsev made sometime ago about Severus being caught in an Oedipal conflict.

I was not make the comparison with Umbridge and Volemort to show Severus was a great teacher or a nice guy – the fact that I said ‘I'm not saying you have to like him, or that his behaviour was great when he was teaching’ should illustrate that. I was pointing out that there is a difference between a mean teacher and an evil person/teacher and that perhaps we should moderate our feeling of dislike, where they exist, before we label someone as being evil; something I strongly believe Severus Snape is not.

I feel that Snape and Umbridges treatment of the children was similar in nature on this issue. I feel that Snape's in class treatment of the children was worse than Umbridges, although I feel her detention of Harry was worse than Snape's general detentions (imo). However, I feel that his shoving to Harry to the ground with all of his might and throwing the jar of cockroaches at his head (OOTP) and striking him across the face with the whip-like curse (HBP) were examples of his treatment of the kids going over the line. In both cases, I feel the various treatment was limited to one occassion - but in my view, that does not lesson the wrongfulness of their behavior or treatment toward the children. In class, I felt Snape similarly went over the line with incidents like that with Neville's frog and Hermione's teeth - and his conversation with Lupin about Hermione and Neville before the entire class (imo).

In reference to Snape, JKR said: "As a teacher, the worst, shabbiest thing you can do is to bully children" (Conversations with JK Rowling pg. 21). I agree with her and I feel her depiction of Snape in that regard is a study of this type of professor, showing the ills that come from the treatment, both while it is given and in the aftermath, imo. To me, JKR's examples were not of a merely strict and harsh professor, but as set forth in CoS, as a cruel and sarcastic one, which to me characterizes the bullying treatment JKR referenced in her interview - and shown in the examples I provided above.

Do you think Molly Weasley was condoning such bullying behaviour by keeping quiet about said abuse? Or Sirius, who hated Snape and would raised hell had he known Snape was bullying Harry? Do you think Sirius felt Snape was bullying Harry and still never bothered, and trusted Snape to peep into Harry's mind, which would give Snape more things to bully Harry with?

I don't think Molly would have kept quiet if Snape had indeed bullied Harry or any of her kids. And neither would Sirius IMO.

In reference to Snape, JKR said: "As a teacher, the worst, shabbiest thing you can do is to bully children" (Conversations with JK Rowling pg. 21).

IMO there is a world of difference between shabby behaviour and evil behaviour. I know you feel he is evil and that is your prerogative. With all due respect we will simply have to agree to disagree - as I have already said I do not believe the ‘judging a character’ thing is part of character analysis and neither do if find it of any interest. :)

I happen to agree with you that Snape bullied the children. In my mind, it was part of the connection between how he was treated as a child and his subsequent need to pick on those weaker than him in adulthood. (And no, that doesn't make it right. At all.) However, I also believe that there are some generation/cultural differences that lead me to interpret some of the events somewhat differently than they were intended. It's hard for me to think that Snape is supposed to be seen as a "child abuser" when he's been allowed to teach for 14 years at the school; you'd think Dumbledore would have stopped any truly abusive behavior from occurring. I think Snape is supposed to represent a "bad, bullying teacher" that still falls in the realm of acceptable authority figure in generations past. Whether he is seen as more over the top than that is probably a matter of perspective: I know I wouldn't want my kids in his class, but I also had a 7th grade science teacher who would throw oranges and chalk at his students and call us names!

As for the whipping and glass throwing incident; those actions can stand on their own, but I don't see either as being representative of Snape's teaching methods (which is what was being discussed). And in the whipping scene he is basically out of his mind. To get back to kittling's point; I saw some of how Snape treated Harry as representative of Snape's own father. Dumbledore essentially asked Snape to take on a fatherly role with Harry; a relationship that Snape did not think highly of or regard with any positive emotion. He does react with anger, violence and shaming toward Harry and I feel like these are things he connects to his own experiences of what a father is. And as kittling said, these opinions are given, not to excuse or condemn Snape, but merely to understand him.

By the way, a wonderful wonderful (and heartbreaking) book that illustrates a more realistic Harry and Snape (as well as the bullies who rule the school) is Robert Cormier's "The Chocolate War." I highly recommend it!

A change of subject, in case anyone is interested. :)

This is from the HBP and from the chapter Sectumsempra.

'Bring me your schoolbag,' said Snape softly, 'and all of your school books. All of them. Bring them to me here!'

There was no point arguing. Harry turned at once and splashed out of the bathroom. Once in a corridor, he broke into a run towards Gryffindor Tower. Most people were walking the other way and they gaped at him, drenched in water and blood, but he answered none of the questions fired at him as he ran past.

He felt stunned; it was as though a beloved pet had turned suddenly savage. What had the Prince been thinking, to copy such a spell into his books? And what would happen when Snape saw it? Wold he tell Slughorn - Harry's stomach churned - how Harry had been achieving such good results in Potions all year? Would he confiscate or destroy the Book that had taught Harry so much ... the book that had become a guide and friend? Harry could not let it happen ... he could not ....

......

'Do you know what I think you are Potter?' said Snape very quietly. 'I think you are a liar and a cheat and that you deserve detention with me every Saturday, until the end of term. What do you think Potter?'

1) Was Harry's thinking about the Book a reflection of his opinion about the Book's owner?

:huh: Probably not, if I get your meaning. Harry still hated Snape at the time. I think Harry's kind descriptions of the Prince indicate mostly how alike Harry and Snape are, and foreshadow his later feelings toward the man and the revelations about Snape's good side in DH.

2) The reason for Snape's punishment? Form the words in the text, was it for the sectumsempra or was it for hiding the Book? Or both?

Both, I'd say, but I think Snape was more affronted by Harry's lies than anything.

3) Why did not Snape force Harry to hand over the Book to him?

I think he tried to do that when he asked Harry to bring his schoolbag. But Harry hid the book, and so Snape could not get it.

4)Was the sectumsempra copied into the book as Harry thinks or was it created by Snape? (in the Flight of the Prince, Harry uses both the sectumsempra and Levicorpus, so Snape could have been talking about the Levicorpus instead of the sectumsempra as his spells used against him.)

I have no idea. Both are possibilities. :)

His inability to move on...though admittedly it has both helped and hindered him in this case.
For example, his hatred of Harry's father and his friends, caused this immediate rift between Harry and Snape, and has most likely been the key issue in preventing these two bonding, or even having any kind of normal teacher-student relationship. I think had Snape took Harry for a seperate person and not James Potters' son, then they might have some kind of a normal relationship.

However his inability to move on has also helped Harry greatly, as we now know all these years Snape had been working to protect Harry, out of love for Lily. And if it weren't for Snape protecting Harry, he would never have gotten the sword, not to mention what he would have done if he truly had moved on and gone back to Voldemort.

I like what you say about that being a blessing and a curse. :agree: I think that a lot of Snape's attributes work both for him and against him.

IIRC I would have to disagree with you Iggi, I’m sure I remember harry making mention of how the Slytherin table were very pleased when Severus was made DADA teacher – didn’t they applaud him quite loudly. :hmm: I was always under the impression that they appreaciated their head of house anyway. :)

*slaps forehead* Oh, thanks, Kitt! I can't believe I forgot about that. That's a good point, and I'll have to think about it more.

Originally Posted By Kittling
Initially when I thought of Eileen I remember a dower faced woman who saw Sev off at King’s Cross. She seems remote and distant. My impulse initially was to assume that this is the way she is as a mother, it seemed to fit with what I saw in the protego memory flashback in OotP.

But actually if we look at the characters timeline the first thing we hear about Eileen is little Sev saying to Lily ‘You are a witch. I’ve been watching you for a while. But there’s nothing wrong with that. My mum’s one,’

This implies that his mother inhabits the role of good parent in Sev’s mind. He seems to rejoice in his likeness to her – they are both magical and they are good; or at least benign.

This is a nice obsevation! :tu: His rejoicing in his likeness to his mother eventually led him use his mother's maiden name and call himself "The Half-Blood Prince".

This makes me rethink the situation on King’s Cross perhaps she is not remote and distant with him normally. It seems likely to me that there was a time when she was actively a good mother – certainly good enough for ‘little Sev’ to mark her as an indicator of goodness.

This leaves two possibilities in my mind (of course there maybe others that I have not yet considered )
1) Eileen was once available emotional/mentally to her son but ceased to be so (I assume because of the strain of her les than perfect marriage)
2) Eileen was still available emotional/mentally to her son but was withdrawn because of his imminent departure a situation that she is likely, in this scenario, to have mixed feelings about; on the one hand her son was about to go somewhere safe where his inheritance as a wizard would be nurtured and his escape to permanent safety was being readied, on the other hand she was losing what was probably her only remaining link with kindness, love and magic.

I’m not sure which of these I think is correct, they both have merit imo –

Could it even be a combination of the two?

In the case of either option I think it could be possible that Severus would have learnt early on that loving feeling could not be openly expressed, while his mother may have been accepting of such overtures it seems likely to me that they would have been unwise in front of his father and rejection, either real or pretended, seems a real possibility to me.
His only words about his father do rather point to some kind of rejection.
'He doesn't like anything, much.'

Sad, isn't it.:(

Snape's bark is always worse than his bite. He threatens to do a lot of things which he never actually follows through on. I am not defending or excusing him by saying this. But there are few examples of him threatening to do something bad to someone and then actually doing it. He doesn't poison Trevor - he doesn't get Sirius or Lupin kissed by the dementors - he doesn't get Harry expelled. To me the idea that he actually intended to do these things just doesn't make any sense.

I wanted to touch on the 3 things I highlighted. 1, "He doesn't poison Trevor." Actually, he tries to. Trevor didn't end up poisoned because Hermione told Neville how to fix his potion. Snape tests the potion on Trevor, and isn't pleased when the potion works perfectly.
2. "He doesn't get Sirius or Lupin kissed by the dementors." But, he tries. The only reason that Sirius isn't kissed is because Harry saves him. And Lupin was transformed, and when he came back, he said, "Professor Dumbledore managed to convince Fudge that I was trying to save your lives."
3. "He doesn't get Harry expelled." Again, he tries. On several occasions, he says that Harry gets away with far too much, and should be "suspended-at the very least-for leading his friends into such danger. Consider, Minister,- against all school rules- after all the precautions put in place for his protection- out of bounds, at night, consorting with a werewolf and a murderer-and I have reason to believe he has been visiting Hogsmeade illegally too-" He tries very hard to convince Fudge to suspend-or worse- Harry.


I don't buy the trying to make Albus feel better interpretation simply because I don't think that Jo included the epilogue just to show the one big happy Weasley family. While she may well have wanted to show us Harry having a happy future given that the last chapter ended so abruptly, the epilogue is IMO undoubtedly there so that we can have Harry's view of Snape having digested everything he learnt in TPT. There was not time to address this in the last chapters of the book. Harry going into a long contemplation on the character of Severus Snape would have ruined the end of the book, so it in the epilogue that we see this loose end (Harry and Snape's relationship) tied up. Harry gives the reader his opinion of Severus Snape now that he is a mature adult in full possession of all the facts of Snape's life. Harry is very forgiving and that is what makes him so powerful. Forgiveness is a very necessary part of love which is Harry's greatest strength.

Harry is very forgiving. But I don't see the epilogue as a "Harry loves Snape and all he stands for" kind of thing. I read it as a glimpse of Harry's life with a family; the thing he has always wanted. Did I think Albus Severus was a bit cheesy? Yeah. (Plus, did Ginny have any input on the names?) But, I think it shows that Harry is unlike Snape in the fact that he forgives and then moves on. But that's just My opinion.

I certainly didn't view that speech as an illustration of his conceit. To me he was trying to get the classes attention and interest in a subject that some might see as boring difficult and not very magical. Certainly I don't think he was boasting - he was telling the students what a good potioneer could do - in much the same was as McGonagall turning the table into a pig in her first lesson showed the students what they could achieve in transfiguration of the applied themselves.

Well, I read McGonagall's as "This is the curriculum later on." Whereas Snape's read to me "I can teach you to do this because I am fantastic." That's just a silly girl's impression of 2 teachers, though. Just my opinion.:tu:

I think the reason why some people have a problem with Snape's teaching methods is a generational thing. When I was at school (and I am about the same age as Jo) the rules on what was acceptable behaviour from a teacher were far less strict than they are now. When I was at primary school we still had corporal punishment. I certainly was called an idiot by at least one teacher. Snape's idea of insulting and threatening pupils to make them improve was not unknown, and is still one that is very much approved of by my mother (though not by me)So while I might think that Snape was a nasty teacher I do not think he was a bad teacher or that his behaviour was "evil"

Hmm, I never thought of a generational thing, but that makes sense that older (I'm not trying to call you old or anything,) people might believe that to be a viable teaching method because that is what they are used to. I am 14, however, so I don't like the idea of teaching by intimidation. I had one teacher that tried to do that, and I ended up to the point of tears everyday and I certainly did poorly in that class. (Now that I think about it, "Idiot Girl!" was leveled against me in that class a couple times.)
I feel young now. :blush:

As I recall McGonagall was just a harsh with Neville as Snape was at times. The writing down the passwords incident for example.
"Which person," she said, her voice shaking, "which abysmally foolish person wrote down this week's passwords and left them lying around?"

But she wasn't being harsh on Neville to her knowledge. She didn't know it was Neville. And it was foolish to leave passwords laying around, especially when there was a supposed mass-murderer escaped and looking for a boy in the dormitory that the passwords went to. She was mad and scared, because that act had put many lives in danger. Snape calling Neville "Idiot boy" was insulting him directly, and for a much smaller act. (doing a potion incorrectly). In my mind, "Idiot Boy" is a lot harsher than "abysmally foolish".

2. "He doesn't get Sirius or Lupin kissed by the dementors." But, he tries. The only reason that Sirius isn't kissed is because Harry saves him.

No, Harry doesn't save him. Snape conjures up stretchers, puts the unconscious Sirius on them and transports him into the castle uninterrupted by Harry or anyone else. And he didn't hand Sirius over to the Dementors - didn't even look for them.

1, "He doesn't poison Trevor." Actually, he tries to. Trevor didn't end up poisoned because Hermione told Neville how to fix his potion. Snape tests the potion on Trevor, and isn't pleased when the potion works perfectly.
Snape was perfectly aware of what was going on in his class. He knew that Hermione was helping Neville. We are also not given any proof that the incorrectly made potion would do any lasting harm to Trevor. What actually happens - Trevor is unhurt. He is not poisoned.
2. "He doesn't get Sirius or Lupin kissed by the dementors." But, he tries. The only reason that Sirius isn't kissed is because Harry saves him. And Lupin was transformed, and when he came back, he said, "Professor Dumbledore managed to convince Fudge that I was trying to save your lives."He doesn't try to. Trying to would involve calling the dementors and handing Black over to them - which was what the Ministry had ordered should happen. At no point does Snape bring the dementors to Black or take Black to the dementors. Ergo he did not try to have Black kissed he merely threatened to have it done. There is a difference.
3. "He doesn't get Harry expelled." Again, he tries. On several occasions, he says that Harry gets away with far too much, and should be "suspended-at the very least-for leading his friends into such danger. Consider, Minister,- against all school rules- after all the precautions put in place for his protection- out of bounds, at night, consorting with a werewolf and a murderer-and I have reason to believe he has been visiting Hogsmeade illegally too-" He tries very hard to convince Fudge to suspend-or worse- Harry.Again he doesn't try to get Harry expelled he merely threatens to get him expelled. Severus knows Harry is the chosen one of the prophecy before Harry even enters the school. He knows that there is no way on earth that Dumbledore will expell him and therefore leave Harry with no magical education. He himself has pledged to protect Harry. Given that Snape knows all these things why would he try to have Harry expelled? And why would he think for one moment he would suceed? Again threatening to do something is not the same as trying to do it. He enjoys threatening people but he is all bark and no bite. As I said when making my original point none of what Snape threatens actually comes to pass. It is rather like telling a child that if he pulls a funny face and the wind changes he will be stuck like that (which I believed until I was embarrassingly old :lol: )

Hmm, I never thought of a generational thing, but that makes sense that older (I'm not trying to call you old or anything,) people might believe that to be a viable teaching method because that is what they are used to. I am 14, however, so I don't like the idea of teaching by intimidation. I had one teacher that tried to do that, and I ended up to the point of tears everyday and I certainly did poorly in that class. (Now that I think about it, "Idiot Girl!" was leveled against me in that class a couple times.)
I feel young now. :blush:
Yea, I've been wondering if it's generational thing as well. I'm 24, and the people who I've talked to that don't have much of a problem with Snape's teaching methods are much older than me. At the same time, we have Jo who has said in interviews how she detested teachers who bully, and that Snape character's was supposed to be an example of that. My mother who grew up in another country where they did use bullying tactics and corporal punishment used to tell me how the teachers in the U.S. were much better than the teachers she had. (Of course that wasn't always the case in the U.S.) And she wasn't at all pleased with my old first grade teacher who was pretty much like Snape.

Anyway, both Harry, Neville, and pleanty of other students did turn out fine regardless of Snape's teachings. So did I and the rest of my classmates who were in that 1st grade class with me. We all incorporate our own personal feelings in interpreting these characters. But I for one think the encouragement method works a lot better than intimidation.

1, "He doesn't poison Trevor." Actually, he tries to. Trevor didn't end up poisoned because Hermione told Neville how to fix his potion. Snape tests the potion on Trevor, and isn't pleased when the potion works perfectly.

:agree: he also takes points from Gryffindor, I know he had a good reason to do so, but imo, he could've encouraged Neville by giving him a few points or at least not to take points from him, and asking him to do his job independantly later on.


Well, I read McGonagall's as "This is the curriculum later on." Whereas Snape's read to me "I can teach you to do this because I am fantastic." That's just a silly girl's impression of 2 teachers, though. Just my opinion.:tu:

That's how I read it too, also, imo it sounded like I wont teach you because you're a 'bunch of dunderheads' to use his exact words. I'd to say that McGonagall's way gave the students a good start, they were eager to start their work, showing them that kind of transfiguration was a boost to the students, but imo, Snape's words were not encouraging as much as insulting, students start their work with their morales really down, and none of them except Hermione was able to produce the potion properly.

But she wasn't being harsh on Neville to her knowledge. She didn't know it was Neville. And it was foolish to leave passwords laying around, especially when there was a supposed mass-murderer escaped and looking for a boy in the dormitory that the passwords went to. She was mad and scared, because that act had put many lives in danger. Snape calling Neville "Idiot boy" was insulting him directly, and for a much smaller act. (doing a potion incorrectly). In my mind, "Idiot Boy" is a lot harsher than "abysmally foolish".

I can't agree more :tu: in Sirius's case it was a matter of life and death, while in the potions class it was imo, normal and even expected, as it was the first potions class they'd ever had.


He doesn't try to. Trying to would involve calling the dementors and handing Black over to them - which was what the Ministry had ordered should happen. At no point does Snape bring the dementors to Black or take Black to the dementors. Ergo he did not try to have Black kissed he merely threatened to have it done. There is a difference.

I would disagree with you on this point, imo, Snape was not threatening to call the dementors, I think he was intent on doing so, the fact that Harry and the other two had interfered and disarmed him, was the only reason he didn't call the dementors to Sirius, and when he regained consciousness, he found the dementors retreating, (because Harry had used the Patronus charm), that's why he resorts to taking the injured kids to the castle, and also bring Sirius to the castle where he'd be locked untill the dementors came to kiss him. Snape does not get the dementors directly to Sirius, but he locks him where the dementors would come and finish him, which is imo, just as bad. That makes me shiver though, I mean Snape could be a bit nasty -imo- but how could he be so ready to hand someone to the dementors, no matter how many school tricks they'd played on him.

Trying to would involve calling the dementors and handing Black over to them - which was what the Ministry had ordered should happen. At no point does Snape bring the dementors to Black or take Black to the dementors. Ergo he did not try to have Black kissed he merely threatened to have it done. There is a difference.


I would respectfully disagree; I feel the scene shows that Snape was trying or on the point of having both Sirius and Lupin kissed and would have if the trio had not issued a simultaneous spell at him:

----POA - The Servant of Lord Voldemort

"Vengeance is very sweet," Snape breathed at Black. "How I hoped I would be the one to catch you..."

"The joke's on you again, Severus, ' snarled Black, "As long as this boy brings his rat up to the castle - " he jerked his head at Ron, "I'll come quietly..."

"Up to the castle?" said Snape silkily. "I don't think we need to go that far. All I have to do is call the Dementors once we get out of hte Willow. They'll be very pleased to see you. Black...pleased enough to give you a little kiss I daresay..."

What little colour there was in Black's face left it.

"You - you've got to hear me out, " he croaked. "The rat- look at the rat-"

But there was a mad glint in Snape's eye that Harry had never seen before. He seemed beyond reason.

"Come on, all of you," he said. He clicked his fingers and the ends of the cords that bound Lupin flew to his hands, "I'll drag the werewolf. Perhaps the Dementors will have a kiss for him, too-"

Before he knew what he was doing, Harry had crossed the room in three strides, and blocked the door.

"Get out of the way, Potter, your're in enough trouble already," snarled Snape. "If I hadn't been here to save your skin..."

"Professor Lupin could have killed me about a hundred times this year," Harry said. "I've been alone with him loads of times, having defence lessons against the Dementors. If he was helping Black, why didn't he just finish me off then?"

"Don't ask me to fathom the way a werewolf's mind works," hissed Snape. "Get out of the way, Potter."

"YOU'RE PATHETIC!" Harry yelled. "JUST BECAUSE THEY MADE A FOOL OF YOU AT SCHOOL YOU WON'T EVEN LISTEN-:

"SILENCE! I WILL NOT BE SPOKEN TO LIKE THAT!" Snape shrieked, looking madder than ever. "Like father, like son, Potter! I have just saved your neck, you should be thanking me on bended kneww! You would have been well served if he'd killed you! You'd of died like your father, too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black - now get out of hte way, or I will make you. GET OUT OF THE WAY , POTTER!"

Harry made up his mind in a split second. Before Snape could take even one step towards him, he had raised his wand.

"Expelliarmus!" he yelled - except that his wasn't the only voice that shouted. There was a blast that made the door rattle on its hinges; Snape was lifted off his feet and slammed into the wall, then slid down it to the floor, a trickle of blood oozing from under his hair. He had been knocked out.

Harry looked around. Both Ron and Hermione had tried to disarm Snape at exactly the same moment...

----

In the above scene, Snape stated his purpose, then with his wand pointed at Black and grasping the cords that bound Lupin, Snape started toward the door. He claimed he was going to have them both kissed (assuming the Dementors would kiss Lupin), imo, and there is nothing in that scene, imo, to show that he was kidding around or exaggerating his purpose, imo. I feel that the two places where it says that Snape looked mad and seemed beyond reason, might help explain his state of mind that contributed to his intent - but I do feel that if the trio hadn't saved Sirius (and perhaps Lupin), they would have both been kissed by the dementors that day (imo). I feel that Snape was wrong to do this without listening to what they had to say, ignoring or overspeaking the four who tried, imo. Black even told him to "look at the rat" - intending to explain, but Snape wouldn't listen, imo. I think that in this case, Snape went beyond his authority (or any one's authority outside of the Ministry officials) in his intent because he was aware there were exigent circumstances that he was unwilling to listen to or was disregarding, imo. Snape indicated he wanted revenge, and I feel that was his primary motive in this scene. To address the point though, I feel that his saying 'come on of you' with the cords in hand and his wand aimed at Sirius was indicative that he was taking them and not merely threatening to do so - in my judgment.

In reference to the 'generational' differences in expectations for treatment by teachers, I think it must also be remembered that JKR herself is of the older generation and SHE's the one who paints the picture of what Harry expected in the way of legitimate punishments.

IF one looks to the canon, the FIRST time Harry actually worries about a physical punishment it is from Minerva! After the first flying lesson, when Minerva takes Harry off to find 'Wood', Harry firmly believes she is looking for a paddle or cane named 'Wood'.

Let me say that one more time - Harry believed that as punishment for disobeying Madame Hooch, that Minerva (his head of house, whom he should look to for guidance) was going to have him beaten/caned with something called 'Wood'. And he fears it but doesn't seem to find it outrageous.

At that point in time, the worst Snape had done to Harry was deduct ONE point for 'cheek', call on him to answer questions in class, made a snide remark on how fame did not make him any different than the other kids and called a kid an idiot for causing an exceptionally dangerous situation by not following directions correctly on a (according to Harry) simple, easy brew.

Not only did Harry actually EXPECT that caning/beating were a legitimate means of punishment, but JKR actually describes Smeltings (Dudley's school) of including a 'knobbly stick' as part of their uniform with the express purpose for it being to whack other kids.

JKR was obviously NOT writing about a school system that follows the teaching style of 'today' in the US. In fact, I'd be a bit shocked if those kind of punishments were actually even allowed in Britain at that time. Yet, she has Harry 'expecting' them as legitimate punishments - and not just legitimate in the Wizarding World, but apparently for the Muggle World as well. JKR was writing a kind of 'British Boys School' style of story. Stories of that genre were generally written about a time period around WWII or before AND canings/beatings WERE a part of the punishments in those times.

JKR did not write these stories in such a way that Hogwarts is in any way comparable to an American High School. The closest comparison for it would be the British Public Schools ('public' being the equivalent to 'private' in America) of a time in the past.

... he found the dementors retreating, (because Harry had used the Patronus charm), that's why he resorts to taking the injured kids to the castle, and also bring Sirius to the castle where he'd be locked untill the dementors came to kiss him. Snape does not get the dementors directly to Sirius, but he locks him where the dementors would come and finish him, which is imo, just as bad. That makes me shiver though, I mean Snape could be a bit nasty -imo- but how could he be so ready to hand someone to the dementors, no matter how many school tricks they'd played on him.

But it's not the tricks that Sirius played at school that caused Snape to hand over Sirius to Fudge. It was the fact that Snape and everyone else believed that Sirius had sold out the Potters - including Lily - to Voldemort. It is not just a boyhood grudge, as Lupin states - he is wrong in my opinion. Lupin doesn't know how much Snape loved Lily, or that he is dedicated to saving Harry.

But looking back after reading The Prince's Tale, we have to see that scene in terms of Snape's love for Lily. Just my opinion.

But I still agree that Snape had a chance to either kill Sirius or leave him for the werewolf or the Dementors, and he didn't do it. He threatens to summon a Dementor, but it's one more case in which Snape's words are stronger than what he actually does, which is to take Sirius back to the castle.

Snape wasn't just in the Shack to get at the truth either. He was there to rescue the kids from Sirius Black and from Lupin, who had "forgotten" to drink his potion. Why should Snape trust either of them at that point?

JKR was obviously NOT writing about a school system that follows the teaching style of 'today' in the US. In fact, I'd be a bit shocked if those kind of punishments were actually even allowed in Britain at that time. Yet, she has Harry 'expecting' them as legitimate punishments - and not just legitimate in the Wizarding World, but apparently for the Muggle World as well. JKR was writing a kind of 'British Boys School' style of story. Stories of that genre were generally written about a time period around WWII or before AND canings/beatings WERE a part of the punishments in those times.

JKR did not write these stories in such a way that Hogwarts is in any way comparable to an American High School. The closest comparison for it would be the British Public Schools ('public' being the equivalent to 'private' in America) of a time in the past.
Great points! :agree: It is not just a generational thing, and most Americans did not agree with corporal punishment even when we had it, and most school districts banned it some time in the 70s and 80s. Harry's life has been shaped by his life with the Dursleys and at his Muggle school in which corporal punishment must have played a part also, or he wouldn't have thought "Wood" was a paddle or a cane.

In the above scene, Snape stated his purpose, then with his wand pointed at Black and grasping the cords that bound Lupin, Snape started toward the door. He claimed he was going to have them both kissed (assuming the Dementors would kiss Lupin), imo, and there is nothing in that scene, imo, to show that he was kidding around or exaggerating his purpose, imo.

We as readers know Sirius was innocent. Snape in the shack did not and it was not his fault that he did not know. Lupin preferred to keep him unconscious and I don't think Snape can be blamed for thinking that Sirius was guilty; much like every other person including Harry, Dumbledore and Lupin before that time, and, that Lupin was aiding a murderer IMO. Like Dumbledore said just a bit later to Harry in the infirmary, Sirius's actions were not like those of an innocent man.

'Sirius has not acted like an innocent man. The attack on the Fat lady - entering Gryffindor Tower with a knife - without Pettigrew alive or dead, we have no chance of overturning Sirius' sentence.'

posted by CathyWeasley
Snape was perfectly aware of what was going on in his class. He knew that Hermione was helping Neville. We are also not given any proof that the incorrectly made potion would do any lasting harm to Trevor. What actually happens - Trevor is unhurt. He is not poisoned.

Plus, I think he would also know if the potion had turned out correctly, by looking at it (that's how both he and Slughorn assess students' potions in class; they seem to know a perfect potion from an imperfect one by looking at it IMO). That he gave the potion to Trevor I think is an indication that the potion was correct. I don't think he would have given the potion to Trevor, if it had turned out wrong.

We as readers know Sirius was innocent. Snape in the shack did not and it was not his fault that he did not know.

I agree. However, I felt Snape behaved wrongfully in not listening when four people were asking him to do so. I feel that Snape's stated motive of getting revenge against Sirius was his only concern. Based on the circumstances and the evidence from OOTP, GoF, HBP and DH, I feel that Snape's desire for revenge was based on his childhood grudge and only minimally related to Lily's death (imo). I think Snape's feelings of vengeance for Lily's death were focused on Voldemort because the dark lord is the one that he'd asked to spare her and he hadn't. I think he felt that like himself, Sirius had been a Death Eater at the time and was simply working under Voldemort as he had been - and would have been expected to betray his friends to their deaths, imo. I feel Snape felt that way about Peter later on as well in HBP, which is why he did not display an overt need for vengeance against him, imo. So I feel that Lupin was correct in that the childhood grudge was the reason behind Snape's behavior in the shack. I feel that Snape listening to the conversation but popping out at the story involving himself was another indicator of this. And I also feel his comparative comment between Harry and his dad in relation to Sirius was yet another indicator. So my overall conclusion was that Snape did not want to listen because he feared Sirius might be innocent of the Ministry's charges against him, and that would forbid him from taking the personal revenge he sought without getting into trouble himself, imo.

Like Dumbledore said just a bit later to Harry in the infirmary, Sirius's actions were not like those of an innocent man.

'Sirius has not acted like an innocent man. The attack on the Fat lady - entering Gryffindor Tower with a knife - without Pettigrew alive or dead, we have no chance of overturning Sirius' sentence.'

Well as Dumbledore indicates in this quote, this was because Peter was gone and they had no evidence. If they had been able to bring Peter to the castle, the whole thing would have turned out distinctly, as it would have explained Sirius' behavior, and overturned the sentence as he indicated, imo. My point was that if Snape had listened to any one of the four who were attempting to explain the truth to him, he would have known this in the shack and been able to determine Sirius' innocence for himself, imo.

I agree. However, I felt Snape behaved wrongfully in not listening when four people were asking him to do so.

Not when he thought one of them to be a murderer, one the murderer's best friend helping the murderer and 3 students who were Confunded by the two adults IMO.

Lupin could have woken up Snape, petrified him or bound him, just and then showed him Peter and told him why he and the 3 students believed Sirius to be innocent. Snape would have had to believe. He did believe when he came to know the truth from Dumbledore later. But Lupin asked Snape to believe his word alone, when Lupin himself needed the Map to realise with shock that Peter be innocent IMO.

Not when he thought one of them to be a murderer, one the murderer's best friend helping the murderer and 3 students who were Confunded by the two adults IMO.

Well that is what Harry and his friends believed too when they arrived, so I agree everyone felt that way. But I feel Snape could have listened - if he still didn't believe them after listening, then he could do whatever he wanted, imo. Snape was in control at that point; Lupin was bound, Sirius was unarmed and Snape had his wand at his throat - and if he felt the kids were confunded, then he could have only allowed Lupin or Sirius to speak and then decide what he thought about their story, imo. I feel Snape simply didn't want to listen for the reason I set forth above.

Well that is what Harry and his friends believed too when they arrived, so I agree everyone felt that way. But I feel Snape could have listened - if he still didn't believe them after listening, then he could do whatever he wanted, imo.

I don't understand why Snape should listen to a (ETA) person who was believed to be a murderer, when the murderer is on the loose and with a person (Lupin) who Snape believed to be an accomplice.

Snape's priority at that time would be to get Sirius into custody and remove the 3 students who were in great danger from that place. That was not the place IMO to listen to confessions. That was the place to act, to bind Sirius and Lupin; Lupin, simply because his presence there was very suspicious; and get the 3 kids out. Then take them all up to Dumbledore.

From Snape's point of view, this is what he would have done; this is what he was trying to do IMO. He was not told anything, and so he would act on the premise that Sirius was very much a murderer, and on the pemise the students were in very great danger.

I agree. However, I felt Snape behaved wrongfully in not listening when four people were asking him to do so.

There's the little matter of the 'Imperious Curse' as well. ;)

I would disagree with you on this point, imo, Snape was not threatening to call the dementors, I think he was intent on doing so, the fact that Harry and the other two had interfered and disarmed him, was the only reason he didn't call the dementors to Sirius, and when he regained consciousness, he found the dementors retreating, (because Harry had used the Patronus charm), that's why he resorts to taking the injured kids to the castle, and also bring Sirius to the castle where he'd be locked untill the dementors came to kiss him. Snape does not get the dementors directly to Sirius, but he locks him where the dementors would come and finish him, which is imo, just as bad. That makes me shiver though, I mean Snape could be a bit nasty -imo- but how could he be so ready to hand someone to the dementors, no matter how many school tricks they'd played on him.
Firstly - while Severus may have intended to call the dementors to the shack was this an evil, vindictive thing? Afterall he was only carrying out the punishment that had been ordered by the Ministry. If the dementors had found Sirius they would have kissed him not because Snape is mean and nasty but because the Ministry had ordered it. Severus along with everyone else beleived Sirius was a mass murderer. Secondly - where were the dementors when Severus intended to call them? Were they outside the shack? OR were they guarding the Hogwarts perimeter? IMO they were doing the latter because that is what they had been doing throughout the book. They were stationed at the entrances and exits to Hogwarts. So Severus, Sirius et al were in the shack and the dementors were goodness knows how far away at the perimeter to Hogwarts yet Severus expresses his intent to have Sirius kissed as per the order of the Ministry. Surely whatever means he would have used to get the dementors to Sirius or Sirius to the dementors would still have applied when he awoke from being unconscious? In fact even though the dementors were in retreat (having invaded the grounds) they would have been closer to Severus and Sirius at this point than they were when Severus and Sirius were in the shack. And as others have pointed out Severus was not willing to have Sirius kissed due to the tricks Sirius played on him at school but because he believed as did everyone else that Sirius was a murderer and not only that but it was not Severus's decision to have Sirius kissed by the dementors but the Ministry's - and one that was endorsed by Harry himself when he too thought Sirius was a murderer. As such I do not see anything remiss in Severus's conduct in the shack. He behaved as a good wizarding citizen attempting to bring a fugitive to justice, and to see that the order of the Ministry was carried out. When he regained consciousness the opportunity to have Sirius kissed was still available to him, but instead he chose to put the welfare of Ron first. Not only that but he put Sirius on a stretcher. He did not bind him while unconscious and drag him back to the castle he put him on a stretcher. Did Sirius do that for Severus when he was unconscious? Did Severus have Sirius moved to the castle so his head was bumped?

IMO it is necessary to look at what people actually do not what they threaten to do.
IMO all characters should be judged by the same standard in their treatment of others.

I'd just like to mention here that Molly Weasley was in favor of having the dementors around the school to protect Harry from Sirius Black. I don't see how Snape is any different. Just the fact that Dumbledore and both the Weasleys were willing to have Dementors stationed around Hogwarts is a sign that Snape agrees with them instead of the reverse. None of them knew what Sirius might do since he was acting totally insane and later attacked Ron in his bed.

...The guards told Fudge that Blacks been talking in his sleep for a while now. Always the same words: 'He's at Hogwarts... he's at Hogwarts.' Black is deranged, Molly, and he wants Harry dead. If you ask me, he thinks murdering Harry will bring You-Know-Who back to power. Black lost everything the night Harry stopped You-Know-Who, and he's had twelve years alone in Azkaban to brood on that...."

There was a silence. Harry leaned still closer to the door, desperate to hear more.

"Well, Arthur, you must do what you think is right. But you're forgetting Albus Dumbledore. I don't think anything could hurt Harry at Hogwarts while Dumbledore's headmaster. I suppose he knows about all this?"

"Of course he knows. We had to ask him if he minds the Azkaban guards stationing themselves around the entrances to the school grounds. He wasn't happy about it, but he agreed."

"Not happy? Why shouldn't he be happy, if they're there to catch Black?"

"Dumbledore isn't fond of the Azkaban guards," said Mr. Weasley heavily. "Nor am I, if it comes to that... but when you're dealing with a wizard like Black, you sometimes have to join forces with those you'd rather avoid."

Edited to Add: Snape couldn't have been too happy that the Dementors made Harry crash his broom either, since he spent most of Book One trying to help Harry stay airborne during Quidditch.

But Snape could not have stopped Fudge from letting the Dementors kiss Sirius Black anymore than he could stop him in GoF from letting the Dementors have Barty Jr.

But Snape could not have stopped Fudge from letting the Dementors kiss Sirius Black anymore than he could stop him in GoF from letting the Dementors have Barty Jr.

:agree: In fact I don't see a role for Snape at all IMO. His role was confined to the Shack, where he was trying his best to save 3 students and capture a man he thought was a DE, along with another man he thought was helping him IMO.

Sirius's case without Peter is so hopeless, Dumbledore was forced to use the Time Turner to save his life, but even then Dumbledore was unable to prove his innocence; Sirius had to remain in hiding, he was not a free man in the eyes of the Ministry, where I presume the Orders for him to be Kissed was still present. Had Dumbledore not used the time turner Sirius would have been kissed by Fudge IMO.

POA - Hermione's secret

'Sirius has not acted like an innocent man. The attack on the Fat lady - entering Gryffindor Tower with a knife - without Pettigrew alive or dead, we have no chance of overturning Sirius' sentence.'

And as others have pointed out Severus was not willing to have Sirius kissed due to the tricks Sirius played on him at school but because he believed as did everyone else that Sirius was a murderer.

Indeed! I think we were most certainly meant to believe that Severus was threatening Sirius with the Dementors as revenge for the schoolboy pranks he played on him. However, I see it as a deliberate misdirection diverting our attention away from the real reason which was Lily. In fact, I think we are supposed to keep thinking this right up until that one word in DH that tells us differently....."Always"


IMO it is necessary to look at what people actually do not what they threaten to do.
:agree:

I have always thought the actions of men the best interpreters of their thoughts. ~John Locke

However, I see it as a deliberate misdirection diverting our attention away from the real reason which was Lily. In fact, I think we are supposed to keep thinking this right up until that one word in DH that tells us differently....."Always"

:tu: :agree: It's a red herring, even though Snape had good reason to dislike the Marauders. But that isn't why he is in the Shack, in my opinion. He is there for Harry.

Firstly - while Severus may have intended to call the dementors to the shack was this an evil, vindictive thing? Afterall he was only carrying out the punishment that had been ordered by the Ministry. If the dementors had found Sirius they would have kissed him not because Snape is mean and nasty but because the Ministry had ordered it. Severus along with everyone else beleived Sirius was a mass murderer. Secondly - where were the dementors when Severus intended to call them? Were they outside the shack? OR were they guarding the Hogwarts perimeter? IMO they were doing the latter because that is what they had been doing throughout the book. They were stationed at the entrances and exits to Hogwarts. So Severus, Sirius et al were in the shack and the dementors were goodness knows how far away at the perimeter to Hogwarts yet Severus expresses his intent to have Sirius kissed as per the order of the Ministry. Surely whatever means he would have used to get the dementors to Sirius or Sirius to the dementors would still have applied when he awoke from being unconscious? In fact even though the dementors were in retreat (having invaded the grounds) they would have been closer to Severus and Sirius at this point than they were when Severus and Sirius were in the shack. And as others have pointed out Severus was not willing to have Sirius kissed due to the tricks Sirius played on him at school but because he believed as did everyone else that Sirius was a murderer and not only that but it was not Severus's decision to have Sirius kissed by the dementors but the Ministry's - and one that was endorsed by Harry himself when he too thought Sirius was a murderer. As such I do not see anything remiss in Severus's conduct in the shack. He behaved as a good wizarding citizen attempting to bring a fugitive to justice, and to see that the order of the Ministry was carried out. When he regained consciousness the opportunity to have Sirius kissed was still available to him, but instead he chose to put the welfare of Ron first. Not only that but he put Sirius on a stretcher. He did not bind him while unconscious and drag him back to the castle he put him on a stretcher. Did Sirius do that for Severus when he was unconscious? Did Severus have Sirius moved to the castle so his head was bumped?

IMO, he had no right to carry out a punishment the Ministry had ordered, he was by no means a Ministry official, he was merely a school teacher, also like some have pointed out above, four people were begging him to listen to what Sirius had to say, imo, he shows some kind of arrogance in this situation, he's so convinced of the truth of his own words that he's ready to let someone die without giving them chance to defend themselves.

Also I think the revenge Snape had been talking about there, was related to the school trick they'd played on him. WWB, makes good points about this matter in a post above, I'll also add, that when Dumbledore when had wanted to speak to Harry and Hermione alone in the hospital wing, he says 'Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen, You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?' this, imo, refers to the school trick, if it had something to do with Lily's death, surely he would've confided in Dumbledore, which I think he didn't.

:tu: :agree: It's a red herring, even though Snape had good reason to dislike the Marauders. But that isn't why he is in the Shack, in my opinion. He is there for Harry.

I agree! Severus promised to protect Harry for Lily and that is why he followed Lupin to the Shack that night, to protect Harry from a known murderer and his werewolf friend.

IMO, he had no right to carry out a punishment the Ministry had ordered, he was by no means a Ministry official, he was merely a school teacher, also like some have pointed out above, four people were begging him to listen to what Sirius had to say, imo, he shows some kind of arrogance in this situation, he's so convinced of the truth of his own words that he's ready to let someone die without giving them chance to defend themselves.

The main point is, he didn't look for Dementors to hand Sirius over to. He transported him straight to the castle - on stretchers, even though he still believed him to be a murderer and Lily's betrayer, which is more than Sirius did for him when he was unconscious (he let his head scrape the ceiling fo the tunnel).

Also, the fact that he refused to listen is, in my opinion, better explained with uncontrollable rage than arrogance - owing to the fact that he thought he was facing the man who betrayed Lily. Now that we have DH in mind, that seems like the most logical explanation, as I see it, and the teenage bullying like an excellent red herring. He was too frenzied to listen, which in this particular situation is understandable and believable in my opinion.

Also I think the revenge Snape had been talking about there, was related to the school trick they'd played on him. WWB, makes good points about this matter in a post above, I'll also add, that when Dumbledore when had wanted to speak to Harry and Hermione alone in the hospital wing, he says 'Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen, You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?' this, imo, refers to the school trick, if it had something to do with Lily's death, surely he would've confided in Dumbledore, which I think he didn't.

Well, we know he didn't want anyone to know how he felt about Lily, so he was hardly going to mention it in front of everyone.

Of the events in PoA

Before I began to like Snape as a character, I took the view that deep in his heart he knew that the Trio were telling him the truth about Pettigrew being an Animagus and he just didn't want to believe that Pettigrew, not Sirius, had been the traitor ... just because he hated both Sirius and Remus (but most of all, Sirius) that much. :yuhup:

I now take the view that Yoana does:

Also, the fact that he refused to listen is, in my opinion, better explained with uncontrollable rage than arrogance - owing to the fact that he thought he was facing the man who betrayed Lily. Now that we have DH in mind, that seems like the most logical explanation, as I see it, and the teenage bullying like an excellent red herring. He was too frenzied to listen, which in this particular situation is understandable and believable in my opinion.

In the light of the revelations in DH, this makes perfect sense, IMO.

The teenage bullying alone is not nearly enough to explain the ferocity of Snape's hatred and rage against Sirius. If, however, he truly believed that Sirius was the one who had betrayed Lily and her family, then that explains why he would want Sirius subjected to something as appalling as the Dementor's kiss.

IMO, he had no right to carry out a punishment the Ministry had ordered, he was by no means a Ministry official, he was merely a school teacher,
The order had been given that the dementors could perfrom the kiss when they found Sirius. That was an order given by the Ministry. The punishment - ie the kiss would actually be carried out by the dementors not Severus. There was no mention anywhere that a Ministry official would have to oversee the punishment being carried out by the dementors. Therefore Severus was not doing anything wrong. He was apprehending an escaped prisoner - he was not going to do anything to Sirius himself unless he was forced to defend himself. He was not carrying out a punishment - he was only passing him over to those selected by the Ministry to carry out a punishment that they had been authorised to carry out. I do not think that Severus did anything wrong. As I said Harry said that Sirius deserved it when he believed him guilty. And as other posters have pointed out the only other adult present was believed by Severus to be an accomplice, so why should he take the word of a murderer and a murderers accomplice? And why should he listen to Harry Ron and Hermione given they were only children and we have been shown plenty of ways that a wizard can control or change people's behaviour (Imperius curse, confunding them etc) Ultimately though he didn't hand Sirius over to the dementors even though he had ample opportunity.

Also I think the revenge Snape had been talking about there, was related to the school trick they'd played on him. WWB, makes good points about this matter in a post above, I'll also add, that when Dumbledore when had wanted to speak to Harry and Hermione alone in the hospital wing, he says 'Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen, You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?' this, imo, refers to the school trick, if it had something to do with Lily's death, surely he would've confided in Dumbledore, which I think he didn't.:no: The revenge Severus is talking about is revenge for Lily's death. I think after TPT there can be no doubt of that. The reason why Severus brings up the werewolf incident is because doubt is being cast on the crimes that Sirius was sent to Azkaban for. Everyone is now saying that Sirius did not betray the Potters and that he did not murder all those muggles. As such it would make absolutely no sense for Severus to say "But he betrayed the Potters and killed all those muggles" because it is precisely these crimes which it is now being said Sirius is not guilty of. Severus sees that Dumbledore is starting to give some credence to what Harry et al are saying regarding Sirius being innocent of these crimes. What Severus is saying is that Sirius can't be innocent - he is not innocent because he showed he had murderous tendencies when he was 16 and sent me to meet my death at the jaws of his werewolf friend. Severus is convinced of Sirius guilt regarding the betrayal of the Potters and is afraid that Sirius is going to talk his way out of it and literally get away with murder (of the Potters and the muggles). This is why he is so insistent that Dumbeldore not believe Sirius.

Severus does have a tendency to not trust the judgement of others and does seem to be rather sure that he is right. But the same could be said for many other characters in the series (e.g. The Potters refusing Dumbledore as SK and choosing Sirius then Peter)

Interestingly once Severus becomes fully conversant with all the facts and is aware that the true traitor was Wormtail, he stops accusing Sirius of those crimes. Sirius on the other hand refuses to trust Severus and reckons he knows better than Dumbledore and that Severus has not stopped being a Death Eater.

I am fully conversant with WWB opinions on this matter. I completely disagree with them.

I've been thinking about what happened after Sirius's flight. Snape -whatever the reasons were- was so outraged that Fudge calls him 'unbalanced'. I have a few questions that concern this situation:

- It seemed that Snape didn't know about Hermione's time turner, yet he seems too convinced that somehow Harry and Hermione had managed to help Sirius flee from the dementors, Did you think Snape had any thoughts that he didn't want to share with Dumbledore with the Minister around? If not why do you think he still accused Harry and Hermione of having a hand in Sirius's flight?

- In GoF, he finds out that Harry had really helped Sirius, does this affect his relationship with Harry in any way?

Of the events in PoA

Before I began to like Snape as a character, I took the view that deep in his heart he knew that the Trio were telling him the truth about Pettigrew being an Animagus and he just didn't want to believe that Pettigrew, not Sirius, had been the traitor ... just because he hated both Sirius and Remus (but most of all, Sirius) that much. :yuhup:

I now take the view that Yoana does:

In the light of the revelations in DH, this makes perfect sense, IMO.

The teenage bullying alone is not nearly enough to explain the ferocity of Snape's hatred and rage against Sirius. If, however, he truly believed that Sirius was the one who had betrayed Lily and her family, then that explains why he would want Sirius subjected to something as appalling as the Dementor's kiss.

I respect your view; but I don't think that explains why later Snape, knowing the truth could live with Peter and yet, could not even be in the same room with Sirius for 10 miutes without coming to wand point. (OOTP Occlumency/HBP Spinner's End).

To me, it also doesn't give Snape any more basis for his behavior than it gave Harry. Harry too was choking Sirius and aiming wands at him and so forth, but ultimately he didn't shoot a spell and eventually, with all the wands in hand, he listened rather than act (POA). Snape had no more buy in with respect to his emotions for Lily's death than Harry did regarding his emotions for his beloved mother and father's deaths, imo. So while I agree it would be a better reason for Snape (or Harry or Dumbledore) wanting Sirius kissed, I don't see that as a good reason not to listen, imo. Dumbledore too listened - and worked to save Sirius despite having no proof at all (the trio was not yet awake) and despite Snape's contention that the trio was confunded, he believed them as well - all from just listening, imo. To me the canon showed that Snape did not have a leg to stand on, regardless of his motivation for revenge, because he was unwilling to listen to the truth, imo.

Voldemort sent Wormtail to live at Spinner's End so Severus had no say in the matter. It would most certainly have been stupid of him to have attacked Wormtail seeing that he was sent there to spy on Severus, as is indicated when Severus tells Bella and Cissy that; 'He (Wormtail) has lately taken to listening at doors..." However it is obvious, that Severus most definately does not appear to welcome Wormtail's presence at Spinner's End. Severus had to put up with him or risk blowing his cover. I'd say it was a case of,"needs must where the devil drives"

It seemed that Snape didn't know about Hermione's time turner, yet he seems too convinced that somehow Harry and Hermione had managed to help Sirius flee from the dementors, Did you think Snape had any thoughts that he didn't want to share with Dumbledore with the Minister around? If not why do you think he still accused Harry and Hermione of having a hand in Sirius's flight?

As staff, he may have known about the time turner and if he did, he could have guessed Harry had used it (he would also not have known Hermione did not share this with Harry and Ron) and he would have been alarmed because he still thought Sirius to be guilty, and in that case he would have been livid, like we saw in the Books, because Sirius had managed to get away IMO.

- In GoF, he finds out that Harry had really helped Sirius, does this affect his relationship with Harry in any way?

In no way, really. Because by that time he would have known Sirius was innocent IMO.

- It seemed that Snape didn't know about Hermione's time turner, yet he seems too convinced that somehow Harry and Hermione had managed to help Sirius flee from the dementors, Did you think Snape had any thoughts that he didn't want to share with Dumbledore with the Minister around? If not why do you think he still accused Harry and Hermione of having a hand in Sirius's flight?

I actually think it's possible he did know about the time turner, which is partly why he thinks Harry *and* Hermione were involved. He accuses them because they believed Sirius to be innocent, and he hasn't been convinced of that as of yet. Then I think he may have put two and two together about them possibly getting out and using the time turner. He just doesn't know the specifics of how they got Sirius out and helped him escape. Then once Dumbledore makes the comment about Snape suggesting that Harry and Hermione were in two places at once (which Snape might know was possible if all the teachers of Hermione's classes were made aware of the time turner) Snape just turns and leaves. He doesn't argue any longer, or suggest they got out in another way or whatever. This to me suggests, that Snape realized Dumbledore was in on whatever went on and he didn't want to press the issue however angry it made him. If he pressed the issue and revealed that Hermione did have a time turner and Dumbledore was in on it then he'd get Dumbledore in trouble, and he might think that Dumbledore would have his reasons at this point. Even if he was incredibly angry about it.

In GoF, he finds out that Harry had really helped Sirius, does this affect his relationship with Harry in any way?

I think he found out about the events of the end of PoA much earlier than that. I think Dumbledore told him. If he truly believed that Sirius was still guilty (and that's the only reason for him to be upset with Harry about freeing Sirius) then he would have reacted much more strongly, and would not have consented to "put aside their differences". He seemed more surprised that the dog was Sirius. Perhaps he didn't know that Sirius was animagus or that the form he took was that of a big black dog.

So I don't think he learned about Harry helping Sirius at this point, and I don't think it effected their relationship really.

Also, some might point out that Snape was still rather angry with Harry during classes ect at the end of PoA. However, after DH, I don't feel he was angry at him for freeing Sirius. I strongly believe that Dumbledore would have set him straight soon after Fudge left. He would then he'd be angry because Peter Pettigrew escaped, and somehow Harry and his friends were involved with that, even if it was not their intention to free Pettigrew.

I respect your view; but I don't think that explains why later Snape, knowing the truth could live with Peter and yet, could not even be in the same room with Sirius for 10 miutes without coming to wand point. (OOTP Occlumency/HBP Spinner's End).

Well, you'll have to take that one to JKR. :cool:

I find TreacleTartlet's explanation pretty plausible. If Voldemort wanted to plant Peter at Spinner's End, Snape certainly would have no say in the matter!

He contents himself with being as unpleasant to Peter as possible ... and, quite frankly, I don't blame him!

... Snape had no more buy in with respect to his emotions for Lily's death than Harry did regarding his emotions for his beloved mother and father's deaths, imo. So while I agree it would be a better reason for Snape (or Harry or Dumbledore) wanting Sirius kissed, I don't see that as a good reason not to listen, imo.

I didn't say it was a good reason not to listen.

I said that this theory -- that Snape likely believed Sirius to be the traitor -- provides a better (and more convincing and substantive) understanding for the sheer intensity and ferocity of his rage towards Sirius in that whole scene. Understanding is not excusing.

I disapprove of the Wizarding World subjecting anyone to the Dementor's Kiss (even Peter), so that is a wider issue of what I think of Snape's motives. But since this is Snape's thread, I am discussing him. :)

To me the canon showed that Snape did not have a leg to stand on, regardless of his motivation for revenge, because he was unwilling to listen to the truth, imo.

Yes, but that's not really the point I was addressing, which was his reason for wanting such a savage revenge on the man he thought had betrayed Lily.

I actually think it's possible he did know about the time turner, which is partly why he thinks Harry *and* Hermione were involved. He accuses them because they believed Sirius to be innocent, and he hasn't been convinced of that as of yet. Then I think he may have put two and two together about them possibly getting out and using the time turner. He just doesn't know the specifics of how they got Sirius out and helped him escape. Then once Dumbledore makes the comment about Snape suggesting that Harry and Hermione were in two places at once (which Snape might know was possible if all the teachers of Hermione's classes were made aware of the time turner) Snape just turns and leaves. He doesn't argue any longer, or suggest they got out in another way or whatever. This to me suggests, that Snape realized Dumbledore was in on whatever went on and he didn't want to press the issue however angry it made him. If he pressed the issue and revealed that Hermione did have a time turner and Dumbledore was in on it then he'd get Dumbledore in trouble, and he might think that Dumbledore would have his reasons at this point. Even if he was incredibly angry about it.

This is exactly how I read that scene, boushh! :) After Dumbledore's comment about being in two places at once, Severus looks between Fudge and Dumbledore, then exits without further ado. I think Dumbledore made that particular comment to let Severus know that he was involved. Although the Ministry approved Hermione's use of the Time Turner, there were strict rules which Harry and Hermione broke and if Dumbledore was implicated he would be in very big trouble, not only for helping an escaped convict escape but for changing time.

This is exactly how I read that scene, boushh! :) After Dumbledore's comment about being in two places at once, Severus looks between Fudge and Dumbledore, then exits without further ado. I think Dumbledore made that particular comment to let Severus know that he was involved. Although the Ministry approved Hermione's use of the Time Turner, there were strict rules which Harry and Hermione broke and if Dumbledore was implicated he would be in very big trouble, not only for helping an escaped convict escape but for changing time.

:tu::tu: You put it much better than I did! :)

IMO, he had no right to carry out a punishment the Ministry had ordered, he was by no means a Ministry official, he was merely a school teacher, also like some have pointed out above, four people were begging him to listen to what Sirius had to say, imo, he shows some kind of arrogance in this situation, he's so convinced of the truth of his own words that he's ready to let someone die without giving them chance to defend themselves.

I agree, well said. However, I would qualify my opinion in that I feel this particular scene shows Snape was willing to do this in terms of Lupin and Sirius, rather than it being a universal proposition.

Also I think the revenge Snape had been talking about there, was related to the school trick they'd played on him. WWB, makes good points about this matter in a post above, I'll also add, that when Dumbledore when had wanted to speak to Harry and Hermione alone in the hospital wing, he says 'Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen, You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?' this, imo, refers to the school trick, if it had something to do with Lily's death, surely he would've confided in Dumbledore, which I think he didn't.

I agree. To me the most telling was their subsequent meeting at #12G in OOTP because there, their relations were no better and in my view, the only issue between them was their youthful interaction, imo. Also, I don't understand why Snape would be forced to be more decent with Peter because of Voldemort - what is the distinction between that and his having to be more decent with Sirius because of Dumbledore? So I feel that Snape was able to live with Peter because he didn't have the same grudge stemming from childhood against him (and visa versa in both cases), imo.

But again, I don't think the motivation for Snape's desire for revenge was as important as the mere fact that he wanted revenge (POA) - because that is why I feel that he was unwilling to listen to anything that might prove Sirius' innocence - and, imo, what lie behind his ratting out Lupin the next day to his students (POA).

I don't understand the idea that Snape was forced to be more decent with Peter because of Voldemort - what is the distinction between that and his having to be more decent with Sirius because of Dumbledore?

Well Dumbledore didn't have a habit of using the Cruciatus Curse on people, I also don't remember any cannon references to him slaughtering a room full of people when he lost his tempter - I think things like that might have made a bit of a difference :)

Well Dumbledore didn't have a habit of using the Cruciatus Curse on people, I also don't remember any cannon references to him slaughtering a room full of people when he lost his tempter - I think things like that might have made a bit of a difference :)

Exactly! Severus's relationship with Dumbledore was very different to that with Voldemort. Also, Severus had to maintain his position as spy on Voldemort and killing or attacking Wormtail, who was so obviously sent by Voldemort to spy on him would have been a very bad move and would have thrown even more suspicion on him than there already was after the MoM disaster. Actually I always wondered how Severus explained to Voldemort how the Order knew to go the DoM.

Well Dumbledore didn't have a habit of using the Cruciatus Curse on people, I also don't remember any cannon references to him slaughtering a room full of people when he lost his tempter - I think things like that might have made a bit of a difference :)

I agree with that angle knowing how Voldy is - but I meant from Snape's point of view. Because in all seriousness, wouldn't that be taking advantage of Dumbledore's mercy (a show of disrespect), but showing reverence and respect for Voldemort's lack of mercy? (Assuming his behavior was all consequence based.) In the same way Snape was proving to the Death Eaters that he was loyal to Voldemort - wouldn't he wish to show the Order members he was loyal to Dumbledore? Wouldn't Voldemort and Dumbledore want that of Snape also? It was as if he didn't care if Dumbledore had to deal with the Order members doubt of him and questioning because Dumbledore would have mercy and longstanding patience - but he did care about Voldemort having to deal with it because it might mean his death due to Voldemort's lack of mercy and patience. See what I mean? It also raises the issue of Snape's relative importance to Voldemort (in his view). Did he feel he was less important to Voldemort than he was to Dumbledore? Snape took the time to convince Bella of his loyalty when she accused him of disloyalty, but didn't address Sirius' accusation at all (HBP).

In the same way Snape was proving to the Death Eaters that he was loyal to Voldemort - wouldn't he wish to show the Order members he was loyal to Dumbledore?

No, I don't think so, because Dumbledore did not want Snape to show his loyalty openly, because he felt that would hurt their chances in the war. And by taking on the accusations of murderer, traitor and coward by the Order members, I think Snape exhibited extraordinary loyalty to Dumbledore.

Wouldn't Voldemort and Dumbledore want that of Snape also?

They did not IMO.

It was as if he didn't care if Dumbledore had to deal with the Order members doubt of him and questioning because Dumbledore would have mercy and longstanding patience - but he did care about Voldemort having to deal with it because it might mean his death due to Voldemort's lack of mercy and patience.

This implies that Dumbledore expected Snape to do one thing and that Snape disobeyed him and did another thing. I am afraid there is no canon that I remember for this. Canon states that Snape was as much Dumbledore's man as Harry was, by stating that fact through Harry itself in the Books IMO.

Did he feel he was less important to Voldemort than he was to Dumbledore?

I don't think Snape cared about that except where it reflected in his work as spy for the Order; and in that area Snape and Dumbledore's planning had him well covered IMO.

Snape took the time to convince Bella of his loyalty when she accused him of disloyalty, but didn't address Sirius' accusation at all (HBP).

Where in HBP does Sirius accuse Snape? :hmm:

No, I don't think so, because Dumbledore did not want Snape to show his loyalty openly, because he felt that would hurt their chances in the war. And by taking on the accusations of murderer, traitor and coward by the Order members, I think Snape exhibited extraordinary loyalty to Dumbledore.

Exactly! I think Dumbledore would be happy that Order members questioned Snape's loyalties as it made it easier for them to truely believe he was Voldemort's man when the time came for him to go deep under cover. Any suspicions to the contrary would only serve to weaken Snape's position and he was already under suspicion after not returning immediately to Voldemort's side in GoF and after the MoM fiasco.

Snape knew Dumbledore trusted him and didn't have to prove his loyalty to him by explaining himself to members of the Order. As for Voldemort, he knew he was under suspicion as were all the DE's as Voldemort didn't trust anyone completely. It was Snape's job as spy to get Voldemort to trust him as much as possible as his mission for Dumbledore depended on it.

Snape was perfectly aware of what was going on in his class. He knew that Hermione was helping Neville. We are also not given any proof that the incorrectly made potion would do any lasting harm to Trevor. What actually happens - Trevor is unhurt. He is not poisoned.

Snape couldn't have known what was going on every second in his classroom, no teacher can. Besides, it wasn't stated in canon or by J.K. that he is all seeing, so that assumption cannot be made.

The end of the lesson in sight, Snape strode over to Neville, who was cowering by his cauldron. "Everyone gather around," said Snape, his black eyes glittering, "and watch what happens to Longbottom's toad. If he has managed to produce a Shrinking Solution, it will shrink to a tadpole. If, as I don't doubt, he has done it wrong, his toad is likely to be poisoned."
...Snape picked up Trevor the toad in his left hand and dipped a small spoon into Neville's potion, which was now green. He trickled a few drops down Trevor's throat.
There was a moment of hushed silence, in which Trevor gulped; then there was a small pop, and Trevor the tadpole was wriggling in Snape's palm.
The Gryffindors burst into applause. Snape, looking sour, pulled a small bottle from the pocket of his robe, poured a few drops on top of Trevor, and he reappeared suddenly, fully grown.
"Five points from Gryffindor," said Snape, which wiped the smiles from every face. "I told you not to help him, Miss Granger. Class dismissed.

Yes, Trevor is unhurt, but through no mercy of Snape's. Plus, all he says to Hermione is : "I don't remember asking you to show off, Miss Granger,"
He doesn't say not to help him.

He doesn't try to. Trying to would involve calling the dementors and handing Black over to them - which was what the Ministry had ordered should happen. At no point does Snape bring the dementors to Black or take Black to the dementors. Ergo he did not try to have Black kissed he merely threatened to have it done. There is a difference.

"Up to the castle?" said Snape silkily. "I don't think we need to go that far. All I have to do is call the dementors once we get out of the Willow. They'll be very pleased to see you, Black... pleased enough to give you a little kiss, I daresay..."
(A couple paragraphs later)
"Expelliarmus!" he yelled—except that his wasn't the only voice that shouted. There was a blast that made the door rattle on its hinges; Snape was lifted off his feet and slammed into the wall, then slid down it to the floor, a trickle of blood oozing from under his hair. He had been knocked out.
Harry looked around. Both Ron and Hermione had tried to disarm Snape at exactly the same moment.

He was going to call the dementors as soon as he got out of the willow. But he never got the chance.

"What amazes me most is the behavior of the dementors... you've really no idea what made them retreat, Snape?"
"No, Minister... by the time I had come 'round they were heading back to their positions at the entrances..."
"Extraordinary. And yet Black, and Harry, and the girl—"
"All unconscious by the time I reached them. I bound and gagged Black, naturally, conjured stretchers, and brought them all straight back to the castle."

He had no chance to get the dementors to kiss Sirius.


Again he doesn't try to get Harry expelled he merely threatens to get him expelled. Severus knows Harry is the chosen one of the prophecy before Harry even enters the school. He knows that there is no way on earth that Dumbledore will expell him and therefore leave Harry with no magical education. He himself has pledged to protect Harry. Given that Snape knows all these things why would he try to have Harry expelled? And why would he think for one moment he would suceed? Again threatening to do something is not the same as trying to do it. He enjoys threatening people but he is all bark and no bite. As I said when making my original point none of what Snape threatens actually comes to pass. It is rather like telling a child that if he pulls a funny face and the wind changes he will be stuck like that (which I believed until I was embarrassingly old :lol: )


But really, where does he not try to get him expelled when he has the chance? Can you get a quote or two?

He had no chance to get the dementors to kiss Sirius.

On the contrary - if they were heading back to the entrances, he could have carried Sirius to them instead in the castle. After all, when he made the threat, this is where he imagined they'd be - at their positions at the entrances - and this is where he would have called them from. But he doesn't call them.

On the contrary - if they were heading back to the entrances, he could have carried Sirius to them instead in the castle. After all, when he made the threat, this is where he imagined they'd be - at their positions at the entrances - and this is where he would have called them from. But he doesn't call them.
:tu: Exactly! Where is Snape when he comes around? Outside the willow. Precisely where he said he would call the dementors. Where were the dementors? On their way back to their positions at the entrances - which is actually closer than where he thought they would be when he made the threat. Yet he doesn't call them.

I will provide quotes when you have answered the points I have already made. :)

Yes, Trevor is unhurt, but through no mercy of Snape's.

I think Snape and Slughorn have the capacity to see if Potions are perfect or not by simply looking at them (there are quite a few instances of that in the Books). When Snape gave the potion to Trevor, I am sure, he would have known it was a perfect one. Would he have given an imperfect potion to Trevor? I'm afraid there is no canon at all to show that. It is only speculation to assume Snape would have given a wrong potion to a student's pet IMO.

He was going to call the dementors as soon as he got out of the willow. But he never got the chance.

He had no chance to get the dementors to kiss Sirius.

Why did he not get a chance? I don't think there was anyone there stopping Snape. He could have just called the dementors. Personally, I don't think Snape would ever take decisions of that nature because he was working for Dumbledore. I think he would have taken them to Dumbledore and asked him to investigate into the whole thing.

But really, where does he not try to get him expelled when he has the chance? Can you get a quote or two?

Without the Book quotes I can think of a few instances right off my head.

One is the sectumsempra, where Harry cast a curse, a dark curse at that, which almost killed another student. I don't think Snape called for Harry's expulsion. In fact I don't think Snape even punished him appropriately.

The second would in the Dept. of Mysteries. Snape could have claimed that Harry put 5 other students into a great danger, of losing their lives when he led them there, and so Harry should be suspended/expelled. He does not IMO.

The third I can think of is peeping into Snape's personal memories. That is equal to rifling through a teacher's bag and would qualify for a suspension or expulsion. Snape asks for neither.

The fourth time is when Harry asks a teacher to 'SHUT UP' (The words are in caps in the text) so Harry was shouting at his teacher, when it was he who had made an another mistake, of going to Hogsmeade when he was forbidden to. Snape does not ask for Harry to be punished even at that time.

The fifth time is when Snape knows Harry is using his Book to get good grades in Potions and he does not take that to McGonagall or Slughorn as Harry fears and shame Harry. Instead he gives Harry a detention, to protect both Harry and Draco.

Snape IMO never tries to get Harry expelled. Why would he, when it would be easier for Snape to keep an eye on Harry when he is in School, rather than anywhere else.

He speaks sneeringly, sarcastically to the students and to others too, perhaps,, but I don't think that's not a wrong thing. It merely shows that Snape was a sarcastic person, given to sneering. :shrug: He hated James and Sirius. That too, I do not think is a crime. :)

But really, where does he not try to get him expelled when he has the chance? Can you get a quote or two? Can you please provide quotes from the book where Snape actually tries to get Harry expelled?
In CoS he goes to get Dumbledore and McGonagall after Ron and Harry arrive in the flying car:
Most unfortunately, you are not in my House and the decision to expel you does not rest with me. I shall go and fetch the people who do have that happy power.

Although Snape protests when Dumbledore does not expel Ron and Harry, he does not demand or ask that they be expelled:
But I must impress upon both of you the seriousness of what you have done. I will be writing to both of your familes tonight. I must also warn you that if you do anything like this again, I will have no choice but to expel you.
Professor Dumbledore, these boys have flouted the Decree for the Restriction of Under-age Wizardry, caused serious damage to an old and valuable tree...surely, acts of this nature....
To me, that sounds like Snape is protesting that Dumbledore did not issue any punishment. Dumbledore replies to him that it's up to McGaonagall to decide on their punishment, and Snape says nothing more.

Mrs Weasley also seems to think that the boys' actions were deserving of expulsion.
...STEALING THE CAR, I WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SURPRISED IF THEY'D EXPELLED YOU, YOU WAIT TILL I GET HOLD OF YOU....

I think that, given the DH revelation about the relationship between Snape and Dumbleodre, Snape's attempts to get Harry expelled can hardly be taken in earnest. He knew there was no way Dumbeldore would expel Harry, no matter what Harry did.

I think that, given the DH revelation about the relationship between Snape and Dumbleodre, Snape's attempts to get Harry expelled can hardly be taken in earnest. He knew there was no way Dumbeldore would expel Harry, no matter what Harry did.
Plus the whole point of Snape being a professor was so that he could keep an eye on Lily's child. If he were to be expelled then what?

Can you please provide quotes from the book where Snape actually tries to get Harry expelled?
In CoS he goes to get Dumbledore and McGonagall after Ron and Harry arrive in the flying car:
Most unfortunately, you are not in my House and the decision to expel you does not rest with me. I shall go and fetch the people who do have that happy power.

Although Snape protests when Dumbledore does not expel Ron and Harry, he does not demand or ask that they be expelled:
But I must impress upon both of you the seriousness of what you have done. I will be writing to both of your familes tonight. I must also warn you that if you do anything like this again, I will have no choice but to expel you.

Professor Dumbledore, these boys have flouted the Decree for the Restriction of Under-age Wizardry, caused serious damage to an old and valuable tree...surely, acts of this nature....
To me, that sounds like Snape is protesting that Dumbledore did not issue any punishment. Dumbledore replies to him that it's up to McGaonagall to decide on their punishment, and Snape says nothing more.

Mrs Weasley also seems to think that the boys' actions were deserving of expulsion.
...STEALING THE CAR, I WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SURPRISED IF THEY'D EXPELLED YOU, YOU WAIT TILL I GET HOLD OF YOU....

:agree: Thank you for the quotes CF! :) :clap:

I had forgotten this incident, but this clearly shows that Snape never threatened Harry with expulsion, Dumbledore did, and Molly thought this was an offence that could have easily resulted in expulsion as well. The boys had broken the statute of secrecy which was a very serious offence. Snape says 'You were seen!', but he did not warn the boys that another incident like this will be their last one in Hogwarts; Dumbledore did.

posted by 2green_eyes
Plus the whole point of Snape being a professor was so that he could keep an eye on Lily's child. If he were to be expelled then what?

:agree: It was not in Snape's interests to see Harry expelled at all IMO.

Thanks, Colonel Fubster! I had forgotten it was Dumbledore - not Snape - who mentioned expelling Harry.

2gree_eyes: I agree - why would Snape want Harry to be expelled? He's been waiting around for 10 years to see him so he could fulfill his promise to watch out for him, and he does. :agree:

posted by Lizzy Potter
But really, where does he not try to get him expelled when he has the chance? Can you get a quote or two?

ColFub has posted one quote, where it was not Snape but Dumbledore who said he would be forced to expel Harry if Harry and Ron did one more foolish stunt.

I have another which hwyla suggested elsewhere, about the sectumsempra incident, where McGonagall notes that Harry was lucky not have been expelled.

McGonagall was Harry's Head of House and as such she was the person who had the power to expel Harry (Snape says so in COS when Harry and Ron wait in his office for McGonagall to arrive), and she thought this was something that was serious enough to merit expulsion.

Snape could have easily expelled Harry for this and he would be right to do so, but he did not do that. Instead he gave Harry detentions.

In other words, Snape's detentions for the rest of the year SAVED Harry from expulsion.

Harry had already been called out of the common room to endure 15 highly unpleasant minutes in the presence of McGonagall, who told him he was lucky not have been expelled and that she whole heartedly supported Snape's punishment of detention until the end of term.

I'll just add a bit about the expulsion opportunities.

We even have an outright example of ALBUS (whom JKR once told us she uses to tell truths) actually LYING in the CoS incident, just to impress upon Harry that he shouldn't do such things.

We now know in retrospect that regardless of anything that Harry might do, there was NO WAY that Albus would ever have him expelled. He threatened Harry with it, but never intended to use it - ever.

It's interesting, because one has to REALLY pay strict attention to Snape's words. Even in SpinnersEnd, where he is basically lying to Bella - he uses 'truths' to do it. For instance, he uses the fact that many DEs hoped Harry would become some sort of super-wizard whom they could later follow. He makes a statement of fact, but uses it in such a way that he implied he was one of them - yet it's obvious from the beginning that Snape was not trying to curry any favor from Harry. So, he did NOT agree with those wizards. And in fact, never once said he did.

So, in CoS, what does he actually SAY. He says he will get the people who have the ability to expel Harry. That IF Harry were in his House then HE would have that ability. He even says that it is unfortunate that he doesn't have the option of expelling Harry. Yet he never once says he WOULD expel Harry, nor that he would even want to do so.

Then later in HBP, Harry once again does something that is grounds for dismissal, almost kills Draco. And by giving Harry so many detentions, he has given Minerva an 'out', he has given a severe enough punishment that she apparently feels that IF it satisfies the Head of House of the boy who could have died, then it is enough for her. This from the woman who sent first years into the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid to search for a unicorn killer as punishment for being out after curfew (not even off-grounds)

Also of interest (in regards to Snape's background) is that in PoA, when Snape was talking to Fudge, he also gives Harry an 'out' from expulsion before it is even threatened. From what he said, just being off school property, without permission seems to be grounds for expulsion (or maybe it's just off property after curfew?) - but Snape says he believes the trio was confunded, which gives them an 'out'

Anyways, my point - was Snape threatened with an expulsion for the Werewolf Incident for being off-grounds? It may or may not have been after curfew (depending upon the time of year) I tend to think this was another case of Albus threatening without intending to actually do it. It also parallels the SectumSempra Incident, where Minerva says Harry was lucky to not be expelled - therefore Sirius was also probably told that he was lucky that Albus could not expel him without revealing Remus' secret.

I can see Albus threatening both Sirius and Snape, with it, knowing full well that he cannot expel either of them.

On the contrary - if they were heading back to the entrances, he could have carried Sirius to them instead in the castle. After all, when he made the threat, this is where he imagined they'd be - at their positions at the entrances - and this is where he would have called them from. But he doesn't call them.

In my opinion, Snape had every intention of attempting to get Sirius and Lupin kissed in the midst of the shack incident, but was rendered unconscious and could not (POA). However, once Snape recovered from being knocked out, he not only had three injured children on his hands, but a completely unconscious Sirius (POA). Snape had said inside of the Shack that he wanted revenge and in my judgment, that was his primary goal; however, there would be no revenge for Snape if he took an unknowing and unconscious Sirius to the edge of the campus to be kissed, imo; that is a no joy situation for Snape, imo, because there is no getting back at a man who feels no pain, anxiety or anguish and is merely kissed - when Sirius regained consciousness after that, he'd be good as dead (veggie brain) and wouldn't know who had him kissed or from what is indicated, know who he was himself, imo. Add to that, for all Snape knew, Sirius had already been kissed, together with Harry, imo (he didn't see the patronus as he told Dumbledore that he didn't know what had ultimately driven the dementors away).

So Snape did the next best thing under the circumstances, imo, and that was to take everyone back to the castle; the kids so they could be placed in the hospital and Sirius, so that he could be kissed when he regained consciousness, if he wasn't already a vegetable, and if not, he would still be credited with bringing Sirius in to be kissed, it would just be facilitated by the authorities instead, imo, and he would still be able to get revenge for having brought Sirius in and being able to watch the kissing - more to the point, Sirius' anguish and fear in the process, imo. In support of this, Snape was happy to accept the Order of Merlin for having captured Sirius and brought him to justice, imo (POA) and continued to argue the facts in light of ensuring Sirius was kissed upon the discovery that he hadn't been, imo.

Snape then set about trying to convince the Minister to take action against Harry - suspension or worse - for consorting with murderers and werewolves; this after having tried to convince the Minister that Harry and friends had been confunded - which makes absolutely no sense, imo, for how could they be confunded and not know what they were doing and still merit suspension or expulsion for consorting with those who confunded them? (POA)

I feel the canon supported that Snape was all about revenge from the beginning to the end of this scene and in a final display, Snape ratted out Lupin when he lost his bid against obtaining revenge against Sirius - which imo, was simple vindictiveness under the circumstances. Snape could have gone to Dumbledore or Lupin with any concerns; could have even threatened to expose him if action was not taken, but instead, he told his students (POA) and imo, that resulted in nothing in as far as Lupin's position as DADA (he resigned anyway and the position was cursed) - but advised all the Death Eaters who would return to Voldemort that Lupin was a werewolf - and the outcome of that was shown in DH, Chapter 1, imo, when Lupin and his family were marked for death because he was a werewolf (imo).

In conclusion, I feel that Snape behaved in a wrongful manner throughout the evening and morning after the Shack incident and his doings had far reaching consequences that to me were foreseeable, making him accountable for them, imo. I suspect that Snape felt so too, which was why he made a point of trying to spare Lupin from the death charge against him by the DE in 7 Potters - but that is pure speculation on my part and it may be that Snape removed the blame from himself in his mind instead as possible (which I feel was something he regularly attempted to do relative to acts he was culpable for).

Snape had said inside of the Shack that he wanted revenge and in my judgment, that was his primary goal; however, there would be no revenge for Snape if he took an unknowing and unconscious Sirius to the edge of the campus to be kissed, imo; that is a no joy situation for Snape, imo, because there is no getting back at a man who feels no pain, anxiety or anguish and is merely kissed - when Sirius regained consciousness after that, he'd be good as dead (veggie brain) and wouldn't know who had him kissed or from what is indicated, know who he was himself, imo. Add to that, for all Snape knew, Sirius had already been kissed, together with Harry, imo (he didn't see the patronus as he told Dumbledore that he didn't know what had ultimately driven the dementors away.

Severus could have taken Sirius to the Dementors and then performed Ennervate to revive him first.:) Also, if Sirius had already been kissed unbeknown to Severus it would have made no difference to try it anyway.

Well my impression was that Snape was calmer when he awoke and that is why he realized the benefit of taking Black directly to the castle because he'd not only get to have him kissed and watch, obtaining his revenge from a revived Sirius if he was merely unconscious, but if he wasn't, he'd get credit for Black's capture, imo, which would at least be something, imo.

To me the ensuing storyline I feel shows Snape had not lost any of his desire for revenge, especially against Sirius - and thus, it makes no sense that he was trying to do any 'right thing' by Black, imo. That is why I feel that if he didn't try to rouse him and have him kissed, then it was because he concluded taking him back to the castle would result in a better form of revenge, imo. I simply feel Snape saw that as a better option with respect to his desire in that regard than carrying either an unconscious or groggy Sirius before the dementors, because his behavior to me clearly showed his need for revenge was still very keen, even the next day (POA).

To me, Snape could have told the Minister and Dumbledore that everyone in the shack had been attempting to say that Black had further evidence and that they should hear it before making further moves - I feel that would have been the 'right thing' to do, but he didn't do that (POA). Instead, he continued to pursue his revenge, imo. I feel he made up the story about the trio being confunded and waived off the objection of the new evidence with his 'something about a rat' statement - and added his gambit that Sirius was an attempted murderer at 16, all in an effort to try and have Sirius ultimately kissed (imo).

Well my impression was that Snape was calmer when he awoke and that is why he realized the benefit of taking Black directly to the castle because he'd not only get to have him kissed and watch, obtaining his revenge from a revived Sirius if he was merely unconscious, but if he wasn't, he'd get credit for Black's capture, imo, which would at least be something, imo.

I think he'd have benefited a lot from bringing Sirius to the castle, rather than let the dementors perform the kiss outside. The minister had suggested that Snape should be given Order of Merlin second class for just being there and managing the situation, I think they'd have given him first class if everything had gone well and Sirius had not managed to flee.

I think that, given the DH revelation about the relationship between Snape and Dumbleodre, Snape's attempts to get Harry expelled can hardly be taken in earnest. He knew there was no way Dumbeldore would expel Harry, no matter what Harry did.


I agree. I picture Snape doing this almost as a way to save face and keep up his cold appearence.

I think he'd have benefited a lot from bringing Sirius to the castle, rather than let the dementors perform the kiss outside. The minister had suggested that Snape should be given Order of Merlin second class for just being there and managing the situation, I think they'd have given him first class if everything had gone well and Sirius had not managed to flee.


So what do you think Snape should have done then? :hmm: It sounds to me like a case of he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
At least Severus took care to place the bodies on stretchers and float them up to the castle, which is better treatment than he recieved from Sirius, who allowed Snape's head to bang on the ceiling of the tunnel. Regardless of what Sirius felt towards Snape I found this lack of respect for an unconcious person very disturing and distasteful.

I agree. I picture Snape doing this almost as a way to save face and keep up his cold appearence.

Well I think that's true that he probably didn't actually expect Harry to be expelled I don't think he would have been to particularly sorry if he was expelled. After all, Harry would have just returned to the Dursely's were he was safest from Voldemort so Snape would not be betraying his obligation and Snape wouldn't have to look at (what he perceived to be) James' clone every day. So he probably would have been more than okay with Harry being expelled. Although the eyes may have been Harry's saving grace.

Well I think that's true that he probably didn't actually expect Harry to be expelled I don't think he would have been to particularly sorry if he was expelled. After all, Harry would have just returned to the Dursely's were he was safest from Voldemort so Snape would not be betraying his obligation and Snape wouldn't have to look at (what he perceived to be) James' clone every day. So he probably would have been more than okay with Harry being expelled. Although the eyes may have been Harry's saving grace.

However, when Harry is at Hogwart's Snape can give him day-to-day protection, which wouldn't be possible if Harry was living with the Dursleys. The blood protection didn't do him much good when the dementors attacked him in what would have the start of his fifth year at Hogwarts. Luckily he had been at Hogwarts and DADA professor Lupin taught him how to make a patronus.

So what do you think Snape should have done then? :hmm: It sounds to me like a case of he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

I respect your view, but I don't see it that way. It wasn't a damned if you do or don't situation; I think he did the right thing taking them up to the castle, he merely did so with a wrongful intent, imo. He should have revealed that Sirius and everyone else in the shack were indicating that there was new evidence they should hear before putting Black to death - rather than trying to convince them to have him kissed asap, imo.

At least Severus took care to place the bodies on stretchers and float them up to the castle, which is better treatment than he recieved from Sirius, who allowed Snape's head to bang on the ceiling of the tunnel. Regardless of what Sirius felt towards Snape I found this lack of respect for an unconcious person very disturing and distasteful.

Again, I respect your view, but from my view, Sirius was according Snape far better treatment than what he had threatened him and his only living best friend with (and Snape began making good on his threat with Lupin, imo - POA). I think Snape was lucky to have been floated at all, rather than bound and dragged through the dirt and rocks of the terrain like a wild animal as Snape said he was planning to do with Lupin - or forced out to your death (or good as) without being heard. Of course Sirius had no respect for Snape, he hadn't merited any by his earlier behavior and treatment of them, imo. To me it wasn't disturbing, it was literary justice (imo). That is how I look at all situations like this; Harry getting his head thwacked after being nasty with Lupin - Sirius getting zapped by Bella when he stood recklessly taunting her instead of taking her out at the MOM, Ron's spell backfiring on him when he tried to upend Draco...literature was cruel in these cases, but it is just, imo.

However, when Harry is at Hogwart's Snape can give him day-to-day protection, which wouldn't be possible if Harry was living with the Dursleys. The blood protection didn't do him much good when the dementors attacked him in what would have the start of his fifth year at Hogwarts. Luckily he had been at Hogwarts and DADA professor Lupin taught him how to make a patronus.

That's actually something I've debated with myself. I suppose it comes down to does Snape feel Harry's safer in his (Snape's) personal protection or the ancient magic that protects him at the Dursley's? Because Harry did spend ten years at the Dursley's and from what we've seen Snape had no noticeable objections to it so he must feel Harry's safe there. I still feel Snape, while not earnest in his attempts at Harry's expulsion would not have cared if he was sent back to the Dursley's. What's your thoughts on it though, do you think Snape's more comfortable with Harry where he can see him or where a bond of blood protects him?

What's your thoughts on it though, do you think Snape's more comfortable with Harry where he can see him or where a bond of blood protects him?

Well, of course Snape has much more confidence in his ability to protect Harry than some nebulus blood protection. Anyway it only seems to be in effect whilst Harry is actually in the house.

However, once Snape recovered from being knocked out, he not only had three injured children on his hands, but a completely unconscious Sirius (POA). Snape had said inside of the Shack that he wanted revenge and in my judgment, that was his primary goal; however, there would be no revenge for Snape if he took an unknowing and unconscious Sirius to the edge of the campus to be kissed, imo; that is a no joy situation for Snape, imo, because there is no getting back at a man who feels no pain, anxiety or anguish and is merely kissed - when Sirius regained consciousness after that, he'd be good as dead (veggie brain) and wouldn't know who had him kissed or from what is indicated, know who he was himself, imo. Add to that, for all Snape knew, Sirius had already been kissed, together with Harry, imo (he didn't see the patronus as he told Dumbledore that he didn't know what had ultimately driven the dementors away).

I don't understand. Are you saying Snape wanted Sirius to be kissed or not? :hmm:

I think what Snape did is very clear in canon, irrespective of what he may have said.

Snape had regained consciousness. He was conjuring stretchers and lifting the limp forms of Harry, Hermione and Black onto them. A fourth stretcher was already, no doubt bearing Ron, was already at his side. Then, wand held out in front of him, he moved them away to the castle.

What happened at the castle once Snape turned Black over to Dumbledore was not IMO Snape's responsibility. That was something Dumbledore, Fudge and others would take care of. As we saw, DD arranged for Black to escape and succeeded in it too. So, I really don't know in what way Snape was responsible, except to try his best to protect 3 students and to stop a man who he knew as a murderer and another man who he thought was helping Black. It is not Snape's fault if Lupin felt Snape need not know the truth and kept him unconscious IMO.

Snape then set about trying to convince the Minister to take action against Harry - suspension or worse - for consorting with murderers and werewolves; this after having tried to convince the Minister that Harry and friends had been confunded - which makes absolutely no sense, imo, for how could they be confunded and not know what they were doing and still merit suspension or expulsion for consorting with those who confunded them? (POA)

Asking for Harry to be punished was IMO very much right, for Harry would have placed himself in great danger had Sirius actually been a DE. Snape wanted punishment for Harry not for being Confunded, but for being in a place, where he had no business to be at that time (out of bounds, against all School rules - after all precautions put in place for his protection, says the Book), which was against the rules and where he could be attacked and/or Confunded by a man who had betrayed his parents IMO.

The Confunded part was for believing Black to be innocent, for which Snape does not blame the 3, but Black IMO.

I feel the canon supported that Snape was all about revenge from the beginning to the end of this scene and in a final display, Snape ratted out Lupin when he lost his bid against obtaining revenge against Sirius - which imo, was simple vindictiveness under the circumstances.

I think Snape was right in this too. Lupin showed a carelessness for the life of a student, when he was silent about Sirius's animagus form, even after Sirius broke into Gryffindor Tower. Lupin committed a grave mistake by thinking more of himself than the students lives which would be in danger. I think in a way Snape was right when he told Lupin that he had warned Dumbledore time and again of Lupin helping Sirius. Snape was right, because Lupin was helping Sirius by his silence on Sirius's animagus form, which was almost as wrong by helping Sirius actively IMO.

Snape could have gone to Dumbledore or Lupin with any concerns; could have even threatened to expose him if action was not taken, but instead, he told his students (POA) and imo, that resulted in nothing in as far as Lupin's position as DADA (he resigned anyway and the position was cursed) - but advised all the Death Eaters who would return to Voldemort that Lupin was a werewolf - and the outcome of that was shown in DH, Chapter 1, imo, when Lupin and his family were marked for death because he was a werewolf (imo).

Lupin's work with the werewolves, would have made Voldemort and others know he was a werewolf IMO.

I suspect that Snape felt so too, which was why he made a point of trying to spare Lupin from the death charge against him by the DE in 7 Potters - but that is pure speculation on my part and it may be that Snape removed the blame from himself in his mind instead as possible (which I feel was something he regularly attempted to do relative to acts he was culpable for).

Snape by trying for Sirius to ensure he was safe in OOTP and by trying to save Lupin in DH, was IMO doing what any other Order member would do. Watch the backs of other Order members. I don't think Snape thought of Lupin or Sirius more than that, because of the enmity they had between them. But Snape to his credit never let the enmity come in the way of his work for the Order IMO.

I respect your view, but I don't see it that way. It wasn't a damned if you do or don't situation; I think he did the right thing taking them up to the castle, he merely did so with a wrongful intent, imo.

I disagree. I don't think there is any canon for this. With the Ministry have ordered for Sirius to be kissed at sight, Snape would not be wrong in handing over Black to the dementors. But canon (I have given the quote above) clearly says Snape took them to the castle; which means he took them to Dumbledore and from then on, what happened to Black was not his business, for he had no authority to decide what and how the punishment should be. I don't understand how he is blamed for it.

I don't understand. Are you saying Snape wanted Sirius to be kissed or not? :hmm:

Yes, but he wanted revenge, so I feel he wanted to see it and he wanted Sirius to suffer, imo.

I think what Snape did is very clear in canon, irrespective of what he may have said.

Snape had regained consciousness. He was conjuring stretchers and lifting the limp forms of Harry, Hermione and Black onto them. A fourth stretcher was already, no doubt bearing Ron, was already at his side. Then, wand held out in front of him, he moved them away to the castle.

Yeah but I don't have a problem with what he did, I think he did the right thing. As I indicated, I have a problem with what he failed to do.

What happened at the castle once Snape turned Black over to Dumbledore was not IMO Snape's responsibility.

I feel it was Snape's moral responsibility to advise the minister and Dumbledore that everyone in the shack had indicated new evidence had come to light. In my judgment, he was culpable of withholding evidence, and obstructing justice for Sirius. Snape wanted revenge he said, and I feel that is why he tried to keep quiet about the events that occurred in the shack. He didn't talk about the kids being confunded until he was forced to explain his injury and that the kids had done it, so imo, he hadn't related all of the facts to anyone, purposely, because he feared evidence showing Sirius' innocence would come to light. That isn't right, imo.

As we saw, DD arranged for Black to escape and succeeded in it too. So, I really don't know in what way Snape was responsible,

Snape had absolutely nothing to do with Sirius escaping (POA), on the contrary, he argued in a manner to try and keep him looking guilty so he could be kissed, imo.

except to try his best to protect 3 students

I disagree; Snape said he wanted revenge. He didn't mention anything about protecting the students - and upon entering he understood they were not in danger, imo, which is why he sat under the cloak for such a long time listening instead of 'rescuing' the kids or protecting them in any way, imo. Indeed, he threatened Harry when the lad tried to stop him from getting revenge and to me that is far from protection. Snape lost it, imo, and his focus was entirely centered on revenge, imo.

Asking for Harry to be punished was IMO very much right, for Harry would have placed himself in great danger had Sirius actually been a DE. Snape wanted punishment for Harry not for being Confunded, but for being in a place, where he had no business to be at that time (out of bounds, against all School rules - after all precautions put in place for his protection, says the Book), which was against the rules and where he could be attacked and/or Confunded by a man who had betrayed his parents IMO.

But Snape said Harry was there to consort with a murderer and werewolf. That to me sounds like he is accusing him of going into the shack to make evil plans or nefarious deals with them or something. That is what that sentence means - it doesn't mean Harry just happened to go to the shack where he shouldn't have - it means he purposely went there to engage in wrongdoing with Sirius and Lupin, imo. That is what he asked for the punishment for - and then also said Harry was confunded. Those two ideas are completely contradictory to me. (POA)

I think Snape was right in this too. Lupin showed a carelessness for the life of a student, when he was silent about Sirius's animagus form, even after Sirius broke into Gryffindor Tower.

In my judgment, betrayal of well founded trust is always wrong. Hence, I feel Snape should have went to Dumbledore or Lupin - not a bunch of 11-17 year old kids with his tattling.

Lupin committed a grave mistake by thinking more of himself than the students lives which would be in danger. I think in a way Snape was right when he told Lupin that he had warned Dumbledore time and again of Lupin helping Sirius. Snape was right, because Lupin was helping Sirius by his silence on Sirius's animagus form, which was almost as wrong by helping Sirius actively IMO.

How is Snape's betrayal of Dumbledore's trust okay merely because of what he thinks about Lupin? Even if Lupin was wrong, evil, or Voldemort the second, Snape should have gone to Dumbledore, not to his students, imo.

Lupin's work with the werewolves, would have made Voldemort and others know he was a werewolf IMO.

It made his work with the werewolves more difficult because he not only had to steer clear from Greyback, but from all of the Sith who knew he was a werewolf - thanks to Snape ratting him out, imo. And Voldemort then marked Lupin and his family for Death. I feel that Snape didn't think about that very negative consequence or didn't care when he ratted out Lupin, imo, and he broke Dumbledore's trust as well, in my judgment.

To me, no one deserves to be marked for death merely because of another man's quest for revenge. So my sympathy goes with Lupin on this one. :)

Snape by trying for Sirius to ensure he was safe in OOTP

Well I am still hoping JKR will explain why it took Snape like five or so hours to determine if Sirius was safe and advise what was going on with Harry. This may be a plot hole in Snape's story, or he may have wished to give Voldemort time to kill Sirius, the canon does not say - but I do feel it is unclear.

and by trying to save Lupin in DH, was IMO doing what any other Order member would do. Watch the backs of other Order members.

My impression from the canon was that Snape purposely joined in that particular battle as the DE was about to issue his curse. Because there were DEs issuing curses in all directions, I felt he might have made his selection of which party to join based on other factors. But that was my opinion. :)

I disagree. I don't think there is any canon for this.

No canon for him not advising that Sirius had new information? I feel there is. We heard the conversations between Snape and the minister and he didn't tell him (POA). When Harry brought it up, Snape tried to waive off the idea, imo. So I feel he was culpable for trying to hide the truth in order to have his revenge (imo).

Of course Sirius had no respect for Snape, he hadn't merited any by his earlier behavior and treatment of them, imo. To me it wasn't disturbing, it was literary justice (imo). That is how I look at all situations like this; Harry getting his head thwacked after being nasty with Lupin - Sirius getting zapped by Bella when he stood recklessly taunting her instead of taking her out at the MOM, Ron's spell backfiring on him when he tried to upend Draco...literature was cruel in these cases, but it is just, imo.

:wow: You seriously think that Sirius deserved to be killed by Bella because he recklessly taunted her???? Seriously? :hmm: Um ... wow. :(

You think that JKR's characters get some kind of simplistic payback every single time they do something wrong? :huh: We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. :whistle: I mean, if we were to apply this rigid rule all the time (or if the author were to apply this rigid rule to her own literature), then Harry should have received instant payback for Crucio'ing Carrow!

It's not that I don't believe nobody gets their just desserts in the Potterverse: obviously they do. Bella did, Voldemort did, Peter did. Nonetheless: as satisfying as it is to see a bad guy get their comeuppance, JKR usually limits that sort of thing in her stories (although I have to confess that I am always disturbed by the savage fate meted out to Marietta for ratting out the DA. Not that I agree with what Marietta did, but the punishment is so excessive).

I do not agree with Snape wanting Sirius subjected to the Dementor's Kiss, even if he did believe Sirius was the guy responsible for Lily's death. I say that not because I am anti-Snape but because I find the Dementor's Kiss so very disturbing. I believe the Ministry was totally wrong to employ it, and to use Dementors full stop.

I also don't agree with Sirius treating the unconscious Snape the way he did. I can understand it, because of what Snape had threatened him with, but I don't have to like it.

It's interesting, because one has to REALLY pay strict attention to Snape's words. Even in SpinnersEnd, where he is basically lying to Bella - he uses 'truths' to do it. For instance, he uses the fact that many DEs hoped Harry would become some sort of super-wizard whom they could later follow. He makes a statement of fact, but uses it in such a way that he implied he was one of them - yet it's obvious from the beginning that Snape was not trying to curry any favor from Harry. So, he did NOT agree with those wizards. And in fact, never once said he did.

So, in CoS, what does he actually SAY. He says he will get the people who have the ability to expel Harry. That IF Harry were in his House then HE would have that ability. He even says that it is unfortunate that he doesn't have the option of expelling Harry. Yet he never once says he WOULD expel Harry, nor that he would even want to do so.

Then later in HBP, Harry once again does something that is grounds for dismissal, almost kills Draco. And by giving Harry so many detentions, he has given Minerva an 'out', he has given a severe enough punishment that she apparently feels that IF it satisfies the Head of House of the boy who could have died, then it is enough for her. This from the woman who sent first years into the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid to search for a unicorn killer as punishment for being out after curfew (not even off-grounds)

:tu: hwyla I just can't say how much I really appreciate this post, I think you're spot on when you say many characters listen to the apparent implication of what Severus is saying not what he actually says - as readers we have to be so careful not to fall into the same trap don't we! :D

That's actually something I've debated with myself. I suppose it comes down to does Snape feel Harry's safer in his (Snape's) personal protection or the ancient magic that protects him at the Dursley's? Because Harry did spend ten years at the Dursley's and from what we've seen Snape had no noticeable objections to it so he must feel Harry's safe there. I still feel Snape, while not earnest in his attempts at Harry's expulsion would not have cared if he was sent back to the Dursley's. What's your thoughts on it though, do you think Snape's more comfortable with Harry where he can see him or where a bond of blood protects him?

Blood protection or his own protection? :hmm:

While I have to say I don’t think he ever really wants Harry expelled I’m not sure which Severus would most trust. As he seems to have no concerns about Harry returning ‘home’ during the holidays I would say he probably trusts both relatively equally – after all that bond of blood / blood protection is Lily’s last piece of magic and I think we know Severus respected her magical ability.

To my mind he sees a place for both, the blood protection will stop when Harry comes of age – so in the mean time Harry needs to learn how to use magic as well as possible and I think he sees it as his role to protect Harry while he learns magic. I think that there is also the fact that Severus wants to make sure Lily’s death wasn’t in vain and he wants to honour his last pledge to her (metaphorically speaking) – to protect Harry; in some ways Severus & Lily are working together to protect Harry, and I suspect Severus finds that thought comforting at some level.

Yes, but he wanted revenge, so I feel he wanted to see it and he wanted Sirius to suffer, imo.

Revenge for Sirius's betrayal. Once Snape knew about Sirius's role, I don't think Snape ever made comments about revenge. Just like Harry, who was angry when he thought Sirius to the one who betrayed his parents. I don't see anything wrong in that.

Yeah but I don't have a problem with what he did, I think he did the right thing. As I indicated, I have a problem with what he failed to do.

What did he fail to do? As far as I can remember, he did the right thing. He made Ron who was hurt comfortable first and then conjured stretchers for everyone, including Sirius. He did not let Sirius drag behind him in the mud, and neither did he hurt him. On the contrary, Sirius bumped Snape's head into the ceiling, when Snape was unconscious IMO.

I feel it was Snape's moral responsibility to advise the minister and Dumbledore that everyone in the shack had indicated new evidence had come to light.

I don't think he could do this when he was unaware Sirius was innocent.

In my judgment, he was culpable of withholding evidence, and obstructing justice for Sirius.

How?

Snape wanted revenge he said, and I feel that is why he tried to keep quiet about the events that occurred in the shack. He didn't talk about the kids being confunded until he was forced to explain his injury and that the kids had done it, so imo, he hadn't related all of the facts to anyone, purposely, because he feared evidence showing Sirius' innocence would come to light. That isn't right, imo.

This explanation assumes that Snape was the deciding authority and that Dumbledore would never question Sirius about his escape from Azkaban or about his reasons for coming to Hogwarts (and Dumbledore would question on the assumption Sirius was guilty, not innocent; it would be only after Sirius's explanation, and maybe some Legilimency that Dumbledore would realise Sirius was innocent; since Snape had not done anything like this and nor was he privy to what Lupin and Sirius told the 3 and because he did not see Peter, Snape would only assume Sirius was guilty IMO).

1) Snape did not know Sirius was innocent, because Lupin decided to keep Snape unconscious.

2) Snape was not the deciding authority who sealed the fate of Sirius Black.

3) Like Fudge and every other citizen of the WW, Snape too thought Sirius was guilty.

4) Snape also stopped talking about Sirius's guilt and revenge, when he came to know the true story IMO.

Snape had absolutely nothing to do with Sirius escaping (POA), on the contrary, he argued in a manner to try and keep him looking guilty so he could be kissed, imo.

Did he argue after he knew Sirius was innocent?

In my judgment, betrayal of well founded trust is always wrong.

I agree. I think this is true of Lupin and not Snape, though. He should have informed Dumbledore about their animagus forms the day he came to Hogwarts or at least on the day Sirius entered Gryffindor Tower. That he kept quiet, shows a betrayal of trust on Lupin's part, which implies that he cared more for himself than for the protection of students IMO.

Dumbledore trusted Lupin, even when Snape time and again warned Dumbledore that Lupin was not to be trusted. And Snape was right IMO. Lupin betrayed the trust Dumbledore had in him and in a way that could have killed a couple of students, had Sirius actually been a DE. I think Snape by revealing Lupin as a werewolf, was making sure that Lupin would not be placed in a position where he would place his interests over students' lives IMO.

To me, no one deserves to be marked for death merely because of another man's quest for revenge. So my sympathy goes with Lupin on this one. :)

And I feel no one should die, because Lupin wanted his Headmaster to think well of him, because he did not want Dumbledore to think he had betrayed him. I think Harry and Ron's lives are worth more than that.

Well I am still hoping JKR will explain why it took Snape like five or so hours to determine if Sirius was safe and advise what was going on with Harry. This may be a plot hole in Snape's story, or he may have wished to give Voldemort time to kill Sirius, the canon does not say - but I do feel it is unclear.

I think it was the time Snape thought they were in the Forest and when they did not return, was when he got worried and went to Dumbledore.

No canon for him not advising that Sirius had new information? I feel there is. We heard the conversations between Snape and the minister and he didn't tell him (POA). When Harry brought it up, Snape tried to waive off the idea, imo. So I feel he was culpable for trying to hide the truth in order to have his revenge (imo).

That was before Snape knew Sirius was innocent. Is there canon to say he said the same things and wanted revenge, after he knew Sirius was innocent?

:wow: You seriously think that Sirius deserved to be killed by Bella because he recklessly taunted her???? Seriously? :hmm: Um ... wow. :(

Deserved? I didn't say that. I said literary justice. That is when the author makes a moral point by having things result that the reader would or should find fair. In my judgment, that is what was happening in these scenes. I was totally behind Sirius in that scene, but I recognized the literary justice there nonetheless - same with Ron's scene. Harry and Snape's I was against them storywise, but it was the same phenomenon at work, imo.

You think that JKR's characters get some kind of simplistic payback every single time they do something wrong? :huh: We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. :whistle: I mean, if we were to apply this rigid rule all the time (or if the author were to apply this rigid rule to her own literature), then Harry should have received instant payback for Crucio'ing Carrow!

Oh I don't think it is either always simplistic or always instant. Nor do I feel it is 'always' done - because sometimes the whole point is to show unfairness can result (i.e., as she wished to show with the results of war on innocents like Hedwig, for example). But I saw literary justice happening throughout the series, it was a theme she employed, imo.

It's not that I don't believe nobody gets their just desserts in the Potterverse: obviously they do. Bella did, Voldemort did, Peter did. Nonetheless: as satisfying as it is to see a bad guy get their comeuppance, JKR usually limits that sort of thing in her stories (although I have to confess that I am always disturbed by the savage fate meted out to Marietta for ratting out the DA. Not that I agree with what Marietta did, but the punishment is so excessive).

Well that was an example where it was neither instant or simplistic, imo. But the idea was the same - although in light of Marietta being fundamentally in the right (reporting the wrongs of students to the proper authorities), I think JKR rekindled the friendship with her and Cho in the aftermath.

But Snape was placed in an antagonistic role in that particular scene, clearly in the wrong, imo, and so the trio's charge together with the head bumping was the justice metered out, imo. Was it vindictive and not nice? Yes - I don't know if Sirius noticed, but Harry did and he didn't say anything. But that is how it often works, as you pointed out, anywhere from not nice to savage, imo.

I do not agree with Snape wanting Sirius subjected to the Dementor's Kiss, even if he did believe Sirius was the guy responsible for Lily's death. I say that not because I am anti-Snape but because I find the Dementor's Kiss so very disturbing. I believe the Ministry was totally wrong to employ it, and to use Dementors full stop. I also don't agree with Sirius treating the unconscious Snape the way he did. I can understand it, because of what Snape had threatened him with, but I don't have to like it.

Well I didn't like Sirius being killed at all - nor Bella winning that particular battle, I wanted Sirius to win and remain alive. But that has nothing to do with literary justice - that is all character based for the reader's benefit, imo. Sirius behaved recklessly and dangerously and the moral is, there are consequences for that behavior and the author caused them to apply, imo.

That is what happened in the scene in POA with Snape as well, imo. It wasn't only that he was going to have both people kissed without listening to them - it was his entire attitude, behavior, words and his acts in the shack prior to being knocked out, imo. So here, the total literary justice was a bit much, but so was the behavior that required it, imo.

:tu: hwyla I just can't say how much I really appreciate this post, I think you're spot on when you say many characters listen to the apparent implication of what Severus is saying not what he actually says - as readers we have to be so careful not to fall into the same trap don't we! :D

:agree: Indeed, this is the trap the author has carefully planted for us to fall into, so we would easily believe Snape to be working against Dumbledore. However, it is one we need to step back from and avoid falling into when we comes to analysis of the character.

I think that there is also the fact that Severus wants to make sure Lily’s death wasn’t in vain and he wants to honour his last pledge to her (metaphorically speaking) – to protect Harry; in some ways Severus & Lily are working together to protect Harry, and I suspect Severus finds that thought comforting at some level.

I had'nt thought of it like that before. :)


This explanation assumes that Snape was the deciding authority and that Dumbledore would never question Sirius about his escape from Azkaban or about his reasons for coming to Hogwarts (and Dumbledore would question on the assumption Sirius was guilty, not innocent; it would be only after Sirius's explanation, and maybe some Legilimency that Dumbledore would realise Sirius was innocent; since Snape had not done anything like this and nor was he privy to what Lupin and Sirius told the 3 and because he did not see Peter, Snape would only assume Sirius was guilty IMO).

1) Snape did not know Sirius was innocent, because Lupin decided to keep Snape unconscious.

2) Snape was not the deciding authority who sealed the fate of Sirius Black.

3) Like Fudge and every other citizen of the WW, Snape too thought Sirius was guilty.

4) Snape also stopped talking about Sirius's guilt and revenge, when he came to know the true story IMO.

I comletely agree here! Snape must have known Sirius would be questioned at the very least if only to find out how he escaped from Azkaban. If Snape thought Sirius had new evidence which would acquit him and didn't want him to have a chance to present it, then why didn't he let the Dementors have him before taking him to the castle. This is what he should have done if he was just out for revenge and knew there was evidence to prove Sirius innocent. By taking him to the castle Sirius has a chance to give his evidence. However, I don't think Severus thought Sirius had any new evidence that would prove his innocence.

Well I didn't like Sirius being killed at all - nor Bella winning that particular battle, I wanted Sirius to win and remain alive. But that has nothing to do with literary justice - that is all character based for the reader's benefit, imo. Sirius behaved recklessly and dangerously and the moral is, there are consequences for that behavior and the author caused them to apply, imo.

Well, in that case, the supposed 'moral' that the author was supposed to be applying in the case of Sirius's death went straight over my head. :lol: I don't see his death as 'literary justice' for having been reckless and I don't see JKR trying to apply any simplistic moral lesson about that.

The only literary 'purpose' in Sirius's untimely death, IMO, is that JKR wished to remove all of Harry's surrogate fathers before he could become the man alone against his nemesis. And that is a recognised literary trope.

I should get back to discussing Snape. :whistle: :)

I comletely agree here! Snape must have known Sirius would be questioned at the very least if only to find out how he escaped from Azkaban. If Snape thought Sirius had new evidence which would acquit him and didn't want him to have a chance to present it, then why didn't he let the Dementors have him before taking him to the castle. This is what he should have done if he was just out for revenge and knew there was evidence to prove Sirius innocent. By taking him to the castle Sirius has a chance to give his evidence. However, I don't think Severus thought Sirius had any new evidence that would prove his innocence.

Well he probably brought Sirius back to the castle because he: A) was convinced Sirius was guilty/figured even if he was innocent no one would believe him, B) probably wanted Sirius to be in a state where he could see Snape victorious (a petty act of revenge), and C) he probably had some sort of intention to view the Kiss, again out an act of revenge.

Well he probably brought Sirius back to the castle because he: A) was convinced Sirius was guilty/figured even if he was innocent no one would believe him,

Snape at the time was convinced Sirius was guilty. He had no reason to think otherwise IMO. If he was innocent, it was up to Sirius to prove that, not Snape IMO. For, until that time, for 13 years, everyone believed Sirius to be guilty, not Snape alone.

B) probably wanted Sirius to be in a state where he could see Snape victorious (a petty act of revenge),

For that Snape would have to be in charge or at least a part of the interrogation of Sirius. I don't think Dumbledore left such things to Snape and neither did the Ministry, who had their own interrogators to question Azkaban escapees. And Dumbledore, I think would prefer to question Sirius himself about his intentions.

and C) he probably had some sort of intention to view the Kiss, again out an act of revenge

Again, this seems to assume Sirius would be Kissed in front of Snape as an innocent and that irrespective of it Snape would be Glad to witness it. If Sirius had indeed been guilty for the Potters deaths, then he would have received the Kiss as the punishment as ordered by the Ministry. It would not be for Snape's sake, but for betraying the Potters IMO.

Since Sirius was very much innocent, Dumbledore used the time turner to save him. Once Snape handed over Sirius and the 3 students to Dumbledore, I don't think he really had any role in what happened next. His conversation with Fudge was before he was aware of what happened, but spoke to Fudge, because he was the one to bring Sirius in IMO.

Snape at the time was convinced Sirius was guilty. He had no reason to think otherwise IMO. If he was innocent, it was up to Sirius to prove that, not Snape IMO. For, until that time, for 13 years, everyone believed Sirius to be guilty, not Snape alone.

That's true, now that I think about it, there's no way Snape could have had an inkling that Sirius was innocent in any way, shape, or form.

For that Snape would have to be in charge or at least a part of the interrogation of Sirius. I don't think Dumbledore left such things to Snape and neither did the Ministry, who had their own interrogators to question Azkaban escapees. And Dumbledore, I think would prefer to question Sirius himself about his intentions.

Well no, Sirius would just have to be conscious enough to see that he was behind bars and Snape was there sneering at him. I don't think Snape needed (or wanted) to be there during the interrogation just as long as Sirius was aware that Snape had been the one to bring him in.

Again, this seems to assume Sirius would be Kissed in front of Snape as an innocent and that irrespective of it Snape would be Glad to witness it. If Sirius had indeed been guilty for the Potters deaths, then he would have received the Kiss as the punishment as ordered by the Ministry. It would not be for Snape's sake, but for betraying the Potters IMO.

Since Sirius was very much innocent, Dumbledore used the time turner to save him. Once Snape handed over Sirius and the 3 students to Dumbledore, I don't think he really had any role in what happened next. His conversation with Fudge was before he was aware of what happened, but spoke to Fudge, because he was the one to bring Sirius in IMO.

I'm going with Snape's thoughts before he knew Sirius was innocent. Snape would have been all to happy to witness Sirius Kissed and we saw in GoF that people can witness a Kiss (Snape and McGonagall were present for Barry Crouch Jr.'s Kiss). Dumbledore, of course, would never allow an innocent man to be subjected to such a terrible fate and did something about it. But Snape (prior to knowing Sirius' innocence) was fully prepared to let Sirius be Kissed and witness it (both because of Sirius's role in Snape's unhappy adolescence and because he believe Sirius betrayed the Potter's hiding place).

Well no, Sirius would just have to be conscious enough to see that he was behind bars and Snape was there sneering at him. I don't think Snape needed (or wanted) to be there during the interrogation just as long as Sirius was aware that Snape had been the one to bring him in.

Sirius already would have known, because Snape had held him at wand point in the shack. Having become unconscious because of the dementors, once he regained consciousness, I think Sirius would have understood and assumed that Snape had managed to drive away the dementors and capture him (assuming of course that Sirius did not know Harry cast the Patronus because he was unconscious).

I'm going with Snape's thoughts before he knew Sirius was innocent. Snape would have been all to happy to witness Sirius Kissed and we saw in GoF that people can witness a Kiss (Snape and McGonagall were present for Barry Crouch Jr.'s Kiss).

Before Snape knew Sirius was innocent, Snape's action was to take Sirius to the castle.

Snape had regained consciousness. He was conjuring stretchers and lifting the limp forms of Harry, Hermione and Black onto them. A fourth stretcher was already, no doubt bearing Ron, was already at his side. Then, wand held out in front of him, he moved them away to the castle.

Dumbledore, of course, would never allow an innocent man to be subjected to such a terrible fate and did something about it. But Snape (prior to knowing Sirius' innocence) was fully prepared to let Sirius be Kissed and witness it (both because of Sirius's role in Snape's unhappy adolescence and because he believe Sirius betrayed the Potter's hiding place)

It was Dumbledore who allowed dementors to guard the castle in order to capture Sirius and later when the Ministry passed orders for Sirius to be Kissed on sight, to allow dementors to do that, if Sirius was caught IMO. Had Sirius been caught at any point by the dementors he would have been kissed straight away, because of the Ministry orders and Dumbledore was okay with that. Snape had nothing to do with placing dementors outside Hogwarts and he did not pass the Decree to have Black Kissed on sight. When he regained consciousness, he did not leave Black to the mercy of the dementors or Lupin, who could have come back, but instead placed him on a stretcher and took him up to the castle IMO.

I don't see what else he could have done.

It was Dumbledore who allowed dementors to guard the castle in order to capture Sirius and later when the Ministry passed orders for Sirius to be Kissed on sight, to allow dementors to do that, if Sirius was caught IMO. Had Sirius been caught at any point by the dementors he would have been kissed straight away, because of the Ministry orders and Dumbledore was okay with that. Snape had nothing to do with placing dementors outside Hogwarts and he did not pass the Decree to have Black Kissed on sight. When he regained consciousness, he did not leave Black to the mercy of the dementors or Lupin, who could have come back, but instead placed him on a stretcher and took him up to the castle IMO.

I don't see what else he could have done.

Well now that I think about it, I see your points also. Sirius being Kissed would have been enough for Snape. And at that point, because the Dementor's had left, he had no choice but to lug Sirius up to the castle to be locked away to avoid Sirius escaping should he wake and not be attacked by Lupin. However it was a plus for Snape because he was rewarded (or would have been) by Fudge for capturing Sirius (but I don't think he planed to be rewarded).

i think I'm going to have to reread PoA....I skimmed back over it after DH and my impressions were that there were specific similarities between Sirius and Snape's actions and intentions. They were both emotionally frenzied in their desire to avenge the betrayal of their best friend and both were equally willing to kill that person on sight. In fact they both had been waiting years to do exactly that. Snape, clearly, had wrong information but I can't imagine Sirius being any more willing to listen to Snape explain how Peter wasn't the betrayer than Snape was willing to listen to Sirius.

And as for the werewolf red herring...while clearly Snape hated Sirius for it, there was nothing in the book, to me, that suggested Snape would have had Sirius kissed for that alone. If he had been conscious but immobile during the Shack scene, I think his subsequent actions would have been very different. No, I don't think he shed any tears when Sirius died, but he wasn't a cold-blooded killer, imo.

And as for the werewolf red herring...while clearly Snape hated Sirius for it, there was nothing in the book, to me, that suggested Snape would have had Sirius kissed for that alone. If he had been conscious but immobile during the Shack scene, I think his subsequent actions would have been very different. No, I don't think he shed any tears when Sirius died, but he wasn't a cold-blooded killer, imo.

I agree with that, Snape wouldn't have taken the actions he did if he knew Sirius was innocent. If Snape wanted Sirius Kissed it was because of the part he believed Sirius played in Lily's death. And I agree Snape isn't a cold blooded killer but at the time of PoA he wouldn't have stopped Sirius' death/loss of soul because of his lack of information. And when Sirius finally did die I'm sure Snape didn't cry, he may have matured enough to realize his mocking of Sirius was partially to blame for Sirius showing up in the Department of Mysteries. But I don't think he really would have felt much remorse for it; while he no longer wanted Sirius dead, he still did not forgive him for his cruelty during their school years.

i think I'm going to have to reread PoA....I skimmed back over it after DH and my impressions were that there were specific similarities between Sirius and Snape's actions and intentions. They were both emotionally frenzied in their desire to avenge the betrayal of their best friend and both were equally willing to kill that person on sight. In fact they both had been waiting years to do exactly that. Snape, clearly, had wrong information but I can't imagine Sirius being any more willing to listen to Snape explain how Peter wasn't the betrayer than Snape was willing to listen to Sirius.

Sirius was emotionally frenzied, but Lupin told him Harry deserved to hear the truth before anything was done and he conceded. Snape didn't listen to anyone, he started yelling, telling Hermione to basically shut up, bounding Lupin's mouth so he couldn't talk and threatened Sirius to silence (POA). So Harry, behaving in an arrogant and bold manner as he can be sometimes, imo, loud talked Snape right back - telling him he was allowing a childhood grudge to guide him in doing the wrong thing - this is all in capital letters in the canon, so he was yelling to match Snape at that point, imo. But Snape still refused to listen, he reduced his yelling and made his cutting remark about Harry being well served to die like his pop (likely reminded of James' similar self esteem, imo), and he took up Lupin's binds, his wand at Sirius' throat, told everyone they were outta there and heading for the dementors to kiss Black and Lupin (POA). Harry blocked Snape's progress, and Snape rose his voice again and threatened Harry; get out of his way - or he'd make him (POA).

I think there was a huge distinction in Snape's behavior - unexplanable, imo, except based on Snape's old grudge which was ferocious, imo. Because Harry had lost something far more devastating than Snape, imo - both his parents, driving his vengeance against Sirius, Voldemort and anyone else involved - and he was willing to listen and consider (POA). My interpretation of the canon to that point, does not allow me to negate Harry's deep emotions for his parents at that stage and try to say Snape's were greater for Lily - but I do feel he had greater anger based on his childhood enemyship with Sirius and all that went with that.

So I would disagree that Snape's responses were altogether similar to Sirius'. And that is why I feel it was important to show Snape was in the wrong in that scene.

And as for the werewolf red herring...while clearly Snape hated Sirius for it, there was nothing in the book, to me, that suggested Snape would have had Sirius kissed for that alone. If he had been conscious but immobile during the Shack scene, I think his subsequent actions would have been very different. No, I don't think he shed any tears when Sirius died, but he wasn't a cold-blooded killer, imo.

I would have to respectfully disagree. I feel that the canon showed that in every instance Snape referred to the werewolf incident, he went ballistic. He refrained from revealing his role, intent and behavior during the incident, imo, which was revealed in the memories, imo (DH TPT). But prior to that, I feel that Snape had convinced himself to not consider his role and concentrate on the role of others. I feel that he both was upset that his rescuer hadn't played a role in the set up as he had believed because that was a depiction of James that Snape was unwilling to credit in his mind, imo and he was angered that Sirius revealed some of Snape's intent in that incident, giving some merit to his statement that Snape deserved to be given tools to harm himself because of his negative intent, imo. But even before that, when speaking about the incident in the hallway with Harry over the Marauder's map, Snape had become very agitated and vindictive, imo (POA Snape's grudge), and again the next day after the shack incident, he reminded Dumbledore that Sirius was an attempted murderer for that event (POA). Even in the more revealing memory in DH-TPT, Snape became extremely agitated when speaking about it back at that time, imo.

So to me, this was quite possibly the most poignant memory for Snape in relation to his old enemies, because if all the facts were placed on the table, he was shown to have behaved in a manner that was extremely unwise - with Sirius giving him the tools to place himself in that position and James rescuing him from himself - both factors that I feel greatly upset him (Sirius getting the best of him and James showing the best of himself, imo, and Lily recognizing the latter.) Hence, I feel that is why this memory was not just another 'tale' for Snape in any way, and why his need for revenge was so great. It wasn't for what was done (giving him tools and rescuing him), but because of how he came out looking after the incident, imo, to Lily mainly, but to the entire student body, who seemed to be aware of it, imo - including his friends at the time. Sirius act was reckless and dangerous because Lupin at least, believed Snape was the type of young man who would take his enemies advice in order to further his goals (POA) - But Snape's characterization went further than that, removing himself from having had any responsibility by calling Sirius an attempted murderer as if he'd dragged Snape into the tunnel - or gave him information on how to access a place that Snape didn't know was dangerous; but neither was true, imo, and in fact, even less true than Sirius knew at the time, imo. Snape not only knew the place was dangerous (POA), but stopped the tree and tried to access the shack of his own accord (POA) and suspected that inside he would meet Lupin in werewolf form (DH TPT), imo.

That is my detailed view of Snape's take on the event and why I feel it was a particularly horrible memory for him that could engender intense feelings of a need for revenge, imo. In my judgment, Snape understood what it meant to be a Death Eater very well, having been one himself; so his view of Sirius, Peter, Voldemort and even his own behavior, while DEs would be in light of his knowledge that they would have been working for Voldemort, forwarding the dark lord's goals at the time - in other words - expected behavior of a DE, imo. Betrayal, killing, plotting the death of others was just business for the DEs, imo, and Snape knew that as well as an one, imo. So that is why I feel his underlying need for revenge for Lily's death was tempered by his knowledge - especially since it was the only mitigating factor for himself from his point of view, imo. The factor doesn't mitigate if you are not a Death Eater - but if you are or were, there is the added factor of 'being there and involved' which helps one rationalize their own behavior at the time, imo. So I feel when it came to Lily's death, Snape could control his emotions in as far as the killers were concerned from that point of view (imo).

Sirius was emotionally frenzied, but Lupin told him Harry deserved to hear the truth before anything was done and he conceded. Snape didn't listen to anyone, he started yelling, telling Hermione to basically shut up, bounding Lupin's mouth so he couldn't talk and threatened Sirius to silence (POA). So Harry, behaving in an arrogant and bold manner as he can be sometimes, imo, loud talked Snape right back - telling him he was allowing a childhood grudge to guide him in doing the wrong thing - this is all in capital letters in the canon, so he was yelling to match Snape at that point, imo. But Snape still refused to listen, he reduced his yelling and made his cutting remark about Harry being well served to die like his pop (likely reminded of James' similar self esteem, imo), and he took up Lupin's binds, his wand at Sirius' throat, told everyone they were outta there and heading for the dementors to kiss Black and Lupin (POA). Harry blocked Snape's progress, and Snape rose his voice again and threatened Harry; get out of his way - or he'd make him (POA).

I think there was a huge distinction in Snape's behavior - unexplanable, imo, except based on Snape's old grudge which was ferocious, imo. Because Harry had lost something far more devastating than Snape, imo - both his parents, driving his vengeance against Sirius, Voldemort and anyone else involved - and he was willing to listen and consider (POA). My interpretation of the canon to that point, does not allow me to negate Harry's deep emotions for his parents at that stage and try to say Snape's were greater for Lily - but I do feel he had greater anger based on his childhood enemyship with Sirius and all that went with that.


Oh, I agree that the werewolf incident was a horribly upsetting memory for Snape, for all sorts of reasons. I think it contributed to him not wanting to listen to Sirius, but I still can't see him being willing to kill Sirius just for that in and of itself. So in my mind, in OotP Snape didn't care if Sirius died, but he wasn't going to hunt him down and kill him.

Anyway, IIRC, Sirius is only stopped from killing Peter in the Shack because he had a trusted friend (Lupin) stop him. Snape didn't trust Lupin or Sirius--both due to their history and the current facts as he knew them--so he's on his own and gets himself more and more wound up, from what I remember. Anyway, the fact that Harry finally knocks Snape down I think does show that he (Harry) is the most passionate one in the room; he takes control of the situation, amidst the angry adults, and demands that Peter is taken back to the castle. Harry is the one (not Snape and not Sirius) who does not want to take the matter into his own hands, which I think is an important part of Harry's character (and purposely distinct from how the other two acted...I think both Snape and Sirius are motivated by guilt which Harry is not).

Oh, I agree that the werewolf incident was a horribly upsetting memory for Snape, for all sorts of reasons. I think it contributed to him not wanting to listen to Sirius, but I still can't see him being willing to kill Sirius just for that in and of itself.

Absolutly! I think that while he was still angry about the werewolf incedent - he was much more concerned with the 'fact' (as it was known at the time) that he was facing the person who undid all the work he did trying to protect Lily. I really do believe that was where his focus was at that time - on the person who betrayed Lily.

Anyway, IIRC, Sirius is only stopped from killing Peter in the Shack because he had a trusted friend (Lupin) stop him.

Well Lupin only made Sirius pause while they explained things to Harry - they were both more than happy to murder soemone in front of three children. :sigh:

Snape didn't trust Lupin or Sirius--both due to their history and the current facts as he knew them--so he's on his own and gets himself more and more wound up, from what I remember.

I don't think many people would stop to chat if they were faced with a mass murder :lol: the police certain wouldn't advise it! But your point that Severus has no real reason to stop and talk is one with which I totally agree.

he takes control of the situation, amidst the angry adults, and demands that Peter is taken back to the castle. Harry is the one (not Snape and not Sirius) who does not want to take the matter into his own hands, which I think is an important part of Harry's character (and purposely distinct from how the other two acted...I think both Snape and Sirius are motivated by guilt which Harry is not).

Well put - esp the bit I've bolded. Its strangly fitting that the two people who hate eache other most have so much in common in this scene imo :)

Oh, I agree that the werewolf incident was a horribly upsetting memory for Snape, for all sorts of reasons. I think it contributed to him not wanting to listen to Sirius, but I still can't see him being willing to kill Sirius just for that in and of itself. So in my mind, in OotP Snape didn't care if Sirius died, but he wasn't going to hunt him down and kill him.

In my view, Snape didn't have to, Sirius was already wanted for murder and the dementors were already there ready to kiss him. To me, the problem was not Snape wanting to ensure that happen because Sirius was wanted for murder - but for reasons of personal revenge. And the only reason that matters to me at all is because Snape refused to listen to everyone in the room as they attempted to enlighten him about new relevant facts - they said enough for him to understand that - predominantly Lupin at first, and Snape bound his mouth for his trouble (POA).

I could white wash the situation, but the bottom line to me is that Snape wanted Sirius kissed and good as dead - by legal means of course - and he didn't want to hear anything that might cause his desire to be rendered wrongful in nature, imo. Having Sirius kissed would become "illegal" if the man was innocent of the charges against him.

Anyway, IIRC, Sirius is only stopped from killing Peter in the Shack because he had a trusted friend (Lupin) stop him. Snape didn't trust Lupin or Sirius--both due to their history and the current facts as he knew them--so he's on his own and gets himself more and more wound up, from what I remember. Anyway, the fact that Harry finally knocks Snape down I think does show that he (Harry) is the most passionate one in the room; he takes control of the situation, amidst the angry adults, and demands that Peter is taken back to the castle. Harry is the one (not Snape and not Sirius) who does not want to take the matter into his own hands, which I think is an important part of Harry's character (and purposely distinct from how the other two acted...I think both Snape and Sirius are motivated by guilt which Harry is not).

Oh I agree with this completely. I was merely addressing the distinction you raised between Sirius and Snape. However, Harry was on a whole different level than both, imo. He had no guilt, but he had the most buy-in, imo, as the very blood that was chilled when his parents were murdered was running through his veins and his alone and I agree he behaved in the most righteous manner of all nonetheless. Even the calm Lupin who was the most settled of all in the room allowed his passions to overcome him in the end. So I agree with you on this front. (I should mention that deep down, Sirius and Snape were feeling distinct, imo, because Snape truly had something to feel guilty about, but Sirius did not, imo, and I think they both knew that relative to themselves when they searched their feelings - even if they knew naught about the other.)

All the characters in the scene can be analysed, but as it is Snape's thread, my focus was on his behavior. The problem to me was Snape's unwillingness to listen based on his desire for revenge, imo. That remains true despite Sirius and Lupin threatening to kill Peter in front of children (something Snape was also willing to do with Sirius and Lupin, imo), Sirius being wanted for murder and Snape believing Lupin was helping him; his loathing for some or all of those present, his emotions about the Potters, his past guilt, acts, and the relative past guilt of others, etc., etc., all those things can be true also - but it doesn't change the fact of what Snape failed to do, imo, and that was listen to four individuals attempting to proclaim Sirius' innocence - two of them with evidence and doing all in his power to shut them up, imo.

Everyone says snape was very brave, but I have serious doubts about his bravery. He didnt actually offer Harry or Dumbledore much in the way of help to bring Voldemort down (save giving the Sword to Harry, which anyone could have done), and also sat by whilst a lot of people were murdered/let free.

I dont think he was that brave, and I certainly dont see why Harry likes him so much after the end. So he kept a secret about loving Harry's mum? He was still a horrible person.

Everyone says snape was very brave, but I have serious doubts about his bravery. He didnt actually offer Harry or Dumbledore much in the way of help to bring Voldemort down (save giving the Sword to Harry, which anyone could have done), and also sat by whilst a lot of people were murdered/let free.

I dont think he was that brave, and I certainly dont see why Harry likes him so much after the end. So he kept a secret about loving Harry's mum? He was still a horrible person.

No, of course, Snape wasn't brave.

At the end of Gof he only went back to Voldemort two hours after all the other summoned DEs. Back to the DL who had previously said he was going to kill him because Snape had left him forever. And he continues to go back to Voldie until his death; the only thing saving his life is his occlumency abilities.

No, not brave at all.

/end sarcasm

Everyone says snape was very brave, but I have serious doubts about his bravery. He didnt actually offer Harry or Dumbledore much in the way of help to bring Voldemort down (save giving the Sword to Harry, which anyone could have done), and also sat by whilst a lot of people were murdered/let free.

I dont think he was that brave, and I certainly dont see why Harry likes him so much after the end. So he kept a secret about loving Harry's mum? He was still a horrible person.

First, how can you say Snape didn't offer any help in the way of bringing down Voldemort? Snape spent the last three years of his life doing nothing but spying on Voldemort: it was through Snape that the Order found out about Voldemort's plans to retrieve the prophecy and to murder Dumbledore. And Snape (though it failed) made an effort to insure that the Elder Wand did not fall into Voldemort's hands by killing Dumbledore himself. He also was the one who ensured Harry received the information he needed to defeat Voldemort.

Second, you don't have to be a good person to be brave. Yes Snape is spiteful, immature, and can hold a grudge; yes he purposelly mentally tortures the students he doesn't like; yes he's a terribly unfair teacher; yes he was a Death Eater and probably allowed people to be killed or tortured in front of him. Snape is by all means not a good person. But that doesn't mean he wasn't brave. He spent three years plus jumping into the lion's den, lying to the face of the most accompished Legilmens in the wizarding world. He spent everyday of his life constantly in danger by just existing as a triple agent in Dumbledore's service. What's more is he chose to do it, he was given the option to run and he chose to put himself in mortal risk to ensure the Order had intelligence on Voldemort. It takes quite a bit of courage to be Snape.

First, how can you say Snape didn't offer any help in the way of bringing down Voldemort? Snape spent the last three years of his life doing nothing but spying on Voldemort: it was through Snape that the Order found out about Voldemort's plans to retrieve the prophecy and to murder Dumbledore. And Snape (though it failed) made an effort to insure that the Elder Wand did not fall into Voldemort's hands by killing Dumbledore himself. He also was the one who ensured Harry received the information he needed to defeat Voldemort.

Well I think Snape was able to help the Order in ways - probably more than we know since we were not given many details about what Order members did or information they gained and gave, imo. I think Snape's efforts assisted in bringing down Voldemort in that respect, like everyone else. But as I see it, he was nothing special because everyone placed themselves in danger for the cause - and most put themselves in a lot more danger than Snape in my judgment, because Voldemort knew they were against him, unlike Snape.

Second, you don't have to be a good person to be brave. Yes Snape is spiteful, immature, and can hold a grudge; yes he purposelly mentally tortures the students he doesn't like; yes he's a terribly unfair teacher; yes he was a Death Eater and probably allowed people to be killed or tortured in front of him. Snape is by all means not a good person. But that doesn't mean he wasn't brave. He spent three years plus jumping into the lion's den, lying to the face of the most accompished Legilmens in the wizarding world. He spent everyday of his life constantly in danger by just existing as a triple agent in Dumbledore's service. What's more is he chose to do it, he was given the option to run and he chose to put himself in mortal risk to ensure the Order had intelligence on Voldemort. It takes quite a bit of courage to be Snape.

I think Snape did a brave thing returning to Voldy in GoF, and I figure there might be some other occassion he was brave that I can't think of - but I would have to agree with the foregoing poster because I felt that his bravery was not presented in the canon (with the exception of that I named - and something else I may have forgotten). The way I see it, Voldemort expected him to be a good spy, so Snape didn't have to hide much, just certain specific information, imo, which would not be too difficult for Snape, imo. He didn't have to do any lying with Dumbledore, so that side of things was a piece of cake, imo. Hence what I mainly saw was Snape behaving in what I felt was a cowardly manner, with the kids, Harry, his co-workers and co-Order members, imo. Thus, I don't think it is a miscontruction to doubt his bravery, because I don't feel it was shown, I have to imagine it, and it is a bit difficult to do considering his role of double spy, imo. That said, I respect your view because I think people can interpret the canon in various ways. :)

...and also sat by whilst a lot of people were murdered/let free.
Can you name the people Snape could have saved without breaking his cover? What do you mean by "let free"?

I can see why it would be difficult to remember some of the details of Snape's bravery in the first few books without the help of a reread. Harry hardly takes notice of them or misunderstands them frequently. When Snape goes back to spy on Voldemort in GoF, for instance, Harry only briefly speculates on it before returning to what most concerns him and his friends.

That's why rereads are useful. DH explained quite a lot about Snape. These revelation are, IMHO, meant to make us look at what happened in past books and go "Hey! So that's what was going on!" :D

I can see why it would be difficult to remember some of the details of Snape's bravery in the first few books without the help of a reread...

For instance...?

Well I think Snape was able to help the Order in ways - probably more than we know since we were not given many details about what Order members did or information they gained and gave, imo. I think Snape's efforts assisted in bringing down Voldemort in that respect, like everyone else. But as I see it, he was nothing special because everyone placed themselves in danger for the cause - and most put themselves in a lot more danger than Snape in my judgment, because Voldemort knew they were against him, unlike Snape.



I think Snape did a brave thing returning to Voldy in GoF, and I figure there might be some other occassion he was brave that I can't think of - but I would have to agree with the foregoing poster because I felt that his bravery was not presented in the canon (with the exception of that I named - and something else I may have forgotten). The way I see it, Voldemort expected him to be a good spy, so Snape didn't have to hide much, just certain specific information, imo, which would not be too difficult for Snape, imo. He didn't have to do any lying with Dumbledore, so that side of things was a piece of cake, imo. Hence what I mainly saw was Snape behaving in what I felt was a cowardly manner, with the kids, Harry, his co-workers and co-Order members, imo. Thus, I don't think it is a miscontruction to doubt his bravery, because I don't feel it was shown, I have to imagine it, and it is a bit difficult to do considering his role of double spy, imo. That said, I respect your view because I think people can interpret the canon in various ways. :)

You make good points. Snape, being Snape, is up to interpretation, we haven't seen all his actions and have never been inside his head. So we can only interpret what we've been given between Harry's POV and Snape's memories. Although, we do know Snape must have thought himself brave (his comments to Harry at the end of HBP support this). And I take Dumbledore's word for Snape's bravery since he knew more about Snape than we as the readers did.

And I suppose (coming back to personal interpretation) it also depends on your definition of bravery, as well as characters' definition of bravery. Both Dumbledore and Harry regarded Snape as brave using the Gryffindor definition of bravery: nerve and daring. And they both thought he exhibited those qualities through his actions against Voldemort. Imo, Snape seems to define bravery as simply "not being a coward" and the word coward seems to be a nerve point for him which could mean he views himself as a coward based on past actions (that we may or may not have seen).

With my personal definition of bravery (overcoming fear or other emotions that would cause you to feel fear) Snape is a brave person to me. He exhibited fear in GoF when the Dark Mark returned and over came it to aid Dumbledore. But that's my interpretation :)

For instance...?

Harry looks back and probably thinks about . . .

1. SS - Snape not only stands up to Quirrell, which in hindsight is significant because it is actually Voldemort under the Turban, but he also guards the Stone in spite of Fluffy the three headed giant dog - for which Snape got a bloody "mangled" leg. And we know that Snape doesn't like dogs but he did it to keep the school safe.

2. CoS - Snape stands up to Lockhart several times because he can spot a phoney when he sees one. And he makes sure that the kids learn Expelliarmus in spite of it, which makes a huge difference for Draco and Harry later on.

He also makes sure that all the Muggleborns get their Mandrake Restorative Draught in spite of the fact that he is Head of Slytherin and a friend of Lucius Malfoy, who thought up the Diary Plot which released the Basilisk in the first place. It's very clear when Snape tells Lockhart, "I am the Potions Master of this school" that he intends to help the Muggleborns and do it right.

3. PoA - Snape stands up to a Werewolf, a Convicted Felon, and Cornelius Fudge in order to save Harry's life.

Harry looks back and probably thinks about . . .

1. SS - Snape not only stands up to Quirrell, which in hindsight is significant because it is actually Voldemort under the Turban, but he also guards the Stone in spite of Fluffy the three headed giant dog - for which Snape got a bloody "mangled" leg. And we know that Snape doesn't like dogs but he did it to keep the school safe.

2. CoS - Snape stands up to Lockhart several times because he can spot a phoney when he sees one. And he makes sure that the kids learn Expelliarmus in spite of it, which makes a huge difference for Draco and Harry later on.

He also makes sure that all the Muggleborns get their Mandrake Restorative Draught in spite of the fact that he is Head of Slytherin and a friend of Lucius Malfoy, who thought up the Diary Plot which released the Basilisk in the first place. It's very clear when Snape tells Lockhart, "I am the Potions Master of this school" that he intends to help the Muggleborns and do it right.

3. PoA - Snape stands up to a Werewolf, a Convicted Felon, and Cornelius Fudge in order to save Harry's life.


Well I was asking about episodes of bravery. Of the above, Snape never met the werewolf in the book and the felon was unarmed, while Snape was armed. Don't recall Snape doing battle with Fudge, but the duel with Lockheart was for the sake of the kids at dueling club, not actual. And the guarding in that case and healing didn't require bravery, imo - unless I am forgetting something. I respect your view of these things being brave, but I don't feel they are examples of bravery.

While re-reading PoA I've noticed some interesting similarities between Sirius's actions before and during the Shack, and Snape's actions in HBP's Flight of the Prince.

Both men had an apparent motive that seemed obvious at the time, but we later learn they each have a different, true motivation.

In PoA, Sirius' apparent motivation is to kill Harry, but we learn that his true motivation is to kill Pettigrew, to commit the murder he was imprisoned for.

In HBP, Snape's apparent motive was to kill Dumbledore for Voldemort, to protect Draco because of the Vow, and to return to service as a true DE. We learn in DH, however, that his true motivation was to grant Dumbledore's request, follow Dumbledore's plan, and to not only protect Draco, but also Harry and the rest of the students.

In Flight of the Prince, Snape confronts Harry and does the following: knocks Harry down with a spell (Harry jumps right back up), blocks a number of Harry's spells, stops a DE from using Crucio on Harry, knocks Harry down with a “whip-like” spell that hits Harry's face and Harry bangs his head hard when he falls.
During this time, Snape is aware of the danger to Draco (and, we learn, to Harry and the other students). He tells Draco to keep running when he stops to confront Harry, and repeatedly urges the DEs to leave quickly.

In PoA, Sirius does the following: knocks Harry down while in dog form (leaving Harry feeling like his ribs were broken), drags Ron with his teeth in Ron's arm, breaks Ron's leg, chokes Harry until Hermione kicks him in the head, falls onto Ron's broken leg while trying to grab Scabbers, and allows Snape's head to bang against the roof of the tunnel.
Sirius clearly states his intention to commit murder in front of three 13 year olds, only stopping when Harry jumped between them. Sirius then says “But if you transform, Peter, we will kill you.”
Throughout this, Sirius either forgets or ignores the fact that Lupin is a werewolf, despite the long conversation about it, and that a transformed werewolf poses considerable danger to the Trio. Interestingly, Snape seems to be more aware of this danger, despite his highly charged emotions at the time, tying Lupin up, but leaving Sirius (the Azkaban escapee) unbound.

The similarities in terms of physical violence are striking, but I find it interesting that Snape is (we later learn) far more aware of and concerned about the overall safety of Harry and others.

I can definitely see the similarities. Two men who have been through the wringer and driven by strong emotions, appear to be against Harry but turn out to be on his side.

Harry's emotions are also the same in both scenes. For the very first time, Harry is seized with a desire to kill when he lays eyes in Sirius and pounces on him immediately. Similarly, he tries Sectumsempra against Snape knowing full well what that spell can do.

I would agree that Sirius is the less controlled of the two there and more focused on his ultimate goal. Sirius spends a great deal of Remus' story staring at Peter hungrily, and it takes Harry's intervention to calm him down. Snape, however, is aware of all the things he has to juggle, from telling Draco to move on ahead, to preventing a DE from attacking Harry, to telling the DEs to get out of the castle quickly rather than taking their time and killing everyone.

You make good points. Snape, being Snape, is up to interpretation, we haven't seen all his actions and have never been inside his head. So we can only interpret what we've been given between Harry's POV and Snape's memories. Although, we do know Snape must have thought himself brave (his comments to Harry at the end of HBP support this). And I take Dumbledore's word for Snape's bravery since he knew more about Snape than we as the readers did.

And I suppose (coming back to personal interpretation) it also depends on your definition of bravery, as well as characters' definition of bravery. Both Dumbledore and Harry regarded Snape as brave using the Gryffindor definition of bravery: nerve and daring. And they both thought he exhibited those qualities through his actions against Voldemort. Imo, Snape seems to define bravery as simply "not being a coward" and the word coward seems to be a nerve point for him which could mean he views himself as a coward based on past actions (that we may or may not have seen).

With my personal definition of bravery (overcoming fear or other emotions that would cause you to feel fear) Snape is a brave person to me. He exhibited fear in GoF when the Dark Mark returned and over came it to aid Dumbledore. But that's my interpretation :)

I completely agree with you on this...and it's not just one's interpretation of bravery, but I think it's also how we each interpret Snape's perspective. For instance, I think one of the bravest things he did was to kill DD. But to buy into that act being brave, one must believe that DD was meaningful to Snape in the first place. But yes, Snape, regardless of how we might feel about Voldemort, was obviously afraid of him and he still went back and lied to him again and again, which is the definition of bravery in my book too.

Great analysis, Col. Fubster! Especially the fact that in both cases, Harry's first impulse is to kill or maim both Sirius and Snape, and then later of course he names a son after them - both middle names. :) Very good.

Well I was asking about episodes of bravery. Of the above, Snape never met the werewolf in the book and the felon was unarmed, while Snape was armed.

Snape was helping to keep the Werewolf low key by being the only person who could make Wolfsbane Potion "perfectly" to quote Lupin himself.

And I must beg to differ about Snape and Lupin-Wolf. Snape did "meet" the werewolf as much as anyone, but he was unconscious when Lupin transformed. Being in a vulnerable state, he was probably in more trouble than anyone, yet he took time to put everyone on stretchers when he woke up even though he knew Lupin was running around.

Harry saw all that with his own eyes during the Time Turner episode, so in hindsight, Harry might realize that was braver than it seemed at the time, because that's what we were discussing - the fact that later in life Harry would understand the bravery better leading to his statement about Snape as the "bravest man he ever knew."

Don't recall Snape doing battle with Fudge
Not all bravery is about battling someone, unless you mean a battle of wits. :)

Snape tells Fudge exactly what he thinks of Harry, even though Fudge seems to have a soft spot. That's what I meant by standing up to him.

Since we are discussing hindsight and looking back from DH, I thought it was a good example of the fact that Snape is associated with the truth, which Fudge later discredits in Harry, while Snape always knew Harry was telling the truth.

That is one of the subtleties of the books. It's not about battling, but about standing up for what is right, instead of what is easy.

Fudge took the easy way and never believed Dumbledore, Snape, or Harry that Voldemort had returned. Snape could have been put into Azkaban for being a Death Eater, but he showed his Dark Mark to Fudge so the Ministry would fight back. That is one of the bravest things anyone can do, in my opinion. It takes guts to stand up to your own government sometimes. :agree:

but the duel with Lockheart was for the sake of the kids at dueling club, not actual.
Sure, but again, I was also discussing a verbal duel with Lockhart about the Mandrake Draught for the Muggleborns, as well as the verbal duel telling Lockhart to go rescue Ginny since he was always bragging about his bravery. Lockhart was a very popular public figure. In my opinion, it takes guts to stand up to a famous writer.


[quote=WWB]And the guarding in that case and healing didn't require bravery, imo - unless I am forgetting something.[/quote'
The pertinent passage is in SS :

Snape was holding his robes above his knees. One of his legs was bloody and mangled. Filch was handing Snape bandages.

"Blasted thing," Snape was saying. "How are you supposed to keep your eyes on all three heads at once?"

Fluffy was supposed to be an ironic name. He was really like Cerberus the 3-headed dog guarding hell in Greek Mythology.

Also from Chapter 16:

"Anyway, we've never had any proof Snape found about how to get past Fluffy. He nearly had his leg ripped off once, he's not going to try it again in a hurry.

I think it takes bravery to face a large animal that wants to rip off your legs. I think in ancient history that might have been the first definition of bravery. He does it again in PoA when facing Lupin, the werewolf.

I can definitely see the similarities. Two men who have been through the wringer and driven by strong emotions, appear to be against Harry but turn out to be on his side.

Harry's emotions are also the same in both scenes. For the very first time, Harry is seized with a desire to kill when he lays eyes in Sirius and pounces on him immediately. Similarly, he tries Sectumsempra against Snape knowing full well what that spell can do.

I would agree that Sirius is the less controlled of the two there and more focused on his ultimate goal. Sirius spends a great deal of Remus' story staring at Peter hungrily, and it takes Harry's intervention to calm him down.
Snape, however, is aware of all the things he has to juggle, from telling Draco to move on ahead, to preventing a DE from attacking Harry, to telling the DEs to get out of the castle quickly rather than taking their time and killing everyone.

But also, Snape was whipping Harry across the face until he was clawed at and chased away by Buckbeak. Harry might have intervened as he did with Sirius, if he hadn't been the one Snape was attacking at the time. So I don't really see Snape as more controlled, especially seeing as Sirius only had to be asked to stop his intended killing of Peter, where as Snape had to be forced and driven away by the big screeching, angry bird in order to desist from continuing to harm or killing Harry.

The similarities in terms of physical violence are striking, but I find it interesting that Snape is (we later learn) far more aware of and concerned about the overall safety of Harry and others.

Excellent Analysis ColFub! :)

I agree with what you've said, and I feel Snape was more aware and concerned about Harry's safety. For instance, even when he was running and deflecting Harry's curses, not only was he teaching Harry to keep his mind closed and mouth shut, but he was also making sure Harry would not be hurt by the other DEs and he also ensured Draco had left.

It is admirable because Snape himself was in great pain at that time, but he never lost sight of the most important thing, which was to keep Harry safe and keep his cover for that last year.

In the Shack too, I think Snape was more aware of the situation with Lupin (he bound Lupin first; it must be noted that he did not bind Sirius who was the killer; instead Snape bound Lupin, because he was the werewolf who could not be controlled once he transformed; that was one of his his first actions after stepping into the Shack and Sirius thinking Snape had done so in a fit of vindictiveness or whatever :rolleyes:, untied the knots, acted without thinking yet again, which helped Lupin to transform and place everyone around him in grave danger). Had Snape been conscious, I wonder if he would not have first removed the students to safety by getting them and Sirius out of the tunnel and activating the whomping willow, keeping Lupin in there IMO.

Excellent points as well, Ignisia, SIP and TGW! :agree:
But also, Snape was whipping Harry across the face until he was clawed at and chased away by Buckbeak. Snape only hit Harry with that spell once, and it caused no lasting injury. Harry himself assures Hagrid only moments later that he is fine, and tells Ginny shortly thereafter that he's not hurt. It is mere speculation whether Snape would or would not have used another spell against Harry if Buckbeak had not arrived.
Unlike Ron in PoA, whose leg was broken and clearly very painful, and who had to spend the night in the hospital wing.

Snape was helping to keep the Werewolf low key by being the only person who could make Wolfsbane Potion "perfectly" to quote Lupin himself.

And I must beg to differ about Snape and Lupin-Wolf. Snape did "meet" the werewolf as much as anyone, but he was unconscious when Lupin transformed. Being in a vulnerable state, he was probably in more trouble than anyone, yet he took time to put everyone on stretchers when he woke up even though he knew Lupin was running around.

But we were not arguing the facts of what happened, we were discussing Snape's bravery. Making potion and being in the proximity of a werewolf while unconscious cannot qualify as brave, imo. There was no werewolf around when he was loading stretchers either. For all we know, if he'd of heard a noise, he'd of run, imo.

Not all bravery is about battling someone, unless you mean a battle of wits.

In your opinion. I can appreciate that, but hopefully you can appreciate that battling with weapons - as in war/duels/battles - is what bravery is all about to others and imo.

Snape tells Fudge exactly what he thinks of Harry, even though Fudge seems to have a soft spot. That's what I meant by standing up to him.

Agreed - but I don't construe this as a show of bravery.

That is one of the subtleties of the books. It's not about battling, but about standing up for what is right, instead of what is easy.

Well I think battling and waring were overt facts of the books - it was all about battling at the MOM, in the first war, in the graveyard, in the second war, in the 7 Potters, and many other exciting scenes. That to me takes bravery and I feel that JKR agreed, otherwise she would not have made heroes out of those who did battle - like Dumbledore, imo.

I feel the platitude you quoted from the book (doing what is right instead of easy) is also a truth, and not always subtle, because the three Potters made an obvious show of that in their sacrifices which we saw repeatedly for the parents and in a huge culmination that was hard to miss when Harry did it. So I agree that has validity too and is also brave.

However, Snape standing up to Fudge, hardly is an example in this regard, imo, as he was in defiance of Dumbledore and in the wrong to boot, imo. He wasn't doing what was right, but what was easy and in my view, Snape very well knew it. However, I think Snape standing up and facing Voldy in GoF is an example of choosing right over easy - which is why I feel it was brave.

Fudge took the easy way and never believed Dumbledore, Snape, or Harry that Voldemort had returned. Snape could have been put into Azkaban for being a Death Eater, but he showed his Dark Mark to Fudge so the Ministry would fight back. That is one of the bravest things anyone can do, in my opinion. It takes guts to stand up to your own government sometimes. :agree:

Well I would say that since Fudge already knew Snape had been a Death Eater, and charges dismissed against him, Snape was not at risk of being placed in Azkaban at all, imo. I am not sure why you feel that is the case. Snape backed up Dumbledore's argument there, but nobody was taking a risk merely by saying that Voldy had returned - they were just being ignored or disdained for their unpopular opinion, imo.

Sure, but again, I was also discussing a verbal duel with Lockhart about the Mandrake Draught for the Muggleborns, as well as the verbal duel telling Lockhart to go rescue Ginny since he was always bragging about his bravery. Lockhart was a very popular public figure. In my opinion, it takes guts to stand up to a famous writer.

I would respectfully disagree. I don't see this as brave at all as nearly everyone stood up against Lockheart if they weren't head over heels in love with him, imo.

Snape was holding his robes above his knees. One of his legs was bloody and mangled. Filch was handing Snape bandages.

"Blasted thing," Snape was saying. "How are you supposed to keep your eyes on all three heads at once?"

My impression was that Snape and the other professors were supposed to stand guard outside of the door - that is why Dumbledore didn't bother having Hagrid tell them about the music that would put Fluffy to sleep. So I felt that Snape went in of his own accord - likely out of curiosity - but we were supposed to think he was after the stone, imo.

"Anyway, we've never had any proof Snape found about how to get past Fluffy. He nearly had his leg ripped off once, he's not going to try it again in a hurry.

I think it takes bravery to face a large animal that wants to rip off your legs. I think in ancient history that might have been the first definition of bravery. He does it again in PoA when facing Lupin, the werewolf.

Well I would admit that even if curiosity drove Snape, it was brave to make the attempt, so that would count, if he had understood the danger he was going to face - which seems unlikely or he would have taken better measures againt harm - but that is unclear in the canon, imo.

Excellent points as well, Ignisia, SIP and TGW! :agree:
Snape only hit Harry with that spell once, and it caused no lasting injury. Harry himself assures Hagrid only moments later that he is fine, and tells Ginny shortly thereafter that he's not hurt. It is mere speculation whether Snape would or would not have used another spell against Harry if Buckbeak had not arrived. Unlike Ron in PoA, whose leg was broken and clearly very painful, and who had to spend the night in the hospital wing.

Well while I didn't interpret this the same, that was not my point, although I respect yours. I was referring to the comparison of Sirius requiring intervention to be stopped in his quest to kill Peter - and adding that it had been the same with Snape, only Snape was already in the act of harming Harry and had to be forced and chased away rather than merely asked to desist (HBP/POA).

I was referring to the comparison of Sirius requiring intervention to be stopped in his quest to kill Peter - and adding that it had been the same with Snape, only Snape had to be forced and chased away rather than merely asked (HBP/POA).Please clarify, when did Snape have a quest/desire/intention to kill Harry? Does knocking someone down twice and making them hit their head qualify as intent to kill? Sirius in PoA chokes Harry until Hermione kicks him in the head. That is not mere asking.

Sirius in PoA states his intent and threatens to kill Pettigrew several times, Snape in Flight of the Prince never states any intent nor threatens to kill anyone.

Great comparisions, Col.Fubster!:tu:


Not all bravery is about battling someone, unless you mean a battle of wits. :)

Indeed! We all have our own opinions on what constitutes bravery, however I think we need to keep in mind the actual definition of bravery, which is much more broad.


OED
brave

• adjective having or showing courage.

• verb endure or face (unpleasant conditions) with courage.


OED
courage

• noun 1 the ability to do something that frightens one. 2 strength in the face of pain or grief.

As there is no mention of having to do this by fighting in battle I would say courage and bravery come in many different forms. Although individuals may have a personal intepretation of this, the actual definition cannot be denied and when looking at Snape's bravery throughout the series, I think we can see that he fullfills these criteria. For a start, he has an obvious fear of Voldemort and like many others won't speak his name, yet he continues to spy on him and works to gain his confidence.


My impression was that Snape and the other professors were supposed to stand guard outside of the door - that is why Dumbledore didn't bother having Hagrid tell them about the music that would put Fluffy to sleep. So I felt that Snape went in of his own accord - likely out of curiosity - but we were supposed to think he was after the stone, imo.

Snape went throught the door because he was trying to stop Quirrell from getting the Stone. Qurirrell mentions it in 'The Man with Two Faces.

'Certainly. I have a special gift witg trolls - you must have seen what I diid to the one in the chamber back there? Un fortunately while everyone else was running around looking for it, Snape who already suspected me, went straight to the third floor to head me off - and not only did my troll fail to beat you to death, that three-headed dog didn't even manage to bite Snape's leg off properly.'

So knowing about Hagrid's three-headed dog, Snape goes into the room in order to face and stop Quirrell from attempting to steal the Stone.I think that was brave.

Patients with terminal illnesses are often described as brave in their coping with their situation and their family members' emotions. They're very far from battling with weapons in a war, but I think we'd all agree they are corageous. So I don't think most people take such a narrow definition of bravery, and therefore I don't see a reason to employ it with regard to the HP universe.

Also, since Snape is called by the protagonist "probably the bravest man I ever knew", that suggests the meaning of "bravery" applicable within the novels, which is the relevant definition here.

Please clarify, when did Snape have a quest/desire/intention to kill Harry? Does knocking someone down twice and making them hit their head qualify as intent to kill? Sirius in PoA chokes Harry until Hermione kicks him in the head. That is not mere asking.
Neither Snape nor Sirius had the slightest intention of killing Harry and this is entirely canon. Yet I won't take those two incidents to judge Snape and Sirius's treatment to Harry. In HBP, Snape had a role to play in front of all those DEs and he couldn't do anything less harmful to Harry, as DEs were supposed not to kill Harry, but they could hit him with jinxes as long as they were not fatal.
I'd choose the occlumency lessons to judge Snape's treatment to Harry physically. As far as I can recall, he let Harry fall several times through those lessons and he hit the desk repeatedly, without Snape's least intention to do anything to prevent that, for example he could've removed the desk or cleared an area in his study for those lessons. He didn't provide Harry with chocolates like Lupin used to do. All he did was compliment Harry with his mental abilities. IMO, this means that he was not in those lessons as he was supposed to be, and that gave negative results.
As for Sirius, this shouldn't be discussed her, but for comparison, Sirius was trying to defend himself from Harry's attempts to choke him, too. He was merely trying to get the trio listening to him, or at least stop them from interfering with his attempts to kill Peter. Once they'd agreed to listen, his attempts were stopped, moreover, he and Lupin handed them the wands.

Sirius in PoA states his intent and threatens to kill Pettigrew several times, Snape in Flight of the Prince never states any intent nor threatens to kill anyone.

Both Sirius and Snape were intent on killing the person who betrayed Lily, whom ever they thought that person was. And yes, Snape would've harmed and perhaps killed anyone as long as it was not Harry, imo, if not for him being chased out of the place and being afraid that the ministry was about to be there,imo.

He didn't provide Harry with chocolates like Lupin used to do..

Lupin did not give Harry chocolate as a reward. He only gave chocolate to Harry because he was teaching Harry to fight off Dementors and chocolate helps after a Dementor attack. This is not the case with Occlumency and so would have been inappropriate.

I respect your view of these things being brave, but I don't feel they are examples of bravery.
That opinion implies a rather simplistic view of bravery. Combat isn't the only test.

Lupin did not give Harry chocolate as a reward. He only gave chocolate to Harry because he was teaching Harry to fight off Dementors and chocolate helps after a Dementor attack. This is not the case with Occlumency and so would have been inappropriate.

I was not referring to chocolate, as chocolate. Improving his performance at what he was learning with Snape and Lupin, is what I was referring to. Instead of chocolate, he could've given him short periods between each attempt at penetrating his mind, in which he could regain his energy and so would be able to improve his occlumency skills, imo.

I was not referring to chocolate, as chocolate. Improving his performance at what he was learning with Snape and Lupin, is what I was referring to. Instead of chocolate, he could've given him short periods between each attempt at penetrating his mind, in which he could regain his energy and so would be able to improve his occlumency skills, imo.
Whether he mistreated Harry or not, I have no doubt that Snape was teaching him Occlumency in the manner that was most effective. First, because Dumbledore asked him to, and second, because he knew that Harry would be in a lot of danger if Voldemort continued to have access to him. Let's not forget that Harry himself is quite eager to end the lessons, and several times he admits that he hasn't prepared as Snape instructed. If Harry had wanted to improve his Occlumency skills he could have taken it seriously, but he didn't, and I don't think Snape's teaching methods are to blame.

Lupin did not give Harry chocolate as a reward. He only gave chocolate to Harry because he was teaching Harry to fight off Dementors and chocolate helps after a Dementor attack. This is not the case with Occlumency and so would have been inappropriate.

I agree. Occlumency was totally different from learning the Patronus Charm and Snape IMO taught Harry quite well. Harry was not interested in learning because it was Snape and also because he was rather resenting Dumbledore's treatment towards him, unable to understand why he was avoiding Harry. Plus Harry had begun to sense Voldemort quite frequently and that did not help either IMO.

Even when Harry knew it was important he had to learn, because Sirius had nothing to say against it when Snape approached Grimmauld Place with Dumbledore's letter and when Snape told him what Voldemort could do with the mind link, he was disinclined to give his best, mainly I suspect because he resented Dumbledore delegating this to Snape, without telling him first. It was a case of childish defiance towards Dumbledore IMO.

If Harry had wanted to improve his Occlumency skills he could have taken it seriously, but he didn't, and I don't think Snape's teaching methods are to blame.

I agree! In fact, Harry does not want to have Occlumency lessons and is only doing so because Dumbledore has requested it and so he has no motivation to learn. In contrast Harry actually approaches and asks Lupin to teach him so that he can play Quidditch without fear of Dementors effecting him, so he has motivation to learn.

Well I was asking about episodes of bravery. Of the above, Snape never met the werewolf in the book and the felon was unarmed, while Snape was armed. Don't recall Snape doing battle with Fudge, but the duel with Lockheart was for the sake of the kids at dueling club, not actual. And the guarding in that case and healing didn't require bravery, imo - unless I am forgetting something. I respect your view of these things being brave, but I don't feel they are examples of bravery.

I agree. I dont see these things as being brave. The only episode people seem to be bringing up as showing Snape's bravery is his returning to Voldemort at the end of GoF. Which yes, to a great extent, was brave. But what was his alternative? Voldemort would have killed him! So perhaps not such a brave deed, although I can certainly accept that as being brave.

The whole "spying on voldemort thing", well yes that was a braveish deed, but his part was such that it was made easier. i.e. Dumbledore was able to tell Snape pretty much exactly what he had to do. Snape had to merely carry out the orders.

I dont consider letting the man who betrayed the love of your life live with you as bravery (Spinner's end). I'm quite sure that he could have found some way to avenge Lily by taking care of Wormtail (whether that be killing him or having him sent to azkaban) and coming up with a cover story. Or how about doing more at the end of ootp to stop Harry attending the ministry? Could he have done anything to save Charity Burbage without giving the game up to Voldemort? There are always ways to show bravery, to take a chance and do something brave, and I just think Snape did less of that and more of following orders.

Whether he mistreated Harry or not, I have no doubt that Snape was teaching him Occlumency in the manner that was most effective. First, because Dumbledore asked him to, and second, because he knew that Harry would be in a lot of danger if Voldemort continued to have access to him. Let's not forget that Harry himself is quite eager to end the lessons, and several times he admits that he hasn't prepared as Snape instructed. If Harry had wanted to improve his Occlumency skills he could have taken it seriously, but he didn't, and I don't think Snape's teaching methods are to blame.

I dont agree with this. Dumbledore himself admits the lessons were a disaster (start of HBP) and Snape threw Harry out of the class, stopping him from learning occlumency. Surely the brave thing would have been to coach Harry through the occlumency, and continue teaching him, and giving him more information as to why he should learn occlumency. Not throwing him out of the class would have been the brave thing to do, carrying on with the lessons would have been the brave, and best, thing.

1. SS - Snape not only stands up to Quirrell, which in hindsight is significant because it is actually Voldemort under the Turban, but he also guards the Stone in spite of Fluffy the three headed giant dog - for which Snape got a bloody "mangled" leg. And we know that Snape doesn't like dogs but he did it to keep the school safe.
I do not think it is outstanding bravery for Snape to overcome his fear of dogs (which I did not glean from his character) when trying to get past Fluffy. I agree that it was brave for him to stand up to/keep an eye on Quirrel, like Dumbledore asked, but I do not think it was outstanding bravery. I do not think Snape knew Voldemort was attached to Quirrel: Quirrel certainly does not think so, based on his statement when talking to Harry.
2. CoS - Snape stands up to Lockhart several times because he can spot a phoney when he sees one. And he makes sure that the kids learn Expelliarmus in spite of it, which makes a huge difference for Draco and Harry later on.
Again, I do not think this is bravery. None of the other teachers liked Lockhart, and he certainly did not need to be "stood up to" like, say, Umbridge needed. As you say, Lockhart was a phoney, all the teachers knew this, and Snape was as outspoken as he could be about him. I do not think this is brave; Snape was defiant for his own sake, as I see it.
He also makes sure that all the Muggleborns get their Mandrake Restorative Draught in spite of the fact that he is Head of Slytherin and a friend of Lucius Malfoy, who thought up the Diary Plot which released the Basilisk in the first place. It's very clear when Snape tells Lockhart, "I am the Potions Master of this school" that he intends to help the Muggleborns and do it right.
Snape had already denounced his "old ways" in working with Voldemort, so I do not think his friendship with Lucius still existed. Therefore, I do not see his brewing of the Mandrake Restorative Draught as brave - a good and helpful deed, certainly, but not brave, in my opinion.
3. PoA - Snape stands up to a Werewolf, a Convicted Felon, and Cornelius Fudge in order to save Harry's life.
Snape tells Fudge exactly what he thinks of Harry, even though Fudge seems to have a soft spot. That's what I meant by standing up to him.

I do agree that Snape was courageous in confronting Lupin and Sirius, but not Fudge. As I interpret the scene, Snape is pouncing on an opportunity to discuss Harry with the Minister, an opportunity Snape has probably never had. I do not think Snape is being brave by confessing his opinion to Fudge - especially since Fudge was so pleased with Snape at that time - he is merely capitalizing on the favorable circumstances.

I agree. I dont see these things as being brave. The only episode people seem to be bringing up as showing Snape's bravery is his returning to Voldemort at the end of GoF. Which yes, to a great extent, was brave. But what was his alternative? Voldemort would have killed him!

For example, he could have returned to Voldemort immediately instead of waiting for two hours with the risk of being killed on sight.

From that point on, as Dumbeldore points out, Snape was under constant danger in Voldemort's presence. Doing that every day for 3 years requires quite a lot of courage in my opinion.

Snape's going to Dumbeldore to ask for help for Lily - a known Death Eater meeting the Head of the Order of the Phoenix and the most powerful wizard of the time - is also no little feat, and not something many would face. As we can see from the episode, Snape did think he would be killed, as the first thing he says is "Don't kill me!"

The whole "spying on voldemort thing", well yes that was a braveish deed, but his part was such that it was made easier. i.e. Dumbledore was able to tell Snape pretty much exactly what he had to do. Snape had to merely carry out the orders.

It is precisely the carrying out, and not the conception of the orders, which involves bravery.

Could he have done anything to save Charity Burbage without giving the game up to Voldemort?

Well - could he? What do you suggest?

As for Wormtail, he was there on Voldemort's orders. You don't think Voldemort would have put two and two together if Snape murdered Wormtail and deduced he still wanted revenge on Lily - and since he is the one who actually murdered her, that Snape was possibly conspiring to have him removed next?

There are always ways to show bravery, to take a chance and do something brave, and I just think Snape did less of that and more of following orders.

Yes, if a show of bravery was Snape's goal. It wasn't though. His goal was to protect Harry, and doing that involved doing things not many people would have the courage to do. Hence the theory that he was, in fact, brave, and Harry wasn't wildly inventing when he told his son that.

Also, I don't understand the logic behind claiming that following orders automatically precludes any bravery. By that logic soldiers who fight and risk their lives in wars aren't brave because they are following orders to fight from their superiors. What Snape was ordered to do was dangerous in the extreme. He could have refused to do it, especially after Lily died and there wasn't anything in it for him anymore - anything at all. But he did do it. I find that immensely brave.

I dont consider letting the man who betrayed the love of your life live with you as bravery (Spinner's end). I'm quite sure that he could have found some way to avenge Lily by taking care of Wormtail (whether that be killing him or having him sent to azkaban) and coming up with a cover story. Wormtail was placed by Voldemort at Spinner's End to keep an eye on Snape. Snape indicates this in HBP, Spinner's End, when he says of Wormtail, 'He has lately taken to listening at doors..." Voldemort knew Snape was not stupid and that he would realise he was being watched, so getting rid of Wormtail was not an option.

Could he have done anything to save Charity Burbage without giving the game up to Voldemort? There are always ways to show bravery, to take a chance and do something brave, and I just think Snape did less of that and more of following orders.

When Dumbledore asks Snape how many people he has seen die, he replies, "Lately, only those whom I could not save." I think we should take that to mean that if he could save someone without blowing his cover he did.


I dont agree with this. Dumbledore himself admits the lessons were a disaster (start of HBP) and Snape threw Harry out of the class, stopping him from learning occlumency. Surely the brave thing would have been to coach Harry through the occlumency, and continue teaching him, and giving him more information as to why he should learn occlumency. Not throwing him out of the class would have been the brave thing to do, carrying on with the lessons would have been the brave, and best, thing.

Yes, they were a disaster, but this was not Snape's fault as I see it, but more to do with the fact that Harry refused to put any effort into those classes. Then to top that he invaded Snape's privacy by purposely going into the Pensieve.

The whole "spying on voldemort thing", well yes that was a braveish deed, but his part was such that it was made easier. i.e. Dumbledore was able to tell Snape pretty much exactly what he had to do. Snape had to merely carry out the orders.

To stand in front of Voldemort and lie to him, I think takes great courage.

I dont consider letting the man who betrayed the love of your life live with you as bravery (Spinner's end). I'm quite sure that he could have found some way to avenge Lily by taking care of Wormtail (whether that be killing him or having him sent to azkaban) and coming up with a cover story.


Yes, this is what most would have done too, unable to bear the thought of even looking at the man who killed the love of their lives and a man who betrayed his friends. The lowest scum, really. They would have probably poisoned Peter within the first few days itself.

Then they would have been on the run like Karakoff, and quite unable to help Dumbledore in the war, because they needed their feelings to be avenged.

Thankfully, though Snape was not like most people. He was truly courageous, and had a strength of mind that most people did not have. For, he gritted his teeth and exerted his Occlumency to the maximum and allowed Peter to live with him, keeping the bigger picture in mind and knowing that killing Peter for Lily would be extraordinarily easy, but allowing him to live for now so that Harry may vanquish Voldemort for ever, while very difficult to allow, was be the right thing to do. And for Harry to defeat Voldemort, Snape was most needed and so Snape unlike most people who would have in a fit of emotion killed Peter and made themselves useless, contained himself so that Lily's son may benefit; the boy for whom she died; the boy she so desperately wanted to live after her IMO.

Could he have done anything to save Charity Burbage without giving the game up to Voldemort?

I can't think of anything Snape could have done at that time in a room of DEs and Voldemort, not to mention Nagini. Did you have anything specific that you feel Snape could have done in those circumstances to help Charity and yet keep his cover?

There are always ways to show bravery, to take a chance and do something brave, and I just think Snape did less of that and more of following orders.

Following orders of one's leader is one of the most difficult jobs ever IMO. Harry and Snape did follow orders whether they agreed or not with Dumbledore and did the right thing and Harry won the war, helped by Snape.

The Potters for example did not follow orders and took matters into their own hands and it cost them with their lives.

It is extremely difficult to follow orders, especially when one does not have all the facts with them; and yet Snape and Harry implicitly trusted Dumbledore and trusting Dumbledore, they acted, in a way he wanted them to. They did not have the bigger picture; they knew and trusted him when he said he had it and whether or not they believed in what they were doing, did them just the same. It takes a special kind of person to do this and I think Snape and Harry were special and brave because they had the good sense to allow a man to lead them in such a difficult and suspicious time IMO.

Having placed themselves in Dumbledore's hands, they did not cross him or doubt him or distrust him; they obeyed him and they won the war.

In fact I would say Dumbledore did not do the right thing with Snape over the EW.

I dont agree with this. Dumbledore himself admits the lessons were a disaster (start of HBP) and Snape threw Harry out of the class, stopping him from learning occlumency.

Yes; because he had forgotten how much James Potter had wounded Snape; he had thought Snape could over come those feelings, but he had been mistaken; the wounds had run to deep to heal. (he was specifically referring to the SWM, and generally to the Snape/James interaction, the reason why Snape stopped those classes IMO)

'But I forgot - another old man's mistake - that some wounds run too deep for the healing. I thought Professor could overcome his feelings about your father - I was wrong.'

Surely the brave thing would have been to coach Harry through the occlumency, and continue teaching him, and giving him more information as to why he should learn occlumency.

Seeing that it was Harry's mistake in peeping into a teacher's personal possession, I think Harry should have returned to apologise to Snape and asked him to continue the classes IMO.

Yes, this is what most would have done too, unable to bear the thought of even looking at the man who killed the love of their lives and a man who betrayed his friends. The lowest scum, really. They would have probably poisoned Peter within the first few days itself. Then they would have been on the run like Karakoff, and quite unable to help Dumbledore in the war, because they needed their feelings to be avenged. Thankfully, though Snape was not like most people. He was truly courageous, and had a strength of mind that most people did not have. For, he gritted his teeth and exerted his Occlumency to the maximum and allowed Peter to live with him, keeping the bigger picture in mind and knowing that killing Peter for Lily would be extraordinarily easy, but allowing him to live for now so that Harry may vanquish Voldemort for ever, while very difficult to allow, was be the right thing to do. And for Harry to defeat Voldemort, Snape was most needed and so Snape unlike most people who would have in a fit of emotion killed Peter and made themselves useless, contained himself so that Lily's son may benefit; the boy for whom she died; the boy she so desperately wanted to live after her IMO.

I disagree. I think Snape was simply behaving in a cowardly manner in this instance because his own life was in the balance. I feel that if Snape could have come up with a story for receiving the Order of Merlin for bringing in one of Voldemort's DEs (Sirius) and ensuring he was kissed, then he could have conjured a story regarding Wormtail in the same light, imo.

Following orders of one's leader is one of the most difficult jobs ever IMO. Harry and Snape did follow orders whether they agreed or not with Dumbledore and did the right thing and Harry won the war, helped by Snape.

In my view, there is a time to follow orders, and there is a time to eschew orders and do the right thing - that goes for warriors also, btw, imo. I think in the case of Charity Burbage, her innocent life was worth more than Snape's spy game and he should have rescued her or died trying. But that is my personal opinion.

The Potters for example did not follow orders and took matters into their own hands and it cost them with their lives.

I disagree. Snape was to blame for the Potter's death due to his delivering the prophecy - which got them targeted by Voldemort, who with the help of Peter killed them. Snape was unable to rectify what he'd done, so the blame for his part in their deaths continued to rest with him, imo. The Potters were given no orders, they were given a suggestion which they accepted and used (F. Charm), imo. They were victims of Snape, Peter and Voldemort and in attempting to stave off the work of these three, they did their best to keep themselves and their family safe, imo. There is no blame in that; the blame and shame lies with the evil-doers, imo, which in this case were Snape, Voldemort and Peter.

Yes; because he had forgotten how much James Potter had wounded Snape; he had thought Snape could over come those feelings, but he had been mistaken; the wounds had run to deep to heal. (he was specifically referring to the SWM, and generally to the Snape/James interaction, the reason why Snape stopped those classes IMO)

The canon doesn't read that James Potter wounded Snape; it says he could not overcome his feelings - the feelings are the wounds in that statement, imo. Just as Sirius had wounds too deep for the healing regarding Snape - his feelings, imo.

But Snape should have been able to overcome his, seeing as he helped kill James - he should have felt himself the overall victor both in life and any old school yard battles, and that should have tempered his grudge, imo. That it did not makes me believe that Snape had no remorse for his act that killed James and no remorse - without those, there can be no redemption, imo and that is one of the reasons I feel he was not redeemed.

I think in the case of Charity Burbage, her innocent life was worth more than Snape's spy game and he should have rescued her or died trying. But that is my personal opinion.


Being a spy or a soldier is not a "game" in the manner you have implied in the structure of your sentence, and I find it a bit offensive you suggest it is. I'm not sure if you intended for it to come across like that. People are forced into making heartbreakingly difficult decisions a great deal in war time.

Snape knows something no one else alive does, all the information he passed on to Harry in the form of The Prince's Tale; that Harry is an accidental Horcrux. Trying to save Charity would have accompished nothing, she and he would been killed. What happened to Charity was extremely tragic. But, if Snape had died, his knowledge would have gone to the grave with him. Which means many, many more people would have died at the hands of Voldemort and the DE's because Harry did not have that vital information in order to defeat him. Imo.

Plus, Snape was later stationed at Hogwarts, with Dumbledore's guidance in the form of the portrait, to try and protect the students and much as possible, also to further assist the Trio in their quest. Imo.

I usually just lurk here.

I disagree. I think Snape was simply behaving in a cowardly manner in this instance because his own life was in the balance. I feel that if Snape could have come up with a story for receiving the Order of Merlin for bringing in one of Voldemort's DEs (Sirius) and ensuring he was kissed, then he could have conjured a story regarding Wormtail in the same light, imo.
Why is not killing Peter cowardly? Snape would have put all of Dumbledore's plans in jeopardy if he killed Peter. Why chance it?

In my view, there is a time to follow orders, and there is a time to eschew orders and do the right thing - that goes for warriors also, btw, imo. I think in the case of Charity Burbage, her innocent life was worth more than Snape's spy game and he should have rescued her or died trying. But that is my personal opinion.
Again, I don't think this is cowardly. I'm sorry but you say "Snape's spy game" like Snape was spying for his own enjoyment. He was following orders. I understand you would have liked him to not follow orders at this point, but he did. I don't understand how Harry could have successed in defeating Voldemort if Snape died or his cover was blown trying rescue Charity. Besides, what would Hogwarts have been like if Snape wasn't there as HeadMaster? It would have been left to the Carrows and that is a horrible thought.


The canon doesn't read that James Potter wounded Snape; it says he could not overcome his feelings - the feelings are the wounds in that statement, imo. Just as Sirius had wounds too deep for the healing regarding Snape - his feelings, imo.

But Snape should have been able to overcome his, seeing as he helped kill James - he should have felt himself the overall victor both in life and any old school yard battles, and that should have tempered his grudge, imo. That it did not makes me believe that Snape had no remorse for his act that killed James and no remorse - without those, there can be no redemption, imo and that is one of the reasons I feel he was not redeemed.
I don't understand how Snape could feel like a victor over James. Snape is the victor simply because he lived longer than James? No matter how much Snape hated James, I do not believe his death made Snape feel victorious in any sense of the word.

Being a spy or a soldier is not a "game" in the manner you have implied in the structure of your sentence, and I find it a bit offensive you suggest it is. People are forced into making heartbreakingly difficult decisions a great deal in war time.

A spy game = a spy mission = an incident of spying occurring at one time. :) It infers nothing else that I know of.

Snape knows something no one else alive does, all the information he passed on to Harry in the form of The Prince's Tale, that Harry is an accidental Horcrux. Trying to save Charity would have accompished nothing, she and he would been killed. What happened to Charity was extremely tragic. But, if Snape had died, his knowledge would have gone to the grave with him. Which means many, many more people would have died at the hands of Voldemort and the DE's because Harry did not have that vital information in order to defeat him. Imo.

I disagree. I feel that the portrait knew and could have gotten the info to Harry in many ways if necessary. After all, Snape could have been killed at any time, so there had to be this back up anyway, imo.

I disagree that Charity and Snape would have been killed for certain - it is possible that I have more faith in Snape's ability than others, but I definitely don't think it was a sure death bet - he could be sneaky and cunning, and he was not a man who was short of means - he may have had a lot of faults, but he was a Slytherin at heart, imo.

Plus, Snape was later stationed at Hogwarts, with Dumbledore's guidance in the form of the portrait, to try and protect the students and much as possible, also to further assist the Trio in their quest. Imo.

What would this have to do with rescuing Charity?

A spy game = a spy mission = an incident of spying occurring at one time. :) It infers nothing else that I know of.

Ah, okay. :) "spy games" can get used like "playing at (toy) soldiers", which can have a negative meaning.


I disagree. I feel that the portrait knew and could have gotten the info to Harry in many ways if necessary. After all, Snape could have been killed at any time, so there had to be this back up anyway, imo.

How? Who else could have acted in Snape's place? Dumbledore didn't even confide in McGonagall or the other members of the Order, he chose Snape. When Harry arrived at the office during the battle the portrait frame was empty. I think Dumbledore seemed determined and felt it essential Snape to pass on the message at the right moment. In portrait form, Dumbledore would not easily know if Voldemort had started protecting Nagini. Imo.

I disagree that Charity and Snape would have been killed for certain - it is possible that I have more faith in Snape's ability perhaps, but I definitely don't think it was a sure death bet

I have great faith in Snape abilities; I don't trust the stability or prejuding Voldemort's mood and reactions. If he had interrupted the precedings Voldemort would have become suspicious or seen the words/actions as a form of defiance. Not to mention there was a table surrounded by Voldemort himself, DE's and Nagini. Imo.


What would this have to do with rescuing Charity?

If Snape were discovered, highly likely during a rescue, or Voldemort felt Snape was unreliable, Voldemort would likely not have stationed Snape as Headmaster of Hogwarts. He would then have no access to Dumbledore. In other words, possible repercussions/consequences of earlier actions.

In war, huge and heartwrenching sacrifices are made where lives are tragically lost. Read any war book, visit any musuem, it's all there. Things are not black and white; people very sadly do get left behind and/or killed. I found JKR had a realistic approach in presenting the hard decisions and sacrifices made in war.

I disagree. I think Snape was simply behaving in a cowardly manner in this instance because his own life was in the balance.

Of course his life was in the balance. And it was very important Snape keep his life intact at that time IMO. It was because Snape did not want to be killed by Voldemort at that time, he put up with Peter. Had Snape killed Peter, Voldemort would have killed him and Snape's work for the rest of the war would not be completed which in turn would affect Harry IMO.

Peter IMO was a test, to see if Snape had as he told Voldemort that he had got over Lily (Voldemort says so to Harry, when he says Snape only desired or lusted after Lily and there was no true love involved). If Snape had indeed only desired Lily, then he would naturally not harm Peter. But if he loved Lily (for that is what he must have said when he begged Voldemort for her life) his loyalties would not be with Voldemort but Lily and because of her with Harry. I think Snape by keeping quiet about Peter, lessened Voldemort's suspicion about him and that helped him to help Harry in the war.

The same thing we see in the 7 Potters, when Dumbledore asks Snape to keep his role as a DE at any cost. I doubt that had changed when Peter was placed in Spinner's End by Voldemort.

Snape was a spy with a specific purpose; to help Dumbledore's efforts to win the war and help Harry as much as he could. With that in mind, I think Snape put with up all discomforts and evils like Peter, so that the WW and Harry could benefit. I really cannot see anything cowardly in such a noble act, which must have caused him pain.

Cowardly was Peter; I cannot see any similarity between Snape and Peter. At all.

I feel that if Snape could have come up with a story for receiving the Order of Merlin for bringing in one of Voldemort's DEs (Sirius) and ensuring he was kissed, then he could have conjured a story regarding Wormtail in the same light, imo.

I don't understand this. It looks like you are saying Snape wanted Sirius to be thought of a DE when he knew Sirius was not and then was angling for an Order of Merlin? Do you have canon to support this?

In my view, there is a time to follow orders, and there is a time to eschew orders and do the right thing - that goes for warriors also, btw, imo. I think in the case of Charity Burbage, her innocent life was worth more than Snape's spy game and he should have rescued her or died trying. But that is my personal opinion.

I understand. You feel a single life is important and I can't find fault with that. But I think Snape and Dumbledore saw the total picture where winning the war will save a lot more lives, which otherwise will be lost and so they decided Snape needed to play a part, where he always needed to look at the bigger picture and that sadly needed him to look at Charity's death too. I think that was incredibly brave of Snape, where he knew that he could have tried to make a difference; he would have utterly failed, there is no doubt about that, for brilliant as I think Snape was, he could not have fought Voldemort, the DEs and Nagini and saved Charity at all, but it was that much more courageous of Snape to stand by and watch as she died, knowing that he could not even attempt to help her.

I disagree. Snape was to blame for the Potter's death due to his delivering the prophecy - which got them targeted by Voldemort, who with the help of Peter killed them.

LOL! And I would ask what Dumbledore was doing when he saw Snape roughly ushered into the room.

Snape was unable to rectify what he'd done, so the blame for his part in their deaths continued to rest with him, imo.

Yes, and it was something that he never came to terms with. I really don't think one can come to terms with one's mistakes, if one is true to oneself. It is the weakness which help us to justify our actions; those who have made mistakes may learn to live with them, but would they justify their actions which resulted in a mistakes? It is near impossible IMO.

The Potters were given no orders, they were given a suggestion which they accepted and used (F. Charm), imo.

They were also given information about the traitor, who could get them; and they went about it wrongly IMO.

they did their best to keep themselves and their family safe, imo.

I disagree; I feel they could have done much better and stayed alive.

There is no blame in that; the blame and shame lies with the evil-doers, imo, which in this case were Snape, Voldemort and Peter.

Evil is always there, that is what shows us what good is. We cannot languish and take a back seat because we are good; I think we must also try and protect ourselves from evil as much as we can and then try to fight it, so that it cannot reach us and envelop us.

Sure those who are evil are to be blamed; always; but that is always there; the point is have those who are not evil done better than their best to protect themselves and theirs, especially when they knew the nature of the evil, when they knew they were targets and when they knew that the evil would come to them through one of their 3 friends? If they have, then I agree they don't share a part of the responsibility for what happened. Since I believe they did not do what they could have (because of how I see Sirius's reaction to the SK switch in POA) I very much think they bear a part of responsibility.

I don't think they can say that since they are the victims, they have no responsibility. IN fact one of the things I like about Sirius is that he does not say that; he says he killed them, because he knows he was wrong. I presume the Potters will feel more than Sirius and blame themselevs for what happened to them and to Harry as a result.

The canon doesn't read that James Potter wounded Snape; it says he could not overcome his feelings - the feelings are the wounds in that statement, imo. Just as Sirius had wounds too deep for the healing regarding Snape - his feelings, imo.

Well, we interpret canon quite differently I think, for I feel Dumbledore's words are quite clear. When he says some wounds run too deep to heal, I think he means that James wounded Snape too deeply when they interacted with each other, that healing was quite difficult.

Regarding Charity:

It seems to me Voldemort did not have Charity held captive for very long at all.

He says:

last week Professor Burbage wrote an impassioned defense of Mudbloods in the Daily Profit DH US hardcover pg 12

In canon, we have no proof that Snape knew she was being held and it's pretty clear to me that she wasn't in Malfoy Manor very long. We don't even know how often Snape went to Malfoy Manor before he arrived there when the book starts.

Voldemort also asks Snape if he recognized her while she is suspended above the table. (DH pg 11) To me, this means Snape did not know Charity was captured by Voldemort until he entered that room.

IMO, this is important because if Snape just found out that night that she was being held, he couldn't have done anything about it without getting himself or Charity killed. IMO, it would be recklessness, not bravery if Snape tried anything in front of Voldemort and a room full of DE's.

Voldemort also asks Snape if he recognized her while she is suspended above the table. (DH pg 11) To me, this means Snape did not know Charity was captured by Voldemort until he entered that room.

IMO, this is important because if Snape just found out that night that she was being held, he couldn't have done anything about it without getting himself or Charity killed. IMO, it would be recklessness, not bravery if Snape tried anything in front of Voldemort and a room full of DE's.

Yes, this why I feel Snape had just a few minutes to make a difficult choice and consider all the possible repercussions/consequences of his actions. Any choice he made would have a snowball effect for the future.

I was not referring to chocolate, as chocolate. Improving his performance at what he was learning with Snape and Lupin, is what I was referring to. Instead of chocolate, he could've given him short periods between each attempt at penetrating his mind, in which he could regain his energy and so would be able to improve his occlumency skills, imo.

I don't know ~ I think Harry wouldn't have eaten any chocolate if it came from Snape anyway. He would be too suspicious and would think it was laced with Veritaserum or something.

Snape tried to tell Harry a way to deal with the dreams - to relax before he went to sleep and let go of his emotions. The trouble is, Snape didn't know about the horcrux in Harry's head and the direct connection to the Dark Lord.

Also, they didn't have much time, as others have pointed out. The Occlumency lessons took hours over many days, and we don't see every lesson in the books. How many lessons did Harry have with Lupin about the Patronus? Two? Three?

Also, Harry was able to teach some of his classmates how to make a Patronus in one easy lesson - without chocolate. :whistle: So I don't think the chocolate was necessary anyway, in my opinion.

I think when Snape sees the dream with Rookwood, Snape says they've been at this for almost 2 months and Harry was not making progress, and Harry says that his dreams help, citing Arthur Weasley who was saved. Which shows that Harry was really not making enough effort to empty his mind or practise Occlumency at all IMO.

I think when Snape sees the dream with Rookwood, Snape says they've been at this for almost 2 months and Harry was not making progress, and Harry says that his dreams help, citing Arthur Weasley who was saved. Which shows that Harry was really not making enough effort to empty his mind or practise Occlumency at all IMO.
Thanks for the information! :relax: I remembered that correctly and just think Occlumency is much more complicated than teaching someone a Patronus. If they had had better teachers every year, that would have been part of the DADA class anyway, while Occlumency would not, in my opinion.

I was not referring to chocolate, as chocolate. Improving his performance at what he was learning with Snape and Lupin, is what I was referring to. Instead of chocolate, he could've given him short periods between each attempt at penetrating his mind, in which he could regain his energy and so would be able to improve his occlumency skills, imo.

Well, he did pause between attempts, actually, and told Harry when he was going to next cast the spell.
But your post does bring up something interesting. The only positive reinforcement Snape gives during those lessons is this:

"Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been"

While we the readers are able to go back to it and understand what that means (and how nice that is for something Snape says!), Harry may not have understood in the heat of the moment, or was not willing at the time to believe Snape was giving him some praise.


...I'm not touching this whole "Snape was/wasn't brave thing". I just don't see the point.

The discussion of Snape's courage sent me back to OotP to look for evidence that Snape feared Voldemort. We see in DH (Chapter 1) that Snape is able to face Voldemort with apparent fearlessness. Was this because he in fact had confidence in his ability to hoodwink Voldemort? It seems not:

"Do not say the Dark Lord’s name!" spat Snape.

There was a nasty silence. They glared at each other across the Pensieve.

"Professor Dumbledore says his name," said Harry quietly.

"Dumbledore is an extremely powerful wizard," Snape muttered. "While he may feel secure enough to use the name…the rest of us…" He rubbed his left forearm, apparently unconsciously, on the spot where Harry knew the Dark Mark was burned into his skin.

(emphasis mine)


So, Snape believes that Albus is able to use the name Voldemort because he is secure in the knowledge of his vast magical powers. On the other hand, Snape includes himself among those wizards ("the rest of us") who are not similarly secure. And yet, he follows a course of action that brings him into regular contact with Voldemort, and which if discovered is guaranteed to rouse Voldemort's wrath. I, at any rate, am satisfied that Snape displayed a remarkable ability to persevere in the face of this fear.

Thanks for the information! :relax: I remembered that correctly and just think Occlumency is much more complicated than teaching someone a Patronus. If they had had better teachers every year, that would have been part of the DADA class anyway, while Occlumency would not, in my opinion.

I agree; I think this was not something McGonagall or Lupin or Sirius could teach. Apart from Dumbledore the only person competent and very good at Occlumency was Snape IIRC. If McGonagall was as proficient in Occlumency as Snape, I am sure Dumbledore would have made Harry learn from her or someone else.

Snape's going to Dumbeldore to ask for help for Lily - a known Death Eater meeting the Head of the Order of the Phoenix and the most powerful wizard of the time - is also no little feat, and not something many would face. As we can see from the episode, Snape did think he would be killed, as the first thing he says is "Don't kill me!"

Snape admits that he asked Voldemort for mercy on Lily in return for killing only baby Harry!! One of the lowest, most cowardly things a person could do! Unbelievable!

And what about his snide, backstabbing comment to Tonks about her patronus. Surely the courageous thing would have been to realise a person who is deeply in love and cannot be with her love, and comfort that person. But no, Snape mocks her. Hardly the brave thing to do.

Just to be clear, I do think that some of the things Snape did were brave, but I think less of it was bravery and more of it was following orders/his own selfishness. He could have done things to bring down Voldemort of his own bat, but it took for him to give Voldemort the prophecy (i.e. selfish reasons) for him to take action. Not as brave as Harry makes out ("one of the bravest people alive" or whatever he says in the epilogue).

Snape admits that he asked Voldemort for mercy on Lily in return for killing only baby Harry!! One of the lowest, most cowardly things a person could do! Unbelievable!

And he then goes and asks Dumbledore for protection for Lily (as zgirnius has just demonstrated, in spite of his immense fear of Voldemort), knowing that Dumbledore will try to protect James and Harry, too.

Besides which, surely trying to save one person still shows more strength of character than letting all 3 die. What would you have had him do? Confront Voldemort head on, even though the inevitable consequence would have been his own death as well as all 3 Potters? I think he was into damage limitation at this stage of the game. He did everything he could, under the circumstances.

And what about his snide, backstabbing comment to Tonks about her patronus. Surely the courageous thing would have been to realise a person who is deeply in love and cannot be with her love, and comfort that person. But no, Snape mocks her. Hardly the brave thing to do.

Evidence that his intention is to mock or be snide? Could he not merely be trying to warn her that it is dangerous to be so open about her feelings (as he does to Harry in Occlumency lessons in OotP - in what seems to me to be a clear recognition of his own past - that wearing your heart on your sleeve makes you "weak")?

In any case, I know this is an unpopular view, but I read the books less as a psychologicaly coherent account of real people, and more as a literary construct where events have a literary purpose. For me, his comments to Tonks were a conscious clue on JKR's part that Snape recognise Patronus-changing unhappy love, because he's been there. I always saw this as just one of many Snape-Lily clues.

Peter IMO was a test, to see if Snape had as he told Voldemort that he had got over Lily (Voldemort says so to Harry, when he says Snape only desired or lusted after Lily and there was no true love involved).

Why would Voldemort test for desire? Desiring a mudblood in a lustful way was just fine with Voldy or he'd of killed Snape the first time he asked him to spare Lily, imo. I cannot fathom him giving two twigs if his minions lusted after people their whole lives, dead or alive or whatever, because to him, it all held no sway over a person one way or another. I feel if he thought so, he'd of killed Snape - Lucius and others who showed expressed anything along those lines.

In my view, it was to show that Snape's emotions toward Sirius were based in the school yard grudge situation - which was only important to prove how much animosity Snape retained for James and Sirius, imo. Which was only important to show how much animosity Snape retained for Harry - all of that in the hindsight truth of the matter view, imo. In the red herring, Snape was just supposed to appear like he was fraterizing with various death eaters I guess, but since they were all at one another's throats (cept narcissa and snape), that didn't work too well, imo.

If Snape had indeed only desired Lily, then he would naturally not harm Peter. But if he loved Lily (for that is what he must have said when he begged Voldemort for her life) his loyalties would not be with Voldemort but Lily and because of her with Harry. I think Snape by keeping quiet about Peter, lessened Voldemort's suspicion about him and that helped him to help Harry in the war.

Well per the canon, imo, Voldemort never tested for love because he neither understood it or suspected anyone could have it, imo. So I do not feel he could have the suspicion that you indicate.

The same thing we see in the 7 Potters, when Dumbledore asks Snape to keep his role as a DE at any cost. I doubt that had changed when Peter was placed in Spinner's End by Voldemort.

Yeah - but then we get into the question of why Dumbledore wanted Snape to remain looking faithful - it is a bit of a plot hole, imo.

I don't understand this. It looks like you are saying Snape wanted Sirius to be thought of a DE when he knew Sirius was not and then was angling for an Order of Merlin? Do you have canon to support this?

The canon would be the Servant of Lord Voldemort, Dementors Kiss, Hermione's Secret, and Owl Post again chapters in POA. My proposition was not exactly what you said, but rather that Snape knew there was a new revelation in association with Sirius that he did not wish to be brought to light, imo, and I feel he did all in his power to ensure that wouldn't happen. He feared it might exculpate Sirius, either proving he wasn't a DE or that he was not guilty of betraying the Potters, imo. I think the Order of Merlin was a by-product; Snape just wanted credit for bringing Sirius in, the Merlin was just like icing on the cake, imo. To me, he wanted revenge and to see Sirius suffer at all costs.

I understand. You feel a single life is important and I can't find fault with that. But I think Snape and Dumbledore saw the total picture where winning the war will save a lot more lives, which otherwise will be lost and so they decided Snape needed to play a part, where he always needed to look at the bigger picture and that sadly needed him to look at Charity's death too. I think that was incredibly brave of Snape, where he knew that he could have tried to make a difference; he would have utterly failed, there is no doubt about that, for brilliant as I think Snape was, he could not have fought Voldemort, the DEs and Nagini and saved Charity at all, but it was that much more courageous of Snape to stand by and watch as she died, knowing that he could not even attempt to help her.

I understood what Snape did and his reason why. My point wasn't that he didn't make a valid choice because the chance of his being caught was high enough for him to believe that taking action would result in his and Charity's deaths. But, he knew there was also a chance for success, if he took that great risk, and was willing to be brave and rescue her, imo. But he chose not to and I feel choosing not to is not brave at all and I feel Snape was very used to seeing things like that.

LOL! And I would ask what Dumbledore was doing when he saw Snape roughly ushered into the room.

Well we can analyse that in Dumbledore's thread. But in as far as Snape was concerned, he delivered the prophecy to the dark lord and is solely to blame with Voldemort for the subsequent targeting and with Peter for the subsequent killing, imo.

Yes, and it was something that he never came to terms with. I really don't think one can come to terms with one's mistakes, if one is true to oneself. It is the weakness which help us to justify our actions; those who have made mistakes may learn to live with them, but would they justify their actions which resulted in a mistakes? It is near impossible IMO.

Well that is why one feels remorse and wants to repent and behave in a manner that shows those things to seek forgiveness from those affected, imo. But Snape didn't do that, imo and I feel it was because his remorse was only partial - in terms of Lily's targeting and subsequent Death, imo.

I disagree; I feel they could have done much better and stayed alive.

The way I see it is that Snape could have not delivered the prophecy; Voldemort could have not targeted the Potters and Peter could not have betrayed them - and those three would not have been behaving in an evil manner, imo, with the intent to kill in order to ensure Voldemort's supremacy. The Potters were killed, Harry left an orphan, the Longbottoms tortured, Neville left a figurative orphan of his parents, Sirius went to Azkaban for 12 years; many people's lives were affected down the line from the acts of these three in this regard - and all those people were not to blame in the least, imo, it was the three people planning and killing the Potters who were, imo, together with any other DE helpers they had (imo).

Evil is always there, that is what shows us what good is. We cannot languish and take a back seat because we are good; I think we must also try and protect ourselves from evil as much as we can and then try to fight it, so that it cannot reach us and envelop us. Sure those who are evil are to be blamed; always; but that is always there;

Well naturally it would have been better if some Order members got to Snape, Voldemort and Peter and killed them all prior to their being able to carry out their roles in this regard. But 'evil will always exist' is not a justification for their behavior - it exists because they exist and enact it, imo.

the point is have those who are not evil done better than their best to protect themselves and theirs, especially when they knew the nature of the evil, when they knew they were targets

Well I know, you have raised that point many times before, but I have never agreed with you and I never will. We can agree to disagree - again. The topic was Snape's behavior and his subsequent feelings about it, so everyone else, including those who worked with him (Voldy and Peter) really have no bearing on that, imo.

I don't think they can say that since they are the victims, they have no responsibility. IN fact one of the things I like about Sirius is that he does not say that; he says he killed them, because he knows he was wrong. I presume the Potters will feel more than Sirius and blame themselevs for what happened to them and to Harry as a result.

Well one of the things I don't like about Snape is that I feel he went about blaming everyone else instead of accepting all of his culpability, feeling remorse for it and repenting for it, imo.

Well, we interpret canon quite differently I think, for I feel Dumbledore's words are quite clear. When he says some wounds run too deep to heal, I think he means that James wounded Snape too deeply when they interacted with each other, that healing was quite difficult.

This excuse really didn't hold merit when Dumbledore said it, imo. He was merely trying to keep Snape's secret as he promised, imo. First because whatever wounds Snape had that couldn't heal - he'd always had - and if he was that unfit as a result, he couldn't help Harry at all, imo. Yet, Dumbledore clearly didn't feel that way because he asked him before and after that to help. And too, Snape inflicted the same unhealable wounds on Sirius, but that wouldn't serve as any excuse for Sirius to act out on his emotions either, imo. So I don't buy this line of reasoning as genuine truth, it was said to cover up the truth, imo. That memory was Snape's worst because in it, he called Lily a mudblood and lost her friendship forever, imo - he might blame others, but she blamed him. In other words, Snape's wounds were of his own making in that regard, imo.

But Snape should have been able to overcome his, seeing as he helped kill James - he should have felt himself the overall victor both in life and any old school yard battles, and that should have tempered his grudge, imo. That it did not makes me believe that Snape had no remorse for his act that killed James and no remorse - without those, there can be no redemption, imo and that is one of the reasons I feel he was not redeemed.

I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on this. IMO, if Snape would have seen himself as the overall victor after James' death, something I personally feel, he always yearned to be when it came to his interaction with Harry's dad and the other Marauders, it would mean that he actually found happiness in the tragedy which imo would mean that he could not be further from remorse.

I can't see how he could have felt victorious or happy, even to the smallest extent possible, when he lost the love of his life, the only person (imo) he truly cared about, a mere minute or two after James fell motionless to the floor, the sound of his heart existing only as a distant echo. I don't think that he can associate victory or joy of any kind with that night; the night of his biggest loss. I don't think he felt happy that James was finally gone or that he, Snape, had won. I think he simply didn't care. I think that Lily's death was all that meant anything, all that mattered.

Snape admits that he asked Voldemort for mercy on Lily in return for killing only baby Harry!! One of the lowest, most cowardly things a person could do! Unbelievable!

Severus also took a great risk when he went to Dumbledore behind Voldemort's back. In this scene we see that Snape is so very obviously fearful whilst he is waiting on the hilltop for Dumbledore, so much so that even Harry feels his fear.

The adut Snape was panting, turning on the spot, his wand gripped tightly in his hand, waiting for something or for someone...his fear infected Harry, too, even though he knew he could not be harmed, and he looked over his shoulder, wondering what it was that Snape was waiting for -
Then a blinding, jagged jet of white light flew through the air: Harry thought of lightening, but Snape had dropped to his knees and his wand had flown out of his hand.
'Don't kill me!

The first thing Snape says here is "Don't kill me!" which means that he obviously thought that it was a possibility. Yet he was brave enough to take this risk so he could warn Dumbledore about Voldemort's plans and ask him to protect Lily. The fact that he doesn't care what happens to James and Harry quite rightly disgusts Dumbledore, but it makes Snape no less brave.

Why would Voldemort test for desire? Desiring a mudblood in a lustful way was just fine with Voldy or he'd of killed Snape the first time he asked him to spare Lily, imo. I cannot fathom him giving two twigs if his minions lusted after people their whole lives, dead or alive or whatever, because to him, it all held no sway over a person one way or another. I feel if he thought so, he'd of killed Snape - Lucius and others who showed expressed anything along those lines.

I believe there was no way for Voldemort to "test for desire," if by that you mean that he somehow knew the difference between lust and love. The canon is that he had no clue about real love, and therefore couldn't distinguish what was right in front of his face. So there was no way for him to "test" love since he mocked and taunted Dumbledore about it as something insignificant that didn't really matter. And that was long before he ever set eyes on Snape.

But if he had ever really understood love, he would have questioned why Snape would put his own life in danger by asking a pardon for Lily just because he desired her. It really makes no sense in terms of lust in a world full of women, except that Voldemort knew Lily was pretty and talented. But he never could tell whether Snape loved her or not, and that was his fatal problem.

Lucius also loved his family, but Voldemort couldn't have cared less about that except to use blackmail on him. He only understood family life in terms of heredity and bloodlines, and he knew Lucius didn't want to lose his heir, and that's all. Voldemort would never have dreamed that Narcissa would defy him and help Harry out of love for Draco - another sign that he just doesn't get it.

And he then goes and asks Dumbledore for protection for Lily (as zgirnius has just demonstrated, in spite of his immense fear of Voldemort), knowing that Dumbledore will try to protect James and Harry, too.

And then he went on to mistreat orphan Harry throughout their acquaintance, another thing I feel that is one of the lowest and most cowardly things a person can do and quite unbelieveable under the circumstances, imo. From the time of Snape's initial act that ended in the Potter's deaths to the end of his life, I don't think 'bravery' is the over-riding theme in terms of his acts directly focused upon that family (imo).

Besides which, surely trying to save one person still shows more strength of character than letting all 3 die.

I would respectfully disagree. I think it shows a huge fault of character; as Dumbledore said, Snape didn't care about Lily's family, as long as he got what he wanted (DH TPT paraphrased). And the point there was that Snape was acting on his own behalf, imo. The request sounds like he is acting on Lily's behalf (spare her, keep her safe), but that is all for him, imo, his ultimate happiness and his making up for his act that rendered her in that position by way of making himself happy, imo. I fell that is what Dumbledore was making plain in that scene.

I think this is in line with the literary purpose you spoke of below. I just read a scene like this in another novel. A woman is dying and the man pleads for her to be kept alive at all costs - although she was ready to die from her wounds. Well he has people put her in a body suit, like Darth Vader's and when she awakens, she is fit to be tied, spitting angry at his version of 'saving her'. He cries, 'I love you' and she punches him out, kicks him across the room and responds that he doesn't love her at all, doesn't know what it means and is only thinking about his own petty happiness. I think that was the same literary point JKR was trying to get across in the scene with Snape and Dumbledore. Because if you really love someone one, you put their feelings and happiness first when you are doing something so presumably noble as 'saving them'. Saving them for what?

What would you have had him do?

I think Dumbledore's forcing him to ask for them all to be hidden was the goal; but personally, I don't find that very meritable because what is more important is what was in Snape's heart, imo, not what came out of his mouth when forced.

In any case, I know this is an unpopular view, but I read the books less as a psychologicaly coherent account of real people, and more as a literary construct where events have a literary purpose. For me, his comments to Tonks were a conscious clue on JKR's part that Snape recognise Patronus-changing unhappy love, because he's been there. I always saw this as just one of many Snape-Lily clues.

I actually agree with you on that. However, JKR did keep Snape in character while playing out that literary purpose, imo, and I feel that was the point being made here; that he could have been kinder toward Tonks, but he chose not to be, imo.

My proposition was not exactly what you said, but rather that Snape knew there was a new revelation in association with Sirius that he did not wish to be brought to light, imo, and I feel he did all in his power to ensure that wouldn't happen.

Snape didn't know of any revelations according to Hermione.

'That was because you were knocked out Professor!' Hermione said earnestly.'You didn't arrive in time to hear -'

There would be little point in JKR having Hermione say this unless it was true.

I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on this. IMO, if Snape would have seen himself as the overall victor after James' death, something I personally feel, he always yearned to be when it came to his interaction with Harry's dad and the other Marauders, it would mean that he actually found happiness in the tragedy which imo would mean that he could not be further from remorse.


:tu:

Likewise, if Snape had murdered Peter, it would not have made him a better person. It would have made him (possibly for the first time) a murderer. :)

You know, I've always felt that Harry's walk to the Forbidden Forest to meet Voldy was basically his finally walking a mile in Snape's shoes. Walking to meet Voldy knowing full well that one cannot even attempt to fight back if attacked.

I suppose those of you who seem to feel 'inaction' of any kind is cowardly (such as not killing Peter at SpinnersEnd, not rescuing Charity from a circle of DEs and Voldy or even warning Sirius that if he doesn't shut up right now, you'll blow a gasket and kill him in the ShriekingShack) must be terribly disappointed in Harry as well. After all, Harry's signature spell was expelliramus - he was apparently too cowardly to risk killing a DE in 7Potters. And then he just walks up to meet Voldy without even attempting an AK and then to 'play dead' and lastly HIDE under an invisibility cloak while all that other fighting was going on.

I suppose you must think Harry only sees Snape as so brave because you find Harry to be such a coward? Personally, I think they were both the bravest people in the entire series.

Hwyla: Great post - I also see Harry "walking a mile" in Snape's shoes, since his walk in the forest comes directly after watching Snape die without being able to fight back. Also, seeing Snape's memories, Harry recognizes their similarities more than their differences in that they are the abandoned boys of Hogwarts, although Harry was much more fortunate and I think he realizes that by the time he faces Voldemort.

To go in the direction that every character should be a Rambo coming out with both barrels blazing in every situation removes the possibility of mercy from the story. It also means that Harry would have had to rush out of the forest trying to kill or maim every Death Eater there just because he had to prove he was a hero. For that matter, he could have circled them wearing his Invisibility Cloak and killed them one by one like an assassin, but that wouldn't have given Narcissa a chance to redeem herself, and it wouldn't have put the blame for everything where it belonged - with Voldemort himself.

I think JKR is saying something else instead, which is that killing is not the answer to everything - just my opinion. Not being able to win or fight back does not make someone a coward, unless people believe that Lily and James are also cowards, along with Harry, in my opinion.

Harry never walked an inch in Snape's shoes, imo. Snape behaved in a cruel, bullying, nasty and grudge holding manner to his death - plus he held on to hate and in the main, his behavior was cowardly (mistreatment of the kids and his peers, hiding behind Voldemort and Dumbledore, etc.) with the occassional brave act thrown in, like returning to Voldy in GoF, imo. Harry didn't have a solitary thought for Snape on his way to the forest; he thought of his mum, his dad, Dumbledore, even Lupin/Tonks/Fred out of context of what he was doing, but as those who'd bravely died for him. And of course he actually called back his 4 loved ones upon arrival there, which didn't include Snape.

The reason I feel Snape was left off the radar was because his situation did not apply. He didn't sacrifice himself and he didn't go out a warrior either - he died in the line of duty, nothing wrong with that .

I see no reason to knock warriors merely because Snape wasn't one. It would be like knocking handsome men or pleasant people just because he wasn't either of those either. He did his own thing, maybe others were braver, better looking, nicer, and so forth, but Snape still helped out, imo.

You know, I dislike Snape quite a bit myself, but I never saw him as cowardly. Being a double agent for a long time sort of takes that particular adjective away from him, in my eyes.

I think he could have been a better man in terms of how he treated people, but cowardly, no. I think he was an overly demanding teacher, and if JK had set up Hogwarts to have multiple teachers per subject, I think that Snape would only have taught the advanced students, since I see him as having zero patience for the "learning curve". Perhaps this came with his "real job", that of being a double agent, since one mistake and he would have messed it all up.

So, I have never been Snape's biggest fan (far from it), but I do give credit where credit is due. He was courageous and played his main job well. I think he could have been a better teacher and a better man about other things, but he got his main job done.

I see him as having zero patience for the "learning curve". Perhaps this came with his "real job", that of being a double agent, since one mistake and he would have messed it all up.That's an interesting observation, one that I think is very plausible in (at least partially) explaining why Snape is impatient when it comes to the process of learning. Snape's job dealt with life and death and depended heavily on a flawless performance, so I think this could have played a role in his expecting perfection from his students. But also I think it's just part of his nature as well, that he was a perfectionist and was extremely bright in the subject and so couldn't tolerate imperfection in others.

That's an interesting observation, one that I think is very plausible in (at least partially) explaining why Snape is impatient when it comes to the process of learning. Snape's job dealt with life and death and depended heavily on a flawless performance, so I think this could have played a role in his expecting perfection from his students. But also I think it's just part of his nature as well, that he was a perfectionist and was extremely bright in the subject and so couldn't tolerate imperfection in others.

I think that you're right here - it was part of his nature to be a perfectionist; and I think that it was at least in part this nature that helped him be a good double agent. I think it was a feedback cycle - the qualities that made him a good double agent also made him impatient with imperfection; and as he got better at his double agent role, he got more impatient because he was working his butt off to make sure that he didn't mess up but he didn't think his students were working hard enough at a far simpler task when they messed up.

Harry never walked an inch in Snape's shoes, imo. Snape behaved in a cruel, bullying, nasty and grudge holding manner to his death - plus he held on to hate and in the main, his behavior was cowardly (mistreatment of the kids and his peers, hiding behind Voldemort and Dumbledore, etc.) with the occassional brave act thrown in, like returning to Voldy in GoF, imo.

I believe Harry holds a higher opinion of Snape by the last few chapters of the series than you do. When people say that there are similarities between the two, and that he walked in his shoes, they are not talking about those things, though Harry did hold onto a grudge... against Snape, until he did the mature thing and moved past it after gaining a larger understanding of the man Snape was.

Harry acknowledges that walking to his death took a different kind of bravery... that it was different than launching oneself in front of another person they loved in order to save them, or dying quickly without realizing what happened. So even within the text there is an acknowledgment that there are different types of bravery, and this particular thing Harry was having a hard time with.

Snape walked that road of placing himself in front of Voldemort over and over again, knowing full well that he could be discovered and killed at any moment and he would not be killed quickly by Voldemort if he learned he had been betrayed. He would not be directly saving someone in that manner, or going down with a fight. I think Harry is feeling a similar fear to what Snape felt before he returned to Voldemort at the end of GoF, except Harry knew he was going to die for sure, while Snape thought there was a high probability that he might die, judging by his reaction, and Dumbledore's words to him. Harry was able to call in support, which Snape was never able to do. He went at it alone, as Harry did when he brought himself to Voldemort, except for when he called on his loved ones to stay with him for a while.

Harry didn't have a solitary thought for Snape on his way to the forest; he thought of his mum, his dad, Dumbledore, even Lupin/Tonks/Fred out of context of what he was doing, but as those who'd bravely died for him. And of course he actually called back his 4 loved ones upon arrival there, which didn't include Snape.

He thought of Snape by comparing himself to Snape on his way to the forest and not too long before using the resurrection stone. That is where the "abandoned boys of Hogwarts" line comes from. He thought of Lupin/Tonks/Fred as you said, and Ginny, and Ron, Hermione, Hagrid, Dumbledore, Luna, the rest of the Weasleys. Not just people that died.

The reason I feel Snape was left off the radar was because his situation did not apply. He didn't sacrifice himself and he didn't go out a warrior either - he died in the line of duty, nothing wrong with that .

Well Harry called back loved ones, as you said. People he considered family. He also just got a huge dose of Snape. There would be no point in bringing him there, and well the four he chose and Snape don't really go together, do they?

If you meant that he wasn't mentioned at all... he was, along with a lot of other people who are actually not dead and as such did not die fighting or sacrifice themselves.

Also, was Snape really left off the radar when Harry compares himself to him just prior to going to meet Voldemort, and when he says Snape is Dumbledore's man, which is also what Harry considered himself? And then we have half the entire final confrontation between Voldemort and Harry, which has a good chunk of it devoted to Snape, and Harry basically standing up for him. Then of course we have the epilogue, in which Harry afford the man respect by referring to him as a headmaster along with Dumbledore and then the bravest man line... He also named his kid after him. His other children named after family members and others considered family or friends. And his name along with those- a middle name, but it is still an honor. So off the radar at the end of the book? Not really. In the forest? A bit, but there was a short mention just before he entered about as much as others got. We didn't need more Snape just then. Not after the Prince's Tale and then everything that comes after it. It would have been Snape overload, and some people may feel that it was exactly that. I don't, of course. ;)

I see no reason to knock warriors merely because Snape wasn't one. It would be like knocking handsome men or pleasant people just because he wasn't either of those either. He did his own thing, maybe others were braver, better looking, nicer, and so forth, but Snape still helped out, imo.

I think the discussion was about bravery, and what constitutes bravery. For some, the definition is much broader than was implied by others. I feel that within the series the definition of bravery is broader, as is indicated by Harry prior to his walk in the forest. And I do believe that Snape was a warrior... just of a different type.

Chris, and RemusLupinFan, nice posts. Very plausible. I also look at the stress factor. Many teachers in real life show strain and may show impatience from the stresses of life. Teachers are human too. I would say that Snape, throughout most of the books had his fair share of stress, and then some. Not making excuses here. Just looking at what may have factored into his behavior at times.

I shall go back to lurking now. ;)

Hi, RLF and Chris! :wave:

That's an interesting observation, one that I think is very plausible in (at least partially) explaining why Snape is impatient when it comes to the process of learning. Snape's job dealt with life and death and depended heavily on a flawless performance, so I think this could have played a role in his expecting perfection from his students.

:agree: I've thought along similar lines as well, especially during the Occlumency lessons, where Voldemort's influence on Harry was directly connected to the safety of the Order and its plans.

Both in Occlumency and Potions, he leaves little room for error. JKR chooses her character names well, doesn't she? :lol:

You know, I've always felt that Harry's walk to the Forbidden Forest to meet Voldy was basically his finally walking a mile in Snape's shoes. Walking to meet Voldy knowing full well that one cannot even attempt to fight back if attacked.

I suppose those of you who seem to feel 'inaction' of any kind is cowardly (such as not killing Peter at SpinnersEnd, not rescuing Charity from a circle of DEs and Voldy or even warning Sirius that if he doesn't shut up right now, you'll blow a gasket and kill him in the ShriekingShack) must be terribly disappointed in Harry as well. After all, Harry's signature spell was expelliramus - he was apparently too cowardly to risk killing a DE in 7Potters. And then he just walks up to meet Voldy without even attempting an AK and then to 'play dead' and lastly HIDE under an invisibility cloak while all that other fighting was going on.

I suppose you must think Harry only sees Snape as so brave because you find Harry to be such a coward? Personally, I think they were both the bravest people in the entire series.

OH very good analysis.

Yes sometimes the hardest thing to do is to do nothing. Harry has discovered the secret of his mother's protection and now knows what he has to do is not to kill but to die, so that his act of love will save the others.


I have to say the bit in DH where Charity is being dangled above the DE's is quite chilling. For Snape to have to endure this is almost super human.
But I guess if the result of saving her would be unravelling all that you'd worked for it's a tough, adult, decision.

I believe Harry holds a higher opinion of Snape by the last few chapters of the series than you do. When people say that there are similarities between the two, and that he walked in his shoes, they are not talking about those things, though Harry did hold onto a grudge... against Snape, until he did the mature thing and moved past it after gaining a larger understanding of the man Snape was.

Harry acknowledges that walking to his death took a different kind of bravery... that it was different than launching oneself in front of another person they loved in order to save them, or dying quickly without realizing what happened. So even within the text there is an acknowledgment that there are different types of bravery, and this particular thing Harry was having a hard time with.

Agreed...that is Lily, James and Dumbledore's story for Harry in his POV. Just like Regulus' story is that of a man who enters the DEs and doesn't realize what he's gotten himself into; or like Sirius' childhood was so bad for him, he ran away from Walburga's force; or like Sirius and Lupin loved and cared for Harry to the best of their ability after meeting him, treating him with kindness and gentleness and were mentors for him.

Those stories belong to others in canon - not Snape, yet they are snatched up and readily applied to Snape - and I simply disagree that all the charcters were portrayals of 'who Snape really was' or something along those lines. His story, according to the author was that Snape loved Lily and hated her father, son and best friends, but spied and worked for Dumbledore nonetheless. It is as if that story isn't good enough for him and he needs more story or something. He wasn't happy at home, but he was no Sirius - and he was a DE, but no Regulus or Draco - and so while I appreciate your view about Harry possibly walking in a path Snape took - I disagree completely - that was the story of the Potters, mum, dad and Harry - a lovely tale and Snape wasn't involved in that because he didn't walk into any direct sacrifice, imo. I agree that like everyone else Snape found himself at risk of danger and in the end, he was killed by Voldy/Nagini - but his death, his storyline, etc., is his own subplot, not a bit of everyone else's and that includes Harry, imo.

So no, Harry didn't walk in Snape's shoes, he walked thrice into Voldy's path; once to fight, once to sacrifice and the last to fight again and at all times it was known that he was firmly against Voldemort. Harry was not at risk, or in simple danger - he was in mortal peril, i.e., going to be killed (or it attempted anyway) and he knew it, imo. Snape on the other hand, took the risk that all the other Order members did, with the ability to hide behind Dumbledore to shield his loyalty - but he never intended to either fight or die, only realized that could be a consequence.

Snape walked that road of placing himself in front of Voldemort over and over again, knowing full well that he could be discovered and killed at any moment and he would not be killed quickly by Voldemort if he learned he had been betrayed. He would not be directly saving someone in that manner, or going down with a fight. I think Harry is feeling a similar fear to what Snape felt before he returned to Voldemort at the end of GoF, except Harry knew he was going to die for sure, while Snape thought there was a high probability that he might die, judging by his reaction, and Dumbledore's words to him. Harry was able to call in support, which Snape was never able to do. He went at it alone, as Harry did when he brought himself to Voldemort, except for when he called on his loved ones to stay with him for a while.

Harry faced Voldy like his parents, both of them in fact - Voldy knowing they were against him and his thoughts turning to kill, imo. Snape faced Voldy like the other DEs - frightened for their lives and hoping not to be killed. That was brave of Snape, but had nothing in common with what Harry had to do in any of the case where he met Voldemort, imo.

He thought of Snape by comparing himself to Snape on his way to the forest and not too long before using the resurrection stone. That is where the "abandoned boys of Hogwarts" line comes from. He thought of Lupin/Tonks/Fred as you said, and Ginny, and Ron, Hermione, Hagrid, Dumbleore, Luna, the rest of the Weasleys. Not just people that died.

Harry compared the situation of Voldemort, Snape and himself in as far as feeling more at home at Hogwarts than their homes. That had nothing to do with his march to Voldy - it would make no sense since he was using Voldy in the same sentence, imo.

If you meant that he wasn't mentioned at all... he was, along with a lot of other people who are actually not dead and as such did not die fighting or sacrifice themselves.

Yes, together with Voldemort - it simply wasn't the same, imo.


Nonetheless, I respect your view - including the rest of your post which I enjoyed reading, but I believe we have discussed all of that before and we see it completely distinctly, so I didn't feel reiterating my view would be fruitful. We'd just agree to disagree anyhow. :lol:.

Those stories belong to others in canon - not Snape, yet they are snatched up and readily applied to Snape - and I simply disagree that all the charcters were portrayals of 'who Snape really was' or something along those lines.

I feel the author deliberately draws parallels between the characters... many of the characters and not just for Snape, but this is his thread. And no one is saying that the other characters are portrayals of who Snape really was... not unless I missed it, which is possible. Seeing similarities between the characters speaks to the richness of the storytelling... that one can look within these books themselves and compare the characters and how they behaved differently in certain situations or similarly in certain situations. It isn't stealing from another character's story when one sees a similarity in Snape's story...

His story, according to the author was that Snape loved Lily and hated her father, son and best friends, but spied and worked for Dumbledore nonetheless. It is as if that story isn't good enough for him and he needs more story or something.

I don't think anyone is making anything up to add to his story in this thread, if that is what you're implying. There are seven books in which he is a part of. This thread is for analyzing his character. The above comment makes it sound like he isn't worth analyzing because "Severus Snape in one sentence" is all you need.

He wasn't happy at home, but he was no Sirius - and he was a DE, but no Regulus or Draco - and so while I appreciate your view about Harry possibly walking in a path Snape took - I disagree completely - that was the story of the Potters, mum, dad and Harry - a lovely tale and Snape wasn't involved in that because he didn't walk into any direct sacrifice, imo. I agree that like everyone else Snape found himself at risk of danger and in the end, he was killed by Voldy/Nagini - but his death, his storyline, etc., is his own subplot, not a bit of everyone else's and that includes Harry, imo.

I wasn't suggesting that his storyline is a bit of everyone else's, but I do see some similarities.

To me, the only person that has a similar type of direct sacrifice as Harry is Lily... What I mean is the closest comparison when it comes to directly sacrificing one's life is these two characters... however that does not mean I do not see similarities when it comes to sacrifice amongst other characters. By similarity I mean a likeness, not exactly the same.

So no, Harry didn't walk in Snape's shoes, he walked thrice into Voldy's path; once to fight, once to sacrifice and the last to fight again and at all times it was known that he was firmly against Voldemort. Harry was not at risk, or in simple danger - he was in mortal peril, i.e., going to be killed (or it attempted anyway) and he knew it, imo. Snape on the other hand, took the risk that all the other Order members did, with the ability to hide behind Dumbledore to shield his loyalty - but he never intended to either fight or die, only realized that could be a consequence.

Anyone who would have done Snape's job would have been in mortal peril every time he did so, IMHO. He was behind enemy lines and not hiding behind anyone in doing so.

The similarity I was speaking of with Harry is that he went at it alone at the end, as Snape did... into the lion's den... alone. It doesn't take anything away from Harry in saying so. I definitely don't mean to take anything from Harry, so please do not take that as my intention. Harry is my second favorite character. If I did not like Harry, and wanted to snatch up his story and give it to someone else, then I would not have read this series at all.

Harry faced Voldy like his parents, both of them in fact - Voldy knowing they were against him and his thoughts turning to kill, imo. Snape faced Voldy like the other DEs - frightened for their lives and hoping not to be killed. That was brave of Snape, but had nothing in common with what Harry had to do in any of the case where he met Voldemort, imo.

The other Death Eaters weren't actively working against Voldemort the entire time. I'd say that makes things more intense for Snape considering he wasn't a DE.

Harry compared the situation of Voldemort, Snape and himself in as far as feeling more at home at Hogwarts than their homes. That had nothing to do with his march to Voldy - it would make no sense since he was using Voldy in the same sentence, imo.

His other thoughts of people didn't have much to do with his march towards Voldemort either... You said he didn't spare a thought for Snape before he entered the forest. He did spare a thought for Snape.

Yes, together with Voldemort - it simply wasn't the same, imo.

Just because he's mentioned with Voldemort isn't a bad thing. There are similarities between the three of them as I see it. Seeing some similarities does not mean that I think they are clones of each other, which they clearly are not, nor am I grabbing bits of their stories and giving them to Snape. It's a deliberate comparison made by the main character of the series.

Nonetheless, I respect your view - including the rest of your post which I enjoyed reading, but I believe we have discussed all of that before and we see it completely distinctly, so I didn't feel reiterating my view would be fruitful. We'd just agree to disagree anyhow. :lol:.

I take it that you mean we see things differently. Yes, we most definitely do. We will of course agree to disagree about those other points, however I think my post still indicates that Snape was on the radar at the end of the series, even if your take on it is much different than mine.

It's just my own opinion that when Harry saw Snape's memories going back to childhood that it was like walking in Snape's shoes and seeing things from his point of view for the first time - or actually the second time because Harry has great sympathy for Snape after Pensieve-diving in OotP. That is just my own analogy - a walk in his shoes - and nothing more literal than that.

And the reason I tend to see it that way is that immediately after watching Snape's memories, Harry realizes that his own imminent death is going to be like Snape's - he has a choice to run or to stay, but he accepts his fate.

It's not that he literally thinks of himself in Snape's shoes, but the way he is thinking about death parallels what has just happened to Snape minutes before, in my opinion.

How strange that in his dread of death, it pumped all the harder, valiantly keeping him alive. But it would have to stop, and soon. Its beats were numbered. How many would there be time for, as he rose and
walked through the castle for the last time, out into the grounds and into the forest?

Terror washed over him as he lay on the floor, with that funeral drum pounding inside him. Would it hurt to die? All those times he had thought that it was about to happen and escaped, he had never really thought of the thing itself: His will to live had always been so much stronger than his fear of death. Yet it did not occur to him now to try to escape, to outrun Voldemort. It was over, he knew it, and all that was left was the thing itself: dying

With the vague pronoun "He" that passage could just as easily apply to Snape as Harry.

Harry didn't have a solitary thought for Snape on his way to the forest; he thought of his mum, his dad, Dumbledore, even Lupin/Tonks/Fred out of context of what he was doing, but as those who'd bravely died for him. And of course he actually called back his 4 loved ones upon arrival there, which didn't include Snape.
No, not specifically although he was following Snape's instructions from the memories.

And Harry certainly talked up a storm about Snape just before he killed Voldemort, just a short time later. Snape and Lily and Dumbledore - those are the people he talked about just before he vanquished the Dark Lord.

But 19 years later, he is still thinking about Snape, and that's because, in my opinion, he understood the man much better as an adult in hindsight. And Albus Severus who has Snape's name is his loved one, even if Snape was not.

It's just my own opinion that when Harry saw Snape's memories going back to childhood that it was like walking in Snape's shoes and seeing things from his point of view for the first time - or actually the second time because Harry has great sympathy for Snape after Pensieve-diving in OotP. That is just my own analogy - a walk in his shoes - and nothing more literal than that.

Completely agree. I also love a lot of the imagery there, of him standing next to young Snape, following him, and the most striking one to me was the one about his fear also "infecting" Harry from the memory on the hill.

<snip>

With the vague pronoun "He" that passage could just as easily apply to Snape as Harry.

Yes, it could. I agree. :tu:

I think that you're right here - it was part of his nature to be a perfectionist; and I think that it was at least in part this nature that helped him be a good double agent. I think it was a feedback cycle - the qualities that made him a good double agent also made him impatient with imperfection; and as he got better at his double agent role, he got more impatient because he was working his butt off to make sure that he didn't mess up but he didn't think his students were working hard enough at a far simpler task when they messed up.

Though I would suggest, also, that Snape held himself to the same (perhaps excessively) high standards. I got the distinct impression that he was no more pleased with imperfection and mistakes he himself made. His reaction to being seen by Harry after Fluffy bit him in PS/SS, for example. He becomes furious at Harry, but I got a feeling he was externalizing frustration he had with himself that he did not succeed in catching Quirrell.

Likewise his remark to Albus when they are discussing Karkaroff (a scene we see in DH, that occured during the Yule Ball). Snape's comment, "I am not such a coward", understates (to my ears, anyway) what he is preparing ot embark on, as if it isn't anything out of the ordinary.

I also made sense of Snape's anger at Albus in the scene where he contains the damage of the Ring curse to reflect in part his disappointment with his own inability to do more. It seems to me Albus understood it that way, anyway, as he reassures Snape that he has done very well.

While I would agree this was something that made him an excellent spy, I think its consequences for him as a person were less fortunate. I imagine this same trait would make him unable to forgive himself for past mistakes like his own actoins in his "Worst Memory" and his reporting of the Prophecy, and made him at times both unpleasant and unhappy.

Though I would suggest, also, that Snape held himself to the same (perhaps excessively) high standards. I got the distinct impression that he was no more pleased with imperfection and mistakes he himself made. His reaction to being seen by Harry after Fluffy bit him in PS/SS, for example. He becomes furious at Harry, but I got a feeling he was externalizing frustration he had with himself that he did not succeed in catching Quirrell.

Likewise his remark to Albus when they are discussing Karkaroff (a scene we see in DH, that occured during the Yule Ball). Snape's comment, "I am not such a coward", understates (to my ears, anyway) what he is preparing ot embark on, as if it isn't anything out of the ordinary.

I also made sense of Snape's anger at Albus in the scene where he contains the damage of the Ring curse to reflect in part his disappointment with his own inability to do more. It seems to me Albus understood it that way, anyway, as he reassures Snape that he has done very well.

While I would agree this was something that made him an excellent spy, I think its consequences for him as a person were less fortunate. I imagine this same trait would make him unable to forgive himself for past mistakes like his own actoins in his "Worst Memory" and his reporting of the Prophecy, and made him at times both unpleasant and unhappy.

I can buy that. It would also explain his assessments of Harry's raw wizarding ability - Harry was good, but not Snape-as-a-kid good.

I think that if one views him as a perfectionist with no patience, it explains an awful lot of his mannerisms and treatment of others. It really limited him teaching-wise, though, since to me he's a classic "good teacher to gifted students, terrible teacher to struggling students" teacher. I think most of us have had one of those. I really think the ideal would have been that Sluggy or another more "genial" teacher would do years 1-4, then Snape would take over for 5-7, after the learning curve has been shortened dramatically. He probably would have been happier (as happier as he could be) in that role too.

I think that if one views him as a perfectionist with no patience, it explains an awful lot of his mannerisms and treatment of others. It really limited him teaching-wise, though, since to me he's a classic "good teacher to gifted students, terrible teacher to struggling students" teacher. I think most of us have had one of those. I really think the ideal would have been that Sluggy or another more "genial" teacher would do years 1-4, then Snape would take over for 5-7, after the learning curve has been shortened dramatically. He probably would have been happier (as happier as he could be) in that role too.
I think this is a very good explanation of Snape as a teacher, and I agree completely. I've realized that some teachers can be very good, but have no business teaching younger children whatsoever. I've had one these teachers as well, which is why I never respected Snape as a teacher.

Snape being a perfectionist I can definitely see. There was a lot he had to do and put up with as spy and he did it well. JKR had said in an interview about Snape valuing other qualities about himself, which I can see him doing as well. There was a lot he was good at.

Snape admits that he asked Voldemort for mercy on Lily in return for killing only baby Harry!! One of the lowest, most cowardly things a person could do! Unbelievable!

I agree it was despicable. The whole point of Snape's story arc however is to show the enormous change he goes through from being a voluntary Death Eater to a man who devotes his whole life to the right cause without expecting anything - anything - in return. Since Lily was already dead.

And what about his snide, backstabbing comment to Tonks about her patronus. Surely the courageous thing would have been to realise a person who is deeply in love and cannot be with her love, and comfort that person. But no, Snape mocks her. Hardly the brave thing to do.

I think you and I understand courage very differently. If he could understand Tonks and been kind towards her, that's sympathy and kindness, not courage.

Just to be clear, I do think that some of the things Snape did were brave, but I think less of it was bravery and more of it was following orders/his own selfishness.

Since you have ignored that part of my post, I'll say it again: why does following orders preclude courage? Are the soldiers in a battlefield following their general's orders not brave?

He could have done things to bring down Voldemort of his own bat, but it took for him to give Voldemort the prophecy (i.e. selfish reasons) for him to take action.

That would have been plainly stupid. Snape is smarter than that. He trusts Dumbledore's judgement, and what is more - he has given Dumbledore his word. I don't find it an act of cowardice that he kept it.

Not as brave as Harry makes out ("one of the bravest people alive" or whatever he says in the epilogue).

I personally take Harru's word on this, since he is the protagonist, makes this announcement at the very end of the series, and is not countered by anyone. Speaks plainly to me that Snape was indeed meant to be seen as brave. Now, of course some readers would nt be satisfied and find that their own understanding of bravery has not been satisfied by Snape's portrayal, but that is going into personal interpretation land. As far as canon is concerned, I think the books (mainly DH) make it very clear that Snape was indeed brave.

The first thing Snape says here is "Don't kill me!" which means that he obviously thought that it was a possibility. Yet he was brave enough to take this risk so he could warn Dumbledore about Voldemort's plans and ask him to protect Lily. The fact that he doesn't care what happens to James and Harry quite rightly disgusts Dumbledore, but it makes Snape no less brave.

It absolutely makes Snape less brave in my eyes. He came to dumbledore to ask for Lily to be saved, for his own selfish reasons. If he had come to dumbledore and said "save all 3" then his bravery may not have been called into question, but the fact is that he wanted, initially, only to save Lily for his own, personal reasons. He was happy to sacrifice a child and a man for his own reasons, and that extinguishes all bravery in this instance.

It doesnt detract from his bravery in spying on Voldemort, but it does detract from his initial reasons for doing so.

It doesnt detract from his bravery in spying on Voldemort, but it does detract from his initial reasons for doing so.

His reasons do change though. There is no redemption withour change. When he agrees - with very little admonition and seconds aftr he had said he wished he were dead - to devote his life to protecting Harry, he doesn't do so for selfish reasons, unless you think remorse/trying to make amends is selfish. He does so, in my opinion, because he feels the need to make amends, or because, having lost Lily, he wants to make sure he death was not in vain. Either way, I find this very brave of him, considering he had virtually nothing to gain and was in enormous emotional pain.

It absolutely makes Snape less brave in my eyes. He came to dumbledore to ask for Lily to be saved, for his own selfish reasons. If he had come to dumbledore and said "save all 3" then his bravery may not have been called into question, but the fact is that he wanted, initially, only to save Lily for his own, personal reasons. He was happy to sacrifice a child and a man for his own reasons, and that extinguishes all bravery in this instance.

It doesnt detract from his bravery in spying on Voldemort, but it does detract from his initial reasons for doing so.

As I see it Snape has nothing to gain personally, except knowing he has done what he can to save someone he loves. Yes, his motivation was to save Lily, and he put himself in danger in so doing. He faced Dumbledore who he so obviously feared in order to beg for his help, I think that took courage regardless of his motivation. The fact that his love for Lily was his motivation does not for me detract from his bravery in this instance.

Yeah - but then we get into the question of why Dumbledore wanted Snape to remain looking faithful - it is a bit of a plot hole, imo.

Because Dumbledore had lots of work for Snape to do. His work was not quite over, so he had to still look like a faithful DE IMO.

Well we can analyse that in Dumbledore's thread. But in as far as Snape was concerned, he delivered the prophecy to the dark lord and is solely to blame with Voldemort for the subsequent targeting and with Peter for the subsequent killing, imo.

Snape was responsible for handing over the prophecy, I agree with that.

But I would like to know from where in canon you got the fact that Snape along with Peter is to blame for the subsequent killing.

Well that is why one feels remorse and wants to repent and behave in a manner that shows those things to seek forgiveness from those affected, imo.

Did you mean remorse as an apology? To apologise and seek forgiveness from others?

If you did, I see remorse differently from you. I think remorse is the burning of the soul and its inability to come to terms or justify to itself the reasons for the mistakes it made. While it is easy for others to forgive; Harry needs only a big heart to forgive, for Snape, to forgive himself is very difficult, unless he can justify to himself his reasons for the mistakes he made, and that is not very easy IMO. Dumbledore and Snape could not do that and so I think they were unable to seek and accept the forgiveness from themselves, even when others forgave them. They could not justify themselves and could also never shrug off the mistake they made.

But Snape didn't do that, imo and I feel it was because his remorse was only partial - in terms of Lily's targeting and subsequent Death, imo.

Have answered it above.

The way I see it is that Snape could have not delivered the prophecy; Voldemort could have not targeted the Potters and Peter could not have betrayed them - and those three would not have been behaving in an evil manner, imo, with the intent to kill in order to ensure Voldemort's supremacy.

Has Snape not delivered the prophecy, Voldemort may not have chosen Harry as the child of the prophecy, but I am quite sure Peter would have still betrayed them; they were in hiding from Voldemort even before the prophecy for a reason; and this time had they been attacked, not only them but Harry would have died as well, for there would be no Snape to request for Lily's life and no sacrifice to save Harry's IMO.

Well one of the things I don't like about Snape is that I feel he went about blaming everyone else instead of accepting all of his culpability, feeling remorse for it and repenting for it, imo.

Could you give some canon for this?

And too, Snape inflicted the same unhealable wounds on Sirius, but that wouldn't serve as any excuse for Sirius to act out on his emotions either, imo.

And some canon for this as well please.

So I don't buy this line of reasoning as genuine truth, it was said to cover up the truth, imo.

In a time when Harry was hurting? When he had just lost Sirius? I disagree. I don't think Dumbledore would cover up truths at that time.

That memory was Snape's worst because in it, he called Lily a mudblood and lost her friendship forever, imo - he might blame others, but she blamed him.

He never blamed others; Dumbledore did; he said James wounded Snape IMO.

That's an interesting observation, one that I think is very plausible in (at least partially) explaining why Snape is impatient when it comes to the process of learning. Snape's job dealt with life and death and depended heavily on a flawless performance, so I think this could have played a role in his expecting perfection from his students. But also I think it's just part of his nature as well, that he was a perfectionist and was extremely bright in the subject and so couldn't tolerate imperfection in others.

:agree: I think Snape would have been a brilliant teacher for the NEWT classes and those gifted students who truly adore potions.

I also think that if Snape did not have this other job, which was almost 24/7, he would not have been harsh to Harry, Neville, Hermione or Gryffindors in general. Strict he would have been, but I think a lot more patient than he was in the Books.

posted by NeilSquib86
It absolutely makes Snape less brave in my eyes. He came to dumbledore to ask for Lily to be saved, for his own selfish reasons.

But who in the WW was fighting without a selfish or personal reason, could you say?

But who in the WW was fighting without a selfish or personal reason, could you say?

Nobody would offer to sacrifice a child to save someone they love. People may have some selfish reasons, but none so selfish as Snape's.