Severus Snape: Character Analysis v.12 [Archive] - Page 5

wickedwickedboy

August 12th, 2009, 4:58 pm

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.

I agree. :tu: On the Hill, Dumbledore became more contemptuous toward Snape than Harry had ever heard him when he indicated his thorough disgust at the request that Snape had made of Voldemort and was making of him (DH TPT). Dumbledore even called him on it, blatantly and openly - accusing him of exchanging the mother for the child and then of not caring what happened to James and Harry as long as Lily was safe. Dumbledore also had to remind Snape that Lily wasn't targeted, rather Harry was - and that is what Snape's initial act of carrying the prophecy had rendered; the targeting for the killing of a baby, imo.

In my view, Snape never did come around to an agreeable state of mind in that conversation; he conceded that Dumbledore "hide them all then - but keep her - them safe" And I think JKR wrote it that way purposely to show that Snape was not doing the right thing and behaving in a reprehensible manner with respect to his negation of human life. To me, that was the main point; he had done that when he carried the prophecy - Dumbledore was attempting to point that out - that although he was coming to him, it was not at all commendable from Snape's point of view because sparing Lily for himself - meaning for selfish reasons (whether one believes that was just so he'd know she'd be alive - or he wished to pursue her or otherwise). Lily's life was in jeopardy because her son was targeted, not because she was - protecting Lily would do nothing for the child who was the main objective (DH TPT).

I don't think the main idea of the scene is whether or not Snape was behaving in a brave manner - that to me was secondary. One could call betrayal of Voldemort brave or unwise and Snape was betraying him. One could equally call behind the back betrayal instead of direct confrontation, cowardly - or wise, imo. So to me that is secondary to the main thrust of the scene which was not to show how Snape did something commendable and wondrous as a Death Eater - because his goal was entirely selfish and negligent of the value of human life even while speaking to Dumbledore, imo. In my judgment, the scene was to show Snape at one of his lowest moments in life - as a Death Eater, with the views and values that go with it, which are highly unethical and immoral, imo, and to show Dumbledore rendering a primary lesson in an attempt to make Severus Snape see what Lily had been trying to tell him back when they were friends, imo.

It doesnt detract from his bravery in spying on Voldemort, but it does detract from his initial reasons for doing so.

While I think Snape's bravery in spying is overstated, I do think there were elements of bravery involved. But that aside, I feel that initially, his motivation for going to Dumbledore (and Voldemort) definitely show that he was not bravely attempting to undo what his initial act had done - he merely wanted to undo it in terms of Lily - for his own personal reasons, imo. In my view, that wipes away anything 'good' that might be associated with his behavior from Snape's point of view, imo.

I do see that focus could be placed on how contrite and devastated Snape was over Lily due to the results of his giving the prophecy (boo hoo, imo because he didn't care about human life here, imo, nor about Lily herself as a wife and mother, her concerns or happiness, imo) and the risk involved (again boo hoo - because he brought that upon himself 100%, imo). But as I expressed in the parenthesis, I feel like focusing on these things takes away from the main thrust of the scene - showing the depths to which Severus Snape had sunk and just how far out of that hole he ultimately was able to climb. In my honest opinoin, not very far at all - although certainly he did climb upward, imo.

A story of redemption it most definitely is not, imo, because for me, redemption is earned, not dubbed on a person. Sev Snape would have had to express some open remorse in the canon for me to find redemption for him, for more than his selfish feelings in the wake of Lily's death (my view of his subsequent unhappiness in Dumbledore's office). I am not a harsh and strict reader; Snape could have expressed this through kindness and generosity to Harry and I would have accepted it. But he mistreated Harry - very badly, imo, without apology, imo, and since that was in part motivated by his feelings for Harry's dad, I see nothing of remorse in Snape's behavior in that regard either - in fact, rather the opposite. His working for Dumbledore to help 'keep Harry safe' for Lily was with the goal of bringing down Voldemort, imo. I think that was proven when Snape was willing to allow Harry to sacrifice himself in the end - when he adopted Dumbledore's plan, believing Harry would die. In my view, Snape did not have any regard from beginning to end for what Lily might think or want, or what might make her happy - it was all about him and his desires, imo (i.e., what would make Snape happy - what he wanted and thought).

Imo, he loathed Harry, unfairly to his death - he loathed James unfairly to his death also and he believed himself to be in love with Lily, (imo, mistaking what love is) to his death. What that says to me is that Snape's main focus all along was "Snape", imo, and as such, his work for Dumbledore was not dedicated to Lily (as Snape himself set forth by agreement), but rather for himself, imo. In other words, I think he did take some steps forward from his Death Eater days, but he was limited by what I feel was his intense focus on self - and his mistaken belief that his emotions for Lily justified him doing whatever he wanted in terms of her family, imo. In reality, he had no buy-in, no right to anything with respect to Lily or her family in a legitimate sense, imo, not even as a friend, because he had not been one; certainly not as a well wisher, imo, because he helped to kill the parents - so he was in a position to "make it up to them" - in my judgment and I feel he didn't do that at all, not because he couldn't, but because he chose not to, imo. His efforts helped bring down Voldemort, but the manner he treated Harry and Lily and James' memories as humans, was wrongful and thus, eliminates any possibility of making anything up to them, imo. The most I can say is that like the other Order members, his efforts helped in bringing down Voldemort in a general sense - and he was motivated and acting upon his emotions for Lily - but the character of those emotions was such that in reality, he was not really acting on her behalf at all, imo.

I think Harry realized this, and knew that he had to look at it from Snape's point of view because Snape himself behaved in simply too small a manner as a man to understand the truth. Harry forgave, put pettiness aside and tried to tell others that Snape had not been a loyal DE to his death, but had worked with Dumbledore (important in the wizard world) - and he acknowledged Snape's attempt to work in honor of his mother, even though it was achieved in a pathetic manner that was not acutally honoring her at all, imo, by the middle name he gave his son. His final take was that Snape had been brave and a Headmaster - the only positive things he could say about Snape in truth, imo, however, he added probably to the former because he was using Hyperbole to convince his son, imo. Snape had behaved in a cowardly manner many a time, imo, especially in line with his treatment of the children, imo, and that was something Harry knew, but had put aside, imo. So it wasn't dishonest, he did add 'probably' and he did have a good reason in trying to give the right message to his son - even if he didn't truly believe that Snape could stand for Slytherin having been a great house in light of Snape's lifetime behavior, words and acts overall - which is why I feel Harry then gave his son an escape route from having to be placed in the house - he knew it for what it truly was - and he knew the same about Snape, imo. All of the foregoing is an expression of my viewpoint, based on the canon and JKR's subsequent interviews. :)

NeilSquib86

August 12th, 2009, 5:04 pm

SweetSev and TreacleTartlet

I don't recall Snape offering Harry as a sacrifice for saving Lily when he went to Dumbledore? He didn't ask Dumbledore to save Harry and James as he was so totally focused on saving Lily and didn't care what happened to them, but that is not the same as offering Harry as a sacrifice in return for saving Lily.

From the Prince's Tale:

" 'If she means so much to you,' said Dumbledore, 'Surely Lord Voldemort will spare her? Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?'

'I have - I have asked him -' "

So Snape had already offered Harry in exchange for Lily's life. Whatever he then went on to do, it is still the lowest of the low, and whatever he did to bring down Voldemort, it was only for selfish reasons, perhaps to assuage his own conscience about Lily being killed.

ignisia

August 12th, 2009, 5:06 pm

IMO, just because Harry named his son after Snape, doesn't mean Snape wasn't bullying.

True.
I took it to mean that Harry understood both Snape's good side and bad side, but thinks that the good side far outdid the bad. He wouldn't have respected him as well as he did if he had harboured any great resentment about Snape's behavior as a teacher. As a grown-up, he knew that saving his life many times and working tirelessly against Voldemort meant so much more and did so much more good than any evil his teaching may have done.

In short, he had obeyed Snape's final words and took a long, hard look at the man, finally seeing him as a human being, and one who earned a great deal of respect in all he learned, accomplished, and endured throughout life.

NeilSquib86

August 12th, 2009, 5:11 pm

While JKR's opinion was that Snape was a mean person or whatever, in the Books she made him a Hero to the boy whose parents were made targets because he handed over the prophecy to Voldemort. Harry screams at Dumbledore in HBP when he learns Snape was the one who gave the prophecy to Voldemort and yet JKR gave Snape a place with James, Lily and Dumbledore in Harry's heart, by making Harry name his son after Snape. That is canon and I really cannot think Harry would name his son after a bullying man, whatever the reason.

This actually opens up another discussion, because I think the naming of his child after Snape is very out of character and poorly written. Of course they are her books, but I think of myself in that situation. If my parents were killed because someone had divulged information about them to their killer, I would never, ever want to name my child after that person. I just find Harry calling his child after one of the two people who were responsible for his parents death unrealistic.

Daggerstone

August 12th, 2009, 5:12 pm

I think that in book 6, when he had a different subject matter to teach and older students, he continued to treat the children the same, except that he enjoyed the subject more, imo. Snape was not better in his interaction with Hermione, imo, his best student, and he was aggressive with both Harry and Ron - the former finally standing up for himself and feeling the need to turn to sarcasm in response to Snape. We didn't have much classroom time with Snape in HBP, but I think he was unpleasant enough during the class time we were shown to evidence that he hadn't changed his bullying methodology at all - but simply liked the subject matter better.

So, old Snarks wasn't such a bad teacher after all if he wasn't better and yet...

". . . you are, I believe, complete novices in the use of nonverbal spells. What is the advantage of a nonverbal spell?"

Hermione's hand shot into the air. Snape took his time looking around at everybody else, making sure he had no choice, before saying curtly, "Very well - Miss Granger?"

"Your adversary has no warning about what kind of magic you're about to perform," said Hermione, "which gives you a split-second advantage."

"An answer copied almost word for word from The Standard Book of Spells, Grade Six," said Snape dismissively (over in the corner, Malfoy snickered), "but correct in essentials."

He's stating a fact about her answer here. If "Harry was so disarmed that she had thought his words as well worth memorizing as The Standard Book of Spells that he did not argue." it means even he was aware of Hermione's tendency to learn textbooks by heart... :whistle:

"Detention, Saturday night, my office," said Snape. "I do not take cheek from anyone, Potter . . . not even 'the Chosen One.'"

Not a single point docked here?! :lol:

"Well," said Hermione, "I thought he sounded a bit like you."

"Like me?"

"Yes, when you were telling us what it's like to face Voldemort. You said it wasn't just memorizing a bunch of spells, you said it was just you and your brains and your guts - well, wasn't that what Snape was saying? That it really comes down to being brave and quick-thinking?"

So much for your shoes theory, wick... ;)

NeilSquib86

August 12th, 2009, 5:17 pm

So, bravery of a HP character is defined by the number of people he/she saves from being killed by Voldemort and his/her inability to sacrifice Harry? I wonder what such a definition makes of Albus... :hmm:

Of course not, you are misreading what I have said. Bravery is not measured by how many people you save, but cowardice can certainly be measured by whether you offer a child as a sacrifice in place of someone you love! It sounds like you are saying that Snape was not being cowardly by doing so.

He was supposed to ask for mercy on Harry too? And what explanation would he have to offer to his Dark Lord? 'Oh, come on, Voldy... Sure, the prophesy says you have to die if he remains alive, but he's just a baby!' :huh:
He would have ended up dead, and so would all the Potters. It's as simple as that.

What was it Sirius said to Wormtail? Something about dying before betraying your friends? Snape and Lily were supposed to be best friends, and Snape was supposed to have loved her. Surely attempting to save her, and her family's, life would have been a worthwhile task? Whether being killed was a possibility or not. What you are basically saying is that if a child falls on the road, in front of an oncoming car, you shouldnt attempt to save it's life because you might be killed yourself.

That about it. :relax:
There are ways of telling people things. Surely the best way of warning tonks would be to have a private word. Not goad and tease her in front of other people. Goading a woman who is clearly upset over something is a cowardly thing to do, so it does relate to bravery.

boushh

August 12th, 2009, 5:28 pm

Did Snape really have Harry to offer in exchange for Lily's life? Is that really what he did? We don't even know what he asked or how he asked because we did not see it and he stammered and was cut off during his response to Dumbledore.

He did what he stood a chance at getting done, which is to get Lily's life spared. Then when he went to Dumbledore he stated that the danger was to the entire family, and eventually says they should all be protected. I'm sure he went to Dumbledore fully aware that he would protect all of them. He was just much more concerned about Lily, obviously. I think later on he grew to understand the value of all human life, not just those he personally cared about.

TreacleTartlet

August 12th, 2009, 5:29 pm

SweetSev and TreacleTartlet

From the Prince's Tale:

" 'If she means so much to you,' said Dumbledore, 'Surely Lord Voldemort will spare her? Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?'

'I have - I have asked him -' "

So Snape had already offered Harry in exchange for Lily's life. Whatever he then went on to do, it is still the lowest of the low, and whatever he did to bring down Voldemort, it was only for selfish reasons, perhaps to assuage his own conscience about Lily being killed.

Snape couldn't technically offer Harry to Voldemort in exchange for Lily. Snape delivered the Prophecy to Voldemort and sometime later Voldemort decided to target the Potters. Snape then asked Voldemort to spare Lily, only after Voldemort had decided that Harry was the child in the Prophecy. This is not offering Harry in exchange for Lily, as Harry was already targeted by Voldemort. How could Snape offer Harry, when Voldemort already had the information at his disposal? Harry was targeted by Voldemort before Snape made his request to him to spare Lily. This is not an exchange of one life for another as Snape did not have Harry to bargin with and offer in exchange for Lily.

He did what he stood a chance at getting done, which is to get Lily's life spared. Then when he went to Dumbledore he stated that the danger was to the entire family, and eventually says they should all be protected. I'm sure he went to Dumbledore fully aware that he would protect all of them. He was just much more concerned about Lily, obviously. I think later on he grew to understand the value of all human life, not just those he personally cared about.

Exactly!

boushh

August 12th, 2009, 5:31 pm

Snape couldn't technically offer Harry to Voldemort in exchange for Lily. Snape delivered the Prophecy to Voldemort and sometime later Voldemort decided to target the Potters. Snape then asked Voldemort to spare Lily, only after Voldemort had decided that Harry was the child in the Prophecy. This is not offering Harry in exchange for Lily, as Harry was already targeted by Voldemort. How could Snape offer Harry, when Voldemort already had the information at his disposal? Harry was targeted by Voldemort before Snape made his request to him to spare Lily. This is not an exchange of one life for another as Snape did not have Harry to bargin with.

Exactly.

NeilSquib86

August 12th, 2009, 5:36 pm

Exactly.

The mere asking to spare her life for the child's is bad enough.

Snape asked Voldemort to spare Lily's life and take only the child. There is no other reading of that exchange between Snape and Dumbledore. Dumbledore asked him why he didnt just ask Voldemort to take the child but save Lily, and Snape replied "I did". Case closed. Horrible.

TreacleTartlet

August 12th, 2009, 5:42 pm

The mere asking to spare her life for the child's is bad enough.

Snape asked Voldemort to spare Lily's life and take only the child. There is no other reading of that exchange between Snape and Dumbledore. Dumbledore asked him why he didnt just ask Voldemort to take the child but save Lily, and Snape replied "I did". Case closed. Horrible.

So you think Voldemort would have listened and said ok, if Snape had asked him to spare Harry also? I think not. What I think disgusted Dumbledore was that Snape had even made a request of Voldemort at all. I don't think for one minute that Dumbledore expected him to have pleaded with Voldemort for the child's life as he would know that would have been a waste of time. I think Dumbledore was hoping that Snape had come to him in the first place without making his request of Voldemort.

NeilSquib86

August 12th, 2009, 5:52 pm

So you think Voldemort would have listened and said ok, if Snape had asked him to spare Harry also? I think not. What I think disgusted Dumbledore was that Snape had even made a request of Voldemort at all. I don't think for one minute that Dumbledore expected him to have pleaded with Voldemort for the child's life as he would know that would have been a waste of time. I think Dumbledore was hoping that Snape had come to him in the first place without making his request of Voldemort.

Of course voldemort wouldnt have listened to him, but read what I said about treating your friends. Snape should have tried. And yes I think what disgusted Dumbledore was the fact that Snape asked for Lily in exchange for Harry's life, i.e. the cowardly thing.

MrSleepyHead

August 12th, 2009, 5:52 pm

I believe Snape could not ask Voldemort for the life of Harry because Voldemort had marked/chosen that child to kill him, so that he would not be killed by Harry later on.

So, I really can't say Snape was selfish, I think he was helpless and powerless to do anything where Voldemort was concerned; but he did the next best thing, he came to Dumbledore. By that action, I think Snape gave Dumbledore information the Potters and Harry were targeted and that they should protect themselves.
My problem with this scenario is that when Snape did go to Dumbledore, he did not ask Dumbledore to protect Lily's entire family. He begged only for Lily to be protected. I do not think this is a case of selective amnesia: Snape wanted Lily to be safe and did not care about James or Harry. Not until Dumbledore contemptuously scorned Snape, and Snape realized he could not solely have Lily protected, did he agree to the protection of the entire family. To me, that is selfish. If he truly loved Lily, he should have tried to protect her entire family, thus making her live a better life. Instead, he begged both Voldemort and Dumbledore to spare Lily, and not Harry and James, which, in my opinion, is a selfish act.

Also, I do not think Snape could not ask Voldemort to target someone other than Harry. Why not persuade Voldemort to hunt Neville? Surely, with Snape's cunning, he could try to dissuade Voldemort from attacking the Potters (at least in a way that Voldemort would not kill Snape personally). However, he did not care for the deaths of Harry or James - he only cared for the life of Lily. He accepted Voldemort targeting the Potters, as long as Lily was spared.

I would agree that he was better off going to Dumbledore, but he did not meet with Dumbledore with the idea of saving the entire family, as I see it. He wanted Lily to be kept safe, and not until Dumbledore spurned Snape did Severus agree with the plan to keep the entire family safe.
Even if he asked only about Lily, the place he came to (Dumbledore) ensured that all the Potters would be offered protection. Snape's concern was greater as regards Lily. I don't think that is wrong. For, when Dumbledore told the Potters about the danger, the Potters would protect the entire family; they would not sacrifice Harry or Lily or James just because Snape was more concerned about Lily.
I agree that Snape did guarantee the whole Potter family protection by going to Dumbledore, but I do not think that was the reason Snape went to Albus. From that scene, Snape only mentions saving Lily, and not until Dumbledore says something about Harry and James does Snape relinquish. I think Snape went to Dumbledore for a selfish reason, but Dumbledore maneuvered the situation so each of the Potters were protected.
He was supposed to ask for mercy on Harry too? And what explanation would he have to offer to his Dark Lord? 'Oh, come on, Voldy... Sure, the prophesy says you have to die if he remains alive, but he's just a baby!'

He would have ended up dead, and so would all the Potters. It's as simple as that.
Snape could have argued that Neville would have been the more threatening child. I believe he could have tried to persuade Voldemort to target Neville, without being killed personally. However, he made no such effort; he was, as I said previously, content with Harry's death, if Lily was permitted to live.
Did Snape really have Harry to offer in exchange for Lily's life? Is that really what he did? We don't even know what he asked or how he asked because we did not see it and he stammered and was cut off during his response to Dumbledore.
I do not think Snape needed to complete the thought (that is, if he was going to say anything at all after "I have asked him -"), since Severus not denying Dumbledore's claim is all that is needed, to me. If Snape had not asked Voldemort "for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son," then I think he would have said so when Dumbledore allowed him to speak. He did not. Instead, Dumbledore asked, "Could you not ask..." and Snape replies, "I have - I have asked him."
Snape couldn't technically offer Harry to Voldemort in exchange for Lily.
I agree. However, Snape does not deny Dumbledore's diction, so, as I read it, Snape was satisfied with Voldemort killing Harry, as long as Lily was spared. To me, Snape does sacrifice Harry for Lily, to the extent of his ability. He could not technically do so, but by guarding Lily and allowing Harry to be killed is, as I see it, as sacrificial as Snape could be.

snapegirl

August 12th, 2009, 5:55 pm

This actually opens up another discussion, because I think the naming of his child after Snape is very out of character and poorly written. Of course they are her books, but I think of myself in that situation. If my parents were killed because someone had divulged information about them to their killer, I would never, ever want to name my child after that person. I just find Harry calling his child after one of the two people who were responsible for his parents death unrealistic.

IMO, I don't think it's unrealistic for Harry to name his son after Snape. Harry had many years before Albus Severus was born to mature and reflect upon Snape, his actions and his motives for doing what he did.

arithmancer

August 12th, 2009, 6:01 pm

My problem with this scenario is that when Snape did go to Dumbledore, he did not ask Dumbledore to protect Lily's entire family.

He did.

He is constantly interrupted by Albus for a page without being permitted to get a request in edgewise at the start of their meeting. When he finally does make a request, it is:

"Hide them all, then," he croaked. "Keep her - them - safe. Please."

He may or may not have been planning to ask just for Lily, we will never know for sure.

Sly_Lady

August 12th, 2009, 6:03 pm

MrSleepyHead

August 12th, 2009, 6:11 pm

He did.

He is constantly interrupted by Albus for a page without being permitted to get a request in edgewise at the start of their meeting. When he finally does make a request, it is:

"Hide them all, then," he croaked. "Keep her - them - safe. Please."

He may or may not have been planning to ask just for Lily, we will never know for sure.
Yes, but, as I said in my previous post, "not until Dumbledore spurned Snape did Severus agree with the plan to keep the entire family safe." Before this, he is solely concerned with Lily. I agree that "he may or may not have been planning to ask just for Lily," but I find it difficult to believe that he would have asked Dumbledore to protect the entire family. Snape's focus was on Lily throughout the entire conversation, and his earlier action of asking Voldemort to spare only Lily (not James, either. James was not targeted by the prophecy - only Harry "needed" to die), to me, suggests that Snape went to Dumbledore to have Lily more securely protected. Even when he tells Dumbledore to keep the entire family safe, Snape first says, "Keep her - them - safe." His correction of "her" to "them" is as telling evidence as any, to me, that Snape only cared about saving Lily on the hilltop.

wickedwickedboy

August 12th, 2009, 6:12 pm

So you think Voldemort would have listened and said ok, if Snape had asked him to spare Harry also? I think not.

That is not the point - the point is what was represented by Snape asking Voldemort to spare only Lily.

What else could he do? If his morals were in the right place, he would have gone to Dumbledore, the Ministry or the Potters first, and properly had the entire family warned, to spare all of their lives - feeling terrible remorse for his part in getting them targeted, imo. But the whole point is, his morals were not in the right place, rendering his choice to go to Voldy, then to Dumbledore on behalf of himelf (spare Lily) a horrible one, imo.

What I think disgusted Dumbledore was that Snape had even made a request of Voldemort at all. I don't think for one minute that Dumbledore expected him to have pleaded with Voldemort for the child's life as he would know that would have been a waste of time. I think Dumbledore was hoping that Snape had come to him in the first place without making his request of Voldemort.

I agree. Snape should not have gone to Voldemort at all - but that is how morally depraved he was at the time - all the Death Eaters were, not just Snape, but he was one of them, imo.

boushh

August 12th, 2009, 6:14 pm

He also mentions the threat to the entire family very early on during the meeting.

Daggerstone

August 12th, 2009, 6:17 pm

cowardice can certainly be measured by whether you offer a child as a sacrifice in place of someone you love! It sounds like you are saying that Snape was not being cowardly by doing so.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Snape was being rational, thought not terribly charitable.

Snape didn't "offer a child as a sacrifice" - the said child was THE TARGET, the main reason Voldemort hunted Potters down in the first place. If anyone, it was James who offered to sacrifice... his entire family, on the altar of friendship.

[staff edit]

attempting to save her, and her family's, life would have been a worthwhile task? Whether being killed was a possibility or not.

[staff edit] Voldemort would kill him if he tried to save Harry, just like he killed both James and Lily.

Allow me to quote our favourite Headmaster: “And what use would that be to anyone?”

What you are basically saying is that if a child falls on the road, in front of an oncoming car, you shouldnt attempt to save it's life because you might be killed yourself.

No. I'm saying I'd understand the choice of its mother to dive under the wheels... AND the reluctance of her best friend to do the same.

It doesn't necessarily reflect my own probable actions in a similar situation, but then again.... [staff edit]

Goading a woman who is clearly upset over something is a cowardly thing to do, so it does relate to bravery.

He wasn't goading her, he was mocking her. It has absolutely nothing to do with cowardice or bravery, and everything to do with politeness.

Severus Snape was decidedly not a polite man. :relax:

TreacleTartlet

August 12th, 2009, 6:23 pm

Of course voldemort wouldnt have listened to him, but read what I said about treating your friends. Snape should have tried.

To what avail? I see a difference between courage and foolishness. I think Severus sensibly came to the conclusion that his best hope was Dumbledore.

My problem with this scenario is that when Snape did go to Dumbledore, he did not ask Dumbledore to protect Lily's entire family. He begged only for Lily to be protected. I do not think this is a case of selective amnesia: Snape wanted Lily to be safe and did not care about James or Harry. Not until Dumbledore contemptuously scorned Snape, and Snape realized he could not solely have Lily protected, did he agree to the protection of the entire family. To me, that is selfish. If he truly loved Lily, he should have tried to protect her entire family, thus making her live a better life. Instead, he begged both Voldemort and Dumbledore to spare Lily, and not Harry and James, which, in my opinion, is a selfish act.

I don't see this as selfish, but a natural instinct to protect those you love over others.

Also, I do not think Snape could not ask Voldemort to target someone other than Harry. Why not persuade Voldemort to hunt Neville? Surely, with Snape's cunning, he could try to dissuade Voldemort from attacking the Potters (at least in a way that Voldemort would not kill Snape personally).

I don't think this would have been a very viable option, as it seems that when Voldemort makes up his mind only a stupid person would try and change it. In HBP, Spinner's End, Snape tells Narcissa, 'The Dark Lord will not be persuaded, and I am not stupid enough to attempt it,' Snape knows it is a lost cause and this is from an older more experienced Snape not the young 20 year old we see on the hillside.

arithmancer

August 12th, 2009, 6:29 pm

I don't see this as selfish, but a natural instinct to protect those you love over others.

In a Superman comic, a teary young mother might beg the superhero to "Save my baby!" as a bus full of kids teeters over an abyss owing to the machinations of the villain. We do not suppose she is asking Superman to pick her kid out of the crowd and drop the rest...

I see no basis to reason differently in the situation presented in "The Prince's Tale".

silver ink pot

August 12th, 2009, 6:34 pm

The mere asking to spare her life for the child's is bad enough.

Snape asked Voldemort to spare Lily's life and take only the child. There is no other reading of that exchange between Snape and Dumbledore. Dumbledore asked him why he didnt just ask Voldemort to take the child but save Lily, and Snape replied "I did". Case closed. Horrible.

And yet ~ we have the pledge in the word "Anything" when Snape is asked what he will do to save the entire Potter family. Because actually, in asking Dumbledore to help Lily, he promises to help them all, and he does that at "great risk" to himself, according to Dumbledore in GoF.

He thought the Potters were going to be safe ~ he told Dumbledore in time to save them all. He went back as a spy so they could all stay alive, which was the right thing to do.

Unfortunately, Peter and Voldemort had other plans. Peter was the Secret Keeper, not Snape. Peter broke his promise to protect the Potters, but Snape did not.

NeilSquib86

August 12th, 2009, 7:02 pm

Daggerstone

August 12th, 2009, 7:10 pm

Hiding James and Harry was merely an afterthough for Snape. Hardly the actions of a brave man.

Seeing as I am not a native speaker of English, will you please indulge me with the lexical definition of the noun 'bravery'?

Thank you.

NeilSquib86

August 12th, 2009, 7:20 pm

Seeing as I am not a native speaker of English, will you please indulge me with the lexical definition of the noun 'bravery'?

Thank you.

Eh sure.

Concise Oxford Dictionary has the definition as "brave conduct; splendour."

That any help?

MrSleepyHead

August 12th, 2009, 7:20 pm

He also mentions the threat to the entire family very early on during the meeting.
Yes, he mentions it, but he precedes it with "he is going to hunt her down." Again, Lily is the focus, and I think he says "kill them all" to highlight that Lily will also be killed.
I don't see this as selfish, but a natural instinct to protect those you love over others.
I see it as selfish because, by protecting Lily's husband and son, Lily would likely have been much happier than if she was chosen to be spared. If Snape truly loved Lily, saving her entire family should have been priority because that is what would have made Lily happiest.
I don't think this would have been a very viable option, as it seems that when Voldemort makes up his mind only a stupid person would try and change it. In HBP, Spinner's End, Snape tells Narcissa, 'The Dark Lord will not be persuaded, and I am not stupid enough to attempt it,' Snape knows it is a lost cause and this is from an older more experienced Snape not the young 20 year old we see on the hillside.
Exactly; the Snape at the hillside is less experienced and, thus, would not be as aware "it is a lost cause" to try to dissuade Voldemort. I do agree that Voldemort would not have been dissuaded, but Snape could have tried, I think, without endangering himself.
So, you are berating Snape because he "did not care for the deaths of Harry or James - he only cared for the life of Lily" and argue "Why not persuade Voldemort to hunt Neville?" in the same sentence?!

All right, just...
The same paragraph, not sentence. :)

And, yes, I am. From Snape's standpoint, this would have been the most logical option, if he did want to save Lily's entire family. As I said above, saving Lily's family would have made Lily happier than if she had been singled out to live. Snape should have understood this, if he did love Lily, and would thus aim to protect her entire family. Sending Voldemort after Neville, a boy Snape did not have any affiliation with (or if he did, it seems remote), seems a course of action Snape could have taken (I do not agree with it, but Snape did not mind relaying the prophecy to Voldemort in the first place, so he did not seem to care about unknown deaths).

However, Snape did not do any of this; he merely asked Voldemort to spare Lily while killing Harry and James. To me, this is selfish because it shows (as I see it) that Snape cares more for himself (having Lily alive, the sole survivor in her family) than for Lily (who would likely be happier being killed with her husband and child than her life being spared). Again, I will note that James was not listed in the prophecy, so Voldemort did not need to kill him. Why did Snape not ask for James's pardon as well, if he truly cared about Lily and her happiness?
You're obfuscating the real wordage there. Look at the subtleties of the language:- "hide them all then." Its like when someone invites all your friends to a party, and one of your friends says 'what about NeilSquib,' and the inviter says 'ok invite him too then.' Its secondary, an afterthought.

Hiding James and Harry was merely an afterthough for Snape. Hardly the actions of a brave man.
I agree. This, coupled with Snape first saying "Keep her," then amending with 'them', "safe," shows, to me, that Snape was solely concerned with Lily, and Harry and James were unimportant to him.

TreacleTartlet

August 12th, 2009, 7:25 pm

Seeing as I am not a native speaker of English, will you please indulge me with the lexical definition of the noun 'bravery'?.

Thank you.

Dags, this is the definition from The Oxford English Dictionary.:D

brave

• adjective having or showing courage.

• noun dated an American Indian warrior.

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

— DERIVATIVES bravely adverb bravery noun.

courage

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

http://www.askoxford.com/?view=uk

Yoana

August 12th, 2009, 7:34 pm

This actually opens up another discussion, because I think the naming of his child after Snape is very out of character and poorly written.

Your disliking it does not equal poor writing though... They're two different things. :)

NeilSquib86

August 12th, 2009, 7:37 pm

Your disliking it does not equal poor writing though... They're two different things. :)

Of course not. My opinion as a reader though is that it is out of character and therefore poorly written.

TreacleTartlet

August 12th, 2009, 7:38 pm

I see it as selfish because, by protecting Lily's husband and son, Lily would likely have been much happier than if she was chosen to be spared. If Snape truly loved Lily, saving her entire family should have been priority because that is what would have made Lily happiest.
Yes, this may be the conclusion of someone who was looking at the situation from a perspective of calmness and rationality. However going on the state that Severus was I would say he was in a state of agitated desperation.

Snape was wringing his hands he looked a little mad, with his straggling black hair flying around him.

Exactly; the Snape at the hillside is less experienced and, thus, would not be as aware "it is a lost cause" to try to dissuade Voldemort. I do agree that Voldemort would not have been dissuaded, but Snape could have tried, I think, without endangering himself.

I don't agree. I think the younger Severus would have been less confident and clumsy and much more wary of approaching Voldemort. Asking him to spare Lily ws probably about as far as he felt he dared go, and he must have thought that his request did not go well to contemplate going to Dumbledore in the first place. Who he thought may kill him on sight, yet he thought he stood a better chance asking Dumbledore.

kittling

August 12th, 2009, 7:49 pm

Just to be clear, I do think that some of the things Snape did were brave,.

I think that might be getting a bit lost in the conversation – I wonder if you would mind sharing your opinion of which times you thi9nk he was being brave? :)

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.

I’m not sure if you’re meaning that comment to be within the book only or whether it extends to real life – for the sake of convieniance I’ll contain my answer to examples with the book only. :)

Peter Pettigrew was prepared to sacrifice one of his best friends, their wife and child for … well we don’t really know the exact answer but I suspect it has something to do with wanting to ensure his own survival.

Tom Riddle/Voldemort kills seven people, at least one of whom is a child, in cold blood simply to try and protect himself from a death that was a good hundred years away going by the wizarding longevity we see in the books.

Barty Crouch Snr convicted his son to life imprisonment in Azkaban, which I think is worse that prison as we know it, because he had embarrassed him and wanted it dealt with quickly with out the added publicity of a trial.

These are simpley two example the spring to my mind at this moment, give me time and I’m sure there are more. Now please understand I’m not saying Severus wasn’t a bit selfish, but I have to disagree that no-ones motivation was a selfish as Snape’s.

I think the naming of his child after Snape is very out of character and poorly written. Of course they are her books, but I think of myself in that situation. If my parents were killed because someone had divulged information about them to their killer, I would never, ever want to name my child after that person. I just find Harry calling his child after one of the two people who were responsible for his parents death unrealistic.

Just because you don’t agree with something doesn’t make JKR a bad writer.

Neither you nor I are Harry – so how can either of us presume that our opinion of what we would do in the same situation is the right one?

I don’t understand how Bellatrix acts the way she does at times, I don’t call this unrealistic or bad writing – I call it an insight into the mind of a character who is very different from me. :)

What was it Sirius said to Wormtail? Something about dying before betraying your friends? Snape and Lily were supposed to be best friends, and Snape was supposed to have loved her. .

1) Sirius didn’t live up to everything he said so why should someone else be expected to?
2) Severus didn’t know the prophecy would have any effect on Lily – as soon as he did he tried to undo what he did. OK so that doesn’t make him a great bloke when he was in his very early 20’s – but he didn’t knowingly betray his friend so that quote seems redundant to me.

And what about his snide, backstabbing comment to Tonks about her patronus.

There are ways of telling people things. Surely the best way of warning tonks would be to have a private word. Not goad and tease her in front of other people. Goading a woman who is clearly upset over something is a cowardly thing to do, so it does relate to bravery.

Well, I think the comes down to how one interprets Snape’s comments to Tonks.. Yes Harry thought they were said in a particular way but we find out, on several occasions, that Harry isn’t very good at interpreting Snape’s behaviour, or motivations – so personally I tend to disregard Harry’s commentary whe I try to interpret Severus Snape’s behaviour.

To me it seemed like Severus was trying to warn Tonks about something – from the replies you have already received I can see I’m not alone in that! I think there is merit in these other suggestions but the thing I felt he was trying to warn Tonks about was that Lupin was weak.

I know this sounds like a harsh thing to say about Lupin but I think it tallies with what Lupin has said of his own behaviour, that he was always to scared of losing his friends, or telling Dumbledore that he had betrayed his trust as a student, to do the right thing. I think this is something Severus would have been very aware of, as one of the things Lupin himself points out is that he never told ‘the others’ (ie the mauraders) to lay off – so Severus had suffered due to Lupin’s inability to stand up to his friends. I always thought that he just didn’t wan’t Dora to put herself through something similar.

As for the point you made about the when and where of Severus saying this – well yes it wasn’t ideal, but we can’t suppose that he would have had many opportunities to meet her; he was supposed to be a loyal DE & she was an aurora for starters.

.Snape asked Voldemort to spare Lily's life and take only the child. There is no other reading of that exchange between Snape and Dumbledore.

Well I think a lot of this discussion comes down to just that – different readings of that phrase. :)

I get the impression, & I might be wrong, that you interpret that to mean that Snape offered Harry to Voldemort. I, and others, interpret it to mean that Snape knew that it was Harry that was the target and there was nothing anyone could do to dissuade Voldemort from trying to kill Harry; however Snape saw a possibility to dissuade him from killing Lily as well (Voldemort’s reason for planning to kill her was just because she would be around and probably get in the way)

alwaysme

August 12th, 2009, 7:53 pm

I don't want to start seeing JKR bashed here as a writer. If you don't care for something she has written then fine. Just make sure to explain why and remember to back it up as your opinion.

kittling

August 12th, 2009, 7:57 pm

Hiding James and Harry was merely an afterthough for Snape. Hardly the actions of a brave man.

Surely there is a difference between not caring and not being brave enough? I don’t think braver had anything to do with that part of it – it was simply that he didn’t care enough about either James or Harry for them to register as far as I can see.

I don’t think that this was his most shining moment is some respects - but to me it does mark the beginning of his transformation and eventual repentance.

NeilSquib86

August 12th, 2009, 8:02 pm

I think that might be getting a bit lost in the conversation – I wonder if you would mind sharing your opinion of which times you thi9nk he was being brave? :)

Of course. I am not arguing that Snape was never brave, only that I dont think he is as brave as some see him as. The basic task of spying on voldemort was brave, but I dont think each think he did therein was motivated by bravery. And I think the job was easier in some circumstances than it might have been.

Peter Pettigrew was prepared to sacrifice one of his best friends, their wife and child for … well we don’t really know the exact answer but I suspect it has something to do with wanting to ensure his own survival.

Tom Riddle/Voldemort kills seven people, at least one of whom is a child, in cold blood simply to try and protect himself from a death that was a good hundred years away going by the wizarding longevity we see in the books.

Barty Crouch Snr convicted his son to life imprisonment in Azkaban, which I think is worse that prison as we know it, because he had embarrassed him and wanted it dealt with quickly with out the added publicity of a trial.

I would say Barty Crouch's actions were in fact selfless. The selfish thing to have done would have been to free his son so that he wasnt imprisoned. But he put the public's safety before his own family ties. As regards wormtail, I would put wormtail's actions on a par with Snape's. I believe both to be equally as responsible for Lilly and James' death. And Voldemort is the most selfish person in the book, so of course nobodys motivations were as selfish as his.

Just because you don’t agree with something doesn’t make JKR a bad writer.

Sure, agreed. But as a reader I felt that the naming was too rash and out of character; too far-fetched given what Snape had done to Harry. Almost a contradiction in the character.

I don’t understand how Bellatrix acts the way she does at times, I don’t call this unrealistic or bad writing – I call it an insight into the mind of a character who is very different from me. :)

She didnt do anything in the book that made me think "that's out of character" or "thats not realistic of what I would expect of Bellatrix". That's the difference.

I get the impression, & I might be wrong, that you interpret that to mean that Snape offered Harry to Voldemort. I, and others, interpret it to mean that Snape knew that it was Harry that was the target and there was nothing anyone could do to dissuade Voldemort from trying to kill Harry; however Snape saw a possibility to dissuade him from killing Lily as well (Voldemort’s reason for planning to kill her was just because she would be around and probably get in the way)

Well he evidently said something along the lines of "take the baby and leave Lily", which is cowardice.

I don't want to start seeing JKR bashed here as a writer. If you don't care for something she has written then fine. Just make sure to explain why and remember to back it up as your opinion.

If you read the posts I dont think any JKR bashing has gone on. I said I thought one small part was poorly written, and I have given full reasons in more than one post. I dont think JKR is a poor writer, I think she's fantastic. I just thought one bit was poorly written.

alwaysme

August 12th, 2009, 8:12 pm

I am just giving a fair warning.

We don't allow character bashing and none of the mods here will allow author bashing either.

Carry on...

kittling

August 12th, 2009, 8:17 pm

Exactly; the Snape at the hillside is less experienced and, thus, would not be as aware "it is a lost cause" to try to dissuade Voldemort. I do agree that Voldemort would not have been dissuaded, but Snape could have tried, I think, without endangering himself.

Would not be ???? I don’t think we have any cannon to support that do we? Voldemort seems to me to be very bent on his own wishes – it also seems that people pick that up rather quickly. Draco picked that up in less than an academic year. Severus had, in all probability, been working for him longer than that so I think it likely that he had worked it out –unless you have any cannon to support your statement of course :)

saving Lily's family would have made Lily happier than if she had been singled out to live. Snape should have understood this, if he did love Lily,

Loving someone doesn’t mean one automatically understand what makes them happy – any divorce layer or agony aunt could tell you that. ;)

Also we could discuss what Severus should have done – but is that character analysis? Personally I don’t think so.

However the fact that he didn’t do something you thing he should have might lead to the question why? Which I think is far more interesting.

Did he really understand empathy? If he had he might have acted differently. If he didn't why not?
Did he actually think family was that important to someone? If not it might explain some of his actions, also I would want to look at why this was the case.

These are imo interesting questions that I think lead us to examining the character of Severus Snape; how it formed and how it changed. :)

Sending Voldemort after Neville, a boy Snape did not have any affiliation with (or if he did, it seems remote), seems a course of action Snape could have taken

Perhaps he did?
Or perhaps he didn’t because he already knew that he could not dissuade Voldemort once he had made his mind up?

TreacleTartlet

August 12th, 2009, 8:19 pm

Well he evidently said something along the lines of "take the baby and leave Lily", which is cowardice.

Can you provide quotes for this? As far as I can find the only evidence of Snape's request to Voldemort comes from Voldemort himself.

'You should have realised,' he said as he saw Voldemorts nostrils flare' he asked you to spare her life, didn't he?'
'He desired her, that was all' sneered Voldemort, 'but when she had gone, he agreed that there were other women, and of purer blood, worthier of him-'
'Of course he told you that', said Harry.

Morgoth

August 12th, 2009, 8:22 pm

I am just giving a fair warning.

We don't allow character bashing and none of the mods here will allow author bashing either.

Carry on...

To add: It'll be treated with a lengthy suspension from this forum if it doesn't stop.

SurfcatMalfoy

August 12th, 2009, 8:27 pm

I think some things are getting lost in the analysis.
Severus was, without a doubt (IMO), solely concerned with how Voldemort's plans would affect him. That is, how it affected the one person of the three that were targeted for termination. Okay...that may be slightly one-sided. It was inside him. He knew, down deep, that it was wrong. His demeanor (and his request of Dumbledore itself) shows that he was beginning to see the error of his ways but it can't be denied that they WERE his ways. Until that meeting with Dumbledore on the hill he WAS the horrible person that so many make him out to be. Dumbledore's disgust with him, at least in part, went a long way towards helping him in his redemption. Not to mention the impending loss of the woman he loved.
Severus is a tragic hero. He learned too late in life that his path was bringing nothing but pain to himself, and then to the woman he loved. He was brave, but only in the years after Lilly's death. He was on a life long mission of redemption. He was also proving his love for Lilly by protecting her son...whom he despised due to the fact that he wasn't HIS son, he was the son of his boyhood enemy... but doing it for her ('ALWAYS').
In his later years he could see that Dumbledore's was the side of the right minded. He knew that the work he was doing was because it was the right thing to do. Dumbledore said that he thought they sorted too soon. Perhaps it was 20 years too soon for Severus. I believe that if you placed that hat on his head in the Shieking Shack it would have shouted out, "Gryffindor!!!" (not that I think that's better, ;-)).
Lets not pretend that he cared for Harry and James, he didn't save the entire picture from Sirius' room. But in the end he did what was difficult and right.

kittling

August 12th, 2009, 8:57 pm

I would say Barty Crouch's actions were in fact selfless. The selfish thing to have done would have been to free his son so that he wasnt imprisoned. But he put the public's safety before his own family ties.

Well that's a conversation for a different thread - and a different time as I have to go right now. :)

I would say Barty Crouch's actions were in fact selfless. The selfish thing to have done would have been to free his son so that he wasnt imprisoned. But he put the public's safety before his own family ties. As regards wormtail, I would put wormtail's actions on a par with Snape's. I believe both to be equally as responsible for Lilly and James' death. And Voldemort is the most selfish person in the book, so of course nobodys motivations were as selfish as his.

Which was rather my point – Severus is not the most selfinsh character in the book, not even in his worse moments. :)

Sure, agreed. But as a reader I felt that the naming was too rash and out of character; too far-fetched given what Snape had done to Harry. Almost a contradiction in the character.

Personally I think rash is a word that could easily be used to describe Harry’s actions on numerous occasions – just not here! So this is just something we’ll have to agree to disagree about. :)

Well he evidently said something along the lines of "take the baby and leave Lily", which is cowardice.

In your opinion it is obviously but personally I don’t agree I guess that why we all need to be clear about what is our opinion and what is cannon. :)

MrSleepyHead

August 12th, 2009, 9:44 pm

I don't agree. I think the younger Severus would have been less confident and clumsy and much more wary of approaching Voldemort. Asking him to spare Lily ws probably about as far as he felt he dared go, and he must have thought that his request did not go well to contemplate going to Dumbledore in the first place. Who he thought may kill him on sight, yet he thought he stood a better chance asking Dumbledore.
I think Snape must have been adequately "confident" (though certainly wary) to approach Voldemort, if he was asking for Lily, the mother of the "Chosen One" and Muggle-born to boot, to be spared. As I see it, that is a very dangerous request - possibly the most dangerous one he could make, other than asking Harry to be pardoned (unless, of course, he offered Neville instead, I think), so I think Snape could easily have gone a little further in trying to help the entire Potter family (at least saving James as well) if he wanted to.

One thing I do wonder is why was Voldemort willing to spare Lily? What reason did Snape give him? In DH, we know Voldemort says, "He desired her, that was all," sneered Voldemort, "but when she had gone, he agreed that there were other women, and of purer blood, worthier of him-"
Was Voldemort truly prepared to spare the life of Lily (Muggle-born and mother of Harry Potter) simply for Snape's "desire"?
Would not be ???? I don’t think we have any cannon to support that do we? Voldemort seems to me to be very bent on his own wishes – it also seems that people pick that up rather quickly. Draco picked that up in less than an academic year. Severus had, in all probability, been working for him longer than that so I think it likely that he had worked it out –unless you have any cannon to support your statement of course :)
I apologize. I usually try to differentiate between my opinion and canon. I clearly forgot to do so in that statement, so I apologize.

To me, it is logical that a younger, less experienced, and less knowledgeable (especially about Voldemort) Snape would not be as aware that trying to dissuade Voldemort "is a lost cause," compared to the older Snape at Spinner's End (when he says he is "not stupid enough" to persuade Voldemort). I do not claim that Snape would not have understood trying to persuade Voldemort to spare the Potters (at least, Lily and James) would be almost impossible, but I do think his older version is more wary of persuading Voldemort.
Loving someone doesn’t mean one automatically understand what makes them happy – any divorce layer or agony aunt could tell you that. ;)
Agreed. However, I do think Snape understood that Lily's husband and son did make her happy. He grew up with Lily, and he would have known that Lily would not put herself through something (especially a relationship) that she was not devoted to and did not make her happy (this is my analysis of Lily's character; I think she was too strong to be willingly unhappy in a relationship). Therefore, I think Snape did realize Lily's family was key to her happiness, yet he selfishly (I use this term since I think Snape wanted Lily alive largely for his own sake) asked for only Lily to be spared.
Also we could discuss what Severus should have done – but is that character analysis? Personally I don’t think so.
I use it to analyze his character because, to me, what he should have done and did do highlight the difference between selfless and selfish behavior.
Perhaps he did?
Or perhaps he didn’t because he already knew that he could not dissuade Voldemort once he had made his mind up?
It is possible. However, since we do not have any canonical evidence or implication (that I know of), my interpretation of Snape in this scenario does not change because of this possibility.

wickedwickedboy

August 12th, 2009, 9:55 pm

In a Superman comic, a teary young mother might beg the superhero to "Save my baby!" as a bus full of kids teeters over an abyss owing to the machinations of the villain. We do not suppose she is asking Superman to pick her kid out of the crowd and drop the rest...

I see no basis to reason differently in the situation presented in "The Prince's Tale".

I respect your view - but the reason to reason differently is because that is how it came across, imo. Dumbledore construed it as asking only for Lily's safety too, that is why he said "so you don't care what happens to her and child, as long as you get what you want" (DH TPT P'phrase), imo.

ignisia

August 12th, 2009, 10:00 pm

wickedwickedboy

August 12th, 2009, 10:12 pm

I can see why young Snape's indifference toward infant Harry can be disturbing and horrible. I can see why it would make people as indignant as Dumbledore was at that moment. It made me angry at first reading as well.

But, as Yoana pointed out earlier, the point of the chapter itself is not just to show how despicable Snape was as a DE (like we need reminding of how bad they can be!), but also to show how he changed and grew as a person over the years. It's a story of redemption.

There's no reason to gloss over the bad points in that chapter. The fact was, he didn't appear to care about an endangered infant at all, and that's obviously very bad. But I think it's even more unreasonable to judge the character based only on that moment when there is plenty of evidence that his moral view changed as the years went by, and that he would never repeat the same mistake at 38 that he made at 21. Snape was never perfect, but he was no monster by the time Harry met him.

I feel the reason it is important to Snape's character arc is because he actually did go full circle in terms of Harry, imo. He was originally willing to sacrifice him as long as Lily was spared - and then promised to help protect him so Lily's death would not be in vain (but mistreat him during this period, imo) - then in the end was willing to sacrifice him again in order to bring down Voldemort (and by sacrifice, I mean of course, allow Voldy to kill him).

So to me, Snape was repeating the same mistake he made at 21 at 38 - for different reasons and under a leader with a new name (Dumbledore) who was against his old leader. What I feel doesn't help is Snape's mistreatment of Harry in the meanwhile because there is nothing at all to ever show that Snape was in Harry's corner, despite his being the boy named in the prophecy, imo.

And why should Snape be in Harry's corner? To me, there is no reason anyone should be in his corner unless they want to be. However, Snape did claim to care for Lily - and even if from his viewpoint he did, his never being in Harry's corner and treatment of him seems highly contradictory behavior in light of that belief to me. However, that could just be the difference between the way Snape looks at love and I do, nonetheless, from my perspective it all comes across as highly incongruent - making the idea of redemption difficult for me to swallow. That is because redemption for me comes with remorse and repentence, and Snape's motivation for his treatment of Harry, imo, is directly tied to things I feel he should have shown remorse and repentence about in some way if not expressed, but I didn't find that in Snape's character.

silver ink pot

August 12th, 2009, 10:18 pm

Great post, SurfcatMalfoy! :tu: :)

I think some things are getting lost in the analysis.
Severus was, without a doubt (IMO), solely concerned with how Voldemort's plans would affect him. That is, how it affected the one person of the three that were targeted for termination. Okay...that may be slightly one-sided. It was inside him. He knew, down deep, that it was wrong. His demeanor (and his request of Dumbledore itself) shows that he was beginning to see the error of his ways but it can't be denied that they WERE his ways. Until that meeting with Dumbledore on the hill he WAS the horrible person that so many make him out to be.

Yes, he was except for a few important feelings ~ he could still love, and he had a conscience about what he did, which is why he was there on the hill with Dumbledore and why he agreed so readily to help all of the Potters.

I personally don't believe he ever murdered anyone, although others might believe that. I don't believe Snape had a killer inside him anymore than Draco or Regulus did, and that's what sets them apart in my opinion.

Severus is a tragic hero. He learned too late in life that his path was bringing nothing but pain to himself, and then to the woman he loved. He was brave, but only in the years after Lilly's death. He was on a life long mission of redemption. He was also proving his love for Lilly by protecting her son...whom he despised due to the fact that he wasn't HIS son, he was the son of his boyhood enemy... but doing it for her ('ALWAYS').
In his later years he could see that Dumbledore's was the side of the right minded. He knew that the work he was doing was because it was the right thing to do. Dumbledore said that he thought they sorted too soon. Perhaps it was 20 years too soon for Severus. I believe that if you placed that hat on his head in the Shieking Shack it would have shouted out, "Gryffindor!!!" (not that I think that's better, ;-)).
Lets not pretend that he cared for Harry and James, he didn't save the entire picture from Sirius' room. But in the end he did what was difficult and right.
Nice post ~ yes, Snape changed from that confused young man on the hill.

sweetsev

August 12th, 2009, 10:51 pm

And why should Snape be in Harry's corner? To me, there is no reason anyone should be in his corner unless they want to be. However, Snape did claim to care for Lily - and even if from his viewpoint he did, his never being in Harry's corner and treatment of him seems highly contradictory behavior in light of that belief to me. However, that could just be the difference between the way Snape looks at love and I do, nonetheless, from my perspective it all comes across as highly incongruent - making the idea of redemption difficult for me to swallow. That is because redemption for me comes with remorse and repentence, and Snape's motivation for his treatment of Harry, imo, is directly tied to things I feel he should have shown remorse and repentence about in some way if not expressed, but I didn't find that in Snape's character.

See, I struggled with this too...that is, if Snape really cared about Lily and Harry was the only thing of Lily left, then how could he treat him so terribly? Or if he didn't care, why did he bother helping out in the first place? And if it was about repenting for a past wrong, then how could he allow Harry to die (as he was going to on the hill) again? What kind of personal growth is that?

But upon further reflection, I think it really is all part of Snape's tragedy and the story of redemption that comes too late. That is, when he comes to the hill and agrees to help DD, he is not doing it out of a true acceptance of what is right, he is doing it solely for Lily (demonstrated by his lack of concern for her family). In that way, Snape is keeping Harry alive for self-serving reasons (his own guilt/self punishment) and there is nothing stopping him from being cruel to Harry; Harry is a duty. But as the story goes on, I think that we see Snape grow into someone who truly understands that Voldemort/the DE's are morally wrong to all of humanity; not just a force that took his Lily. So the tragedy then for him, at the end of the story, is his understanding that Harry's sacrifice is necessary to win the war against evil. Snape has to make his own sacrifice and let Harry--the representation of his love for Lily and the tool he has used to punish himself over the years--die. Snape has to choose the vanquishment of Voldemort over his personal drive in life, and he does. This is the completion of his redemption. Then he dies. That's how it makes sense to me. If one doesn't see Snape as having changed his worldview over his lifetime, then this probably sounds nonsensical, but that is just the way I see it.

wickedwickedboy

August 12th, 2009, 11:04 pm

and there is nothing stopping him from being cruel to Harry; Harry is a duty. But as the story goes on, I think that we see Snape grow into someone who truly understands that Voldemort/the DE's are morally wrong to all of humanity; not just a force that took his Lily. So the tragedy then for him, at the end of the story, is his understanding that Harry's sacrifice is necessary to win the war against evil. Snape has to make his own sacrifice and let Harry--the representation of his love for Lily and the tool he has used to punish himself over the years--die. Snape has to choose the vanquishment of Voldemort over his personal drive in life, and he does.

I was following your point till I got to this section, I don't really uunderstand what you mean, could you clarify? When did Snape change his view (meaning in which book or part of canon)? Also by change do you also mean from seeing Harry as a representation of Lily's love for James (what JKR said Snape saw) to seeing the boy as a representation of his love for Lily - and if so, how do you feel that was conveyed in the canon? Also, what do you mean by Harry was used as a tool for Snape to punish himself? And finally, what was Snape's personal drive?

Sorry so many questions, but I didn't follow this section very well.

sweetsev

August 12th, 2009, 11:24 pm

I was following your point till I got to this section, I don't really uunderstand what you mean, could you clarify? When did Snape change his view (meaning in which book or part of canon)? Also by change do you also mean from seeing Harry as a representation of Lily's love for James (what JKR said Snape saw) to seeing the boy as a representation of his love for Lily - and if so, how do you feel that was conveyed in the canon? Also, what do you mean by Harry was used as a tool for Snape to punish himself? And finally, what was Snape's personal drive?

Sorry so many questions, but I didn't follow this section very well.

Sorry...I realized i didn't define a lot of what I was saying. As for Snape changing his view...I mean mostly the things we see in DH, although nothing is explicit, so it is open to interpretation. Primarily, I felt that Snape evolved into a more moralistic viewpoint based on things like his punishing the kids who stole the sword by sending them to Hagrid instead of the Carrows, by telling the portrait not to say "mudblood," by giving Harry memories that revealed his past sins, by trying to save Lupin, by expressing remorse about Charity Burbage. As for how Snape saw Harry: yes, he saw him as a part of James (which is why he hated Harry), but at the same time, protecting Harry was the duty Snape took on as his self punishment for getting Lily killed and as a testament to his love for her; therefore Harry was a tool for Snape (hope that makes sense). Snape's personal drive (not sure why I didn't just say "motivation") was keeping Harry alive for the reasons I just gave (guilt and love). So even though he did not care for Harry, as a person, telling Harry he had to die was the destruction of everything Snape was living for (guilt and love). To use a previous word, Snape was "invested" in Harry being kept alive and he had to give that up to win the war; and he did. Oh boy, I hope this wasn't even more confusing.

canismajoris

August 12th, 2009, 11:40 pm

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.
Snape thread notwithstanding, I'm not prepared to guarantee that I'd never do that. I don't know because the situation has never been presented to me. I want to believe that I would save a child, but even then there are some murky moral and ethical waters to navigate. How could I presume to arbitrate who lives and who dies? Is a child's life inherently more valuable than an adult's? Would I be able to forgive myself in either case? No, I do not think it's fair to say that nobody would do that... and it makes the decision to sacrifice one's own life all the more easy by comparison. Snape's actions may have reflected a rather selfish desire of his, but the fact that he could have had a choice is terribly unenviable in the first place. Remember, it was Voldemort who really had to be bargained with here, and I don't think sparing Harry was really on the table.

wickedwickedboy

August 12th, 2009, 11:48 pm

Sorry...I realized i didn't define a lot of what I was saying. As for Snape changing his view...I mean mostly the things we see in DH, although nothing is explicit, so it is open to interpretation. Primarily, I felt that Snape evolved into a more moralistic viewpoint based on things like his punishing the kids who stole the sword by sending them to Hagrid instead of the Carrows, by telling the portrait not to say "mudblood," by giving Harry memories that revealed his past sins, by trying to save Lupin, by expressing remorse about Charity Burbage. As for how Snape saw Harry: yes, he saw him as a part of James (which is why he hated Harry), but at the same time, protecting Harry was the duty Snape took on as his self punishment for getting Lily killed and as a testament to his love for her; therefore Harry was a tool for Snape (hope that makes sense). Snape's personal drive (not sure why I didn't just say "motivation") was keeping Harry alive for the reasons I just gave (guilt and love). So even though he did not care for Harry, as a person, telling Harry he had to die was the destruction of everything Snape was living for (guilt and love). To use a previous word, Snape was "invested" in Harry being kept alive and he had to give that up to win the war; and he did. Oh boy, I hope this wasn't even more confusing.

:lol:, no, I understood that time. I would disagree with the part about Harry serving as a tool for self-punishment in an overall sense - although I agree that was how he may have initially seen it. I think the fact that he did not have to even see Harry for 11 years helped and thereafter, when he saw that he could mistreat Harry and gain some vindication for his jealous feelings, he no longer considered it self-punishment, but punishment to Lily, James and Harry - all through Harry, imo. I also didn't really feel Snape ever saw Harry in any way but to loath him as he had his dad, imo. I don't think he had a problem with sending Harry to his death, based on the canon when he got the news and remained calm and his willingness to gain Harry's trust enough through revealing negative things about himself in order for Harry to believe the message from Dumbledore, imo. I guess the bottom line is that I feel Snape was completely invested in Lily - but via his means of focus, which I found to be somewhat skewed.

TreacleTartlet

August 13th, 2009, 12:04 am

But upon further reflection, I think it really is all part of Snape's tragedy and the story of redemption that comes too late. That is, when he comes to the hill and agrees to help DD, he is not doing it out of a true acceptance of what is right, he is doing it solely for Lily (demonstrated by his lack of concern for her family). In that way, Snape is keeping Harry alive for self-serving reasons (his own guilt/self punishment) and there is nothing stopping him from being cruel to Harry; Harry is a duty. But as the story goes on, I think that we see Snape grow into someone who truly understands that Voldemort/the DE's are morally wrong to all of humanity; not just a force that took his Lily. So the tragedy then for him, at the end of the story, is his understanding that Harry's sacrifice is necessary to win the war against evil. Snape has to make his own sacrifice and let Harry--the representation of his love for Lily and the tool he has used to punish himself over the years--die. Snape has to choose the vanquishment of Voldemort over his personal drive in life, and he does. This is the completion of his redemption. Then he dies. That's how it makes sense to me. If one doesn't see Snape as having changed his worldview over his lifetime, then this probably sounds nonsensical, but that is just the way I see it.

Yes, it makes sense to me! As I see it, it is after Dumbledore tells Severus that Harry must die, that it becomes less about doing it for Lily and more about what is right. That being helping to rid the world of the evil of Voldemort. When Snape shows Dumbledore his doe Patronus and she soared out of the window, I think this was the beginning of the change. He could no longer serve her memory now that he knew Harry must die, or how could he possibly tell Harry.
'I thought...all these years...that we were protecting him for her, For Lily.'
He was doing it all for Lily and as much as he disliked Harry, Severus was aware that he was the only part of her left in this world, and Harry dying would mean never seeing her eyes again. But, he would have to serve a different cause if he was to carry out the task of telling Harry, which is why I think that this was the turning point, from doing it for Lily to doing it for the greater good.

sweetsev

August 13th, 2009, 12:05 am

:lol:, no, I understood that time. I would disagree with the part about Harry serving as a tool for self-punishment in an overall sense - although I agree that was how he may have initially seen it. I think the fact that he did not have to even see Harry for 11 years helped and thereafter, when he saw that he could mistreat Harry and gain some vindication for his jealous feelings, he no longer considered it self-punishment, but punishment to Lily, James and Harry - all through Harry, imo. I also didn't really feel Snape ever saw Harry in any way but to loath him as he had his dad, imo. I don't think he had a problem with sending Harry to his death, based on the canon when he got the news and remained calm and his willingness to gain Harry's trust enough through revealing negative things about himself in order for Harry to believe the message from Dumbledore, imo. I guess the bottom line is that I feel Snape was completely invested in Lily - but via his means of focus, which I found to be somewhat skewed.

Ooooh, you see a dark dark Snape, don't you? (okay, I knew that) I like the bit of him gaining Harry's trust by showing him bad memories. It's really all a post-mortem anyway; I think that, we the readers, are left to puzzle through and make sense of Snape's life and death in our own way; so many pieces are missing and/or contradictory. The scenario I wrote above is just how I put it together in the context of the larger story (themes of love/redemption/sacrifice); but your story works too! I generally just like how he makes us all think...and of course, we all have our own personal investments....:lol:

NeilSquib86

August 13th, 2009, 12:09 am

Snape thread notwithstanding, I'm not prepared to guarantee that I'd never do that. I don't know because the situation has never been presented to me. I want to believe that I would save a child, but even then there are some murky moral and ethical waters to navigate. How could I presume to arbitrate who lives and who dies? Is a child's life inherently more valuable than an adult's? Would I be able to forgive myself in either case? No, I do not think it's fair to say that nobody would do that... and it makes the decision to sacrifice one's own life all the more easy by comparison. Snape's actions may have reflected a rather selfish desire of his, but the fact that he could have had a choice is terribly unenviable in the first place. Remember, it was Voldemort who really had to be bargained with here, and I don't think sparing Harry was really on the table.

True, true. Love/affection/obssession can make people do (sometimes disgustingly) strange things.

On a tangent note how lovely is Bonnie Wright in my new sig pic? *dream*

blak_cat

August 13th, 2009, 1:01 am

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.

He wasn't really offering a sacrifice in return, Harry would be killed regardless, he was just asking that Lily be spared in the process. And yes it is still a terrible thing to do because he intended for James to be killed along with Harry and thus all of Lily's ties to her marriage to James are destroyed. And this is still an extremely selfish and evil act.

And who is to say there isn't people would sacrifice another person (child or otherwise) for someone they love? Is it impossible to think of someone sacrificing another (even a child) in order to save the person they love most? I'm not defending it at all, but it isn't as surprising to me that Snape would ask for Lily to be spared while he let a child and man die. Especially with the nature of his love for Lily. Even as a child Snape exhibited signs of obsession towards Lily.

silver ink pot

August 13th, 2009, 3:45 am

And who is to say there isn't people would sacrifice another person (child or otherwise) for someone they love? Is it impossible to think of someone sacrificing another (even a child) in order to save the person they love most?
There's a good example in the book ~ Mr. Lovegood, with his rather symbolic last name. He loved Luna so much he was willing to do "anything" to get her back, including a sell-out of Harry, Ron, and Hermione to the Death Eaters! They were someone's children, and in fact they were the best friends his daughter had. Yet he didn't love them the way he loved his own daughter.

Luckily they forgave him right away (at least Hermione did), and then Dobby saved Luna from Malfoy Manor. Mr. Lovegood was obliviated and probably not tried as a traitor.

So if that is how Hermione treated someone who wanted to turn her over to the Death Eaters in return for Luna, then I think we can try to understand why Snape was willing to do "anything" to protect Lily. He didn't love James, and he couldn't stop Voldemort from killing Harry by himself - but he did the only thing he thought might work which was to go to Dumbledore. He did the right thing, in my opinion.

It's significant that Mr. Lovegood reminded Harry of Lily when he was pleading for them to stay so he could get Luna back. Was that just an obsession Xenophilius had with his daughter? Or wasn't it just love in its most protective form, and much the same as Snape's love? The latter, in my opinion.

hwyla

August 13th, 2009, 4:04 am

silver ink pot

August 13th, 2009, 4:16 am

Hwyla: You make sense to me down the line in all your points. It would be immensely worse if Snape had tried to persuade Voldemort to go after Neville, but that's not what he did. I don't think Snape wanted any babies to die at all, and that certainly wasn't his own idea, but Voldemort's.

Over the years after the Potters died, Snape was a teacher at Hogwarts, and as one of the staff, he protected all the children - not just Harry, and not just the Slytherins. When there is danger he is usually the first one on the scene telling Dumbledore what he thinks should happen. So he doesn't strike me as a man who wants innocent children to die. Much the contrary, in my opinion. His whole thing is to teach them Defense Against the Dark Arts.

OldMotherCrow

August 13th, 2009, 4:18 am

There's a good example in the book ~ Mr. Lovegood, with his rather symbolic last name. He loved Luna so much he was willing to do "anything" to get her back, including a sell-out of Harry, Ron, and Hermione to the Death Eaters! They were someone's children, and in fact they were the best friends his daughter had. Yet he didn't love them the way he loved his own daughter.

Luckily they forgave him right away (at least Hermione did), and then Dobby saved Luna from Malfoy Manor. Mr. Lovegood was obliviated and probably not tried as a traitor.

So if that is how Hermione treated someone who wanted to turn her over to the Death Eaters in return for Luna, then I think we can try to understand why Snape was willing to do "anything" to protect Lily. He didn't love James, and he couldn't stop Voldemort from killing Harry by himself - but he did the only thing he thought might work which was to go to Dumbledore. He did the right thing, in my opinion.

The parallels of Snape's love for Lily, Xenophilius's for Luna, and Lucius and Narcissa Malfoy's love for Draco is something I've always found intersting in the books. The major difference that I can see is that Xeno was forced into the situation with Voldemort and his Death Eaters, while Snape, Lucius and Narcissa all seem to have joined up of their own free will. Since Xeno didn't create the terrifying situation he was in, I find I have more sympathy for him.

It's significant that Mr. Lovegood reminded Harry of Lily when he was pleading for them to stay so he could get Luna back. Was that just an obsession Xenophilius had with his daughter? Or wasn't it just love in its most protective form, and much the same as Snape's love? The latter, in my opinion.

This is something that has interested me too. IMO, Snape's love for Lily is like that of a parent for a small child, precisely because it mirrors Xeno's love for Luna (I understand Xeno's position, but I think he was wrong to sell out the thing his daughter valued the most), and Narcissa's love for Draco, and Lily's love for Harry (she at least actually was making decisions for a small child, unlike the rest of them).

At what age should the object of one's love be considered a person whose life decisions should be respected, even if they are in danger of death? I can understand Xeno, who was forced into the situation by Voldemort and the Death Eaters. I can even understand Narcissa and Snape, who signed up on their own free will. But I also think Xeno was wrong to sell out what his daughter valued most.

Lily was not Snape's child. At that point in time she was not a child at all. IMO, a promise of "anything" to keep her safe does not show any understanding or respect for her, or what she has decided are the people and values that she wants to risk her own life protecting.

I think a good contrast is Arthur Weasley, who respects Ron's choice to risk his life helping Harry in DH. In my opinion, doing "anything" to protect a person, even to the point of ignoring their values, is not necessary to love at all. I think respect shows a greater love.

arithmancer

August 13th, 2009, 4:25 am

zelinskas

August 13th, 2009, 4:31 am

I realize one poster said Snape should have asked anyways and just let Voldy kill him for doing so. To paraphrase Albus 'just what good would THAT do?' By dying at that time, then Snape cannot meet Albus on the hill, cannot warn him that Voldy has decided on the Potters and Albus would not have even sent them into hiding (since even tho' Albus knew the prophecy and knew Harry and Neville fit it, neither family was in hiding yet). We even learned back in PoA that it was the warning from Albus' spy that sent the Potters into hiding. So, that poster would rather Snape died instead of living to tell Albus?

In other words, some posters would rather Snape had made the useless gesture to die while asking for Lily and her family to be spared than for him to actually live to risk his life to tell Albus that they were in danger? Remember that without Snape's telling Albus, Albus does not tell the Potters of the need to hide. So, they ALL die. Even Harry since Lily's death wouldn't protect him.

And just how stupid do you believe Snape was? That you think he would believe that Albus would protect ONLY Lily, when the important one for winning the war was Harry? Even IF Snape believed Albus could be so heartless as to hide only Lily, leaving her child and husband out of hiding to be killed, it wouldn't make sense for the leader of the opposition to protect the mother of the child of prophecy and leave the kid out to die.

Snape was not an idiot. To assume that asking Albus to hide Lily would leave Lily safe, while keeping James and Harry in danger would be ludicrous on Snape's part. This is the same guy that Hermione praised for using LOGIC to protect the Stone. So, it isn't as if Snape thinks illogically - he knew he had little chance of convincing Voldy to spare ANYONE. He gives it a try anyways by asking Voldy to spare the only one Snape has even a slim chance of convincing Voldy to not kill and then he goes for his backup plan of arranging a meeting with Albus.

The point is not that attempting to save all the Potters rather than one would have done no good, but that Snape couldn't have cared less about what happened to James and Harry. He expressed no concern over their well being when he spoke to Dumbledore, so long as Lily survived. Hence Dumbledore's disgust at Snape.

Quote Neilsquib86: On a tangent note how lovely is Bonnie Wright in my new sig pic? *dream*

And on a side note, to address this odd statement and say just how lovely Bonnie Wright is in his sig pic. Very. She looks kind of gothish, but in a good way.
I couldn't get it two quote two things properly so I had to do it like this.

OldMotherCrow

August 13th, 2009, 4:32 am

Of course, while Xeno may have been betraying Luna's values to protect her, Snape was doing the opposite. The "Anything" he promised to do, was to become a spy for Albus, leader of the same Order of which Lily was a member.

Well, it turned out that way, thanks to Albus Dumbledore IMO :lol:.

But I don't think Snape had any particular plans in that direction. That's what his "anything" meant, to my mind-- that he was willing to do anything, whether it was good, or evil. It's sort of a morally bankrupt promise. I think he got lucky that his best hope to get him what he wanted steered him towards good. But I also think he would have gladly joined up with someone evil just as quickly if he thought that would have gotten him what he wanted too.

silver ink pot

August 13th, 2009, 4:41 am

Of course, while Xeno may have been betraying Luna's values to protect her, Snape was doing the opposite. The "Anything" he promised to do, was to become a spy for Albus, leader of the same Order of which Lily was a member.
Exactly ~ Xeno was selling out to the bad side, while Snape was joining the good side.

I see Snape, Narcissa, and Lucius as not having many choices either, just like Xeno, because in each case their loved one was being threatened by the same powerful wizard who had no conception of love (parental or romantic). They were all trapped, but of them all, I would say that Snape and Narcissa made the best choices.

I don't believe that JKR distinguishes between parental love, romantic love, or brotherly/sisterly love (as with Dumbledore/Arriana or Harry/Hermione). As long as a character can feel that powerful emotion called Love, then there is still good in them and they can be redeemed. Just my opinion.

zelinskas

August 13th, 2009, 4:49 am

Exactly ~ Xeno was selling out to the bad side, while Snape was joining the good side.

Yeah, but IMO Snape wasn't particularly concerned who was a good guy and who was a bad guy at the time.

Colonel_Fubster

August 13th, 2009, 4:55 am

I rather think Snape had enough information even then to know that Voldemort was evil, and Dumbledore was not, that's why he appealed to Dumbledore once he knew who Voldemort was targeting.

hwyla

August 13th, 2009, 5:14 am

The point is not that attempting to save all the Potters rather than one would have done no good, but that Snape couldn't have cared less about what happened to James and Harry. He expressed no concern over their well being when he spoke to Dumbledore, so long as Lily survived. Hence Dumbledore's disgust at Snape.I think you miss my point - IF Snape had truly wanted ONLY Lily to live, then going to Albus at all makes no sense. Voldy apparently was perfectly okay with the idea of sparing Lily (since he did in fact give her the option). So, a Snape that wants an alive Lily (with a dead husband and child) would not risk going to Albus at all. There isn't a single chance that Albus (as head of the Order) would hide Lily and NOT hide Harry - the child of the prophecy. And I contend that Snape is not stupid enough to believe otherwise.

Yes, Lily matters the most to him, but the same can be said for other characters, too. A recent example given was Luna's father. And yes, he was forced to choose between his daughter and her friends through no fault of his own (since he did not willfully join the DEs). However, one also needs to look at it as HE knew exactly who HE would be sacrificing, while Snape (as per canon, straight from Albus' mouth) had no idea who the prophecy would be about when he gave it to Voldy. Is it any better/worse to endanger an unknown (anonymous to you) family who are not standing there waiting to be handed over or to literally try to deliver people you KNOW the enemy would love to kill?

We have no idea of Snape's thoughts regarding the prophecy before he gives it to Voldy - only that he had previously been assigned to spy on Albus, preferably by being hired as the DADA teacher. Here it is, the next school year and he is NOT the DADA teacher, but he gets a rare opportunity to eavesdrop on Albus and takes it, like the loyal DE he was at the time.

He then runs off to Voldy to give him the info he overheard, as Voldy's spy 'should'.

Even now, we have no info on Snape's opinion of divination, nor whether he knows Voldy's opinion of them. The only canon we have for anyone's beliefs regarding divination at that specific time is Albus' decision to NOT replace a divination teacher even partway through a term, only changing his mind because he was surprised by a true prophecy partway through the interview.

We know LATER that Voldy is interested in the prophecy, but only after it had been reported to him. We have nothing to tell us whether Snape thought Voldy believed in divination or not at that time (obviously Snape knows LATER that Voldy is taking the prophecy seriously since he goes off to tell Albus about it)

So, the question arises - what would Mr. Logical-Thinking Snape 'think' of divination as he hares off to tell Voldy what he overheard? We have the opinions on divination of two other characters. One, Hermione - the kid who admired Snape's use of Logic in his trap for the Stone - she finds it useless, until she later learns there are REAL prophecies stored in the DoM. Then we have Minerva, another no-nonsense character who comments on Sybil includes 'Tripe!'. Would many of us assume Snape would be the type to believe in divination if he weren't the one involved in telling Voldy the prophecy. He certainly doesn't seem the type.

Do we even have any canon that suggests Snape would see reporting to Voldy that Albus was interviewing a seer means anything more than a desperate attempt on Albus' part to turn the tide of the war?

ignisia

August 13th, 2009, 5:26 am

I think you miss my point - IF Snape had truly wanted ONLY Lily to live, then going to Albus at all makes no sense. Voldy apparently was perfectly okay with the idea of sparing Lily (since he did in fact give her the option). So, a Snape that wants an alive Lily (with a dead husband and child) would not risk going to Albus at all. There isn't a single chance that Albus (as head of the Order) would hide Lily and NOT hide Harry - the child of the prophecy. And I contend that Snape is not stupid enough to believe otherwise.

I think it's up in the air. Snape does mention all three Potters at the beginning of the meeting ("You know what I mean! He thinks it means her son, he is going to hunt her down – kill them all!") so he's not completely oblivious to their existence. Whether or not he thinks it's an all-or-nothing situation with Dumbledore is something else entirely. He does, after all, think the old man is likely to kill him on the spot. His expectations of Dumbledore's morality must not be very high if he thinks the man will kill him without giving him a chance to talk.

On the other hand, he does seem overly focused on the Lily, which could mean his faith in Voldemort to keep his promise is wavering and he's going to try every avenue to keep her safe. If trusting Voldemort got him into this mess, he's going to be more likely to try other ways of saving the woman he loves.

zelinskas

August 13th, 2009, 5:38 am

To quote DH (and you can check this yourself, its on pg.677, in The Prince's Tale)

Dumbledore: You disgust me. You do not care, then, about the deaths of her husband and child? They can die, as long as you have what you want?

Snape: Hide them all, then. Keep her- them- safe. Please.

I could be reading it wrong, but it seems to me that Snape doesn't refute Dumbledore's statement, but tacks on Harry and James in his request as an afterthought to appease Dumbledore.

Chris

August 13th, 2009, 5:48 am

I think Snape was, originally, intending to double-down his bet on protection for Lily. Dumbledore extracted the other promises out of him and perhaps started his change. But I see Snape as having a one-track mind in that conversation ("Save lily...save lily...save lily"). The later protection of Harry was I think him trying to salvage what he could of what was to him a tragedy.

wickedwickedboy

August 13th, 2009, 6:09 am

There's a good example in the book ~ Mr. Lovegood, with his rather symbolic last name. He loved Luna so much he was willing to do "anything" to get her back, including a sell-out of Harry, Ron, and Hermione to the Death Eaters! They were someone's children, and in fact they were the best friends his daughter had. Yet he didn't love them the way he loved his own daughter.

Agreed that everyone is someone's child, even Dumbledore. But the trio were all adults at the time. Still, Xeno selling them out for Luna didn't come across as a good thing to me, in any sense - and regardless of their ages, imo. So I would think his behavior would stand for the same proposition that Snape's did when he was willing to allow Harry and James to die in order for Lily to be spared/saved - a bad/wrongful decision, imo.

So if that is how Hermione treated someone who wanted to turn her over to the Death Eaters in return for Luna, then I think we can try to understand why Snape was willing to do "anything" to protect Lily. He didn't love James, and he couldn't stop Voldemort from killing Harry by himself - but he did the only thing he thought might work which was to go to Dumbledore. He did the right thing, in my opinion.

I feel the point was that loving someone should have nothing to do with it (imo) - James didn't love Snape when he risked his life to save him - Harry didn't love Draco when he went back to save his life...

It's significant that Mr. Lovegood reminded Harry of Lily when he was pleading for them to stay so he could get Luna back. Was that just an obsession Xenophilius had with his daughter? Or wasn't it just love in its most protective form, and much the same as Snape's love? The latter, in my opinion.

Where does Harry say that Mr. Lovegood reminded him of his mother? I didn't see it in the scene itself or in the direct aftermath. Nonetheless, Lily didn't try to protect Harry at the expense of someone else's life, and in my view, Harry would not validate or justify Xeno's behavior under the big umbrella "protective love" in an attempt to vindicate the man for his wrong - especially not in a comparative sense with either of his parents (imo). Lily placed her own life in the balance - Xeno, like Narcissa, was willing to place another's life in the balance for their loved one, imo.

silver ink pot

August 13th, 2009, 6:27 am

Where does Harry say that Mr. Lovegood reminded him of his mother? I didn't see it in the scene itself or in the direct aftermath.

“No deal,” said Ron flatly. “Get out of the way, we’re leaving.”

Xenophilius looked ghastly, a century old, his laps drawn back
into a dreadful leer.

“They will be here at any moment. I must save Luna. I cannot
lose Luna. You must not leave.”

He spread his arms in front of the staircase, and Harry had a
sudden vision of his mother doing the same thing in front of his
crib.

Notice how Harry describes Xeno as a century old with a dreadful leer. It sounds alot like the way he describes Snape all the time, with the lip-curl.

In Prince's Tale after Lily dies, Snape "looked like a man who had lived a hundred years of misery." As in "a century" like Mr. Lovgood. JKR even uses the same language to describe them, so I think with this Lily reference she is showing us something about why Snape's feelings were just as valid as Mr. Lovegood's. She is showing us that losing a loved one takes a toll on people, for Snape as much as for anyone else, in my opinion. It makes them a little crazy, but that doesn't mean they are horrible. If we follow Hermione's lead, as I mentioned in another post, we would forgive both Xeno and Snape for being crazed with grief.

wickedwickedboy

August 13th, 2009, 6:51 am

Just what reason was Snape supposed to give Voldy for sparing James and Harry?

Oh please don't kill that kid who is predicted to defeat you - it's just wrong to kill a baby? And James? Who had apparently somehow defied Voldy 3 times and was a Full-Time (no other job) Order member? What could Snape possibly SAY to Voldy that would change his mind? Geez - I know the guy bullied me at school and he's defied you 3 times, but he's really pretty funny and charming and loyal to his friends, so that would also be wrong to kill him, so please don't? And remember, Voldy can tell IF he's lying unless he has a memory that can back up his lie.

But Snape HAD a reason, that he can get away with, for asking Voldy to spare Lily. He tells Voldy he 'desires' Lily and since he has memories that can back that up (and Voldy wouldn't know actual love if it smacked him in the face), Voldy will believe it is mere desire. Even IF Voldy suspects Lily means more than mere 'desire' to Snape it's alright with Voldy to grant this boon because it then gives him something to hold over Snape's head. Just as he held the lives of each Malfoy over the heads of the other Malfoys.

If one is going to insist that Snape SHOULD have asked Voldy to not kill James or Harry (as well as sparing Lily) then one has to come up with a plausible reason for Snape to give Voldy that won't be seen as a lie and won't get Snape killed.

I realize one poster said Snape should have asked anyways and just let Voldy kill him for doing so. To paraphrase Albus 'just what good would THAT do?' By dying at that time, then Snape cannot meet Albus on the hill, cannot warn him that Voldy has decided on the Potters and Albus would not have even sent them into hiding (since even tho' Albus knew the prophecy and knew Harry and Neville fit it, neither family was in hiding yet, despite the prophecy having been made many months prior). We even learned back in PoA that it was the warning from Albus' spy that sent the Potters into hiding. So, that poster would rather Snape died instead of living to tell Albus?

In other words, some posters would rather Snape had made the useless gesture to die while asking for Lily and her family to be spared than for him to actually live to risk his life to tell Albus that they were in danger? Remember that without Snape's telling Albus, Albus does not tell the Potters of the need to hide. So, they ALL die. Even Harry since Lily's death wouldn't protect him.

And just how stupid do you believe Snape was? That you think he would believe that Albus would protect ONLY Lily, when the important one for winning the war was Harry? Even IF Snape believed Albus could be so heartless as to hide only Lily, leaving her child and husband out of hiding to be killed, it wouldn't make sense for the leader of the opposition to protect the mother of the child of prophecy and leave the kid out to die.

Snape was not an idiot. To assume that asking Albus to hide Lily would leave Lily safe, while keeping James and Harry in danger would be ludicrous on Snape's part. This is the same guy that Hermione praised for using LOGIC to protect the Stone. So, it isn't as if Snape thinks illogically - he knew he had little chance of convincing Voldy to spare ANYONE. He gives it a try anyways by asking Voldy to spare the only one Snape has even a slim chance of convincing Voldy to not kill and then he goes for his backup plan of arranging a meeting with Albus.

There is NO 'sacrificing' a child to Voldy to keep Lily alive, there is merely trying to save the only one Snape has a chance of saving. And dying because he asks Voldy to spare the others is just NOT logical - he MUST live because he needs to go put his backup plan with Albus into affect, IF he doesn't, then no one will know who Voldy has chosen to go after and Albus apparently would not have hidden the Potters at all (according to canon).

To say that Snape was a coward because he didn't 'die' begging Voldy to spare James and Harry, but instead lived to go risk being killed by Albus, who he cannot but KNOW would also save at LEAST Harry (since he would be the key to Voldy's downfall) is inconceivable to me. I can only imagine that you must have bravery and recklessness confused.

But especially to suggest that Snape was a coward because he didn't try to sicc Voldy onto Neville INSTEAD of Harry? That doesn't make sense to me and needs better explaining. To say that Snape's evil for setting an anonymous child up to die by telling his 'commander' about a prophecy he partially overheard and then to suggest that the BRAVE thing to do would be to sicc him onto a SPECIFIC child? That wouldn't be bravery - that would be taking a mistake and making it worse.

I respect your interpretation, however, I do not feel that the sequence of events went down in this fashion (imo). Lily went into hiding when she was 3 months into her pregnancy according to JKR- which was long before it would be known to the general public if she would be having a boy or girl, imo, or that she was even pregnant, imo. At that time, they were not using the Fidelius charm, and I would assume the Longbottoms went into hiding too (although we don't know their timeline). In any case, my impression was that Voldemort went about making his decision after finding out which male babies were born at the end of July, and about a year before he acted, he decided on Harry - however, I do not feel he told anyone at that point, instead he put things in motion, like recruiting Peter and starting him off spying against the Order, building him up toward the thing he really wanted him for - betraying his friends (imo). Then a week before everything was to go down, Peter told him he was secret keeper and Voldemort revealed his plans to his inner circle, imo. That is when Snape found out who was selected and asked Voldemort to spare Lily - then went to Dumbledore to gain double protection for her, imo. At that point, Dumbledore told the Potters of the Charm to place the Potters under more protection since he knew they were specifically targeted, imo.

That said, I feel that Snape's option to go to Voldemort at all with his request, shows that his initial reaction was to remain loyal to Voldemort and simply try to get Lily spared in the outcome, imo. But he realized that might not work - she might fight for the survival of her child - worse yet, for her husband's survival and be killed and he knew Voldemort, promises or no, wouldn't think twice about doing so, imo. So he went to Dumbledore, hoping to get double whammy protection on Lily for passing the information to him, imo. That is why Snape went silent, imo when Dumbledore put it to him that his attitude disgusted him - Snape had gone there with the intent of presenting an exchange to Dumbledore: information he could do what he wanted with (including protect the Potters or trying to kill Voldy when he attacked or whatever) for Lily's safety - and he didn't want to extend his exchange to include what "Dumbledore wanted" - which was to keep them all safely hidden, just what he wanted, Lily hidden, imo. When Snape saw that wasn't going to work with Dumbledore, he conceded that James and Harry could be added to the bargain, but he reiterated what part of that promise mattered to him "just keep her..." (whoops, Dumbledore will not go for his ) "...them safe", imo.

In any case, in the aftermath of the Potter's death, when Snape went to Dumbledore's office, he did not accuse him of breaking his promise to keep them all hidden - only of not keeping Lily safe because he felt that Dumbledore knew that was the actual bargain that Snape had tried to strike, imo. Dumbledore called him on that too, imo, saying 'you placed your faith in the wrong person - Voldemort' - meaning he was hip to Snape's MO from the start and the fact that in Snape's heart, that MO had not changed, imo.

So Snape's options relative to his request to Voldemort in my view, are immaterial because Snape had no business trying to cut any deals with Voldemort in the first place except under completely immoral reasoning, imo. And his subsequent chat with Dumbledore was blighted by the same error of moral judgment, imo, which is why Dumbledore didn't bother to answer Snape's accusation at all in terms of himself, imo. He'd tried his best to do as he'd indicated and it hadn't worked - and Snape's initial act of taking the prophecy - which he admitted to Dumbledore on the hill - could not be undone in terms of the parents of the child in the prohpecy - which happened to be the Potters, and for that, Snape would have to remain culpable because despite what he may have believed to be his best efforts to keep Lily safe, he'd failed - and his basic, imo, non-attempt toward James had rendered the same result, imo.

Snape had made no real attempt in association with Harry, imo, and was contemptuous in finding out that Harry was still alive, imo (based on Tom's contempt shown through equivalent language in HBP upon finding out another shared his name). Snape wasn't even pleased that had turned out better than hoped for, that his original act had at least been undone in connection with one of the three targeted in the end, imo. So, that rather negated his excupation in a real or moral sense because he neither atttempted to save Harry, nor cared once he found out the child had been spared, imo. But still, Harry had been left an orphan and imo, he didn't care about that either.

All in all, I feel that Snape was shown at his lowest point in the entirety of that scene, from start to finish and I do agree with others that the point was to try and contrast that with subsequent growth. However, Snape's portrayal was relentless, imo, because not only did he show some moral growth (i.e., he now used moral judgment in determining if he could save someone and did so if possible; he did not like hearing others use the term 'mudblood' aloud; he'd save a 'dark creature' werewolf under that reasoning) I feel she continued to show Snape's lack thereof when it came to Snape's ability to accept the moral responsibility for his deeds in terms of his act having ended in the death of James and the orphan status of Harry (the scene included where Snape is complaining about both to Dumbledore - with no other apparent purpose, imo). I think this leaves the open question as to whether or not a person can be redeemed for acts alone, independent of what has happened in their heart, as long as they are not dedicated to the pursuit of the worst evil (i.e., Voldemort's regime), but instead, loyal to the cause of removing its head (Voldy). On that point, I answer no and so I don't find Snape redeemed.

“No deal,” said Ron flatly. “Get out of the way, we’re leaving.”

Xenophilius looked ghastly, a century old, his laps drawn back
into a dreadful leer.

“They will be here at any moment. I must save Luna. I cannot
lose Luna. You must not leave.”

He spread his arms in front of the staircase, and Harry had a
sudden vision of his mother doing the same thing in front of his
crib.

Notice how Harry describes Xeno as a century old with a dreadful leer. It sounds alot like the way he describes Snape all the time, with the lip-curl.

In Prince's Tale after Lily dies, Snape "looked like a man who had lived a hundred years of misery." As in "a century" like Mr. Lovgood. JKR even uses the same language to describe them, so I think with this Lily reference she is showing us something about why Snape's feelings were just as valid as Mr. Lovegood's. She is showing us that losing a loved one takes a toll on people, for Snape as much as for anyone else, in my opinion. It makes them a little crazy, but that doesn't mean they are horrible. If we follow Hermione's lead, as I mentioned in another post, we would forgive both Xeno and Snape for being crazed with grief.

Thank you - I read that, but somehow missed it anyway. :lol:. I respect your view, but I disagree. I feel that the point was just the opposite. Immediately following seeing Xeno's act the thought of his mother doing that before his crib, he says:

"Don't make us hurt you...get out of the way Mr. Lovegood"

And my impression is that Harry is making a completely negative comparison there. In other words, Xeno was willing to injure/kill others in order to protect his interests - whereas Lily was willing to give her own life for him, not the lives of others and I feel Harry was thinking just that. The man was behaving in a cowardly manner in comparison to his mother, willing to sacrifice others for his daughter's safety - and his own - rather than risk his own life as well as his daughters (imo). He even attempted to stun the trio to ensure their capture right after Harry told him to move - but Harry realized their "mistake" in thinking Xeno would not go that far, just in time, imo. To indicate Harry was thinking of Xeno in his mother's situation and undergoing similar thought processes, would be to indicate Harry was placing himself in the shoes of Voldemort in the scene - and I do not feel that is what was going through the chosen one's head.

I agree these situations we compare place a toll on all parties, but what I think the idea is here, is that even in the stress of the situation, one can still do the right thing. Xeno was being told to get out of the way by good siders, those trying to defeat evil - those who would too save his daughter if they could (and went on to attempt to do so) - whereas Lily was told to get out of the way by a dark lord, intent on killing her child - that is very different, imo.

I don't feel the moral was to forgive those who are crazed with grief (on the part of those confronting the person with protection in mind); the moral, imo, was that making the morally correct choice is important independent of the circumstances, including crazed grief or any other emotion a person is under (on the part of those who have protection in mind), imo.

Colonel_Fubster

August 13th, 2009, 8:42 am

Lily went into hiding when she was 3 months into her pregnancy according to JKR Please provide your source for this information.
The only reference close to this that I can find is her Carnegie Hall Open Book Chat:
So I suppose they lived off a private income. But they were full-time fighters, that's what they did, until Lily fell pregnant with Harry. So then they went into hiding.
She does not say that the Potters went into hiding while Lily was still pregnant, just that they went into hiding after she became pregnant with Harry. Not the same thing at all, as I'm sure the moms here could tell you. :)

But thank you for leading me to that, as I found this:
And I was so heartened to see that people on the message boards that people were still arguing about Snape. The book was out, and they were still arguing whether Snape was a good guy But that was really wonderful to me, because there's a question there, was Snape a good guy or not? In many ways he really wasn't. SoI haven't been deliberately misleading everyone all this time, when I say that he's a good guy. Because even though he did love and he loved very deeply and he was very brave, both qualities that I admire above anything else. He was bitter and he was vindictive... but right at the very very end, he did, as your question acknowledges, acheive a kind of peace together and I tried to show that in the epilogue.

link to transcript (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/10/20/j-k-rowling-at-carnegie-hall-reveals-dumbledore-is-gay-neville-marries-hannah-abbott-and-scores-more)

TreacleTartlet

August 13th, 2009, 9:21 am

Wow, I really can't believe we are still on this.

I think you miss my point - IF Snape had truly wanted ONLY Lily to live, then going to Albus at all makes no sense. Voldy apparently was perfectly okay with the idea of sparing Lily (since he did in fact give her the option). So, a Snape that wants an alive Lily (with a dead husband and child) would not risk going to Albus at all. There isn't a single chance that Albus (as head of the Order) would hide Lily and NOT hide Harry - the child of the prophecy. And I contend that Snape is not stupid enough to believe otherwise.

I totally agree! Snape is not so stupid to think Dumbledore that will not save her husband and child.

I still contend that Snape's asking Dumbledore to protect Lily and omitting Harry and James, is a natural instinct to protect those you love over others. I for one will put my hand up and say that I am sure I would plead for someone I loved to be saved at the omission of others. Not because I would want them to die but because they wouldn't even enter my thoughts, as I know I would be so distraught and hysterical to even give them a second thought. When a natural disaster such as an earthquke occurs, people worry about the safety of their loved one's, no one else. It's normal.

Then a week before everything was to go down, Peter told him he was secret keeper and Voldemort revealed his plans to his inner circle, imo. That is when Snape found out who was selected and asked Voldemort to spare Lily - then went to Dumbledore to gain double protection for her, imo. At that point, Dumbledore told the Potters of the Charm to place the Potters under more protection since he knew they were specifically targeted, imo.

In OotP, Snape tells Umbridge that he had been teaching at Hogwarts for 14 years, meaning he began teaching there in September 1981. So, Snape must have gone to Dumbledore before September '81.

Snape had gone there with the intent of presenting an exchange to Dumbledore: information he could do what he wanted with (including protect the Potters or trying to kill Voldy when he attacked or whatever) for Lily's safety - and he didn't want to extend his exchange to include what "Dumbledore wanted" - which was to keep them all safely hidden, just what he wanted, Lily hidden, imo.

Snape actually says, 'I - I come with a warning - no, a request - please-'
Snape doesn't mention anything about an exchange. Neither does he try to bargin with Dumbledore, in fact he gives Dumbledore the information freely.

wickedwickedboy

August 13th, 2009, 9:37 am

In OotP, Snape tells Umbridge that he had been teaching at Hogwarts for 14 years, meaning he began teaching there in September 1981. So, Snape must have gone to Dumbledore before September '81.

That assumes he began teaching in September - it would be more or less 14 years no matter what month he began, even if it was the start of the second term that year, imo. I think time wise, Dumbledore knowing the Potters were targeted for months before attempting to place them with special protection makes no sense, imo.

Snape actually says, 'I - I come with a warning - no, a request - please-'
Snape doesn't mention anything about an exchange. Neither does he try to bargin with Dumbledore, in fact he gives Dumbledore the information freely.

That was my opinion of his words - because of how they were said, Dumbledore's response, and Snape's subsequent behavior in light of that response. He was surprised Dumbledore would want anything more from him, because to me, he felt he'd already supplied his part in telling Dumbledore which couple Voldemort had targeted. I felt he specifically felt that giving that information entitled him a return favor from Dumbledore - keeping Lily safe. So when Dumbledore then says 'what will you do for me in return', Snape is like, what? What do you call what I just did!! :lol:.

But again, Snape in the aftermath reiterates what he felt the deal was: "you promised to keep her safe" - that was the promise Snape felt Dumbledore had not kept - a promise made in exchange for Snape's info and his promise to do anything, imo, (from Snape's point of view). But in truth, Dumbledore hadn't seen the info as presented as a fair exchange for anything at all - it was morally abominable for an individual to see it in that manner, imo, from his point of view and disgusted him. For Dumbledore, any exchange would begin with Snape at least making a proper request (include all three) and Dumbledore agreeing to try to do that, imo. And he never acknowledged that he'd broken any promise to Snape, because I don't feel he felt that he had - and he was unwilling to allow Snape to try to shift the blame on him for Snape's own failure that had instigated the entire ordeal in the first place from his view, imo.

Please provide your source for this information.
The only reference close to this that I can find is her Carnegie Hall Open Book Chat:
So I suppose they lived off a private income. But they were full-time fighters, that's what they did, until Lily fell pregnant with Harry. So then they went into hiding.
She does not say that the Potters went into hiding while Lily was still pregnant, just that they went into hiding after she became pregnant with Harry. Not the same thing at all, as I'm sure the moms here could tell you. :)

I am unsure where I read that - I just remember reading it. However, I would have to stretch my imagination to believe otherwise based on the interview you supplied - if it was after Harry's birth, she would have said so, imo, not 'after falling pregnant'. Lily died after falling pregnant too - but if that is how an author stated it, it would seem as though she never gave birth to the child prior to her death, imo.

But thank you for leading me to that, as I found this:
And I was so heartened to see that people on the message boards that people were still arguing about Snape. The book was out, and they were still arguing whether Snape was a good guy But that was really wonderful to me, because there's a question there, was Snape a good guy or not? In many ways he really wasn't. SoI haven't been deliberately misleading everyone all this time, when I say that he's a good guy. Because even though he did love and he loved very deeply and he was very brave, both qualities that I admire above anything else. He was bitter and he was vindictive... but right at the very very end, he did, as your question acknowledges, acheive a kind of peace together and I tried to show that in the epilogue.

link to transcript (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/10/20/j-k-rowling-at-carnegie-hall-reveals-dumbledore-is-gay-neville-marries-hannah-abbott-and-scores-more)

I remember this too. JKR does not say why or when Snape was brave (similar to Harry in the book) - so that is left unclear for me. I agree Snape loved very deeply - in his own way - that was clearly shown, imo, I would just add that it was any form of behavior I would categorize as love. JKR has said before "if you call it love - let's call it love" in the case of Bella - so she allows for things to be called loved if it is so believed from the character's point of view, imo. I figure she felt Bella was brave and loved too (imo) - perhaps even admires her for it, but Bella was loyal to the evil regime and the forwarding of it's head, imo, which Snape was not - that distinguishes them in perhaps a manner that wipes out any possibility of stating admiration - as it could be miscontrued by an audience, imo.

In any case, I disagree that being able to love makes one admirable, since everyone can and did in the books except Voldy - and many were brave as well - even Death Eaters - so that too is something I cannot always admire. Nonetheless, I am still doubtful of Snape when it comes to bravery - to me, he was in moments, but overall, the opposite was true of his character, imo - so perhaps JKR will give a more detailed explanation of this aspect in the Scottish book. :)

TreacleTartlet

August 13th, 2009, 10:15 am

I am unsure where I read that - I just remember reading it. However, I would have to stretch my imagination to believe otherwise based on the interview you supplied - if it was after Harry's birth, she would have said so, imo, not 'after falling pregnant'. Lily died after falling pregnant too - but if that is how an author stated it, it would seem as though she never gave birth to the child prior to her death, imo.

This from JKR's Official site indicates that the Potters didn't go into hiding until after Harry was born.

When Harry was born, it was at the very height of Voldemort fever last time so his christening was a very hurried, quiet affair with just Sirius, just the best friend. At that point it looked as if the Potters would have to go into hiding so obviously they could not do the big christening thing and invite lots of people.

Source:http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cfm?id=80

wickedwickedboy

August 13th, 2009, 10:25 am

This from JKR's Official site indicates that the Potters didn't go into hiding until after Harry was born.

When Harry was born, it was at the very height of Voldemort fever last time so his christening was a very hurried, quiet affair with just Sirius, just the best friend. At that point it looked as if the Potters would have to go into hiding so obviously they could not do the big christening thing and invite lots of people.

Source:http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cfm?id=80

Perhaps here she meant hiding again? I dunno, but I remember the article with the 3 months pregnant into hiding - it has been quoted on this forum before, perhaps more than once, and later when I am feeling better, I may search for it, but I haven't the patience now, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

TreacleTartlet

August 13th, 2009, 10:58 am

I think I have found the quote you are refering to.

So that's what they did, they left school. James has gold, enough to support Sirius and Lily. So I suppose they lived foff a private income. But they were full-time fighters, that's what they did, until Lily fell pregnant with Harry. So then they went into hiding.

source: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/10/20/j-k-rowling-at-carnegie-hall-reveals-dumbledore-is-gay-neville-marries-hannah-abbott-and-scores-more

So from this it seems that they went into hiding because Lily was pregnant. Maybe they came out of hiding after Harry was born for a while and then went back into hiding. Or maybe this is just another time were JKR contradicts herself. In which case we are neither the wiser.

wickedwickedboy

August 13th, 2009, 11:03 am

Well there is that one - quoted earlier by CFubster too - and I agree it points to their going into hiding when Lily fell pregnant, but there is another one where JKR actually designates the month Lily was pregnant when they went into hiding - I thought it was 3 - it may have been 2 or 4, but I remember it was very early on. I will look later. :)

Annielogic

August 13th, 2009, 11:09 am

So from this it seems that they went into hiding because Lily was pregnant. Maybe they came out of hiding after Harry was born for a while and then went back into hiding. Or maybe this is just another time were JKR contradicts herself. In which case we are neither the wiser.

It's possible JKR changed her mind or she is talking about two different occurences of having to go into hidding in the seperate interviews. The Potters initially started having to hide shortly after Lily became pregnant. This could be when Dumbledore was told (ie Snape) that the Potters were targets. These could also be the times Pettigrew was feeding Voldemort information, which meant the Voldemort/DE's kept tracking them down, but because of Snape's spying and information, Dumbledore was able to keep ahead. We know the Fidelius Charm was the last resort, so Harry's Christening might have occured before they went into hidding (again) with the SK Charm. :hmm:

TreacleTartlet

August 13th, 2009, 11:17 am

However, the canon from the books points to them going into hiding after Dumbledore was warned by Snape.

'Not many people are aware that the Potter's knew You-Know-Who was after them. Dumbledore, who was of course working tirelessly against You-Know-Who, had a number of usefull spies. One of the tipped him off, and he alerted James and Lily at once. He advised them to go into hiding.

ETA:
It's possible JKR changed her mind or she is talking about two different occurences of having to go into hidding in the seperate interviews. The Potters initially started having to hide shortly after Lily became pregnant. This could be when Dumbledore was told (ie Snape) that the Potters were targets. These could also be the times Pettigrew was feeding Voldemort information, which meant the Voldemort/DE's kept tracking them down, but because of Snape's spying and information, Dumbledore was able to keep ahead. We know the Fidelius Charm was the last resort, so Harry's Christening might have occured before they went into hidding (again) with the SK Charm. :hmm:

Indeed! I think the Fidelius Charm was suggested after Dumbledore found out about there being a spy very close to the Potters.

WWB: I'm not sure as to why the timing of when the Potters went into hiding is relevant? :hmm:

kittling

August 13th, 2009, 11:35 am

By dying at that time, then Snape cannot meet Albus on the hill, cannot warn him that Voldy has decided on the Potters and Albus would not have even sent them into hiding (since even tho' Albus knew the prophecy and knew Harry and Neville fit it, neither family was in hiding yet, despite the prophecy having been made many months prior). We even learned back in PoA that it was the warning from Albus' spy that sent the Potters into hiding. So, that poster would rather Snape died instead of living to tell Albus?

The moment Severus finds out who Voldemort has decided the prophecy is about and his actions on finding this out are really crucial to both the prophecy and the plot line of the entire series. It is this moment changes then we don’t get a ‘chosen one’ to defeat Voldemort. Surely that has to be born in mind – Harry is only who he is, is only able to do what he does because Severus acted as he did at this point.

Personally I think that Harry realises this and that is one of the reasons he names his second son Albus Severus.

The parallels of Snape's love for Lily, Xenophilius's for Luna, and Lucius and Narcissa Malfoy's love for Draco is something I've always found intersting in the books. The major difference that I can see is that Xeno was forced into the situation with Voldemort and his Death Eaters, while Snape, Lucius and Narcissa all seem to have joined up of their own free will. Since Xeno didn't create the terrifying situation he was in, I find I have more sympathy for him.

There is an idea that seems quite pervasive on this site – that everyone who became a DE knew what they were getting into. Personally I don’t see it that way, I think examples that t5hat of Regulus Black & Draco Malfoy demonstrate this fairly clearly. I also think that if wee look at the characters of the DE we know a bit about in the series, such as Lucius, and compare that with what is expected of them once they become DE – it reinforces that idea (Lucius doesn’t seem to me they type to feel happy about bowing & kissing the hem of anyone’s garments!)

In an interview Rowling said that, to her, the moral significance of the tales seems "blindingly obvious." The key for her was the choice between what is right and what is easy, "because that ... is how tyranny is started, with people being apathetic and taking the easy route and suddenly finding themselves in deep trouble." * To me this is as much about the people who join the Death Eaters as anyone else in the books and I think it underlines the point that they didn’t really know what they were getting into until it was too late.

I certainly think this was the case for Severus - that he didn’t realise that Lily was going to be in danger – all their conversations as children seem to demonstrate that this is one link Severus seems to be either unable or unwilling to make until Voldemort makes it impossible for him to do so any longer.

IMO, a promise of "anything" to keep her safe does not show any understanding or respect for her, or what she has decided are the people and values that she wants to risk her own life protecting

No I think it shows that he felt her continued existence was the only important thing. Which later goes to show how he changes, even in ’81 when Lily dies he has moved forward a little because he decides, with prompting, to make sure he sacrifice/death was not in vain. By the end of his life he has moved on to a position where he values something else more, the end of evil and tyranny – well that’s how I see it anyway! :)

* Max, Wyman (26 October 2000). ""You can lead a fool to a book but you cannot make them think": Author has frank words for the religious right". The Vancouver Sun (British Columbia). http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-vancouversun-wyman.htm. Retrieved on 28 July 2008.

silver ink pot

August 13th, 2009, 11:42 am

That was my opinion of his words - because of how they were said, Dumbledore's response, and Snape's subsequent behavior in light of that response. He was surprised Dumbledore would want anything more from him, because to me, he felt he'd already supplied his part in telling Dumbledore which couple Voldemort had targeted. I felt he specifically felt that giving that information entitled him a return favor from Dumbledore - keeping Lily safe. So when Dumbledore then says 'what will you do for me in return', Snape is like, what? What do you call what I just did!! .

My own belief is that Snape never expected in a million years that Dumbledore would trust him enough to let him help to the extent that he did. So he was shocked that Dumbledore would ever want to see him again, especially on a continuing basis as a spy. I disagree that it was because Snape felt he had done enough - he just didn't expect to have the privilege of doing more. Maybe he thought Dumbledore would lock him up, torture him for more information, or kill him, which is what he implies when he says "Don't kill me." JMO.

TreacleTartlet

August 13th, 2009, 12:00 pm

The moment Severus finds out who Voldemort has decided the prophecy is about and his actions on finding this out are really crucial to both the prophecy and the plot line of the entire series. It is this moment changes then we don’t get a ‘chosen one’ to defeat Voldemort. Surely that has to be born in mind – Harry is only who he is, is only able to do what he does because Severus acted as he did at this point.

Personally I think that Harry realises this and that is one of the reasons he names his second son Albus Severus.

Yes, it is Severus' love for Lily that prompts him to ask Voldemort to spare her life, and Lily's love for her son that she died for him that made Harry who he is. So Severus' love starts the sequence of events that leads to Harry's love protection from his mother. In effect, if it wasn't for Severus's love for Lily and his subsquent actions, Harry would probably have been killed.

There is an idea that seems quite pervasive on this site – that everyone who became a DE knew what they were getting into. Personally I don’t see it that way, I think examples that t5hat of Regulus Black & Draco Malfoy demonstrate this fairly clearly. I also think that if wee look at the characters of the DE we know a bit about in the series, such as Lucius, and compare that with what is expected of them once they become DE – it reinforces that idea (Lucius doesn’t seem to me they type to feel happy about bowing & kissing the hem of anyone’s garments!

Indeed! Doesn't Voldemort himself, as Tom Riddle from the diary in CoS say, that he was always very good at charming the people he needs.

silver ink pot

August 13th, 2009, 12:21 pm

I also think that if we look at the characters of the DE we know a bit about in the series, such as Lucius, and compare that with what is expected of them once they become DE – it reinforces that idea (Lucius doesn’t seem to me they type to feel happy about bowing & kissing the hem of anyone’s garments!
Indeed! Doesn't Voldemort himself, as Tom Riddle from the diary in CoS say, that he was always very good at charming the people he needs.

In "Lord Voldemort's Request," Tom Riddle says that the people waiting for him at the pub are his "friends," while Dumbledore says the Death Eaters are more like servants. And of course they are - they have to call him "Master" just as House Elves speak to their owners. They expect rewards that never appear, and they are punished every day either mentally or physically just on Voldemort's whim. Of course the new recruits probably don't see that side of him until it is too late.

We never see the process of young people becoming Death Eaters and taking the Dark Mark. Draco has the Dark Mark in HBP, and after seeing the way Voldemort treats his family, he must have been pressured into taking the mark. Of course he sees it as a way to be more mature and take his father's place, or to be cooler than the other kids, and I think Snape and Regulus probably had the same opinion. Sirius says that Regulus had no idea what he was getting into until it was too late, and then he was trapped. It must have been similar for Snape, in my opinion.

OldMotherCrow

August 13th, 2009, 12:52 pm

I don't feel the moral was to forgive those who are crazed with grief (on the part of those confronting the person with protection in mind); the moral, imo, was that making the morally correct choice is important independent of the circumstances, including crazed grief or any other emotion a person is under (on the part of those who have protection in mind), imo.

I agree. I think making the right choices is a major theme of the book. I think Rowling gave us many instances where love and respect for the object of the love went hand in hand, like when Arthur helps Ron get ready for his trip with Harry in DH; or Ginny in OotP, after being told by Sirius that some things are worth dying for, she chooses not to rush off to see her possibly dying father because it might compromise his work for the Order. Ron might die, but Arthur doesn't hinder him to keep him safe, and Arthur might die, but Ginny doesn't ruin what he was working for even though she might never see him alive again. IMO, both showed great respect to their loved ones.

There is an idea that seems quite pervasive on this site – that everyone who became a DE knew what they were getting into. Personally I don’t see it that way, I think examples that t5hat of Regulus Black & Draco Malfoy demonstrate this fairly clearly. I also think that if wee look at the characters of the DE we know a bit about in the series, such as Lucius, and compare that with what is expected of them once they become DE – it reinforces that idea (Lucius doesn’t seem to me they type to feel happy about bowing & kissing the hem of anyone’s garments!)

I think that is a significant question. But what is it that people like Regulus Black and Draco Malfoy didn't know about what they were getting into? In my opinion, they did know that the agenda they were supporting would lead to death, torture, and oppression-- just not for themselves or their loved ones. And I think that was the flaw in their outlook, that somehow all of this horrible stuff was okay and that it would magically never touch them, except in a good way.

I remember Draco expressing glee in CoS at the thought of Mudbloods being killed by the Heir of Slytherin, and again at Quidditch World Cup because Muggles were being tortured. IMO, later Draco discovers that evil doesn't necessarily equal the easy way to fame and fortune.

In my view, Draco changes when he himself and his loved ones suffer, but I don't see that he cared when it was other people doing the suffering. The same goes for Regulus, and Snape. I think they were all okay with what they signed up for, and knew full well that people would suffer and die, they just didn't think that they might be some of those people.

In an interview Rowling said that, to her, the moral significance of the tales seems "blindingly obvious." The key for her was the choice between what is right and what is easy, "because that ... is how tyranny is started, with people being apathetic and taking the easy route and suddenly finding themselves in deep trouble." * To me this is as much about the people who join the Death Eaters as anyone else in the books and I think it underlines the point that they didn’t really know what they were getting into until it was too late.

In my view, Rowling equates the easy path with those who do nothing to oppose evil, i.e., All that's needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. Death Eaters, in my opinion, are not good men doing nothing; they have actively set out on a path of evil.

I certainly think this was the case for Severus - that he didn’t realise that Lily was going to be in danger – all their conversations as children seem to demonstrate that this is one link Severus seems to be either unable or unwilling to make until Voldemort makes it impossible for him to do so any longer.

For me this isn't a big moral difference that renders Snape's actions understandable. Why should it matter whether he knew her or not? The murder victim is just as dead, her friends and family just as traumatized. As I see it, it's only if he can start thinking about them, and then start thinking about the nameless victims as people too, that would really show any significant difference in morality (IMO, bringing him more in line with a human of average compassion).

No I think it shows that he felt her continued existence was the only important thing. Which later goes to show how he changes, even in ’81 when Lily dies he has moved forward a little because he decides, with prompting, to make sure he sacrifice/death was not in vain. By the end of his life he has moved on to a position where he values something else more, the end of evil and tyranny – well that’s how I see it anyway! :)

Well, I think he changes, too, although I found the journey to be at a painful snail's pace! In TPT, he does say that he has stopped doing nothing when he has the power to save someone, and I believe him. Personally I think his sending Harry to his death showed him finally acting for the good side rather than himself, because he had wanted Harry kept alive for personal reasons.

wickedwickedboy

August 13th, 2009, 1:18 pm

The moment Severus finds out who Voldemort has decided the prophecy is about and his actions on finding this out are really crucial to both the prophecy and the plot line of the entire series. It is this moment changes then we don’t get a ‘chosen one’ to defeat Voldemort. Surely that has to be born in mind – Harry is only who he is, is only able to do what he does because Severus acted as he did at this point.

Personally I think that Harry realises this and that is one of the reasons he names his second son Albus Severus.

I seriously doubt Harry would find anything positive or pleasant in Snape's role in causing him to be the chosen one (including his delivery of the prophecy and his acts afterward). It is a title Harry never wanted and a function he hated: being beleagured by Voldemort from 11 -17 years old; nor would he appreicate that it caused his parents to be targeted and killed - he abhored that, imo. For Harry, being the one who had to kill Voldemort = no joy.

Yes, it is Severus' love for Lily that prompts him to ask Voldemort to spare her life, and Lily's love for her son that she died for him that made Harry who he is. So Severus' love starts the sequence of events that leads to Harry's love protection from his mother. In effect, if it wasn't for Severus's love for Lily and his subsquent actions, Harry would probably have been killed.

If Snape hadn't delivered the prophecy in the first place, none of this would have been necessary - that is the overriding point, imo. To celebrate Snape's subsequent action which got Harry's parents killed seems macabre to me. The only reason Lily's death allowed for the old magic to work is precisely this: Because Voldemort grew impatient and ignored Snape's request in the end. If he had not, Lily would be alive and Harry and James dead - just what Snape wanted, imo, but as horrible a result as what actually took place, imo.

Maybe one doesn't like James and Lily, but Snape's acts painted with a silver lining of enabling innocents to be killed in sacrifice, in light of Harry living and going on to eventually killing Voldy is to me, unreasonably heedless of the loss of life and devastation Harry and his parents had to face.

arithmancer

August 13th, 2009, 2:03 pm

Maybe he thought Dumbledore would lock him up, torture him for more information, or kill him, which is what he implies when he says "Don't kill me." JMO.

More likely, given the reputations of the persons involved and their roles in wizard society...turn him over to Barty Crouch, Sr. who would of course do same. ;)

In my view, Draco changes when he himself and his loved ones suffer, but I don't see that he cared when it was other people doing the suffering.

Then why did he not kill Albus the moment he had the chance? There is was, the chance for glory and and end to his family's sufering, but he did not take it. There's a difference between civil war and a regime of discrimination, vs. murder and genocide. Not, mind you, that I am defending the former, just that I think one can be signed up for it and not like when it turns into the latter.

Daggerstone

August 13th, 2009, 2:27 pm

I seriously doubt Harry would find anything positive or pleasant in Snape's role in causing him to be the chosen one (including his delivery of the prophecy and his acts afterward).

I'm sure the lack of pleasant feelings was mutual, but that's quite beside the point...

Positive or not, Snape did play a crucial part in setting Harry on his course as The-Boy-Who-Would-Not-Roll-Over-And-Die, which is what the HP series are all about: it's not a story of a boy wizard, it's a story of THE boy wizard.

If Snape hadn't delivered the prophecy in the first place, none of this would have been necessary - that is the overriding point, imo.

Precisely. Without him delivering the prophesy we'd have no HP series as such. And unless we want to discuss alternate HP universes (aka 'fan fiction'), we have to stick to the facts: Snape did what he did because he HAD to - Jo plotted her story thus and anything else would not have worked for her.

I agree. I think making the right choices is a major theme of the book.

I understand you might see this distinctly, but I find 'right choice' to be too subjective a concept. You see, I happen to believe Severus, Lucius, Regulus and Draco all thought they were 'making the right choices' when they joined the DEs to promote and further their personal goals and beliefs.

I think 'selfless choices' would make a much better theme for a book. ;)

But back to the original topic: I don't understand why Snape has to be painted all black or all white. I, for one, don't think he cared either way about Harry and James when he went to meet Dumbledore - which is not to say I think he was looking forward to their impending demise... he simply didn't care. At that point, I don't think he was capable of displaying much social affinity.

On the other hand, I don't understand the fixation on discussing Snape's bravery. Is that the only trait that defines him as a character, and everything else is irrelevant? Or are we all in agreement considering his other qualities? ;)

OldMotherCrow

August 13th, 2009, 2:38 pm

Then why did he not kill Albus the moment he had the chance? There is was, the chance for glory and and end to his family's sufering, but he did not take it.

Because, in my view, Draco changes when he himself and his loved ones suffer, but I don't see that he cared when it was other people doing the suffering. In HBP he and his loved ones are suffering. Forcing Draco to commit murder was Voldemort's idea to punish Lucius, as I understood it. If the Malfoys weren't suffering, it is my opinion Draco would have been tolerant of murder, torture and oppression, as long as it didn't interfere with him.

There's a difference between civil war and a regime of discrimination, vs. murder and genocide. Not, mind you, that I am defending the former, just that I think one can be signed up for it and not like when it turns into the latter.

I think we are also shown that many people understood what Voldemort's regime would mean to other people, and they were okay with that as long as it was happening to those other people. I think the people we are shown to change their minds who were Death Eaters were shown to change them not because they had a sudden revelation that Voldemort stood for torture, murder, and oppression, and that they had not realized that before, but rather that these people realized that they too were going to suffer from the torture, murder, and oppression, when they had assumed that it would not touch them personally. That is what I believe Snape believed.

Sly_Lady

August 13th, 2009, 2:56 pm

SurfcatMalfoy

August 13th, 2009, 3:00 pm

I think we are also shown that many people understood what Voldemort's regime would mean to other people, and they were okay with that as long as it was happening to those other people. I think the people we are shown to change their minds who were Death Eaters were shown to change them not because they had a sudden revelation that Voldemort stood for torture, murder, and oppression, and that they had not realized that before, but rather that these people realized that they too were going to suffer from the torture, murder, and oppression, when they had assumed that it would not touch them personally. That is what I believe Snape believed.

I think it is also important to note that they signed up not just for the ideology but also for gain. They believed that they would be better off with Voldemort in charge and with them as his faithful servents. Perhaps they figured he was going to take charge with or without them and they stood to profit from being on the winning side.
That is how it was Wormtail. He believed that Voldemort was taking over and gave up his friends in an effort to gain favor with the man that would control the world.
Severus, however, seems to have had different reasons. He most likely had only one friend in school (Lilly) and her other friends questioned her her for that. He was poor, unkempt, and had a HUGE chip on his shoulder. You can see the draw to a group of 'friends' that valued his dark abilities and ruthless character. Had Lilly returned, fully, Severus' feelings for her I think his path would have been different.
IMO, it was Lilly that rescued his humanity by being kind to him from the start. He knew that love, kindness, and good existed. Somebody robbing her from him caused the beginning of the shift. Sure, he never let go of the bitterness (although some of it was an act to maintain his cover) but he had what Voldemort didn't, a knowledge of love....unrequited or not.
I beleive that Severus realized that lilly wouldn't let Voldemort kill her son without killing her first. That is why he went to Dumbledore. He didn't care for Harry and James, he wanted protection for Lilly.

wickedwickedboy

August 13th, 2009, 3:01 pm

I'm sure the lack of pleasant feelings was mutual, but that's quite beside the point...

Positive or not, Snape did play a crucial part in setting Harry on his course as The-Boy-Who-Would-Not-Roll-Over-And-Die, which is what the HP series are all about: it's not a story of a boy wizard, it's a story of THE boy wizard.

Precisely. Without him delivering the prophesy we'd have no HP series as such. And unless we want to discuss alternate HP universes (aka 'fan fiction'), we have to stick to the facts: Snape did what he did because he HAD to - Jo plotted her story thus and anything else would not have worked for her.

The point wasn't what readers might make of Snape's deeds, rather that Harry would not be so overcome with joy at being made the chosen one, dubbed to destroy Voldemort, his parents killed and his subsequently being left an orphan, so as to name is child Albus Severus in light of Snape's, imo, despicable behavior delivering the prophecy and his request to Voldemort - merely because in the end he was able to kill Voldy. That is what was proposed and what I strongly disagree with. Harry loved his parents and did not enjoy being the chosen one and based on his reactions in HBP, I feel he felt Snape's actions and behavior at that time were diabolical.

SurfcatMalfoy

August 13th, 2009, 3:18 pm

The point wasn't what readers might make of Snape's deeds, rather that Harry would not be so overcome with joy at being made the chosen one, dubbed to destroy Voldemort, his parents killed and his subsequently being left an orphan, so as to name is child Albus Severus in light of Snape's, imo, despicable behavior delivering the prophecy and his request to Voldemort - merely because in the end he was able to kill Voldy. That is what was proposed and what I strongly disagree with. Harry loved his parents and did not enjoy being the chosen one and based on his reactions in HBP, I feel he felt Snape's actions and behavior at that time were diabolical.

I agree. However, I think it was the life he lead after his horrible actions that Harry valued. After all, he spent the remainder of his days atoning for his deed... at the risk of certain death. I got the impression that Harry (starting with 'Snape's Worst Memory') had begun to feel sympathy for Severus. That was put on hold when he killed Dumbledore of course, but it wasn't much of a leap to me that Harry's feelings about him changed after TPT. Harry was mature beyond his years and could move past his loathing of him for delivering half the profecy, and his parents death sentence, to Voldemort. He's a person than I am at this point but, IMO, that is the authors perspective.

kittling

August 13th, 2009, 3:29 pm

IMO, it was Lilly that rescued his humanity by being kind to him from the start. He knew that love, kindness, and good existed.

I totaly agree :tu: It's the reason I think it was so important to Severus that Lily lived - regardless of if she was with him or not, because as long as she was alive he knew that love, kindness, and good existed just as you have suggested.

I seriously doubt Harry would find anything positive or pleasant in Snape's role in causing him to be the chosen one (including his delivery of the prophecy and his acts afterward).

“Yes, Dumbledore’s dead,” said Harry calmly, “but you didn’t have him killed. He chose his own manner of dying, chose it months before he died, arranged the whole thing with the man you thought was your servant.”

“What childish dream is this?” said Voldemort, but still he did not strike, and his red eyes did not waver from Harry’s.

“Severus Snape wasn’t yours,” said Harry. “Snape was Dumbledore’s, Dumbledore’s from the moment you started hunting down my mother. And you never realized it, because of the thing you can’t understand. You never saw Snape cast a Patronus, did you, Riddle?”

Voldemort did not answer. They continued to circle each other like wolves about to tear each other apart.

“Snape’s Patronus was a doe,” said Harry, “the same as my mother’s, because he loved her for nearly all of his life, from the time when they were children. You should have realized,” he said as he saw Voldemort’s nostrils flare, “he asked you to spare her life, didn’t he?”

“He desired her, that was all,” sneered Voldemort, “but when she had gone, he agreed that there were other women, and of purer blood, worthier of him ---“

“Of course he told you that,” said Harry, “but he was Dumbledore’s spy from the moment you threatened her, and he’s been working against you ever since! Dumbledore was already dying when Snape finished him!”

[...]

"I killed Severus Snape three hours ago, and the Elder Wand, the Deathstick, the Wand of Destiny is truly mine! Dumbledore’s last plan went wrong, Harry Potter!”

“Yeah, it did,” said Harry. “You’re right. But before you try to kill me, I’d advise you to think about what you’ve done…Think, and try for some remorse, Riddle…”
“What is this?”

Of all the things that Harry had said to him, beyond any revelation or taunt, nothing had shocked Voldemort like this. Harry saw his pupils contract to thin slits, saw the skin around his eyes whiten.

“It’s your one last chance,” said Harry, “it’s all you’ve got left…I’ve seen what you’ll be otherwise…Be a man…try…Try for some remorse…”

To me Wick it sounds like Harry did appreciate what Severus did for Lily from the moment he realised she was in danger. The fact that he repatedly uses the term 'Dumbledore's man' is something I can only see as Harry expressing a possitive given his previous use of that term in previos books.

It also sounds like he valued remorse – something I believe he saw in Severus Snape. Interstingly here Snape's example shows a way for Voldemort to survive, we know it might just be possible if Tom Riddel can truely find some remourse but I think most readers knew that he would not take that option.

TreacleTartlet

August 13th, 2009, 3:53 pm

kittling

August 13th, 2009, 3:59 pm

Because, in my view, Draco changes when he himself and his loved ones suffer, but I don't see that he cared when it was other people doing the suffering. In HBP he and his loved ones are suffering. Forcing Draco to commit murder was Voldemort's idea to punish Lucius, as I understood it. If the Malfoys weren't suffering, it is my opinion Draco would have been tolerant of murder, torture and oppression, as long as it didn't interfere with him.

I’m not entirely sure about this – I seem to remember JKR saying that Regulus didn’t understand the reality of becoming a DE (or words to that effect).* To me this implies that he may have known in theory what would be expected of him but he didn’t grasp the reality of that, of how it would feel to kill, maim, torture etc. The same can be said for Draco, he knew he had to get other DE into Hogwarts and that he had to kill Dumbledore; but it was not until he was faced with the reality did he realise just what that meant – as Dumbledore predicted he wasn’t a killer.

Theory and practice are very different things – the theory of killing is relatively simple, the practice is an assult on what it is to be a human imo.

I feel that Severus was in a similar position. I don’t think empathy was his strong point at 18 (or whenever age he was when he took the dark mark) and so he wasn’t in a position to understand the realities of pledge on taking the dark mark imo – but the real point is that he had to start at a low point to change and to be redeemed; both of which he did imo & in the authors apparently :)

Annielogic just mail this to me - Is this the quote you're thinking of?

"That doesn't necessarily show that Voldemort killed him, personally, but Sirius himself suspected that Regulus got in a little too deep. Like Draco. He was attracted to it, but the reality of what it meant was way too much to handle."

http://www.accio-quote.org/
I think we are also shown that many people understood what Voldemort's regime would mean to other people, and they were okay with that as long as it was happening to those other people. I think the people we are shown to change their minds who were Death Eaters were shown to change them not because they had a sudden revelation that Voldemort stood for torture, murder, and oppression, and that they had not realized that before, but rather that these people realized that they too were going to suffer from the torture, murder, and oppression, when they had assumed that it would not touch them personally. That is what I believe Snape believed.

Again the same points apply however I would add that people often side with the bully because as long as the bully is one their side – they have a better chance of not being on the receiving end, or at least mitigating the extent of the bully’s actions. It’s not glorious, or even nice but I think it is probably a reality of life.

Why should it matter whether he knew her or not? The murder victim is just as dead, her friends and family just as traumatized. As I see it, it's only if he can start thinking about them, and then start thinking about the nameless victims as people too, that would really show any significant difference in morality (IMO, bringing him more in line with a human of average compassion).

Why should it matter? Because it changed everything – it changed the path he was on. The ability to see someone as a person as opposed to depersonalising them makes a big difference in how one is likely to treat them. It is when he starts to do this for one potential victim (Lily) that he begins to be able to do this for other people. In the end I think he does make the very shift you’re talking about – he no longer stands by and watches people die when he can help them, he doesn’t specify 'people I know’ just ‘people’. :)

Well, I think he changes, too, although I found the journey to be at a painful snail's pace! In TPT, he does say that he has stopped doing nothing when he has the power to save someone, and I believe him. Personally I think his sending Harry to his death showed him finally acting for the good side rather than himself, because he had wanted Harry kept alive for personal reasons.

Could it be we agree on something! ;)

wickedwickedboy

August 13th, 2009, 5:55 pm

To me Wick it sounds like Harry did appreciate what Severus did for Lily from the moment he realised she was in danger. The fact that he repatedly uses the term 'Dumbledore's man' is something I can only see as Harry expressing a possitive given his previous use of that term in previos books.

What you said in your previous post was about Harry becoming the chosen one - the only things that Snape was associated with Harry being the chosen one were: delivering the prophecy to Voldemort and asking Voldy to spare Lily when he went to murder the family. Snape was not Dumbledore's man at that time - he hadn't even seen Dumbledore yet - although he did know she was in danger at that time. As for the acts, there is nothing good in them - nothing to celebrate at all, nothing to appreciate; rather it is something Harry would need to forgive because they are disgusting, immoral and diabolical in nature - which is how the DEs operated, imo. That is why Dumbledore was disgusted with Snape and why Harry too would be disgusted over the acts assoiated with him becoming the chosen one - that got his parents killed, left him an orphan, etc. etc.

If this isn't what you meant to say, then ignore this. What you wrote above in this post is something else - that talks about what he did once he began switching loyalties to Dumbledore and became his man instead of Voldemort's. My response was to your other post.

kittling

August 13th, 2009, 6:40 pm

What you said in your previous post was about Harry becoming the chosen one - the only things that Snape was associated with Harry being the chosen one were: delivering the prophecy to Voldemort and asking Voldy to spare Lily when he went to murder the family. Snape was not Dumbledore's man at that time - he hadn't even seen Dumbledore yet - although he did know she was in danger at that time.

You wrote:
I seriously doubt Harry would find anything positive or pleasant in Snape's role in causing him to be the chosen one (including his delivery of the prophecy and his acts afterward).

My point was that Harry did in fact seem to appreciate how Severus acted ‘from the moment he knew Lily was in danger – which would include going to Voldemort and asking for Lily to be spared. If this is the case, as I believe it is, then Harry does indeed find something positive in Snape's role. Perhaps my adding the work he did after this act confused the issue but I would point out that Harry mentions ‘from the moment you threatened her’, or words to that effect, several times. As Severus went to beg for Lily’s life after he found out she was threatened by Voldemort I interpret this to be included – to be honest I don’t see how I could not do so. :)

As for the act of begging for someone’s life to be spared having nothing good in it - nothing to celebrate at all, nothing to appreciate – well I disagree in the strongest terms but I know you cannot agree with that so I see no point in doing anything other that agreeing to disagree.

wickedwickedboy

August 13th, 2009, 7:10 pm

My point was that Harry did in fact seem to appreciate how Severus acted ‘from the moment he knew Lily was in danger – which would include going to Voldemort and asking for Lily to be spared.

Well he didn't say he appreciated Snape at all in conjunction with any act - all he said was that Snape was Dumbledore's man to taunt Voldy. But if you mean the statement we are talking about shows appreciation, I disagree - however, even if I did think that, Harry said Snape was Dumbledore's man during the time period. Are you purporting that Snape was Dumbledore's man when he went to make his request of Voldemort? Not to mention this act disgusted Dumbledore worst than anything Harry'd ever seen disgust him previously - I think the idea was that Harry saw it the same way imo.

But Harry didn't mean that anyway imo - nobody is going to appreciate a mans effort to kill him and his father off while saving the mother for himself. To me, if he did, then Harry would be thinking as despicably as a Death Eater (which Snape was at the time, so at least he'd have an excuse - but what would Harry's be?) - so naturally I couldn't follow that line of thinking as I am not willing to sink Harry to that level in my estimation - which I would have to do in order to try and say he could appreciate what I see as one of Snape's vilest acts (imo).

As for the act of begging for someone’s life to be spared having nothing good in it - nothing to celebrate at all, nothing to appreciate – well I disagree in the strongest terms but I know you cannot agree with that so I see no point in doing anything other that agreeing to disagree.

Snape didn't beg Voldy - he led him to believe he was lusting after her and nothing more. He waived off the other human lives in the balance during that request - they could die for all he cared. That is not commendable no matter how you spin it to me (imo).

silver ink pot

August 13th, 2009, 7:13 pm

The point wasn't what readers might make of Snape's deeds, rather that Harry would not be so overcome with joy at being made the chosen one, dubbed to destroy Voldemort, his parents killed and his subsequently being left an orphan, so as to name is child Albus Severus in light of Snape's, imo, despicable behavior delivering the prophecy and his request to Voldemort - merely because in the end he was able to kill Voldy. That is what was proposed and what I strongly disagree with. Harry loved his parents and did not enjoy being the chosen one and based on his reactions in HBP, I feel he felt Snape's actions and behavior at that time were diabolical.
But in the DH book, Harry did not see Snape as diabolical after he witnessed Snape's memories and understood that the reason Snape was always around for him in childhood was to make things right for his past mistakes.

He witnessed that Snape had loved Lily his whole life and that had changed him over time into a brave man who put others ahead of himself, and who didn't have much of a life outside of serving Dumbledore in the name of saving Harry.

I don't see that Harry just named his son after Severus because of the defeat of Voldemort. I think it was more personal than that, just as his relationship with Dumbledore was more personal, in my opinion. Even when Harry felt most alone after Dumbledore's death, he really wasn't alone because Snape was working behind the scenes. And in helping to save Harry, Snape also saved other people's lives and really tried to protect the school as best he could. That's why I believe Harry said he was so brave - Snape never faltered when it would have been easy to give up, in my opinion.

blak_cat

August 13th, 2009, 7:24 pm

I don't see that Harry just named his son after Severus because of the defeat of Voldemort. I think it was more personal than that, just as his relationship with Dumbledore was more personal, in my opinion. Even when Harry felt most alone after Dumbledore's death, he really wasn't alone because Snape was working behind the scenes. And in helping to save Harry, Snape also saved other people's lives and really tried to protect the school as best he could. That's why I believe Harry said he was so brave - Snape never faltered when it would have been easy to give up, in my opinion.

I agree, and your last statement goes back to JKR's theme of "the difference between what's right and what's easy". Snape's easy choice was to give in to his suicidal thoughts back when Lily was killed. But he did a difficult thing, he chose to devote his life to protecting a child who, in Snape's eyes, represented Snape's failure and the fact that Lily belonged to someone else. And he protected Harry (someone he severely hated) for seventeen years before dying for his efforts. He chose the hard path of redemption rather than the easy path of a bitter death, which (imo) took a great deal of courage. To make an allusion to make favorite book (and incidentally your signature silver), courage, to me, is doing something you know you can't win at but trying anyway. And that's what Snape did.

silver ink pot

August 13th, 2009, 7:53 pm

I agree, and your last statement goes back to JKR's theme of "the difference between what's right and what's easy". Snape's easy choice was to give in to his suicidal thoughts back when Lily was killed. But he did a difficult thing, he chose to devote his life to protecting a child who, in Snape's eyes, represented Snape's failure and the fact that Lily belonged to someone else. And he protected Harry (someone he severely hated) for seventeen years before dying for his efforts. He chose the hard path of redemption rather than the easy path of a bitter death, which (imo) took a great deal of courage. To make an allusion to make favorite book (and incidentally your signature silver), courage, to me, is doing something you know you can't win at but trying anyway. And that's what Snape did.
Thanks ~ I do see Snape as someone who took a stand at an early age (21 or 22) to be on the right side with Dumbledore. And then he stayed there even when others were running away in GoF, and even when there were two horrible tasks ahead of him: killing Dumbledore and then telling Harry to sacrifice himself. He never wanted either one of them to die because they had given him a reason to live, in my opinion.

Snape didn't beg Voldy - he led him to believe he was lusting after her and nothing more. He waived off the other human lives in the balance during that request - they could die for all he cared. That is not commendable no matter how you spin it to me (imo).
We each spin things our own way - that's what an opinion is for. You can spin Snape as "diabolical" or Harry's son as "Albus El Diablo Potter" but that's still just an opinion. :tu: ;) And you are entitled to that, as the rest of us are to our own.

Daggerstone

August 13th, 2009, 9:51 pm

The point wasn't what readers might make of Snape's deeds, rather that Harry would not be so overcome with joy at being made the chosen one, dubbed to destroy Voldemort, his parents killed and his subsequently being left an orphan, so as to name is child Albus Severus in light of Snape's, imo, despicable behavior delivering the prophecy and his request to Voldemort - merely because in the end he was able to kill Voldy. That is what was proposed and what I strongly disagree with.

I absolutely agree with you on the point of Harry not naming his child Albus Severus because Snape's actions made him 'the chosen one'. :agree:

I have no idea how anyone could think so, when Jo specified the reason in painful detail in the epilogue :no:

"Albus Severus," Harry said quietly, so that nobody but Ginny could hear, and she was tactful enough to pretend to be waving to rose, who was now on the train, "you were named for two headmasters of Hogwarts. One of them was a Slytherin and he was probably the bravest man I ever knew."

Harry loved his parents and did not enjoy being the chosen one and based on his reactions in HBP, I feel he felt Snape's actions and behavior at that time were diabolical.

Interesting turn of phrase, wick. But as much as I respect both your and Harry's feelings... would you mind backing them up with a quote from canon? :)

zelinskas

August 13th, 2009, 10:02 pm

And he protected Harry (someone he severely hated) for seventeen years before dying for his efforts.

While his efforts to protect Harry are comendable, I don't think protecting him despite his hatred makes it any better, because he had no right to hate Harry. He loathed him from the moment he layed eyes on him.

wickedwickedboy

August 13th, 2009, 10:57 pm

I absolutely agree with you on the point of Harry not naming his child Albus Severus because Snape's actions made him 'the chosen one'. :agree:

I have no idea how anyone could think so, when Jo specified the reason in painful detail in the epilogue :no:

:tu:

Interesting turn of phrase, wick. But as much as I respect both your and Harry's feelings... would you mind backing them up with a quote from canon? :)

Well Dumbledore said that Snape disgusted him and Harry noted that he'd never heard so much contempt in Dumbledore's voice (DH TPT)- since Harry slipped his personal POV in there, I would figure if he thought Dumbledore was wrong, he would have mentioned it then, so imo, I felt he agreed. Snape was a DE at the time he took the prophecy and asked Voldy to spare only Lily - both acts would result in murder which I feel Snape disregarded (except with respect to Lily for the second act). So I think Harry would look at it as an act of a DE, who was behaving in a diabolical or evil or murderous fashion because that is what conspiring to kill innocents without care is to me, and I feel it was to all good siders as well, like I felt it was to Dumbledore and including Harry (imo).

While his efforts to protect Harry are comendable, I don't think protecting him despite his hatred makes it any better, because he had no right to hate Harry. He loathed him from the moment he layed eyes on him.

I agree. :tu:

Sly_Lady

August 13th, 2009, 11:17 pm

While his efforts to protect Harry are comendable, I don't think protecting him despite his hatred makes it any better, because he had no right to hate Harry. He loathed him from the moment he layed eyes on him.

When it comes to emotions, rights or no rights to feel a certain way seem irrelevant. Feelings are based in a person's temperament and cumulative experiences. There was a history behind that first look. We spent 6 books with almost no idea what that history was. Only Snape knew and the story was a painful one.

Snape had such a painful, dreadful, guilt-ridden history with the Potters, that I'm impressed that rather than turning his back on Harry, he watched over him and protected him. Snape got the job done and I think he'd believe his feelings were irrelevant. He got the job done and that's what matters. Since that helped Harry get the job of defeating Voldemort done, I think he was right.

Yoana

August 14th, 2009, 7:24 am

eliza101

August 14th, 2009, 7:32 am

If Harry really felt this way at the time of HBP, he is a remarkably magnanimous person because he obviously has fully forgiven Snape's diabolical actions 20 years later. Or that way it felt to me, since he gave his son Snape's name.

Will answer in the Harry thread.

TreacleTartlet

August 14th, 2009, 9:09 am

Annielogic

August 14th, 2009, 11:18 am

Well, you may look at it that way that way, however I'm not so sure Harry did as the canon evidence seems to point to the contrary; in his speech to Voldemort and the naming of Albus Severus. We know Harry has a great capacity to forgive, and I think at the time of seeing these memories of Snape's, Harry was already beginning that process of forgiveness as he was seeing Snape from a different perspective.

Yes and just add, I also find it interesting that Harry thinks of Snape as "Severus" for the first time during The prince's Tale. Just his given name, so it seems more informal, softened even and generally more amicable than his previous ways of refering to Severus Snape, imo. I agree, Harry is already processing the truth and re-evaluating and replacing his previous misconceptions.

blak_cat

August 14th, 2009, 12:12 pm

:tu:Well Dumbledore said that Snape disgusted him and Harry noted that he'd never heard so much contempt in Dumbledore's voice (DH TPT)- since Harry slipped his personal POV in there, I would figure if he thought Dumbledore was wrong, he would have mentioned it then, so imo, I felt he agreed. Snape was a DE at the time he took the prophecy and asked Voldy to spare only Lily - both acts would result in murder which I feel Snape disregarded (except with respect to Lily for the second act). So I think Harry would look at it as an act of a DE, who was behaving in a diabolical or evil or murderous fashion because that is what conspiring to kill innocents without care is to me, and I feel it was to all good siders as well, like I felt it was to Dumbledore and including Harry (imo).

I agree that Harry may have thought that what Snape did was diabolical however I think he ultimately forgave Snape for those actions by the end of The Prince's Tale. After all, Harry was willing to defend Snape to Voldemort in a room full of people who hate Snape. Further, he named his second born son Severus. So yes, when Harry was looking into Snape's memories and saw the time spent as a Death Eater he may have (at the time) viewed the actions as evil but he lost that contempt for Snape upon seeing the earnest actions Snape took to make it right. He forgave Snape in the end. (And I really didn't see Harry throwing in any angry thoughts towards Snape during The Prince's Tale so whatever he was feeling, we don't know; t seemed an objective look at Snape's memories).

Daggerstone

August 14th, 2009, 12:22 pm

Well Dumbledore said that Snape disgusted him and Harry noted that he'd never heard so much contempt in Dumbledore's voice (DH TPT)- since Harry slipped his personal POV in there, I would figure if he thought Dumbledore was wrong, he would have mentioned it then, so imo, I felt he agreed.

That Snape's action was contemptible? Probably. However, seeing as he mentions nothing for the rest of the memory display I'm led to think, by extension, that he must have agreed with Snape's SUBSEQUENT actions as well - surely he would have mentioned something otherwise.

As for Harry never hearing so much contempt in Dumbledore's voice... It's likely the truth. The boy only knew his Headmaster for 5 years. :)

So I think Harry would look at it as an act of a DE, who was behaving in a diabolical or evil or murderous fashion because that is what conspiring to kill innocents without care is to me, and I feel it was to all good siders as well, like I felt it was to Dumbledore and including Harry (imo).

You're implying I'm not a good sider unless I agree with your interpretation, wick. So... is this the part where I go running to the mods to shout 'abuse'? :lol:

I'll keep this short and sweet, for everyone's sake:

1) I do not believe Snape was 'conspiring to kill innocents without care' - I am of a mind that if he did, he wouldn't have gone to Dumbledore to ask for assistance. So, while I agree such behaviour would have been 'diabolical or evil or murderous'', I do not agree that the terms are applicable to Snape.

2) Your opinion of certain actions and attitudes does not necessarily equal that of the characters, even if it's characters you yourself identify with.

3) The fact that someone else's opinions of certain actions and attitudes differ from your own does not necessarily make them different from the opinions of 'good siders'. Your feelings of identification with 'good siders' notwithstanding.

silver ink pot

August 14th, 2009, 12:49 pm

Well Dumbledore said that Snape disgusted him and Harry noted that he'd never heard so much contempt in Dumbledore's voice (DH TPT)- since Harry slipped his personal POV in there, I would figure if he thought Dumbledore was wrong, he would have mentioned it then, so imo, I felt he agreed. Snape was a DE at the time he took the prophecy and asked Voldy to spare only Lily - both acts would result in murder which I feel Snape disregarded (except with respect to Lily for the second act). So I think Harry would look at it as an act of a DE, who was behaving in a diabolical or evil or murderous fashion because that is what conspiring to kill innocents without care is to me, and I feel it was to all good siders as well, like I felt it was to Dumbledore and including Harry (imo).

Isn't it possible that Harry took note of the contempt in Dumbledore's voice because he of all people knows how much trust Dumbledore had always expressed for Snape later on? In other words, it's not the contempt that's important as much as the lack of contempt later on.

In all the book, for the entire time Harry is at Hogwarts, the word most associated with Snape is "Trust."

Things changed after that windy hilltop. Actually, before that ~ Harry tells Voldemort that Snape changed sides "from the moment you threatened her (Lily)."

While it's easy to hate the young man in that scene, that is a memory that happened in the past. That part of Snape's life is over and done with possibly before Harry is ever born, and many years before Harry comes to Hogwarts.

All the books happen long after that scene, while Snape is acting as a "good sider" at all times. There is no time in the books when Snape is on the bad side anymore, and that's just a fact, not an opinion. I see no reason to apologize for believing a fact from a book.

ignisia

August 14th, 2009, 3:27 pm

Here's the quote, which might clear up a few things:

I have --- I have asked him ---“

“You disgust me,” said Dumbledore, and Harry had never heard so much contempt in his voice. Snape seemed to shrink a little,

There's nothing to suggest that Harry agreed with Dumbledore or not. He may have, he may have just been watching without reaction, we'll never know. However, we can suppose that he had at least forgiven Snape somewhat by the time the SWM memory comes up again, because it is there he calls the man "Severus", plus there's his subsequent defence of the man when talking to Voldemort in the final battle. Not a common reaction toward someone who disgusts you.

Oh, and Dags? Love your post. :tu:

wickedwickedboy

August 14th, 2009, 3:38 pm

All of my responses are in response to this:

By Kittling: The moment Severus finds out who Voldemort has decided the prophecy is about and his actions on finding this out are really crucial to both the prophecy and the plot line of the entire series. It is this moment changes then we don’t get a ‘chosen one’ to defeat Voldemort. Surely that has to be born in mind – Harry is only who he is, is only able to do what he does because Severus acted as he did at this point. Personally I think that Harry realises this and that is one of the reasons he names his second son Albus Severus.

I disagree, I've explained why many times over. I am not referring to scenes having nothing to do with Snape's actions that were unassociated with Harry being the chosen one. The only scenes are Snape delivering the prophecy and Snape asking Voldemort to spare Lily. I feel both acts were done by Snape when he was a DE and I feel that both acts would result in the murder of innocents (the Potters) and in my view, Snape didn't care, with the exception of Lily. Dumbledore indicated his disgust in the memories (TPT), Harry indicated his disgust in HBP when he found out Snape was the one who delivered the prophecy and more when he later discussed it with Dumbledore in that book. Finally, I feel Harry in narration agreed with Dumbledore's disgust of Snape in the scene on the hill - this relates to Snape's acts as a DE when he was still trying to help push Voldemort into power - and both acts are related to Harry being the chosen one. His parents died as a result and he was left an orphan - then as the chosen one, he was hunted and beleagured by Voldy - Harry wasn't happy about any of that, imo. So no, I don't feel he approved of either of those two acts of Snape and I feel he was as disgusted with Snape for doing so as Dumbledore had been. But that to me is Snape's earlier characterization as a Death Eater - we don't have much, but enough to help us see who he was at that point, imo.

TreacleTartlet

August 14th, 2009, 4:06 pm

In DH, in his final battle with Voldemort, Harry says:

'Severus Snape wasn't yours,' said Harry. 'Snape was Dumbledore's. Dumbledore's from the moment you started hunting down my mother.

Going from what Harry says here, it is this moment that Harry sees as being important and defining in the changing of Snape's loyalties. The moment that Voldemort targeted Lily.

hwyla

August 14th, 2009, 4:25 pm

And that while Albus may have been disgusted at the time of the scene on the hill, he trusted Snape enough to hire him to teach within a relatively short period of time (either a year-and-a-half, if the scene took place while Lily was pregnant or an even shorter time of just a half-year if it happened after Harry's birth). To go from disgust to trust obviously took a change of opinion on Albus' part - apparently one based on the change in Snape

Let us also remember that not long after that (after Halloween), Albus also testified in front of the Wizengamot that Snape was 'no more of a DE than he was' - and whatever Albus' failing in regards to Grindelwald, he was NEVER a DE. So, he quite believes what he said (or else you believe he perjured himself in front of the body of which he later became the 'head'?)

silver ink pot

August 14th, 2009, 6:42 pm

I disagree, I've explained why many times over. I am not referring to scenes having nothing to do with Snape's actions that were unassociated with Harry being the chosen one. The only scenes are Snape delivering the prophecy and Snape asking Voldemort to spare Lily. I feel both acts were done by Snape when he was a DE and I feel that both acts would result in the murder of innocents (the Potters) and in my view, Snape didn't care, with the exception of Lily.

We all know exactly what scenes you are talking about, and yet that's a very narrow view of even the Prince's Tale because that memory comes before everything that happens in the future. You are choosing those two scenes to define Snape and Harry's reaction to Severus's younger self even though every single thing that happens to Harry in the books comes years after those two scenes. Harry has always seen the relationship between Snape and Dumbledore as one of trust and mutual respect, so he is not going to automatically feel contempt for Snape in that scene because he knows everything that follows after it, in my opinion.

There's just a ton of canon that balances off the negativity of the Prophecy and the Hill Scene. Those were Snape's huge mistakes that he had to spend his life trying to mend. And yet Snape's interaction with Voldemort concerning Lily actually saved Harry and gave him blood protection he wouldn't otherwise have had. So it's hard for me to see the Prophecy as a totally bad thing, when years after the Prophecy came true Harry is leading a happy life with children of his own.

There's a sense of destiny throughout the story, and Snape plays a major role, in my opinion. It starts out badly, but his choices reverse that. There's a sense that it was all supposed to happen that way, and surely much of it was beyond Snape's control anyway, in my opinion. I believe Harry recognizes that he did everything he could within his power to change and to do the right thing. JMO.

Edited to Add: One more thing about the Hill scene ~ Harry notices the contempt in Dumbledore's voice. But he also notices how distraught Snape is over the possible death of Lily. Harry notices both things - I don't think he would see the concern over his mother's life as a negative, in my opinion.

wickedwickedboy

August 14th, 2009, 10:36 pm

We all know exactly what scenes you are talking about, and yet that's a very narrow view of even the Prince's Tale because that memory comes before everything that happens in the future. You are choosing those two scenes to define Snape and Harry's reaction to Severus's younger self even though every single thing that happens to Harry in the books comes years after those two scenes. Harry has always seen the relationship between Snape and Dumbledore as one of trust and mutual respect, so he is not going to automatically feel contempt for Snape in that scene because he knows everything that follows after it, in my opinion.

There's just a ton of canon that balances off the negativity of the Prophecy and the Hill Scene. Those were Snape's huge mistakes that he had to spend his life trying to mend. And yet Snape's interaction with Voldemort concerning Lily actually saved Harry and gave him blood protection he wouldn't otherwise have had. So it's hard for me to see the Prophecy as a totally bad thing, when years after the Prophecy came true Harry is leading a happy life with children of his own.

There's a sense of destiny throughout the story, and Snape plays a major role, in my opinion. It starts out badly, but his choices reverse that. There's a sense that it was all supposed to happen that way, and surely much of it was beyond Snape's control anyway, in my opinion. I believe Harry recognizes that he did everything he could within his power to change and to do the right thing. JMO.

Edited to Add: One more thing about the Hill scene ~ Harry notices the contempt in Dumbledore's voice. But he also notices how distraught Snape is over the possible death of Lily. Harry notices both things - I don't think he would see the concern over his mother's life as a negative, in my opinion.

I feel we would have to agree to disagree on this issue. :)

Daggerstone

August 15th, 2009, 2:19 am

"The odd thing is, Harry," he said softly, "that it may not have meant you at all. Sibyll's prophecy could have applied to two wizard boys, both born at the end of July that year, both of whom had parents in the Order of the Phoenix, both sets of parents having narrowly escaped Voldemort three times. One, of course, was you. The other was Neville Longbottom." OotP, Ch 37

Now, we know the prophecy was self-fulfilling. Voldemort himself would choose his adversary, and we all know he chose Harry. Now...

“Everything – everything I heard!” said Snape. “That is why – it is for that reason – he thinks it means Lily Evans!”
“The prophecy did not refer to a woman,” said Dumbledore. “It spoke of a boy born at the end of July – ”
“You know what I mean! He thinks it means her son, he is going to hunt her down – kill them all – ” DH, Ch 33

If Snape hadn't come to Dumbledore and let him know whom the Dark Lord had chosen...

It took me far less than 19 years to start entertaining the possible alternatives. And I don't know about Harry, but I suspect any lingering feeling of disgust would be at least partially tempered by the realization I might not have been there to name my kid in the first place had it not been for that 'diabolical, evil and murderous' man's actions.

JMO, of course. ;)

silver ink pot

August 15th, 2009, 4:24 am

It took me far less than 19 years to start entertaining the possible alternatives. And I don't know about Harry, but I suspect any lingering feeling of disgust would be at least partially tempered by the realization I might not have been there to name my kid in the first place had it not been for that 'diabolical, evil and murderous' man's actions.

JMO, of course. ;)
And of course the name Albus Severus speaks for itself, as does Harry's affection for his son. :agree:

I'd rather talk about the theme of Trust.

In GoF, Snape tells Fake Moody:

"Dumbledore happens to trust me," said Snape through clenched teeth. "I refuse to believe that he gave you orders to search my office!"

In OotP, Dumbledore tells Harry:

"I trust Severus Snape," said Dumbledore simply.

In HBP, Dumbledore tells Harry:

At last he said, "I am sure. I trust Severus Snape completely."

And in the final analysis, Dumbledore was right. Snape was trustworthy because he had changed. I find that a very hopeful theme.

Colonel_Fubster

August 15th, 2009, 5:19 am

silver ink pot

August 15th, 2009, 5:47 am

CathyWeasley

August 15th, 2009, 8:11 pm

Colonel Fubster I salute you! :clap:

Brilliant catch!

Both Lily and Severus were prepared to do "anything" to save the person they loved. It is a very striking parallel and IMO shows the depth of Severus's love for Lily.

Unrepentant

August 15th, 2009, 8:40 pm

I don't quite understand your never having loved a girl in more than a year. Did you mean for more than a year? If so, hopefully in time you'll meet someone with whom you'll want to spend the rest of your life.

Why do you assume that Snape wanted any children, or for that matter, needed to have children? (Not everybody does, y'know!) There's certainly nothing in canon about him wanting children with Lily, after all they were only 16 when Lily dumped him.

What I meant was, in clear text: I've never loved a girl for more than a year, "loved" as in daydreaming about, writing poems about, thinking sugar-sweet dreams of one certain girl, but nothing more than that. Love as in the "secret burning passion" Merobe held for tom Riddle Sr., love as the "obsessive love" Slughorn tells us about in HBP. That kind of love. The love that is but a seed, the Level 1, love as in the sweetest emotion that remains just an emotion.

Of course I've met girls that I would like to share my life with, if only they... did not think of me as a stupid freak :no::lol:.
My point being, If Snape got ditched by Lily, how come he still hold on to his feelings for her, when they certainly were not, as we know, returned? I mean it's very sweet and so, but why couldn't Snape just... move on? He has the ability to love, so wonders could lie ahead of him if he just started meeting other girls. Especially when Lily ended up marrying his school bully.

Of course, because she had been his (only?) friend since childhood, Snape's feelings for her could be rooted too deep for him to just give up the idea of a relationship with him. And that's very cute. But a heart is big, he could meet other girls and Lily could still be someone he cared very much about.
As for the child comment - Forget about it. I thought maybe Snape wanted to have a kid that he could give the happiness his father could not give him, (Basing this on the "He doesn't like anything much, my dad" comment in TPT) but I may be wrong :whistle:

Sister_Grimm

August 15th, 2009, 8:59 pm

1) Yes, I do think he did. Snape probably didn't want to die without Harry knowing the truth behind his actions, and the way he treated Harry.

3) I would make him a bit more brave at the end. The part where he's begging Voldemort not to kill him kind of disappointed me.

7) I wish he would've had better motives for his actions, yes, but good deeds are good deeds...

8) His school mates all did... and Lily wasn't there to stop him. He was probably hurt at her rejection, so he looked elsewhere for a place to belong.

12) strengths: loyalty, intelligence flaws: bad motives, inability to move on after Lily

14) I think that their relationship was more on the lines of friends rather than father/son. Snape really respected Dumbledore, and Dumbledore trusted Snape more than anybody (it would seem).

15) I think Snape would've done well in Hufflepuff, actually, due to his display of solid loyalty. I' doubt that he would've ever joined the Death Eaters had he not been in Slytherin.

16) Snape was deffinitely brave to go against Voldemort and work as a spy, knowing that at any moment he could be found out.

Fawkesfan1

August 15th, 2009, 9:13 pm

While re-reading PoA, I've found another very interesting parallel with The Prince's Tale.

When Harry confronted the Dementor/Boggart, he heard Lily pleading with Voldemort in his head:
...Harry was falling again through thick white fog, and his mother's voice was louder than ever, echoing inside his head - 'Not Harry! Not Harry! Please - I'll do anything -
'Stand aside - stand aside girl -'

Compare this to Snape's words to Dumbledore on the hill:
"Hide them all, then," he croaked. "Keep her --- them --- safe. Please."
"And what will you give me in return, Severus?"
"In --- in return?" "Anything." Wow awesome catch, Colonel_Fubster... :wow: I never even noticed that one before. The fact that he'd do anything to try and save her... it shows just how much he loved her and how much she loved Harry.

Even though his love was flawed... he didn't really care much for Harry persay... it still showed he cared to a point.

As for Lily, her love was selfless. She'd do anything to protect her son.

Snape was willing to do the same -- for her, but not for Harry. It was rather selfish of him... but still at least he did that. Better than nothing, I say.

silver ink pot

August 15th, 2009, 9:28 pm

What makes it more of a mirror image is that Lily is saying "Anything" to Voldemort, while Snape said it to Dumbledore. But they are both saying it for the same heartfelt reason - Lily loved Harry, while Snape loved Lily.

I don't see it as selfish because after all, Lily didn't love Snape in return. So to me his love is selfless because he gets absolutely nothing out of it except danger and more heartbreak when Lily dies despite his efforts. Then he went further and dedicated his life to protecting Lily's child, which was truly a thankless job that only led to his death, but he did it anyway.

I think it's easy to judge and say that Snape should have moved on with his life, but luckily for Harry he didn't. I think even in real life people fall in love and watch their beloved go happily into the sunset with someone else - as immortalized in thousands of songs, stories, and movies. Alot of times people say they are moving on, but that doesn't mean they stop loving someone either. I think JKR is just showing the loyal side of human nature which is sort of old-fashioned in this day and age. Just my opinion.

ignisia

August 15th, 2009, 9:39 pm

I think there's really a common theme in HP of people who are willing to do anything to protect those they love. There's the quotes Fubs mentioned, but there's also the parallel between Lily and Xenophilius and Harry's own desire to defeat Voldemort and put a stop to him and the horrors he's caused.

Funnily enough, it's Lily who is the one telling Voldemort she is willing to do anything, and Snape the one who is telling Dumbledore the same thing. It really highlights the fact that when it comes to blind devotion, even the sides in the war become secondary to these people. Love is what moves them the most, and it is the power that even a powerful wizard like Voldemort can't understand. Snape, Lily and practically every other character are all connected in this way: they love, and it is the same foolish, blinding, and human love that sets them apart from Voldemort, who loves no one but himself.

snapes_witch

August 15th, 2009, 10:04 pm

What I meant was, in clear text: I've never loved a girl for more than a year, "loved" as in daydreaming about, writing poems about, thinking sugar-sweet dreams of one certain girl, but nothing more than that. Love as in the "secret burning passion" Merobe held for tom Riddle Sr., love as the "obsessive love" Slughorn tells us about in HBP. That kind of love. The love that is but a seed, the Level 1, love as in the sweetest emotion that remains just an emotion.

Of course I've met girls that I would like to share my life with, if only they... did not think of me as a stupid freak :no::lol:.
My point being, If Snape got ditched by Lily, how come he still hold on to his feelings for her, when they certainly were not, as we know, returned? I mean it's very sweet and so, but why couldn't Snape just... move on? He has the ability to love, so wonders could lie ahead of him if he just started meeting other girls. Especially when Lily ended up marrying his school bully.

Of course, because she had been his (only?) friend since childhood, Snape's feelings for her could be rooted too deep for him to just give up the idea of a relationship with him. And that's very cute. But a heart is big, he could meet other girls and Lily could still be someone he cared very much about.
As for the child comment - Forget about it. I thought maybe Snape wanted to have a kid that he could give the happiness his father could not give him, (Basing this on the "He doesn't like anything much, my dad" comment in TPT) but I may be wrong :whistle:

I thought that was what you meant. First and foremost we must remember that Severus Snape is a fictional character created by J. K. Rowling, and hence not likely to react to events as we do in real life. If Jo says he really loved Lily for the rest of his life, then he did.

As for wanting children, he might be afraid that he would act just like his father, since that's the only example of a father that he has.

kittling

August 15th, 2009, 10:11 pm

As for Lily, her love was selfless. She'd do anything to protect her son.

Snape was willing to do the same -- for her, but not for Harry. It was rather selfish of him... but still at least he did that. Better than nothing, I say.

I don't see why one person being willing to do anything for someone they loved is selfless and for another person it is selfish.

Had Severus expected something out of his willingness to do anything to keep her alive then I would understand - but he has agreed to help her whole family so I don't see that there’s anything in it other than knowing that the person he loves is still alive jmho. :)

If Snape got ditched by Lily, how come he still hold on to his feelings for her, when they certainly were not, as we know, returned? I mean it's very sweet and so, but why couldn't Snape just... move on?

Well there are several theories about that but for me it comes down to two main things.

1) Severus seems to be very loyal to his friends. E.g. even when he switches sides there are signs that he is still concerned about Lucius because of their long friendship.
2) I think it is more the fact that as long as Lily exists in the world Severus can believe that there is some love and kindness in it. So when she is threatened so is his ability to hold on to that idea.

I’m denying the possibility that he also held romantic feelings for him but I don’t think that is quite as important as what Lily symbolised to Severus – jmho. :)

He has the ability to love, so wonders could lie ahead of him if he just started meeting other girls.

Indeed and I think it is sad that he doesn’t get to experience those ‘wonders’, as you put it. :sigh:

As for the child comment - Forget about it. I thought maybe Snape wanted to have a kid that he could give the happiness his father could not give him, (Basing this on the "He doesn't like anything much, my dad" comment in TPT) but I may be wrong :whistle:

Actually your not the first person to raise that idea and from previous discussions I don’t think its far fetched at all! :tu:

One person noted what Ron said in OotP about Snape coming to Order meetings at Grimmald Place - ‘you should see the way he looks at us’ or words to that effect, and they wondered what Severus saw when he looked at the Weasley kids / family. When you add to this that Lily is herself a redhead it becomes a reasonable proposition to wonder if he is looking at the family he never had – how painful would that be for him :upset: There are other things that contribute to the plausibility of the ‘Sev wanted kids’ idea, but it’s late here :D

when it comes to blind devotion, even the sides in the war become secondary to these people. Love is what moves them the most

:tu: Beautifully put Iggi

silver ink pot

August 15th, 2009, 10:38 pm

Funnily enough, it's Lily who is the one telling Voldemort she is willing to do anything, and Snape the one who is telling Dumbledore the same thing. It really highlights the fact that when it comes to blind devotion, even the sides in the war become secondary to these people.

That's very ironic, isn't it? What if Lily really had sold out to Voldemort in order to spare Harry - much like Mr. Lovegood tried to do to save Luna? What would we think of her? Peter by contrast sold out to save himself because that is who he loved the most (himeself), while Draco was willing to do "anything" Voldemort asked of him to save his family.

This is why it's hard for me to see Snape as selfish in his love when there are so many shades of gray in the books. It's all very situational ethics and Snape shouldn't be held to a higher standard than anyone else.

And while it's easy to say that Snape's love was selfish because he always loved only Lily, she was after all protecting "only" her biological offspring and not someone else's child. She wasn't protecting Neville, for instance, but her own flesh and blood, which any mother worth her salt would instinctively do in that situation.

To me what Snape does later in protecting both Harry and Draco is much more unselfish because he is honoring their mothers' wishes but getting nothing in return (except the promise of death). Just my opinion.

ignisia

August 16th, 2009, 12:02 am

The similar quotes really point to the feelings of these two characters as being very similar. I think JKR is really getting an interesting point across with characters like Snape, Lily, Xeno and Draco, who are driven to desperate acts to save the lives of loved ones. The love these people have for another is just as good yet just as all-consuming. Xenophilius doesn't love his daughter less, nor does Lily love her son less because they're willing to cooperate with Voldemort in their panic for the life of their child. I think the lesson there is that love is just that powerful.

Snape, on the other hand, has the odd position of going against Voldemort because of Lily, as opposed to the other three, who cooperate with Voldemort or promise to. The real question is, what does this say about him? Does the side of the war he is appealing to make a difference in these cases? Whether it does or not, his response is no worse than that of Lily, Xeno, or Draco. In fact, the similarity is likely deliberate.

Colonel_Fubster

August 16th, 2009, 1:13 am

Snape, Lily and practically every other character are all connected in this way: they love, and it is the same foolish, blinding, and human love that sets them apart from Voldemort, who loves no one but himself.
That is truly a wonderful way of putting it!
I think the lesson there is that love is just that powerful.
Snape, on the other hand, has the odd position of going against Voldemort because of Lily, as opposed to the other three, who cooperate with Voldemort or promise to. The real question is, what does this say about him? Does the side of the war he is appealing to make a difference in these cases? Whether it does or not, his response is no worse than that of Lily, Xeno, or Draco. In fact, the similarity is likely deliberate.I think so too, given that Snape's first words to Dumbledore were "Don't kill me!" Snape knew just how powerful Voldemort was, and Dumbledore was the only one that Voldemort ever feared. Snape must have been terrified at the idea of facing such a powerful and renowned wizard, but he did it anyway, purposefully, to try and save the only person he loved.

And while it's easy to say that Snape's love was selfish because he always loved only Lily, she was after all protecting "only" her biological offspring and not someone else's child. She wasn't protecting Neville, for instance, but her own flesh and blood, which any mother worth her salt would instinctively do in that situation.

I agree, an excellent point. I think we are all willing to do more, do anything, to protect those we love, as opposed to those we merely know, or know about.

wickedwickedboy

August 16th, 2009, 1:20 am

I feel that one message was how powerful emotions can be and the things that it can make one do. I think it was shown through many characters, including Snape. Some mentioned, but others too; Sirius running to the MOM for Harry, Harry sacrificing himself for mankind, James for his family, Ron risking his life for Harry and Draco, Xeno, Lily, Narcissa and others metioned and so on.

But I felt that there were secondary messages throughout; because in instances like Snape going first to Voldemort and Dumbledore's construing it as exchanging the mum for the son (DH TPT), or Xeno actually attempting to stun the trio and allow their capture to save his daughter (DH) or Merope's emotions driving her to give love potion to Tom out of her strong emotions for him (HBP) or Draco sending the necklace and mead to Dumbledore to save his parents (HBP) - you have examples of those emotions causing people to do things involving harm to innocents in order to save those they care about, imo. I don't think the message there was to be construed similarly to the cases where either people placed only their own lives in the balance to save their loved ones or worked toward that goal without harming anyone else, imo. That would not only include strong emotions of love, but even where people saved others out of compassion or duty, like Aurors saving people, Harry saving Draco in the ROR or Snape slowing Harry's fall on the broom or trying to find a cure for Katie's illness - you have that same message getting across of people doing things based on emotions of wanting to do the right thing, or be helpful or save a life, etc., without the added element of purposeful or knowing harm to another invovled, imo.

So I think you get a myriad of messages and I feel that based on his portrayal, Snape's character was shown to experience several of the above type instances, and for each, he may be driven by various emotions, but differing messages can be derived based on how he went about achieving his goal, imo. A good example I think is with Snape finding a cure for Katie, because she was in dire straits and he was driven to help her in a legitimate way - and compare that to Lockheart who 'healed' Harry's broken arm in what turned out to be a non-legitimate manner, driven perhaps by a desire to look like a brilliant healer that he was not. They may have both been driven by a strong emotion to do what they did - with the presumption of helping/saving, but I feel the legitimacy of their efforts in those cases sent out differing messages, (imo). I could conclude that they were both driven to be helpful and stop there, but I think that the other message sent out was also important, because Snape's efforts were actually sufficient to being helpful, whereas Lockheart's were not, imo. Lockheart should have used the means of taking Harry to Poppy, imo, whereas Snape's best means were to try to find a cure, which is what he did, imo.

silver ink pot

August 16th, 2009, 5:50 am

Xenophilius doesn't love his daughter less, nor does Lily love her son less because they're willing to cooperate with Voldemort in their panic for the life of their child. I think the lesson there is that love is just that powerful.

Snape, on the other hand, has the odd position of going against Voldemort because of Lily, as opposed to the other three, who cooperate with Voldemort or promise to. The real question is, what does this say about him? Does the side of the war he is appealing to make a difference in these cases? Whether it does or not, his response is no worse than that of Lily, Xeno, or Draco. In fact, the similarity is likely deliberate.
Yes, I think it is deliberate because JKR is exploring all the many situations in which people are given choices involving a loved one and what those people are willing to do to save them. Food for thought, indeed!

Lockheart who 'healed' Harry's broken arm in what turned out to be a non-legitimate manner, driven perhaps by a desire to look like a brilliant healer that he was not. They may have both been driven by a strong emotion to do what they did - with the presumption of helping/saving, but I feel the legitimacy of their efforts in those cases sent out differing messages, (imo). I could conclude that they were both driven to be helpful and stop there, but I think that the other message sent out was also important, because Snape's efforts were actually sufficient to being helpful, whereas Lockheart's were not, imo. Lockheart should have used the means of taking Harry to Poppy, imo, whereas Snape's best means were to try to find a cure, which is what he did, imo.

Or you could say that Lockhart was just a phoney and braggart who had no clue how to heal Harry's arm, while Snape was the real deal as a healer, as we see with Lupin, Katie, Dumbledore, and Draco. I've always wondered who made the skelegrow that healed Harry's arm so quickly, and considering that Snape was adamant about brewing the Mandrake Draught in CoS, it was probably Snape, in my opinion.

I think a parallel to that is in PoA when Ron has a broken leg (due to being dragged into the Shrieking Shack by Sirius) and Snape puts him on the stretcher first to take back to the castle. He certainly doesn't try to heal Ron's broken leg there on the ground. He probably went back and told Madame Pomfrey to give Ron "boneset" or some other herb. :lol:

Beatifically

August 17th, 2009, 4:23 pm

:scared:

In the poll, I picked his vindictiveness and his inability to move on. I think those two sort of tie together, especially in regards to Harry. Snape, IMO, should have moved past his hatred for James and not get revenge for what he did by making Harry miserable. But even with Lily, he should have moved on. I think a lot of his misery came out of his need to live in the past. He was stuck thinking about how Sirius and James treated him and how he was friends with Lily and lost her.

If I were to add anything else, I think another major flaw was the way he treated his students.

Yoana

August 17th, 2009, 5:29 pm

In the poll, I picked his vindictiveness and his inability to move on. I think those two sort of tie together, especially in regards to Harry. Snape, IMO, should have moved past his hatred for James and not get revenge for what he did by making Harry miserable.

I wouldn't call that revenge, as in, deliberately doing things to get the satisfaction of getting even with someone. I think Snape just couldn't help himself with Harry; and he was rather curt with his other students as well.

But even with Lily, he should have moved on.

But who are we to say what other people "should" have done? This is so subjective. One man's meat is another man's poison. We can't know what's best for others or what would work for them. Though I do think it's lucky for Harry that Snape didn't move on.

wickedwickedboy

August 17th, 2009, 6:14 pm

But who are we to say what other people "should" have done? This is so subjective. One man's meat is another man's poison. We can't know what's best for others or what would work for them. Though I do think it's lucky for Harry that Snape didn't move on.

I feel like objectively Snape was making Harry miserable and independent as to whether that made Snape happy or miserable himself, a different approach was called for, imo. Whether moving on would help or not, I agree is a subjective call, but it is a possible means for arriving at a different approach, imo. Perhaps there were other means of achieving a different approach, but in general I agree with the idea that he should have pursued one.

I would respectfully disagree that Harry was lucky Snape didn't move on. I don't feel that moving on meant he had to completely reject all feelings of fondness for his old friend Lily, merely back away from the intensity he placed on them to give his resultant feelings of jealousy and guilt a chance of diminishing. I feel that if the outcome was that Snape no longer wished to work for Dumbledore, then he would simply not be made to spy and Dumbledore would have had to have found a workaround to the part of his plan involving Snape, imo. However, it could be that Snape would still wish to assist, because I feel he'd of still retained liking for his old friend and felt guilt for having played a role in her death, imo, or more generally for having played the role period, imo.

UselessCharmMaster

August 17th, 2009, 6:24 pm

All of my responses are in response to this:
The only scenes are Snape delivering the prophecy and Snape asking Voldemort to spare Lily.

But we don't see these scenes. We can see Snape begging Dumbledore for Lily's life and promising him "anything" for it. This is the author's choice. She shows us Snape doing the good choice, not the bad ones. And I think she knows better...

CathyWeasley

August 17th, 2009, 6:29 pm

A couple of things occurred to me while I was away and I feel like sharing.

Firstly it occurred to me that there are certain similarities between Severus Snape and Aragorn son of Arathorn from LotR. Both appear to be evil and up to no good, both have a dodgey reputation - Snape for his "love of the Dark Arts" and Aragorn because he is a ranger. Aragorn is a king in hiding (or exile) while Snape has the nickname, which no one else seems to be aware of, Half-Blood Prince. Both are healers.

Secondly, at the camp site wherre we stayed there was a fair number of teenagers. I actually found it quite interesting to watch their behaviour as the girls made themselves up, and the boys pushed each other around. This reminded me of the typical teenage boy behaviour especially when around girls. They tend to become more agressive scuffling amongst the group which often turns into a sort of "play wrestling". Of course this is all supposed to impress the girls, and it is generally totally subconsciously done, as so much of our behaviour is. The big one of course is the "boy racers" - teenagers who drive too fast and wildly thinking it impresses people (particularly girls)when it doesn't.
So why am I bothering to share this with you?
Well because this is exactly how Severus behaves as a teenager. He wants to be a Death Eater because he thinks it will impress Lily if he is Someone. In the same way teenage boys think that girls will be impressed by them driving like a maniac when this is (90% of the time) not true and they actually scare them to death. Lily is as unimpressed by Snape's DE ambitions as girls are by the wild driving. So however much it may appear that he didn't know Lily because if he did he would have known that she wouldn't be impressed by his DE ambitions, Severus is displaying a behaviour pattern that is typical of teenage boys.

ETA: It also occurred to me that this is also what James does in SWM. He is trying to impress Lily and starts to pick on Snape, but Lily is not impressed. All that testosterone doesn't seem to encourage well reasoned behaviour.

The_Green_Woods

August 17th, 2009, 6:49 pm

IMO, just because Harry named his son after Snape, doesn't mean Snape wasn't bullying. There are many reasons why Harry could've given his son Snape's name. One of them is because Harry is a grateful and a kind person, he was not one to dwell on the negative, imo, not when Snape had protected him from Voldemort. Harry forgot what Snape had done, because of his forgiving nature, but that doesn't mean Snape hadn't bullied and mistreated him on many occassions, imo.

I think if Harry was just grateful and kind, he would speak out for Snape, ensure his name got cleared and that he was recognised by the WW for his work. Naming his child is a very personal thing and I don't think any parent would name their kids after bullies, nasty people, or someone like that. The other names Snape gave his kids are James, Lily and Albus. Snape comes in this list and I think that means Harry had understood Snape and has accepted him, more than exhibiting a forgiveness or kindness or gratefulness. He had accepted Snape warts and all, just like he had accepted his parents and Albus Dumbledore. That's how it looked to me. :)

This actually opens up another discussion, because I think the naming of his child after Snape is very out of character and poorly written. Of course they are her books, but I think of myself in that situation. If my parents were killed because someone had divulged information about them to their killer, I would never, ever want to name my child after that person. I just find Harry calling his child after one of the two people who were responsible for his parents death unrealistic.

While yes, Harry was targeted because of Snape handing over the prophecy, Harry also lived because of Snape's request and work for as long as he lived. I think it depends upon each person. Harry IMO thought Snape's remorse as true and that Snape had played a part not unlike Dumbledore in Harry's survival, perhaps an even more important part, for without his request, Harry would not have received the protection that would ultimately save his life in the Forest, not to mention saving his life the day his parents died.

Snape wanted Lily to be safe and did not care about James or Harry. Not until Dumbledore contemptuously scorned Snape, and Snape realized he could not solely have Lily protected, did he agree to the protection of the entire family. To me, that is selfish. If he truly loved Lily, he should have tried to protect her entire family, thus making her live a better life. Instead, he begged both Voldemort and Dumbledore to spare Lily, and not Harry and James, which, in my opinion, is a selfish act.

I think Snape by going to Dumbledore ensured the protection of all the Potters. He was at that time desperate for Lily's life. I don't think he could ask or save Harry's and James' life (asking Voldemort or planning independently). Would he have, if he could have? I think he would have, not because he cared at that time, but because he knew Lily cared IMO.

I agree that Snape did guarantee the whole Potter family protection by going to Dumbledore, but I do not think that was the reason Snape went to Albus. From that scene, Snape only mentions saving Lily, and not until Dumbledore says something about Harry and James does Snape relinquish.

This implies that Dumbledore would listen to Snape and save only Lily. I disagree. I think Snape was helpless when it came to saving James and Harry; if he did not want them to be saved, Snape would not have gone to Dumbledore, who he knew would save all of them, no matter what Snape wanted. I think Snape went to Dumbledore to double protect Lily and to also warn Dumbledore about the danger for Harry, knowing Dumbledore would save all of them.

To me, Snape does sacrifice Harry for Lily, to the extent of his ability. He could not technically do so, but by guarding Lily and allowing Harry to be killed is, as I see it, as sacrificial as Snape could be.

Out of the 3 Potters, Snape could ask Voldemort to spare only one. The other 2 he could not, without Voldemort killing Snape first. I think whether Snape sacrificed Harry or not depends upon whether Snape could effectively ask Voldemort for Harry's life and he could in any way save Harry's life by manipulating Voldemort in some manner.

I feel he could not and because he could not, I think Snape did not sacrifice Harry for Lily's. It was not an exchange of lives; it was pleading for the only life Snape could dare ask and I think there is a difference between this and sacrificing Harry's life in exchange for Lily's IMO.

silver ink pot

August 17th, 2009, 7:29 pm

I would respectfully disagree that Harry was lucky Snape didn't move on. I don't feel that moving on meant he had to completely reject all feelings of fondness for his old friend Lily, merely back away from the intensity he placed on them to give his resultant feelings of jealousy and guilt a chance of diminishing.
I don't think "fondness" would result in the sort of dedication over years that Snape had to the Order and to Harry. As for intensity, that is Snape's personality. He's an intense character. He was never going to be mellow about someone he loved, or someone he was trying to protect. But that's good because he is never indifferent or mamby-pamby about anything he cares about. That makes him a stronger character, in my opinion.

And a sense of guilt is necessary for true remorse because the person has to admit that they've done something wrong. To forget that fact would be denial, and unlike Voldemort, Snape owned his guilt - probably too much, since he wasn't responsible for the actual deaths of the Potters.

wickedwickedboy

August 17th, 2009, 7:51 pm

I don't think "fondness" would result in the sort of dedication over years that Snape had to the Order and to Harry. As for intensity, that is Snape's personality. He's an intense character. He was never going to be mellow about someone he loved, or someone he was trying to protect. But that's good because he is never indifferent or mamby-pamby about anything he cares about. That makes him a stronger character, in my opinion.

Well it was just a suggestion and I agree there is no knowing what the outcome would be. My point was that a different approach that didn't include Snape's personal treatment of Harry as set forth in the canon would have been better, imo. I also agree that didn't happen in the canon and was based on his character as you pointed out. I see intensity as capable of being both a strength and a weakness though and I feel Snape exhibited both as a result of his characteristic in that regard.

And a sense of guilt is necessary for true remorse because the person has to admit that they've done something wrong. To forget that fact would be denial, and unlike Voldemort, Snape owned his guilt - probably too much, since he wasn't responsible for the actual deaths of the Potters.

I agree guilt is necessary for remorse; but I was thinking in terms of Snape's guilt for his act when a Death Eater that had resulted in the deaths of others (giving the information in the prophecy to the dark lord). That it turned out to be the Potters would allow Snape to put a name to the ultimate victims, but who it turned out to be was less important, imo, than the idea that some living beings had their lives cut short due to Voldemort receiving the information in the prophecy, imo. JKR pointed out that if Voldemort had chosen the Longbottoms, back at that time, Snape wouldn't have cared and I feel that the underlying importance is Snape coming to care no matter who might be targeted by his act in that regard, as opposed to caring only because of a particularly named victim, imo. So the resultant guilt would be a result of that realization, rather than for the harm that came to a specific party, and the former I feel would be most important.

silver ink pot

August 17th, 2009, 8:16 pm

JKR pointed out that if Voldemort had chosen the Longbottoms, back at that time, Snape wouldn't have cared and I feel that the underlying importance is Snape coming to care no matter who might be targeted by his act in that regard, as opposed to caring only because of a particularly named victim, imo. So the resultant guilt would be a result of that realization, rather than for the harm that came to a specific party, and the former I feel would be most important.

My response to that is to point out that James and Lily and their friends weren't expending any energy to save Neville or the Longbottoms, and neither was Dumbledore. Nor were the Longbottoms trying to save Harry in any way, and I presume they were at home taking care of the Heir of Longbottom. They were each trying to protect their own children, and we see that over and over in the books as parents pulled their children out of school and made them stay home.

People protect those whom they love first, and Snape was no different than the rest of the characters, in my opinion. JKR implied that he was somehow different for loving one person over another, but I disagree with her on that. He seems to be exactly the same. Love for all Humanity is great, but only Dumbledore comes close to that Gandhi-esque ideal, and when he put on the ring with the The Stone he just wanted to see his own particular loved ones, and not a bunch of other people he didn't know. To me that just reflects human nature, and not some personality flaw of Dumbledore or Snape.

Maybe JKr wasn't just implying something about Snape, but about everyone. When things get personal, people wake up and start to think about what they are doing wrong. And that's certainly what happened to Snape, Regulus, Draco, and Narcissa. They realized what really mattered because they could love, which makes them just like everyone else except Voldemort or the worst Death Eaters. Love is the great levelor in the story, in my opinion, and the way Voldemort was defeated.

wickedwickedboy

August 17th, 2009, 10:00 pm

My response to that is to point out that James and Lily and their friends weren't expending any energy to save Neville or the Longbottoms, and neither was Dumbledore. Nor were the Longbottoms trying to save Harry in any way, and I presume they were at home taking care of the Heir of Longbottom. They were each trying to protect their own children, and we see that over and over in the books as parents pulled their children out of school and made them stay home.

Well I wasn't trying to make a distinction between those families that were all possible targets and in hiding; I agree there was little they could do for one another. But I think Order member/Aurors like Kingsley or Moody would willingly pursue a means of helping to keep either the Longbottoms or the Potters from danger if possible, imo. I realize Snape was a Death Eater at the time and would be thinking in terms of forwarding Voldemort's goal, but I was referring to his considering that issue after turning against Voldemort and reaching the realization that there was a better way of looking at it in general. In other words, rather than focusing on the harm that came to Lily and what that meant to him - focusing on the harm that came in general from his act. The benefit to doing so, imo, is that Snape could change his way of thinking relative to future acts, because he would not be able to change the past.

People protect those whom they love first, and Snape was no different than the rest of the characters, in my opinion. JKR implied that he was somehow different for loving one person over another, but I disagree with her on that. He seems to be exactly the same. Love for all Humanity is great, but only Dumbledore comes close to that Gandhi-esque ideal, and when he put on the ring with the The Stone he just wanted to see his own particular loved ones, and not a bunch of other people he didn't know. To me that just reflects human nature, and not some personality flaw of Dumbledore or Snape.

Maybe JKr wasn't just implying something about Snape, but about everyone. When things get personal, people wake up and start to think about what they are doing wrong. And that's certainly what happened to Snape, Regulus, Draco, and Narcissa. They realized what really mattered because they could love, which makes them just like everyone else except Voldemort or the worst Death Eaters. Love is the great levelor in the story, in my opinion, and the way Voldemort was defeated.

Well we would have to agree to disagree on these points. :)

SusanBones

August 17th, 2009, 10:08 pm

I think we are leaving the realm of character discussion and entering the world of speculation here when we talk about whether or not James, Lily, Dumbledore and the Order may or may not have worked tirelessly to protect the Longbottoms.

Let's stick to the topic please.

CathyWeasley

August 17th, 2009, 10:42 pm

As for intensity, that is Snape's personality. He's an intense character. He was never going to be mellow about someone he loved, or someone he was trying to protect. But that's good because he is never indifferent or mamby-pamby about anything he cares about. That makes him a stronger character, in my opinion.
IMO this is why he is a popular character. It is certainly the reason why I like him so much.

silver ink pot

August 18th, 2009, 12:32 pm

In other words, rather than focusing on the harm that came to Lily and what that meant to him - focusing on the harm that came in general from his act. The benefit to doing so, imo, is that Snape could change his way of thinking relative to future acts, because he would not be able to change the past.

I think that's exactly what Snape did, in my opinion. He never forgot Lily's death of course, just as no one forgets the death of a loved one, and we see him weeping about it in Prince's Tale.

But we also know that it changed everything he did in the future, because he never went back to the Dark Side.

So we can agree to agree on that one! ;)

wickedwickedboy

August 18th, 2009, 12:50 pm

I think that's exactly what Snape did, in my opinion. He never forgot Lily's death of course, just as no one forgets the death of a loved one, and we see him weeping about it in Prince's Tale.

I didn't interpret Snape to be weeping over remorse for his act in TPT - if you mean the scene where he was at #12G. There he ripped the photos of Lily's family away from the other part and threw it onto the ground beneath the dresser and I think that showed his focus to be upon himself and the harm to him (his pain and anguish), rather than his acts in the past that resulted in harm to others, imo. I felt the same about his talk with Dumbledore in his office after the Potter's death, if you refer to that scene, based on his focus upon his pain in terms of how he felt about Lily and his initial reaction when Dumbledore brought up Harry. So I don't feel that Snape focused on the harm from his general act, but rather on the harm to him that resulted from Lily's death, imo.

But we also know that it changed everything he did in the future, because he never went back to the Dark Side.

Well I agree that Snape continued to work with Dumbledore and never returned to being loyal to Voldemort, which helped the cause including Harry. However, I don't feel that Snape's emotions produced only positive personal acts, behavior and words on his part, particularly in terms of her son and husband, both of whom she loved. Again, I feel that this was due to Snape's focus on the harm he sustained, rather than the harm others sustained as a result of his acts (imo).

The_Green_Woods

August 18th, 2009, 1:07 pm

And a sense of guilt is necessary for true remorse because the person has to admit that they've done something wrong. To forget that fact would be denial, and unlike Voldemort, Snape owned his guilt - probably too much, since he wasn't responsible for the actual deaths of the Potters.

:agree: I think Snape's guilt was a little too much too, seeing that he was not actually responsible for the POtters deaths. The guilt which he had when he realised his actions placed Lily in danger, brought him to Dumbledore. He provided information about the danger which the Potters faced and he also started working for Dumbledore since then.

When Lily died and Voldemort also vanished; I think Snape's job also came to an end. Dumbledore in the TPT recruits him for the future, at some date when Voldemort will re-appear.

Snape agrees to work for Dumbledore again and from then on, I think it is less of guilt and more of a sense of doing the right thing. His guilt over his actions cannot be undone. Lily Potter died and there was nothing Snape could do about it. That chapter in a way was over IMO.

What started after Lily's death was his work for the Light for all the right reasons. The guilt of his action would never go away, just like it never went away with Dumbledore or Sirius, because a loved one died, even if the actual death was not because of Snape, (while one cannot say the same about other characters, like Dumbldore for example) IMO. Their actions in a way contributed directly to the death of a loved one, while Snape's action was indirect and he also came in time to warn them about the mistake he had made IMO.

silver ink pot

August 18th, 2009, 1:15 pm

So I don't feel that Snape focused on the harm from his general act, but rather on the harm to him that resulted from Lily's death, imo.

I don't understand the "general" and "specific" distinction you are making. Snape took Lily's death personally because of the love he felt for her. And he had to live with the guilt every day.

What exactly do you mean by "general act"?

UselessCharmMaster

August 18th, 2009, 5:45 pm

I felt the same about his talk with Dumbledore in his office after the Potter's death, if you refer to that scene, based on his focus upon his pain in terms of how he felt about Lily and his initial reaction when Dumbledore brought up Harry. So I don't feel that Snape focused on the harm from his general act, but rather on the harm to him that resulted from Lily's death, imo.

I don't really undertstand your point. In this scene Snape actually was feeling intense pain, he was shocked by the news of Lily's death. I find rather natural his reaction: to him at this moment, the important person was Lily, not baby Harry. And being still in shock and pain, he is able to accept Dumbledore's point of view and agrees to work to Harry's protection. What "general act" should he have considered then?

The_Green_Woods

August 18th, 2009, 5:58 pm

From the Whatever happened to Snape's Body thread in the Wand Forum

Well, I guess we can agree to disagree then, Green Woods.

Okay! :)

To me, I never thought Snape expected to be honored or his actions extolled after Voldemort died. How could he be?

Snape and his actions were already extolled by Harry in the Final Battle in front of everyone IMO. And in the epilogue there is Albus Severus, which is Harry's personal tribute and acceptance of Snape. I presume that Harry and Hermione along with the remaining Order members, helped by Dumbledore's portrait will clear Snape's name and show to the WW, how deeply they were indebted to a man who made sacrifices of the highest order for the Light.

I think the WW will believe the Chosen One and Albus Dumbledore, and very quickly too.

Most students have years of ingrained hatred towards Snape.

I don't think they hated Snape. But if they did, I hope there will be understanding when they realise Snape was a spy all those years.

It's not going to disappear overnight. Plus, most of the wizarding world thought him a scoundrel. At best, the wizarding community would have, in my view, a grudging respect for him for really sticking it to the Dark Lord in the end, but they would never hold him in the same light as Dumbledore.

That was when they thought he had killed Dumbledore for Voldemort. When they come to know Snape killed Dumbledore on his orders, sacrificing his good name, his character and everything for the next year, putting up with everyone thinking he was a DE and a traitor, I hope they realise on how much sacrifice the war with Voldemort was won.

silver ink pot

August 18th, 2009, 6:09 pm

I don't really undertstand your point. In this scene Snape actually was feeling intense pain, he was shocked by the news of Lily's death. I find rather natural his reaction: to him at this moment, the important person was Lily, not baby Harry. And being still in shock and pain, he is able to accept Dumbledore's point of view and agrees to work to Harry's protection. What "general act" should he have considered then?
Yes, it's very natural that he didn't immediately think of the "The Greater Good" at that moment. Snape's reaction was intensely personal, and after all, uncontrollable. Usually grown men don't break down crying that way unless they are suffering.

Snape rose to the occasion and agreed to spend his life protecting Harry.

Well I agree that Snape continued to work with Dumbledore and never returned to being loyal to Voldemort, which helped the cause including Harry. However, I don't feel that Snape's emotions produced only positive personal acts, behavior and words on his part, particularly in terms of her son and husband, both of whom she loved. Again, I feel that this was due to Snape's focus on the harm he sustained, rather than the harm others sustained as a result of his acts (imo).
I don't think that anyone in the book had 100% positive personal acts. I won't name any other characters, but Snape is no different than any other character. He's not a saint, and he says snarky things.

But I look at it this way. Snape saw Harry as his responsibility, which is a great thing. And he didn't want Harry to follow in his father's footsteps as a troublemaker, especially using the cloak for "undetected wrong-doing" as Dumbledore says of James in King's Cross. He was trying to be a disciplinarian, and while he was too rough in his speech, I believe he meant well. I also think Harry appreciated that after his death, from the way he talks about him in the Epilogue.

The_Green_Woods

August 18th, 2009, 6:59 pm

From the Whatever happened to Snape's Body thread in the Wand Forum

I guess I'm simply a cynic, haha. I just don't see Snape escaping the legacy of a lifetime of living in the shadows with dubious, unconfirmed loyalties unblemished, even with Harry vouching for him. I simply don't think Snape will ever be at the receiving end of too much hero worship

I understand what you are saying even though I disagree. :)

I think when Snape's work comes to light, people will realise how much Snape had worked for them, to help them win the war. And while there may be people who may not believe what Harry and Dumbledore, Kingsley and Arthur say of Snape; I think they would be very much in the minority, a negligent number almost. Most people will happily give Snape respect and credit where it was due, knowing that it takes a special man to do what he did, and without which the war could have seen far more deaths and loss IMO.

silver ink pot

August 18th, 2009, 7:07 pm

I'm resposting this from the "Whatever Happened to Snape's Grave" Thread:

Nah, I didn't imply that students specifically would desecrate his grave, but rather members of the wizarding community: disgruntled survivors, ex-Death Eaters still on the run, etc.

I guess I'm simply a cynic, haha. I just don't see Snape escaping the legacy of a lifetime of living in the shadows with dubious, unconfirmed loyalties unblemished, even with Harry vouching for him. I simply don't think Snape will ever be at the receiving end of too much hero worship.

I would say that the people who grew up as Slytherins with Snape as their Head of House would feel differently. They weren't all Death Eaters or children of the same. I think they would have respected his memory, especially after hearing whatever Harry Potter said before killing Voldemort. I think the point of Deathly Hallows is that the Slytherins were suffering under Voldemort's regime as much as anyone, so knowing that Snape played a role in the downfall would mean a great deal to them.

Besides, I don't think Harry and Hermione would allow any desecration after watching Snape die the way he did. I believe Harry did see Snape as a brave man and a hero, and Albus Severus is the living memorial to that.

wickedwickedboy

August 18th, 2009, 7:42 pm

I don't understand the "general" and "specific" distinction you are making. Snape took Lily's death personally because of the love he felt for her. And he had to live with the guilt every day.

What exactly do you mean by "general act"?

Well what I was talking about before was Snape dwelling on losing whatever it was he wanted as a result of Lily remaining safe (which everyone has a different view about I realize), and instead thinking about the act of delivering the prophecy to a dark lord in general, and the consequences of doing so, which would be death to some unamed party, imo. So in other words, taking Lily totally out of the equation. And I was not referring to Snape in 1981, but rather Snape when we first saw him in the series - some 11 years later. I don't feel like Snape ever reached that evolution of thought during his lifetime with respect to that event (imo). I feel that he always saw it as an act that had resulted in Lily's death, based on my interpretation of the canon.

I don't think that anyone in the book had 100% positive personal acts. I won't name any other characters, but Snape is no different than any other character. He's not a saint, and he says snarky things.

But I look at it this way. Snape saw Harry as his responsibility, which is a great thing. And he didn't want Harry to follow in his father's footsteps as a troublemaker, especially using the cloak for "undetected wrong-doing" as Dumbledore says of James in King's Cross. He was trying to be a disciplinarian, and while he was too rough in his speech, I believe he meant well. I also think Harry appreciated that after his death, from the way he talks about him in the Epilogue.

Well we would have to agree to disagree on these points.

SurfcatMalfoy

August 18th, 2009, 7:56 pm

I would say that the people who grew up as Slytherins with Snape as their Head of House would feel differently. They weren't all Death Eaters or children of the same. I think they would have respected his memory, especially after hearing whatever Harry Potter said before killing Voldemort. I think the point of Deathly Hallows is that the Slytherins were suffering under Voldemort's regime as much as anyone, so knowing that Snape played a role in the downfall would mean a great deal to them.

Besides, I don't think Harry and Hermione would allow any desecration after watching Snape die the way he did. I believe Harry did see Snape as a brave man and a hero, and Albus Severus is the living memorial to that.

Let us not forget about Rita Skeeter's Best Seller, "Severus Snape: Evil Professor or Defender of the Chosen One?" (if she writes it I want .5%!!)
More to the point, the WW has many means of mass communication (magazines, wireless, newspaper, books) and while there's galleons to be made there will be a story to tell. Not everybody was at the Battle of Hogwarts but everybody will want to know what happened... down to the last detail. Severus' story would be told and he would be given his proper respect (IMO).

bellatrix93

August 18th, 2009, 8:20 pm

But I look at it this way. Snape saw Harry as his responsibility, which is a great thing. And he didn't want Harry to follow in his father's footsteps as a troublemaker, especially using the cloak for "undetected wrong-doing" as Dumbledore says of James in King's Cross. He was trying to be a disciplinarian, and while he was too rough in his speech, I believe he meant well. I also think Harry appreciated that after his death, from the way he talks about him in the Epilogue.

Snape's role was to protect Harry, like many others, Sirius, Molly, Dumbledore, etc. Each took the role their own way. Sirius' treatment to Harry was father -and sometimes- brother like. While Snape's was mainly bullying -or that's how it looked like to me, anyway-. Both of them saw Harry misbehave in many situations. Yet the way the two of them dealt with it, imo was very distinct.
Sirius, gives Harry a bit of advice, then leaves him to do whatever he thinks is right. To me this isn't irresponsibility like some people would call it. Personally, I'd call it understanding. Sirius understood that this is a brief stage in Harry's life, and that it would pass one day, leaving Harry a great wise and responsible person. He assures him that people are not to be judged in this age, and that they'd mature one day. This has its immediate effect on Harry. He feels more respect to his father after his doubts.

Snape on the other hand, took the role quite differently. He considered Harry's little faults as wicked deeds, not as actions of a teenager who hasn't discovered the different aspects of life. Snape, imo, wasn't understanding with Harry. I actually think it was the exact opposite. Even if he didn't want Harry to follow his 'father's footsteps', I think the solution was not reminding him how horrible his father was. Or calling his dead father and his friends names that would flare anyone's temper. I think Snape was 'adding wetness to the mud', he didn't stop Harry breaking school rules as much as he increased his protection to James' wrong deeds and disrespect to his teacher, which I think aren't really good things.

Snape's notion of the role of protecting Harry -by being strict, harsh, etc.- was based on his own view of life, and not on the nature of the role itself, as we see different people taking the same role differently. He was bullied as a child. Which I think contributed in his harshness with young kids. Also as a DE -and I'm not taking in account what he turned out to be-, I think he lost some of his compassion and empathy in those years, imo.

silver ink pot

August 18th, 2009, 8:24 pm

Let us not forget about Rita Skeeter's Best Seller, "Severus Snape: Evil Professor or Defender of the Chosen One?" (if she writes it I want .5%!!)

Yes, I was thinking about that. :) It reminds me of the real book that came out just before Deathly Hallows called "Is Snape Good or Bad?" I didn't read it except for bits I saw posted online, and I certainly didn't buy it, because I already believed based on the canon that Snape was good, which turned out to be true. Books don't always persuade people to change their minds about a person.

But yes, I agree with you that there would be lots of books and magazine articles in the Wizarding Wrold written about the Battle of Hogwarts, and the perceptions people had of Snape would change. Imagine all the interviews Harry had to give so the truth would come out! :)

arithmancer

August 18th, 2009, 8:29 pm

Let us not forget about Rita Skeeter's Best Seller, "Severus Snape: Evil Professor or Defender of the Chosen One?" (if she writes it I want .5%!!).

Actually, Ms. Skeeter's bestseller was titled "Snape: Scoundrel or Saint". No news on whether Jo is sharing in the proceeds. ;)

From http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2007/0730-bloomsbury-chat.html

Annie: Does the wizarding world now know that snape was dumbledores man, or do they still think he did a bunk
J.K. Rowling: Harry would ensure that Snape's heroism was known.
J.K. Rowling: Of course, that would not stop Rita Skeeter writing 'Snape: Scoundrel or Saint?'

wickedwickedboy

August 18th, 2009, 8:51 pm

CathyWeasley

August 18th, 2009, 9:11 pm

Personally I found Snape to be far more of a parental figure than Sirius. Sirius seemed to want to treat Harry more as a brother and he never really reprimanded Harry. That may be all very nice but it is a parents job to enforce the boundaries and I don't think Sirius did this. Indeed there was one rather disturbing occasion when he sulkily claimed that Harry was less like James than he ahd thought because he didn't want to take a risk! Hardly parental behaviour!

Severus on the other hand was constantly enforcing boundaries. Parental love requires both affection and discipline; lack of either one can leave the child feeling unloved. (Remember Dumbledore's comment regarding the damage the Dursleys had done to Dudley) The way I see it Harry had Sirius to offer the affection (as well as Molly, Remus and others) and Severus to provide the discipline. As one author of parenting books puts in - sometimes to be a good parent you have to take a knock in the popularity stakes, and this is what we see Severus doing all the time. I do not find it surprising that in general (and this is a big generalisation!) teenagers have more objections to Snape treatment of Harry than parents.

Another thought just occurred to me. It is also very likely given the evidence we have in canon that Severus actually treated Harry better than Tobias treated him.

Beatifically

August 18th, 2009, 9:54 pm

I wouldn't call that revenge, as in, deliberately doing things to get the satisfaction of getting even with someone. I think Snape just couldn't help himself with Harry; and he was rather curt with his other students as well.

But there were instances when he insulted Harry and started smirking as a way of congratulating himself for coming up with a witty insult. :shrug: I disagree that he couldn't help himself; he seemed very aware of what he was doing.

But who are we to say what other people "should" have done? This is so subjective. One man's meat is another man's poison. We can't know what's best for others or what would work for them. Though I do think it's lucky for Harry that Snape didn't move on.

You're right, it is subjective. To rephrase, I personally think moving on would have done Snape some good if it meant that he was a happier person. :) It always seemed to me that his love for Lily both helped him and harmed him. It helped him because her death was a reason for him to help Harry and Dumbledore, but it harmed him because he wallowed in his guilt and kept thinking about the past.

Severus on the other hand was constantly enforcing boundaries. Parental love requires both affection and discipline; lack of either one can leave the child feeling unloved. (Remember Dumbledore's comment regarding the damage the Dursleys had done to Dudley) The way I see it Harry had Sirius to offer the affection (as well as Molly, Remus and others) and Severus to provide the discipline. As one author of parenting books puts in - sometimes to be a good parent you have to take a knock in the popularity stakes, and this is what we see Severus doing all the time. I do not find it surprising that in general (and this is a big generalisation!) teenagers have more objections to Snape treatment of Harry than parents.

I disagree with this. If there is a professor who was parental, it was McGonagall because she was both fair and didn't let her students cross the line. I do agree that parents need to be both affectionate and strict, but extremes of either are not good, a good example being how Dudley ended up, as you rightly said. I hardly think the way Snape treated Harry was ever parental because he crossed the line numerous times. I'd be shocked if any teacher called his student arrogant, lazy, and sloppy and even more so if he started ridiculing him in front of the rest of the class or made fun of his dead father and godfather in front of him. It's not that he was doing it for Harry's benefit either because I don't see how any of those examples were great contributions to shaping Harry as a person.

RavenStar83

August 18th, 2009, 10:30 pm

Personally I found Snape to be far more of a parental figure than Sirius. Sirius seemed to want to treat Harry more as a brother and he never really reprimanded Harry. That may be all very nice but it is a parents job to enforce the boundaries and I don't think Sirius did this. Indeed there was one rather disturbing occasion when he sulkily claimed that Harry was less like James than he ahd thought because he didn't want to take a risk! Hardly parental behaviour!

Severus on the other hand was constantly enforcing boundaries. Parental love requires both affection and discipline; lack of either one can leave the child feeling unloved. (Remember Dumbledore's comment regarding the damage the Dursleys had done to Dudley) The way I see it Harry had Sirius to offer the affection (as well as Molly, Remus and others) and Severus to provide the discipline. As one author of parenting books puts in - sometimes to be a good parent you have to take a knock in the popularity stakes, and this is what we see Severus doing all the time. I do not find it surprising that in general (and this is a big generalisation!) teenagers have more objections to Snape treatment of Harry than parents.
I agree that Sirius wasn't that great of a father figure, and Harry knows that later on. But I don't think Snape was any better either. Strict dicipline is better than what Sirius was giving, but I think what Snape was doing was more towards bullying and belittling. I will agree he did want to keep Harry in check and not get himself in any trouble. He was working along with everyone else who was trying to keep him safe, and he himself wanted Harry safe. I just think his bitterness for James came out more than it should have in his interactions with Harry. Plus, it didn't help Harry find a reason to trust him either, which I think is very important in any healthy parent/child like relationship.

DumbyOwnsYouAll

August 19th, 2009, 2:16 am

What makes Snape such an iconic and unforgettable character? It’s astounding how many fans he has,[staff edit] How did [edit] Severus become so incredibly popular?

Hell, why do we (the audience) love these kinds of characters in general? Gollum, Edmund Pevensie, J.K. Rowling’s own Draco Malfoy, even Hector Barbossa from the Pirates of the Caribbean series have all been embraced by a surprising number of readers/viewers.

Snape is a classic example of an “anti-hero”: a character that has a well-intentioned goal, but his means of achieving said goal cross the line into things that would be considered villainous. In recent times, people have been fascinated by such dastardly do-gooders, as evidenced in comics with Wolverine and The Punisher and, sometimes, Venom. Of course, anti-heroes were around far longer than that, though in those days these characters weren’t categorized as such. Captain Nemo, Professor George E. Challenger, Dr. Lindenbrock and Frankenstein’s Monster are all excellent examples of characters that may be motivated by a good cause, but unfortunately have a habit of placing this rationale in front of either common sense or human lives.

And now, with Severus Snape, we are given yet another terrific addition to this unique roster. Snape perfectly manifests everything that makes the anti-hero so interesting: a traumatic background, the loss of a loved one, sometimes unrequited romantic feelings, an awful error or mistake in their past which haunts them to this day, and a willingness to perform bad deeds in the name of good. It’s made even better by the fact that, for so long, Snape’s true loyalty was completely up in the air!

Fans have spent the last decade or so debating ferociously over their assumptions: “Snape was a Death Eater and never left!” “Snape is a triple-agent for Lord Voldemort!” “Snape murdered a defenseless Dumbledore; this makes him evil by default!” “Snape genuinely defected to the Order of the Phoenix!” “Snape has secretly come to care for Harry after all!” “Snape has yet to truly fulfill his life debt to James Potter!” And so on and so on.

J.K. Rowling proves her genius with this rich, multi-layered and maddeningly enigmatic character. She deliberately constructs Snape early on as a villain, with occasional bits of info intended to make us doubt our initial assessment of Snape. And at series’ end she reveals, in perhaps the most poignant and heart-wrenching chapter of the entire franchise, that all this time Severus has been motivated by his remorse for the role he played in Lily Evans’ murder, the only person who ever treated him with kindness and sympathy and saw the good buried deep below all the child abuse and peer rejection.

This man has lost everything that made life worth living, and now is left with Lily’s only son: living proof that she preferred another man. Adding insult to injury, that “man” is the [edit] bully that was responsible for the death of his friendship with Evans. Imagine how torturous and emotionally unbearable it must have been for Snape every time he looked in Harry’s eyes. It’s completely understandable that he would be extremely spiteful towards the boy as a way of venting his anguish and pain.

He’s in one helluva predicament in that he wants to protect and watch over Harry as atonement for his past mistake, and yet this boy is the spitting image of his [edit] father who made Snape’s teenage life hell! Here’s a quick hypothetical scenario: imagine trying to care for a pet that is the exact same breed as the animal that mauled your childhood friend to death; the likeness inevitably evokes negative memories, making it very hard for a person to keep their head straight. My theory, personally, is that Snape had long ago succumbed to madness in his grief and regret, explaining why he is so emotionally all-over-the-place and his almost-sociopathic contempt for others (yeah, I’m looking at you, Neville Longbottom…).

It speaks volumes in the climax of Half-Blood Prince where, after a misunderstanding Harry declares him a coward, Snape loses his temper and roars “DON’T […] CALL ME COWARD!” Look at his situation: Snape has just slain the man that went out of his way to keep Snape out of Azkaban, the man who gave Severus a new reason to live, the man who completely believed in him and trusted him while nobody else did.

By killing Dumbledore, he has practically doomed himself, as he is now thought to be 100% Death Eater; his reputation is destroyed. He is second only to Voldemort as the most wanted wizard in Britain, which makes his odds of survival practically zilch. He is anything but a coward! So when Harry venomously accuses him as such, not knowing the whole story and just how massive a sacrifice Snape is making in his name, Severus is furious at the injustice and unfairness of it all. He can’t explain himself and assure the boy that everything is perfectly going as planned. He can’t let anyone know that he is still on the side of good without blowing the entire plot, and to be verbally abused like that, after everything he has gone through… I’d be stung by such words too.

I shamefully confess that I was one of the many, many Potter fans who were utterly devastated over Dumbledore’s apparent cold-blooded murder, and were overcome with hatred of that back-stabbing, no-good ******* Snape! Like the characters, I was utterly convinced of his villainy, and scoffed at all the theories that rationalized Snape’s crimes and feebly tried to make excuses for this despicable monster.

You cannot imagine the incredible shame I felt upon finishing the last page of Deathly Hallows: I had just unwittingly proven that I often believe the worst of anyone even on the most superficial of reasons. J.K. Rowling made me realize how aggressive and mistrustful I was towards people who I barely understood. For this, among many other things, I will forever be indebted to Mrs. Rowling. Thank you, Jo.

And so, here we are now. The series is done, the saga is complete, and the epic tale of Harry Potter is finally over. We still have that gigantic Deathly Hallows movie to look forward to, and it’s only a matter of time before Rowling publishes her promised Harry Potter Encyclopedia. And we’ll always have the Internet to discuss this stuff for many years to come (I’ll be right there with ya!), of course.

But never again will our generation witness something like this, something this grand, this wonderful, this brilliant, and this timeless. Every Harry fan felt the hole in their heart when the summer of 2008 passed: our very first summer without the giddy anticipation of an upcoming Potter novel. All we can really look forward to now is that aforementioned Encyclopedia, as Rowling has already stated she has no intention of extending the series past DH (this might imply that prequels are possible, however. Here’s hoping!).

I am convinced that, decades or maybe even centuries from now, of the many timeless elements of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series Severus Snape will be one of the highest-regarded. An ingenious study of how even the most horrible person can redeem themselves, a terrific antagonist (for the first six books, at least), an unforgettable enigma, a tragic story of unwavering love, wonderfully layered and nuance-laden…Snape is all of them. This creation of Rowling’s is timeless, in every sense of the word, and a masterpiece of characterization.

Severus Snape is therefore tied with Albus Dumbledore as my absolute favorite HP character*. It’s a VEEEEEEEEEERY close tie, just so you know.

* In case you’re curious as to my other favorites, here they are (not in any particular order):

Hermione Granger (intelligent, compassionate, cute…I have a major crush on Mrs. Ron Weasley.)

Hagrid (if you don’t know what makes Hagrid great, then you don’t understand Hagrid!)

Dobby (a mischievous and warm-hearted little punk who actually packs a lot of badass when the fit hits the shan. And his heroic final appearance in Deathly Hallows was just beautiful and heartbreaking; I wept for hours. Just another reason to hate Bellatrix!)

Harry Potter (for obvious reasons.)

Fred and George Weasley (they’re practically inseparable, so I count them as one character. They always make me ROTFL with their Wizard Wheezes. On the other hand…what happened to Fred was just plain cruel.)

Arthur Weasley (I get a huge kick out of his naivete of the Muggle world. And he gets bonus points for being one of the few truly positive fathers in the series. Thanks for letting him live, Jo!)

Molly Weasley (probably the sweetest old gal that ever lived, bless her. So kind and sassy. But what really sealed the deal for me was her BIG moment in the climax of Deathly Hallows, which ranks up there with “Han Solo showing up just in time to save Luke’s hide in the Death Star battle” and “Iron Man calmly walking away as a tank blows up behind him” in the annals of Great Moments That Make You Cheer.)

Remus Lupin (he’s an awesome teacher. And he’s a werewolf, which, ya know, makes him super-cool on principal!)

2green_eyes

August 19th, 2009, 3:35 am

What makes Snape such an iconic and unforgettable character? It’s astounding how many fans he has, despite his cruel nature, intimidating sneer and crooked nose. And don’t forget that Greasiriffic hair! How did this happen? How did such a loathsome, despicable and semi-narcissistic jerk-off like Severus become so incredibly popular?

good job on your analysis

I like Snape because he's the dose of reality in the fantasy world that ties you to the fantasy...the ying inside the yang.

arithmancer

August 19th, 2009, 4:00 am

I shamefully confess that I was one of the many, many Potter fans who were utterly devastated over Dumbledore’s apparent cold-blooded murder, and were overcome with hatred of that back-stabbing, no-good ******* Snape! Like the characters, I was utterly convinced of his villainy, and scoffed at all the theories that rationalized Snape’s crimes and feebly tried to make excuses for this despicable monster.

You cannot imagine the incredible shame I felt upon finishing the last page of Deathly Hallows: I had just unwittingly proven that I often believe the worst of anyone even on the most superficial of reasons. J.K. Rowling made me realize how aggressive and mistrustful I was towards people who I barely understood. For this, among many other things, I will forever be indebted to Mrs. Rowling. Thank you, Jo.

:tu: I compliment you on your post, I found it a most interesting read.

It is my opinion that the journey you describe in the portion I quote above, mirrored Harry's journey, also. And that it is the journey on which Rowling hoped to take her readers. She has said that the series is about tolerance. And while her depictions of cruel Death Eaters, Voldemort's genocidal policies, Draco's snobbery, etc. also go towards that end by dramatizing the sorts of evils we ought to oppose, I think it is this journey that makes the point most strongly. That mistakes and injustices based on intolerance are a fact of the human condition which all people should strive to avoid, even good, well-intentioned people, which Harry surely is.

ignisia

August 19th, 2009, 4:01 am

Interesting analysis. :tu: I do agree with a lot of what you have to say, DumbyOwnsYouAll (although the sociopathic madness stuff is a bit iffy to my mind. I've considered the same thing and found it a dead-end).

Perhaps the best thing about Snape's character, aside from how multifaceted he is, is his redemptive arc and how well-hidden it was. I think your reaction was just what JKR wanted from her readers when writing Dumbledore's death. We were supposed to despise Snape and wish him all sorts of ill, but come DH, the rug is yanked from under our feet and we find ourselves utterly fooled and in need of some real introspection as to where we went wrong. It's all done quite masterfully, with clues sprinkled all across the books, just waiting to be picked up and interpreted, or to be seen perfectly from hindsight.

I find Snape to be, overall, a positive character, much along the same vein as Sirius or Dumbledore, who make serious misjudgments and are highly flawed, but at the same time are ultimately all part of what finally defeats Voldemort, both in their duties for the Order and in their humanity, something Voldemort can never share with them.

In fact, it is Snape's love for Lily that makes up a great deal of Harry's final confrontation with Voldemort. Snape's love is brought up as an example of something Voldemort cannot understand (and the Dark Lord does show his ignorance, quite pathetically). In a way, Harry is himself coming to terms with Snape-the-human-being, as opposed to Snape-the-jerk-of-a-teacher, and is finally coming to understand how little he knew and how much he still has to understand about this person who through both neurosis and necessity kept himself at a distance.

And Harry's not the only one. You may have noticed we're on version 12 of this thread. Snape is probably the most talked-about creation in HP, and that title is well-deserved. :agree:

Daggerstone

August 19th, 2009, 4:14 am

S He considered Harry's little faults as wicked deeds, not as actions of a teenager who hasn't discovered the different aspects of life.

Someone's 'little faults' are inevitably 'wicked deeds' to others...

“That was nothing,” said Snape. “It was a laugh, that’s all – ”
“It was Dark Magic, and if you think that’s funny – ”

The view a reader takes depends on the feelings for the character. Authors tend to know that.

Even if he didn't want Harry to follow his 'father's footsteps', I think the solution was not reminding him how horrible his father was. Or calling his dead father and his friends names that would flare anyone's temper.

'Reminding'? Did someone other than Snape ever told Harry 'how horrible his father was' before the infamous Occlumency incident? :huh:

And DumbyOwnsYouAll.... Great write. :tu:

I'm happy to learn there's a number of people on CoS who live their lives not based on personal motivation but on the principles of sheer philanthropy. Not being one of them, I can only extend my deepest respect. :agree:

silver ink pot

August 19th, 2009, 8:43 am

I shamefully confess that I was one of the many, many Potter fans who were utterly devastated over Dumbledore’s apparent cold-blooded murder, and were overcome with hatred of that back-stabbing, no-good ******* Snape! Like the characters, I was utterly convinced of his villainy, and scoffed at all the theories that rationalized Snape’s crimes and feebly tried to make excuses for this despicable monster.

You cannot imagine the incredible shame I felt upon finishing the last page of Deathly Hallows: I had just unwittingly proven that I often believe the worst of anyone even on the most superficial of reasons. J.K. Rowling made me realize how aggressive and mistrustful I was towards people who I barely understood. For this, among many other things, I will forever be indebted to Mrs. Rowling. Thank you, Jo.

Rowling really put the reader in Harry's place by using his point of view to show us Snape committing what seems to be a heinous and unforgivable act in killing Dumbledore. Since I was among those Snape fans making feeble excuses and theories about Snape before DH, I admire your very honest confession, Dumby! :) I think there were alot of clues throughout the series that Snape was not as bad as Harry believed, and that there was more going on with him beneath the surface. We had a list of clues at one time (Zgirnius?) but it was hard to convince people before the author herself let us know the truth about Snape.

Yoana

August 19th, 2009, 11:10 am

It speaks volumes in the climax of Half-Blood Prince where, after a misunderstanding Harry declares him a coward, Snape loses his temper and roars “DON’T […] CALL ME COWARD!” Look at his situation: Snape has just slain the man that went out of his way to keep Snape out of Azkaban, the man who gave Severus a new reason to live, the man who completely believed in him and trusted him while nobody else did.

By killing Dumbledore, he has practically doomed himself, as he is now thought to be 100% Death Eater; his reputation is destroyed. He is second only to Voldemort as the most wanted wizard in Britain, which makes his odds of survival practically zilch. He is anything but a coward! So when Harry venomously accuses him as such, not knowing the whole story and just how massive a sacrifice Snape is making in his name, Severus is furious at the injustice and unfairness of it all.

I'm impressed by your whole post, but I just wanted to say about this bit, I absolutely agree, and that's exactly what I thought too when I read this line. :tu:

I shamefully confess that I was one of the many, many Potter fans who were utterly devastated over Dumbledore’s apparent cold-blooded murder, and were overcome with hatred of that back-stabbing, no-good ******* Snape! Like the characters, I was utterly convinced of his villainy, and scoffed at all the theories that rationalized Snape’s crimes and feebly tried to make excuses for this despicable monster.

You cannot imagine the incredible shame I felt upon finishing the last page of Deathly Hallows: I had just unwittingly proven that I often believe the worst of anyone even on the most superficial of reasons. J.K. Rowling made me realize how aggressive and mistrustful I was towards people who I barely understood. For this, among many other things, I will forever be indebted to Mrs. Rowling. Thank you, Jo.

I don't know you of course, but I'm inlined to believe it is more JKR's writing skills than readers' personal flaws which made them take the Snape-the-villain viewpoint. :) I'm really glad the final twist orked so well and so powerfully for you though!

The_Green_Woods

August 19th, 2009, 12:32 pm

Snape's role was to protect Harry, like many others, Sirius, Molly, Dumbledore, etc. Each took the role their own way. Sirius' treatment to Harry was father -and sometimes- brother like. While Snape's was mainly bullying -or that's how it looked like to me, anyway-. Both of them saw Harry misbehave in many situations. Yet the way the two of them dealt with it, imo was very distinct.

I think this was because their roles in the Order and in the war were different too. Sirius was in hiding and was not required to answer DEs and later Voldemort. Snape had to be far more careful and he had to behave in a particular manner towards Harry for specific reasons.

Snape on the other hand, took the role quite differently. He considered Harry's little faults as wicked deeds, not as actions of a teenager who hasn't discovered the different aspects of life. Snape, imo, wasn't understanding with Harry. I actually think it was the exact opposite. Even if he didn't want Harry to follow his 'father's footsteps', I think the solution was not reminding him how horrible his father was. Or calling his dead father and his friends names that would flare anyone's temper. I think Snape was 'adding wetness to the mud', he didn't stop Harry breaking school rules as much as he increased his protection to James' wrong deeds and disrespect to his teacher, which I think aren't really good things.

I think Harry needed discipline because of what was required of him. This was not the time to be reckless or playful or disobedient, because it could get him killed. So, every time Harry was careless, disobedient or acted in a way which could have serious repercussions, Snape stepped in and told him off. I think Snape was acting like a parent; he does not punish or mock Harry to hurt him, but to stop him from acting irresponsibly IMO.

But there were instances when he insulted Harry and started smirking as a way of congratulating himself for coming up with a witty insult. :shrug: I disagree that he couldn't help himself; he seemed very aware of what he was doing.

I think Snape took a stand on how he was going to treat Harry, from before Harry came to Hogwarts. The first class IMO says it all. And Snape consciously took that stand to keep Harry safe from himself, because unlike others he knew Voldemort was coming back and he was always working with that in mind.

I hardly think the way Snape treated Harry was ever parental because he crossed the line numerous times. I'd be shocked if any teacher called his student arrogant, lazy, and sloppy and even more so if he started ridiculing him in front of the rest of the class or made fun of his dead father and godfather in front of him. It's not that he was doing it for Harry's benefit either because I don't see how any of those examples were great contributions to shaping Harry as a person.

In front of the class IMO makes it an act. In private Snape allowed Harry to get away by shouting at him, asking him to shut up and never opened his mouth about the memories. In public, Snape had a part to play and he chose to make Harry angry by talking about his father, rather than hurting Harry by talking about him IMO.

You cannot imagine the incredible shame I felt upon finishing the last page of Deathly Hallows: I had just unwittingly proven that I often believe the worst of anyone even on the most superficial of reasons. J.K. Rowling made me realize how aggressive and mistrustful I was towards people who I barely understood. For this, among many other things, I will forever be indebted to Mrs. Rowling. Thank you, Jo.

A very interesting post DumbyOwnsYouAll. I especially liked this paragraph. Like others have written, this is what Harry discovered. He did believe along with a host of other elderly people, who should have know Dumbledore and Snape better, that Snape was evil, based on outward action, when Snape was even at that time working for Harry. After The Prince's Tale, this is what Harry realised too, that Snape was totally different from what he had perceived and that showed in his actions a few years later when his second son was born IMO. :)

arithmancer

August 19th, 2009, 5:01 pm

We had a list of clues at one time (Zgirnius?) but it was hard to convince people before the author herself let us know the truth about Snape.

Yes, SIP, the list we all came up with in the old "Hero" thread, and I maintained, is still in the Forum Archives:

http://www.cosforums.com/showpost.php?p=4447121&postcount=1159

Though given this was a "growing up" story, one of the big things that convinced me was the intensity of Harry's dislike before the "murder" of Dumbledore. This last was an excellent reason for Harry to hate Snape, yet it seemed to me to only confirm a view of Snape Harry had, that had hardened by the end of OotP. To me this series-wide phenomenon mirrored the same smaller journey we made with Harry in PS/SS (when I was believing Harry was right about Snape...until Rowling let me know at the end that this was not that type of children's series).

It was completely reasonable of Harry to dislike/hate Snape because of the unpleasant nature of their personal interactions. But, as Hermione pointed out at times, it was not reasonable to believe him a loyal Death Eater in light of the good things Harry knew he had done.

wolfbrother

August 19th, 2009, 8:03 pm

silver ink pot

August 19th, 2009, 8:13 pm

I never got the feeling that Snape wanted to live. IMO Snape preferred to be dead after Lily's death as he mentioned to Dumbledore in the pensieve scene. I think that his non fear of death is what enabled to him play the role of a double spy so well.
Great points, wolfbrother. :agree: I think Harry gave Snape a reason to stay alive as long as he did, and at the end he wanted to keep going for that reason.

Yes, SIP, the list we all came up with in the old "Hero" thread, and I maintained, is still in the Forum Archives:

http://www.cosforums.com/showpost.php?p=4447121&postcount=1159

Though given this was a "growing up" story, one of the big things that convinced me was the intensity of Harry's dislike before the "murder" of Dumbledore. This last was an excellent reason for Harry to hate Snape, yet it seemed to me to only confirm a view of Snape Harry had, that had hardened by the end of OotP. To me this series-wide phenomenon mirrored the same smaller journey we made with Harry in PS/SS (when I was believing Harry was right about Snape...until Rowling let me know at the end that this was not that type of children's series).

It was completely reasonable of Harry to dislike/hate Snape because of the unpleasant nature of their personal interactions. But, as Hermione pointed out at times, it was not reasonable to believe him a loyal Death Eater in light of the good things Harry knew he had done.

Thanks for the Link, Zgirnius - I will keep that handy. :)

Yes, I like the mirror of the First Book and the entire series. :agree:

I see Harry as very conflicted at the end of HBP. His mind seems to go back and forth between Snape and Dumbledore because he can't quite believe what happened. And then he also thinks about the Prince and how much the book meant to him, and he can't quite put Snape and the Prince together. JKR was saving his moment of enlightenment for The Prince's Tale.

RavenStar83

August 19th, 2009, 8:20 pm

I never got the feeling that Snape wanted to live. IMO Snape preferred to be dead after Lily's death as he mentioned to Dumbledore in the pensieve scene. I think that his non fear of death is what enabled to him play the role of a double spy so well.
I have that feeling about his character as well. There's a book I read called "A Seekers Guide to Harry Potter" where the author analyzed the mythology, themes, characters, and just the overall story and how it communicated to the readers. She had a really great analysis on Snape. One thing she mentioned that I think made sense was what may enable someone to do the kind of work Snape did was if "they had nothing left to lose." It's not stated in canon if he had any family that he cared for left or anyone else important in his life. But Lily dying had a devastating impact on him, so to go all out because of that does makes sense I think.

Fawkesfan1

August 20th, 2009, 12:32 am

I don't see why one person being willing to do anything for someone they loved is selfless and for another person it is selfish.

Had Severus expected something out of his willingness to do anything to keep her alive then I would understand - but he has agreed to help her whole family so I don't see that there’s anything in it other than knowing that the person he loves is still alive jmho. :)

Well there are several theories about that but for me it comes down to two main things.

1) Severus seems to be very loyal to his friends. E.g. even when he switches sides there are signs that he is still concerned about Lucius because of their long friendship.
2) I think it is more the fact that as long as Lily exists in the world Severus can believe that there is some love and kindness in it. So when she is threatened so is his ability to hold on to that idea.

I’m denying the possibility that he also held romantic feelings for him but I don’t think that is quite as important as what Lily symbolised to Severus – jmho. :)

Indeed and I think it is sad that he doesn’t get to experience those ‘wonders’, as you put it. :sigh:

Actually your not the first person to raise that idea and from previous discussions I don’t think its far fetched at all! :tu:

One person noted what Ron said in OotP about Snape coming to Order meetings at Grimmald Place - ‘you should see the way he looks at us’ or words to that effect, and they wondered what Severus saw when he looked at the Weasley kids / family. When you add to this that Lily is herself a redhead it becomes a reasonable proposition to wonder if he is looking at the family he never had – how painful would that be for him :upset: There are other things that contribute to the plausibility of the ‘Sev wanted kids’ idea, but it’s late here :D

:tu: Beautifully put Iggi
I just thought that the way he acted towards Harry was selfish to a point. And his love for Lily could be viewed as an obsession of sorts -- no matter how selfless it was. But I do see where you are coming from as well. So I guess it really depends on what view you take -- it's kind of a 'glass half full -- glass half empty' situation of sorts.

Interesting theories there. Either one of them could make sense. The latter one (#2) is rather tragic... but it was awesome that he kept her alive in a way in terms of the doe. What a way (keeping any idea of his obsession and what not out of it) to keep a friend alive. To remember their kindness and love towards you.

Beatifically

August 20th, 2009, 1:03 am

I think Snape was acting like a parent; he does not punish or mock Harry to hurt him, but to stop him from acting irresponsibly IMO.

But that same explanation can be used for abuse. Regardless, I can't remember a situation when Snape does this with a line hinting that he is mocking Harry because he is concerned. :huh:

In front of the class IMO makes it an act. In private Snape allowed Harry to get away by shouting at him, asking him to shut up and never opened his mouth about the memories. In public, Snape had a part to play and he chose to make Harry angry by talking about his father, rather than hurting Harry by talking about him IMO.

Snape never made fun of James in front of his class. He did this when he was alone with Harry.

"How extraordinarily like your father you are, Potter," Snape said suddenly, his eyes glinting."He too was exceeedingly arrogant. A small amount of talent on the Quidditch field made him think he was a cut above hte rest of us too. Strutting around the place with his friends and admirers . . . The resemblance between you is uncanny."

"My dad didn't strut," said Harry, before he could stop himself. "And neither do I."

"Your father didn't set much store by rules either," Snape went on, pressing his advantage, his thin face full of malice. "Rules were for lesser mortals, not Quidditch Cup-winners. His head was so swollen - "

"SHUT UP!"
I don't see how that was a part of Snape's putting on a show. He started insulting James "suddenly," so it was an unprovoked attack. JKR also wrote that his "thin face was full of malice," making it clear that he was not doing it for selfless reasons. IMO, in this instance, Snape is inexcusable for the way he treated Harry by insulting his dead father.

Fawkesfan1

August 20th, 2009, 1:07 am

But that same explanation can be used for abuse. Regardless, I can't remember a situation when Snape does this with a line hinting that he is mocking Harry because he is concerned. :huh:

Snape never made fun of James in front of his class. He did this when he was alone with Harry.

"How extraordinarily like your father you are, Potter," Snape said suddenly, his eyes glinting."He too was exceeedingly arrogant. A small amount of talent on the Quidditch field made him think he was a cut above hte rest of us too. Strutting around the place with his friends and admirers . . . The resemblance between you is uncanny."

"My dad didn't strut," said Harry, before he could stop himself. "And neither do I."

"Your father didn't set much store by rules either," Snape went on, pressing his advantage, his thin face full of malice. "Rules were for lesser mortals, not Quidditch Cup-winners. His head was so swollen - "

"SHUT UP!"
I don't see how that was a part of Snape's putting on a show. He started insulting James "suddenly," so it was an unprovoked attack. JKR also wrote that his "thin face was full of malice," making it clear that he was not doing it for selfless reasons. IMO, in this instance, Snape is inexcusable for the way he treated Harry by insulting his dead father.
I didn't view it that way either. It was just inexcusable in terms of how he treated Harry. It was bullying plain and simple -- that's pretty much how I viewed it and took it as. It was just sick. No matter what he did in the end, that still remains. And in the end, it shows just how much a man Harry became -- to forgive (to a point) Snape for what he had done... and see him for what 'good' he did do. That earned some points from me there.

As for Snape, I'm glad that he did what he did -- in terms of working for the Order and all that. That at least earned him some redemption. But his cruelty kind of overshadows things for me. I don't think that I could forgive him like Harry did.

eliza101

August 20th, 2009, 6:55 am

I didn't view it that way either. It was just inexcusable in terms of how he treated Harry. It was bullying plain and simple -- that's pretty much how I viewed it and took it as. It was just sick. No matter what he did in the end, that still remains. And in the end, it shows just how much a man Harry became -- to forgive (to a point) Snape for what he had done... and see him for what 'good' he did do. That earned some points from me there.

As for Snape, I'm glad that he did what he did -- in terms of working for the Order and all that. That at least earned him some redemption. But his cruelty kind of overshadows things for me. I don't think that I could forgive him like Harry did.

I don't feel quite as strongly as this, but it has to be admitted that practilcally every time there is a scene of this type in one of the books it is usually accompannied with a decription of Snape that indicates his dislike of Harry. I have always felt that Harry's naming of his son had more to do with Harry's magnaminity than Snape himself. Perhaps Harry simply did not want Snape's name to be forgotton, which could easily have happened. Snape did not exactly endear himself to people.

The_Green_Woods

August 20th, 2009, 9:22 am

Snape never made fun of James in front of his class. He did this when he was alone with Harry.

"How extraordinarily like your father you are, Potter," Snape said suddenly, his eyes glinting."He too was exceeedingly arrogant. A small amount of talent on the Quidditch field made him think he was a cut above hte rest of us too. Strutting around the place with his friends and admirers . . . The resemblance between you is uncanny."

"My dad didn't strut," said Harry, before he could stop himself. "And neither do I."

"Your father didn't set much store by rules either," Snape went on, pressing his advantage, his thin face full of malice. "Rules were for lesser mortals, not Quidditch Cup-winners. His head was so swollen - "

"SHUT UP!"

I think this was after Snape had warned Harry to go back to the dormitory and Harry had disobeyed him and gone to Hogsmeade. Harry was asked to stay in Hogwarts, had been sent back to the Gryffindor common room by Snape and Snape was angry Harry had disobeyed him and broken the rules to go to Hogsmeade when Sirius Black could have attacked him or killed him. I think he was stressing the importance of obedience of following rules IMO.

Snape is inexcusable for the way he treated Harry by insulting his dead father.

He got a 'SHUT UP' shout from Harry for his efforts and Snape did not even take a point of Gryffindor or hand over a detention for that. So, he also allowed Harry to get away with a lot, when they were alone. Only, I think Snape could not explain as perhaps Lupin would, because he needed to keep his distance and maintain Harry's dislike of him. Which was why there was a James' reference IMO.

I think Snape was trying to point out to Harry that rules were meant to be followed and not doing so, could very easily end wrongly and in this case endanger Harry's life.

eliza101

August 20th, 2009, 2:41 pm

I think this was after Snape had warned Harry to go back to the dormitory and Harry had disobeyed him and gone to Hogsmeade. Harry was asked to stay in Hogwarts, had been sent back to the Gryffindor common room by Snape and Snape was angry Harry had disobeyed him and broken the rules to go to Hogsmeade when Sirius Black could have attacked him or killed him. I think he was stressing the importance of obedience of following rules IMO.

He got a 'SHUT UP' shout from Harry for his efforts and Snape did not even take a point of Gryffindor or hand over a detention for that. So, he also allowed Harry to get away with a lot, when they were alone. Only, I think Snape could not explain as perhaps Lupin would, because he needed to keep his distance and maintain Harry's dislike of him. Which was why there was a James' reference IMO.

I think Snape was trying to point out to Harry that rules were meant to be followed and not doing so, could very easily end wrongly and in this case endanger Harry's life.

But dragging his long dead father into his reprimand is uncalled for. Harry's mistakes, just like Snape's, are Harry's mistakes, not his father's. Of course Snape was not going to report or take points away from Harry. How could he excuse what he had just said about the boy's dead father? Snape's remarks about James to Harry are inexcusable. What James did has nothing to do with Harry, what Harry did has nothing to do with James. What Snape did has nothing to do with anyone else. They are his - Harry's - James actions, alone. This is why I don't like comparisons. What has the actions of any individual got to do with anyone else's when they are not part of a mob?

bellatrix93

August 20th, 2009, 3:11 pm

I think Harry needed discipline because of what was required of him. This was not the time to be reckless or playful or disobedient, because it could get him killed. So, every time Harry was careless, disobedient or acted in a way which could have serious repercussions, Snape stepped in and told him off. I think Snape was acting like a parent; he does not punish or mock Harry to hurt him, but to stop him from acting irresponsibly IMO.

I agree that Harry needed discipline. Actually that was my point. And IMO, Snape was not helping him stay on the line, at all. To me the person who acted the way you described was Mcgonagall rather than Snape. She was careful with Harry. We never see her mocking Harry or provoking him and so forcing him to retort impolitely. The thing that -I think- Snape was very good at. As an example for Mcgonagall treatment to Harry, I'd take the Umbridge thing in OOTP. She was really worried about Harry. First, she advised him, spoke to him seriously, and warned him from what he didn't know or understand. Then, when he crossed the line for a second time, she acted in a more strict way. She took points from him. Not because she was being a bully or anything, but because she was concerned, imo. And she makes it clear to him.

Also I'd like to comment on your last statement: Parents punish, I agree. But they never mock. Punishment has an effect on children. A positive effect, imo. They get to understand their mistakes and learn from them. However, mockery has horrible effects on children. It rips off their self confidence and leaves deep scars in their ego.

For instance, Snape's never ending criticism of Harry's potion making abilities, had negative effects on the latter. Later when Snape is no longer the potions teacher, Harry accepts cheating in the subject. He accepts reputation he didn't deserve. IMO, Harry was average at potions like other subjects. And it was Snape's effect on him that worsened his abilities, as we see him achieving an E in Potions when Snape was not around, waiting for him to make a mistake, imo.

Daggerstone

August 20th, 2009, 3:28 pm

Of course Snape was not going to report or take points away from Harry. How could he excuse what he had just said about the boy's dead father?

What did he say about the boy's dead father? That he was arrogant, that he 'strutted' and 'didn't set much store by the rules'? :huh:

Harry came to learn as much seeing the detention archives and Snape's memories, as well as by talking to Sirius and Lupin. The only difference is in the manner of delivery, and since Snape wasn't James' childhood friend....

We're discussing a character whose prominent trait is an abrasive personality - it's completely in line with his treatment of other characters (including DD) to speak the truth to the boy in the harshest possible manner.

The_Green_Woods

August 20th, 2009, 3:30 pm

But dragging his long dead father into his reprimand is uncalled for. Harry's mistakes, just like Snape's, are Harry's mistakes, not his father's. Of course Snape was not going to report or take points away from Harry. How could he excuse what he had just said about the boy's dead father? Snape's remarks about James to Harry are inexcusable. What James did has nothing to do with Harry, what Harry did has nothing to do with James. What Snape did has nothing to do with anyone else. They are his - Harry's - James actions, alone. This is why I don't like comparisons. What has the actions of any individual got to do with anyone else's when they are not part of a mob?

To answer this I must go to both Occlumency/Legilimency and also state that Snape was a spy. Plus that I think Snape did not hate Harry, as Harry thought Snape did.

Snape was waiting for years for Voldemort to arrive. And when Voldemort did arrive, Snape knew that he would checked throughly through both Legilimency and through other DEs like Lucius Malfoy and other parents like Crabbe, Goyle etc; about Snape's attitude towards both Harry Potter, Dumbledore, muggleborns and Gryffindor.

Snape needed to pass the test not only to stay alive but to continue to work to help Harry and the Order/Dumbledore.

Snape also needed Harry to look upon him with suspicion and hate, if possible, so that Voldemort would never be able to ask Snape to bring Harry to him, using the boy's trust in him.

But mere words alone would not impress or influence Voldemort. He would see (through Legilimency) and verify through other death eaters before he would even start believing Snape and all that he said.

Snape went a couple of hours later to join Voldemort's resurrection party and in Spinner's End, the readers are told that he was grilled both through Legilimency and otherwise by Voldemort before Voldemort let him in and allowed him to live and do his death eaterly duties.

Occlumency/Legilimency is defined in the books (OOTP) as this.

'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.'

Legilimency is defined as the ability to extract feelings and memories from another's mind.

Not just memories are used to verify the truth of what one is saying. One must also accompany it by a feeling of hate, love, desire, anger or whatever one needs for the memory.

Snape IMO needed to show he hated Harry Potter to keep Harry safe from himself; so that when the day came for Snape to stand in Voldemort's presence Voldemort will not look at the lack of hate in Snape's mind for Harry and order him to bring the Boy Who Lived to his presence.

Snape, naturally would not be able to do it and the Order and Dumbledore would lose their spy inside Voldemort's ranks.

I believe Snape did not hate Harry. I believe so, because Snape never punished him when they were alone; because Snape allowed him to get away with a lot of things a teacher normally would not. (sectumsempra, giving the Marauder's Map to Lupin, instead of destroying it in the fire, allowing Harry to ask him to Shut UP etc).

But it was not enough for Snape to just hand out detentions and take away points and talk nasty. He needed the emotions as well. He needed to show he treated muggleborns with disdain, and he needed to show he felt the same way too.

He needed to show he hated Harry Potter, but he needed to show that he felt that hate towards the boy who destroyed his Master.

I think Snape was unable to feel that hate towards Harry. But he had tons of it towards James, for not just marrying Lily, but IMO for many, many other things, like the SWM, where Snape may have felt very negatively towards James.

So, I think Snape used both physical action, of talking down to Harry, giving him points and detention in public (and of course a few times he may have been genuinely irritated when Harry stepped out of bounds like going to Hogsmeade), which would show Voldemort the scenes in which he was nasty to Harry, but for the feelings, he used James; his hatred of James, which would make the memory complete, both visual and feelings.

People who hate other IMO cannot leave such personal memories to them; people who hate others and are vindictive and bullying, will never allow a mere student to shout 'Shut Up' at them; people who are bullies, would destroy what is dear to the boy (the Map parchment which not only Harry was reluctant to give, but which also insulted Snape very badly), people who bully children will never ever be courageous to be a spy in the first place. Bully and courage are opposites; a bully cannot be brave, unless he has a bigger bully watching his back IMO.

Snape for me disqualifies for the bully title, the mean guy or nasty guy, because of the above.

Sarcastic and snarky, of course yes, he was. Mean, vindictive and a bully; for me definitely not. :)