Severus Snape: Character Analysis Volume 2

[exl2398]

Originally Posted by ignisia

Leaving them certainly doesn't. And, although it's been argued dozens of times, I still tend to believe Snape's act of joining the DEs in the first place had less to do with a natural inclination to kill people and more to do with a need to belong, a ton of misplaced anger, and a twisted moral attitude developed after years of parental neglect.

I think that is a good assessment of Snape, based on the glimpses into the past that we have of him.

Originally Posted by Pearl_Took

Sorry, didn't mean to sound like I was jumping on you.

No worries, you didn't jump me, you just gave me a different way of looking at the situation, which is a good thing.

[Daggerstone]

Well, hello there! Long time no snark...

Originally Posted by bellatrix93

I think the reason he turned back is that he knew that Lily was targeted. If it weren't the Potters that Voldemort had chosen, he may not have met Dumbledore that night at the hill. I think the targeted family being Lily's had a lot of effect on his turning back.

Based on all we know about Snape's character, does he really strike you as someone capable of going through some... err... less savoury aspects of being a DE indefinitely?

There's a reason Lucius was the one in charge of Muggle torture during VWI (and no, I'm not buying the "but Snape had to have taken part in..." argument - after all, Bellatrix doesn't either).

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods

At the end of the lesson, Snape picks up Trevor to feed him and the Book says the Potion is Green, which was the correct colour for that potion (given above). So, Snape actually know before he gives the potion to Trevor that the potion is correct and that Trevor will not suffer.

Don't you just love how detailed Jo gets at times?

Originally Posted by bellatrix93

Because Potions, unlike Transfiguration for instance, doesn't seem to need much explanation, as we see with Slughorn. They both used to write the instructions and just inspect the students' work at the end of the class. The main difference between them, is that Slug's comments on weak students were not so sharp, imo.

Actually, the main difference is that Slughorn taught the advanced class (all twelve students of Harry's entire year who managed "E" and above at Ministry-conducted OWLs ) while Snape had to teach all and sundry, regardless of their skill/interest level.

Originally Posted by bellatrix93

Also, I don't think Snape had any patience with his students.

Now, observe:

Exhibit A: 'Miss Granger, you foolish girl, how could you think of tackling a mountain troll on your own?'


Exhibit B: 'Don't tell me what I can and can't do, Potter.'


Exhibit C: 'Something you have to say is more important than the Ministry of Magic, Potter?'

That's McGonagall in "Sorcerer's Stone" alone. Remind you of someone?

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I wouldn't call Snape 'evil' either. An exasperating, cantakerous old crow, maybe.

Marry me?

Originally Posted by FurryDice

Not even his remark about Hermione's teeth? I think that was way, way over the line.

Yep. But "rude" and "evil" are not synonymous in English.

Originally Posted by FurryDice

Joining a gang of genocidal terrorists doesn't show a propensity for evil?

Voldy advertised DEs as "a gang of genocidal terrorists"?!

Veles' horns... no wonder everyone thought him mental.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Daggerstone

Marry me?

Gladly, but that might not be permitted in your country, due to me being of the feminine persuasion

[MinervasCat]

Originally Posted by eliza101

Don't you miss 90% of the books just reading the Snape scenes.

Mmmmm. Never thought of it that way.

Originally Posted by bellatrix93

That's rather interesting. You got me thinking whether Snape could actually teach any type of students? Snape always struck me as the sort of teachers who know lots about their subject, but can never convey or give it to their students. Snape has problems with Neville-type students as well as Hermione-type students. And since he mistreats Harry (for non-teaching related reasons) we can't tell if he's okay with normal students, those who are between Neville and Hermione. I don't think we can judge fairly, either. Because Potions, unlike Transfiguration for instance, doesn't seem to need much explanation, as we see with Slughorn. They both used to write the instructions and just inspect the students' work at the end of the class. The mani difference between them, is that Slug's comments on week students were not so sharp, imo. Also, I don't think Snape had any patience with his students.

Severus may not have been a teacher by choice, but, he was evidentally good enough for many classes to pass their O.W.L.S. and N.E.W.T.S. and continue on in various positions in the WW, or, I don't think even Dumbledore could have kept him in the position. He'd have had to move him to another position to keep him at Hogwarts if he'd been that bad.

Potions wasn't like Divination, where it didn't matter if Prof. Trewlaney could "teach" or not. She was kept at Hogwarts because of her being the one to initially reveal The Prophecy. Potions was a critical subject for many students who were planning careers that required that subject to continue their education toward those goals. Harry, Hermoine, Ron, and several others in their class received acceptable grades on their O.W.L.S., and, IMO, this would not have happened if Severus had not been able to teach.

That doesn't mean he was the ideal teacher, but, he was capable of imparting the information necessary to his students for them to pass the subject.

[The_Green_Woods]

Originally Posted by Daggerstone

Don't you just love how detailed Jo gets at times?

And how well she manages to hide it. In plain sight.

Now, observe:

Exhibit A: 'Miss Granger, you foolish girl, how could you think of tackling a mountain troll on your own?'


Exhibit B: 'Don't tell me what I can and can't do, Potter.'


Exhibit C: 'Something you have to say is more important than the Ministry of Magic, Potter?'

That's McGonagall in "Sorcerer's Stone" alone. Remind you of someone?

The strict Professor McGonagall reminds me of the strict Professor Snape. I actually thought those remarks were by Snape until I read who said them.

[bellatrix93]

Originally Posted by Daggerstone

Well, hello there! Long time no snark...

Well, would love to say welcome back.. but there's no welcoming someone to their home, .

Based on all we know about Snape's character, does he really strike you as someone capable of going through some... err... less savoury aspects of being a DE indefinitely?

I think Snape is rather like Regelus and Draco. They all didn't see what they were doing clearly untill someone they loved, liked and cared about was targeted by Voldemort. They didn't understand or see how horrible Voldemort was untill the ones they cared about became the victims of his horrors. Honestly, I don't think Snape could've seen the error of his way without Lily being from the family Voldemort targeted. If there's a reason you think he could, I'd like to hear it, .

Actually, the main difference is that Slughorn taught the advanced class (all twelve students of Harry's entire year who managed "E" and above at Ministry-conducted OWLs ) while Snape had to teach all and sundry, regardless of their skill/interest level.

Good point.

Now, observe:

Exhibit A: 'Miss Granger, you foolish girl, how could you think of tackling a mountain troll on your own?'


Exhibit B: 'Don't tell me what I can and can't do, Potter.'


Exhibit C: 'Something you have to say is more important than the Ministry of Magic, Potter?'

That's McGonagall in "Sorcerer's Stone" alone. Remind you of someone?

Again, I don't see McGonagall even slightly similar to Snape. All these instances were out of class, had nothing to do with the students' performance, and in some of them the lives of some students were in danger. I can think of several situations where Snape gets more nasty and very unfair, but I don't see the point of posting them here, since we'll still see them and interept them differently.

Voldy advertised DEs as "a gang of genocidal terrorists"?!

Veles' horns... no wonder everyone thought him mental.

I really don't know of it matters how Voldemort advertised his gang. It was well-known that he used bad means to achieve his 'goal' of purifying the wizarding race. We see the Blacks (Pureblood supermacists of the first class) refuse to join him, except for two of them. His means I think were known to everybody. I don't think Snape walked into this totally unaware of Voldemorts actions. He already mixed with young DEs at the school and saw them hurt other students (even if you think he never took part in that), and already had Lily's advice in mind.

[The_Green_Woods]

I think the fact that Snape turned away from Voldemort is proof enough imo that Snape had the potential to change. In the Books we saw that change happen because of Lily, but if it hadn't been Lily, it might have been something else. Of course he would not have changed at the time he did or in the manner he did; but it is highly probable that he would have walked away from Voldemort imo.

[Daggerstone]

Originally Posted by bellatrix93

I don't think Snape could've seen the error of his way without Lily being from the family Voldemort targeted. If there's a reason you think he could, I'd like to hear it, .

Personally, I don't think Lily was the one who made Snape realize "the error of his way" - she was merely the reason for him to turn away from it. It wasn't until much later that Snape really dropped the "Apres moi le deluge" approach... and Dumbledore was the man to "blame" for it.

All these instances were out of class, had nothing to do with the students' performance, and in some of them the lives of some students were in danger. I can think of several situations where Snape gets more nasty and very unfair

Snark, by any other name, would bite as sharp, m'dear...

And I daresay I'd call Snape a contrary mule even if you did quote those parts. I don't subscribe to the "spy cover" theory - I genuinely believe the man was an antisocial ba***rd.

I simply don't see rude teachers as that crippling a thing - it's not like the rest of the world (as in: family/close friends excluded) wraps kids in cotton wool... well, at least not where I come from.

I don't think Snape walked into this totally unaware of Voldemorts actions. He already mixed with young DEs at the school and saw them hurt other students (even if you think he never took part in that), and already had Lily's advice in mind.

There's still a world of difference between schoolyard skirmishes (even if they involve Dark Magic) and actual genocide, don't you think?

I'm not disputing his anti-Muggle tendencies, you realize. Just the lengths he was willing (and able) to go to realize them: your Draco parallel was spot-on, IMO - he wasn't a murderer, either.

[FleurduJardin]

Originally Posted by bellatrix93

Well, would love to say welcome back.. but there's no welcoming someone to their home, .

You can always say "Welcome home!"

Honestly, I don't think Snape could've seen the errors of his way without Lily being from the family Voldemort targeted. If there's a reason you think he could, I'd like to hear it, .

I think you're right. Actually, it's not so much that he saw "the error of his ways", it's that he hated Voldemort for having killed Lily and turned against his former master to avenge her. Snape joined the fight against Voldemort for love of Lily, not because he wanted to fight evil per se. He fought the person who was responsible for his love's death, not necessarily what that person stood for.

Again, I don't see McGonagall even slightly similar to Snape. All these instances were out of class, had nothing to do with the students' performance, and in some of them the lives of some students were in danger. I can think of several situations where Snape gets more nasty and very unfair, but I don't see the point of posting them here, since we'll still see them and interept them differently.

I totally agree

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods

I think the fact that Snape turned away from Voldemort is proof enough imo that Snape had the potential to change. In the Books we saw that change happen because of Lily, but if it hadn't been Lily, it might have been something else. Of course he would not have changed at the time he did or in the manner he did; but it is highly probable that he would have walked away from Voldemort imo.

I'm not sure I agree with you on this, TGW. From early on, Snape was attracted to the Dark Arts, and kept company with aspiring DEs. Like Tom Riddle himself, he had no great love for his Muggle father, and was proud of his Wizarding heritage. He got Sorted into Slytherin and, apparently very few people knew that he was Half-Blood.

I can't see any reason for him to change if Voldemort hadn't killed Lily. But if you have an idea about what might bring such a turnaround in him, I'm keeping an open mind. What, in your opinion, could or would have made him break away from Voldemort? I would genuinely like to know what kind of thing you think would make him change paths so radically.

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by FleurduJardin

I think you're right. Actually, it's not so much that he saw "the error of his ways", it's that he hated Voldemort for having killed Lily and turned against his former master to avenge her. Snape joined the fight against Voldemort for love of Lily, not because he wanted to fight evil per se. He fought the person who was responsible for his love's death, not necessarily what that person stood for.


I'm not sure I agree with you on this, TGW. From early on, Snape was attracted to the Dark Arts, and kept company with aspiring DEs. Like Tom Riddle himself, he had no great love for his Muggle father, and was proud of his Wizarding heritage. He got Sorted into Slytherin and, apparently very few people knew that he was Half-Blood.

I can't see any reason for him to change if Voldemort hadn't killed Lily. But if you have an idea about what might bring such a turnaround in him, I'm keeping an open mind. What, in your opinion, could or would have made him break away from Voldemort? I would genuinely like to know what kind of thing you think would make him change paths so radically.

It's shocking that one must continue to remind folks that Severus Snape was already working against Voldemort for nearly a year when Lily was killed. I wonder why that is . . .

[ignisia]

Hmm...I see a bit of a distinction between asking whether or not Snape would have turned if Lily were not killed, and whether or not he'd have turned if she were not targeted. The way I see it, Lily being targeted jarred him from the path he was on and impelled him to make the decision to change sides. So he was certainly on DD's side when Lily was killed.

There is also, I think, a distinction between what is meant by "changing sides." Is the the act of transferring loyalties from Voldemort to Dumbledore, or is it the embracing of what Dumbledore fought for? I personally think he attained this latter type of change, but not right away, gradually, until the day he died (culminating, IMO, in his decision to tell Harry of the last Horcrux and his own story). I think Lily's death did play a large part here, but I also give a great deal of credit to DD for guidance, Snape's colleagues, and Snape himself for his own choices.

[FleurduJardin]

Originally Posted by snapes_witch

It's shocking that one must continue to remind folks that Severus Snape was already working against Voldemort for nearly a year when Lily was killed. I wonder why that is . . .

Sorry - I should have said "targeted". Snape changed sides when he realized Lily was in danger (that he was instrumental in making her a target didn't help things).

Once targeted by Voldemort, one was as good as dead... Only Harry managed to escape that fate.

So let me rephrase: I can't see any reason for him to change if Voldemort hadn't targeted Lily, threatened her life.

[ccollinsmith]

Originally Posted by ignisia

There is also, I think, a distinction between what is meant by "changing sides." Is the the act of transferring loyalties from Voldemort to Dumbledore, or is it the embracing of what Dumbledore fought for? I personally think he attained this latter type of change, but not right away, gradually, until the day he died (culminating, IMO, in his decision to tell Harry of the last Horcrux and his own story). I think Lily's death did play a large part here, but I also give a great deal of credit to DD for guidance, Snape's colleagues, and Snape himself for his own choices.

I agree. It was the targeting of Lily that started to bring him to his senses. But he was progressively brought more and more to his senses from that moment until the day he died. By the time he dies, he has embraced DD's perspective (saving all who can be saved, whether it's convenient or not, and whether he likes them or not).

I view it as a very realistic view of how people change in RL... often slow, faltering, plagued with missteps. But imo the change was real, and it did happen.

[Daggerstone]

Originally Posted by FleurduJardin

From early on, Snape was attracted to the Dark Arts, and kept company with aspiring DEs.

Unlike Dumbledore, who spent his whole life avoiding Dark wizards and fighting for the rights of Muggleborns, you mean?

Originally Posted by FleurduJardin

Like Tom Riddle himself, he had no great love for his Muggle father, and was proud of his Wizarding heritage. He got Sorted into Slytherin and, apparently very few people knew that he was Half-Blood.

"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are..."

Plural: because you're worth it.

[Moriath]

Originally Posted by Daggerstone

Unlike Dumbledore, who spent his whole life avoiding Dark wizards and fighting for the rights of Muggleborns, you mean?

Personally, I would say that there is a difference between plotting world domination with one's BFF over the summer and actually joining a terrorist group.

What the comparison to Dumbledore shows, in my view, is how easily the minds of adolescents can be corrupted. One can get carried away quickly and easily and this is what happened to both Dumbledore and Snape, only Snape got his wake-up call later. For me the redemption arc wouldn't work at all if Snape hadn't done anything that required redemption at one point and I believe that he was sincerely invested in DE ideology at school. Back then he knew that DEs targeted Muggle-borns. He may not have known that they were killing them yet but he had no problems considering them sub-human to some extent (with Lily being the exception). Putting them in their place may have been fun indeed, at least that's what everyone else he was friends with seemed to have thought.

But basically I agree with everyone who said that it was Lily being targeted by Voldemort himself that brought him to his senses and initiated his change of mind.

[Daggerstone]

Originally Posted by Moriath

Personally, I would say that there is a difference between plotting world domination with one's BFF over the summer and actually joining a terrorist group.

True... Selver and I constantly plot taking over the translating world, but we'd never terrorize our clients.

Back to earnest discussion, my point was: we can't really know how long it would've taken for Dumbledore's wakeup call to sound, either, had there not been the whole Ariana thing. So that's one more parallel to consider before applying the "evil" label.

For me the redemption arc wouldn't work at all if Snape hadn't done anything that required redemption at one point and I believe that he was sincerely invested in DE ideology at school.

I agree. I just don't think it was a matter of general bias as much as a personal bone to pick.

Back then he knew that DEs targeted Muggle-borns. He may not have known that they were killing them yet but he had no problems considering them sub-human to some extent (with Lily being the exception).

Now, this is what I'm unable to buy: the whole "Muggleborns as sub-humans" thing.

The man was a half-blood - had there truly been a distinct 'we'll-wipe-out-the-non-purebloods' agenda behind the DE activities in those days... how in seven hells did he manage to get in in the first place?! Plus, everyone and their hippogriff must have seen him hanging out with Lily during those first 5 years, not to mention the 'I'll-spend-the-night-with-Fat-Lady-unless-she-comes-out' incident.

Second, Voldemort actually seemed willing to spare Lily back in the day.

Third, GoF reads:

Karkaroff drew a deep breath.
"There was Antonin Dolohov," he said. "I - I saw him torture countless Muggles and - and non-supporters of the Dark Lord."

and

Voldemort now approached the man on Wormtail's right.
"Lucius, my slippery friend," he whispered, halting before him. "I am told that you have not renounced the old ways, though to the world you present a respectable face. You are still ready to take the lead in a spot of Muggle-torture, I believe.."

So I'm guessing Snape's willingness to "have fun putting them in their place" had more to do with his father than his attitude to bloodlines and magic...

Then again, I might be wrong and he was in it for the Dark Chocolate.

[TreacleTartlet]

Originally Posted by ignisia

The way I see it, Lily being targeted jarred him from the path he was on and impelled him to make the decision to change sides. So he was certainly on DD's side when Lily was killed.

There is also, I think, a distinction between what is meant by "changing sides." Is the the act of transferring loyalties from Voldemort to Dumbledore, or is it the embracing of what Dumbledore fought for? I personally think he attained this latter type of change, but not right away, gradually, until the day he died (culminating, IMO, in his decision to tell Harry of the last Horcrux and his own story). I think Lily's death did play a large part here, but I also give a great deal of credit to DD for guidance, Snape's colleagues, and Snape himself for his own choices.

I agree, this is the take I have on Snape's redemption arc.

Originally Posted by Daggerstone

So I'm guessing Snape's willingness to "have fun putting them in their place" had more to do with his father than his attitude to bloodlines and magic...

I think that is the reason we are given the information on Snape's father in both Harry's Occlumency lesson and TPT. Otherwise I see it as serving no purpose. During the Occlumency lessons, Harry breaks into Snape's mind and sees young Snape crying in the corner of the room while his father shouts at his mother who is cowering; and in TPT, to quote Severus on his father when Lily asks him whether his father like magic; '“He doesn’t like anything, much,". I think that statement tells us a lot about Snape's father, and is very sad as I read that to include meaning Severus himself.

Then again, I might be wrong and he was in it for the Dark Chocolate.

Well, I'd be sorely tempted by the Dark Chocolate.

[Chrysalis]

I don't understand why this whole discussion keeps revolving around whether Snape's intent was pure or not (what is a good enough reason to turn from the Dark Side, anyway? Obviously, many people don't consider the possibility of the love of one's life dying to be a noble enough reason). What does it matter? It disturbs me that as a society we elevate intention so much, to the point where somebody's actions are mitigated if their intent was good enough. I'm also thinking here of discussions relating to feminism and marginalisation. Someone may have the best of intentions but when they say something extremely offensive those intentions don't matter anymore.

[Bscorp]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I don't understand why this whole discussion keeps revolving around whether Snape's intent was pure or not (what is a good enough reason to turn from the Dark Side, anyway? Obviously, many people don't consider the possibility of the love of one's life dying to be a noble enough reason). What does it matter?

This is a very interesting observation. On the subject of motives, I find an interesting parallel in Snape's progression of motives to Harry's progression. In the first few books we saw how Harry felt a very personal motive about Voldemort. "He killed my parents" and/or "he wants to kill me" are his primary thoughts around his relationship to Voldemort. It isn't until later on in the series that Harry begins to understand that there is a much larger picture and his parents deaths are only a part of a larger struggle. I don't think it's uncommon at all for people to initially become aware of an issue or a struggle only through some personal "lens: of cause and effect.

[quote=Chrysalis;5641767] It disturbs me that as a society we elevate intention so much, to the point where somebody's actions are mitigated if their intent was good enough. I'm also thinking here of discussions relating to feminism and marginalisation. Someone may have the best of intentions but when they say something extremely offensive those intentions don't matter anymore.[quote]

I think JKR made Snape ambiguous in these terms. He says a lot of things that can be interepreted as offensive by Harry et al. but his actions are something else and almost always sever to protect.

[Chrysalis]

People want a simple, black and white world, they want heroes and villains, and they can't comprehend that even great people have a dark side.

[quote="bscorp"][quote="Chrysalis"] It disturbs me that as a society we elevate intention so much, to the point where somebody's actions are mitigated if their intent was good enough. I'm also thinking here of discussions relating to feminism and marginalisation. Someone may have the best of intentions but when they say something extremely offensive those intentions don't matter anymore.

I think JKR made Snape ambiguous in these terms. He says a lot of things that can be interepreted as offensive by Harry et al. but his actions are something else and almost always sever to protect.

I meant more the whole back-and-forthing on Snape's true intentions, which I find terribly annoying, actually. Honestly, what do you (ETA: not you specifically, but a general 'you') think 'real life' heroes are like? Do you really all think they are wonderful people? Here's a hint, most of them are not. I'm thinking of Mahatma Gandhi, that man who serves conventiently as some sort of Magical Negro for white people, who ironically was ALL about 'The Greater Good'. Gandhi was a great person, but his views and actions range from bizarre to highly controversial to practically illegal.