Severus Snape: Character Analysis Reboot v.5

[mirrormere]

Originally Posted by NiteShade

I agree that he could never have known what his patronus was before he first cast it, however I still think it changed, even before he's ever cast one. My theory is that before he met Lily, he had a different patronus that was unknown to everyone including him because he did not cast his patronus then. Later when he met Lily and fell in love with her (still in childhood), his patronus changed, which was still not known to him, for the same reason as before.

So what do you think his original patronus would have been? A bat?

Also--I recall reading somewhere that Death Eaters could not produce a patronus. Does anyone have supporting evidence for that? Or not?

Originally Posted by FurryDice

As you say, lots of characters had personal reasons for working against Voldemort. That is not my problem with Snape. The problem I have with Snape and personal reasons is that he needed a personal reason not to be a part of something so completely evil as the Death Eaters. He needed a personal reason not to destroy innocent lives. I see that as being different from having a personal reason to fight Voldemort. I see it as being like the difference between having a personal reason for joining the police and needing a personal reason not to be involved in committing crime.

I think Snape was so damaged--even by the time he met Lily--that his empathy for others just never developed very well. It took the shock of Lily's possible death to wake up that part of him. From then on I think he gradually developed, to a certain extent, more concern for others.

[NiteShade]

I have no idea what his patronus might have been...I don't think it's a bat though...

I think it was one of Jo's interviews where she said that Snape was the only DE able to produce a full patronus.

[FurryDice]

[quote]

Originally Posted by LoonyLuna22

I don't think he needed a personal reason not to leave the Death Eaters.

But Snape did not leave the Death Eaters until he had a personal reason to do so. He did not object to the horrors that were being committed until he got a taste of his own medicine and found he did not like it much. Snape only left the Death Eaters because Lily was in danger - not because he suddenly figured out that what he was involved in was completely evil.

Deep down in his core, I don't think he was ever truly evil enough to follow through with some of the DE's most gruesome plans. I think Snape chose the path of least resistance (choosing between what was right, and what was easy, as Dumbledore says in one of the later films). He got involved with this group because he was easily accepted. Perhaps after years of growing up in a domestically unstable environment, then being ridiculed and looked upon as weird at school, and finally having the one person he loved the most taken away by a person he hated the most, he wanted to feel not only accepted but powerful. It's my belief that he would have backed down when it came down to the real dirty work.

I don't imagine that Voldemort branded his Death Eaters simply to make up the numbers and then told them to just stand around looking surly. Snape did not back down from handing over a prophecy that would mean the death of a child and probably his family. Based on this, I can't imagine him having any moral objections to what he was doing as a Death Eater.

Lily was not "taken away" from Snape by anybody, she was not an object to be taken away. Snape himself drove Lily away by associating with bigots who looked down on people like her, and by throwing the worst racist slur in the wizarding world at her. That is Snape's responsibility, and nobody else's.

Originally Posted by CastlePhoenix

But as has been brought up, I truly believe that he suffers from a severe lack of empathy.

I think others suffered more than Snape because of his lack of empathy. The Potters, whose family was destroyed because of Snape's lack of empathy as a Death Eater. The students Snape bullied, including Harry also suffered because of Snape's lack of empathy as a teacher.

This does not excuse his behavior as a teacher, but I think that his role in defeating Voldemort will overshadow that. Clearly, Harry seems to believe so.

Perhaps Harry does, but I think he will also continue to realise that Snape's behaviour as a teacher was wrong and inexcusable. He can appreciate and respect Snape's work against Voldemort without condoning or trivialising Snape's bullying.

[MCDahB]

Originally Posted by FurryDice

But Snape did not leave the Death Eaters until he had a personal reason to do so. He did not object to the horrors that were being committed until he got a taste of his own medicine and found he did not like it much. Snape only left the Death Eaters because Lily was in danger - not because he suddenly figured out that what he was involved in was completely evil.

I see your point and that Snape's choice to be become a Death Eater, his continued participation as a DE, and the level of tragedy it took for him to turn around are immense failings with disastrous effects. There seem to be some assumptions, though, that I am hesitant make. I've already stated that I don't think a good act is equivalent to an act that has no personal motivation. All acts have personal motivation, and as far as those personal motivations go, loving a person and not wanting them killed isn't a bad one. It does of course say something bad about Snape that there is only one person for whom he would do this. I see that indicting another part of Snape's character though, not the part that turned his life around to try to save someone he cared about.

Second, I'm hesitant to say that Snape leaving the DEs because of Lily's plight means that he didn't suddenly realize that it was completely evil and leave it for that reason. It is entirely possible (and consistent with my understanding that people's motivations often have many aspects and reasons simultaneously) that Snape left Voldemort because of Lily's situation and because her situation showed him how evil what he was doing was. People deep in the heart of darkness don't tend to leave it because they just realize one day that "oh, this evil stuff is bad." No, it takes something big to pull someone back once they've gone that far and usually something hugely personal. Snape can be faulted for joining and serving Voldemort, yes, but I at least can't bring judgment upon him for his motivations for being pure enough when he ceased fighting for Voldemort.

Originally Posted by FurryDice

Snape did not back down from handing over a prophecy that would mean the death of a child and probably his family. Based on this, I can't imagine him having any moral objections to what he was doing as a Death Eater.

I can imagine that Snape and likely many other Death Eaters had moral objections to what they were doing as DEs. That is because I thing that that path to being deeply evil is exactly that: a path. The idea that Snape as a boy at school understood what it meant to be a Death Eater and was gung-ho for everything that would entail is, I think, rather unlikely if his case has any resemblance to the way most people in the real world go bad. Why should we assume that Snape never felt inner conflict even at times he didn't show it? Just because someone gets to a point where they are capable of horrible things, doesn't mean that they don't understand their actions as horrible things and even hate doing them. It doesn't mean that they "have no problem" doing them--thought, in the worst cases they may be able to block out their conscience. Snape chose to walk down an evil path, but that doesn't mean his path wasn't fraught with second-guessing, guilt, fear, pain, a periodic desire to stop, and a realization that it might be to late.

[My goodness, I do get sidetracked and ranty, sorry.]

Originally Posted by FurryDice

Originally Posted by FurryDice

Perhaps Harry does, but I think he will also continue to realise that Snape's behaviour as a teacher was wrong and inexcusable. He can appreciate and respect Snape's work against Voldemort without condoning or trivialising Snape's bullying.

I agree entirely! Yay!

[CastlePhoenix]

[quote=FurryDice;5888563]

Perhaps Harry does, but I think he will also continue to realise that Snape's behaviour as a teacher was wrong and inexcusable. He can appreciate and respect Snape's work against Voldemort without condoning or trivialising Snape's bullying.

When did Harry condone or trivialize Snape's bullying? If you are referring to the name he gave to his son, I don't see that as doing either. IMO, it simply honors the good that he did.

As I said before, I think that Snape was unnecessarily harsh on the students, particularly Harry and his friends. However, I stand by my assertion that his protection of Harry and his work as a spy against Voldemort outweighs this. On this, we'll have to agree to disagree.

[WelkinCooper]

Granted, Snape is occasionally a bully as a teacher, but I do think saving someone's life repeatedly rather compensates for that in a big way.
Somebody could hurt my tender little feelings all day long, and make me cry into my pillow every night, but if they pushed me out of the way of a speeding truck I think I'd be inclined to cut them some slack.

[GrimeldaDursley]

Okay, I think we can all agree that probably Snape will not win the "Teacher of the Year" award or the "Mr. Congeniality" prize.

In my opinion, I think saving Lily was his first motivation, but I think he grew as a person as the series progressed, from the man who didn't appear to care if an innocent child and his parents were killed, to a man who made it his mission to save as many as he could. Sometimes, people don't stop doing bad things until it hits home with them.

While I agree that Lily was the catalyst that sent Snape to the good side, I cannot speculate that every decent thing he ever did was solely motivated by Lily, though I am sure she was a part of it.

And you know, I don't think Snape would have remained a Death Eater if he hadn't helped Dumbledore. Actually, I think he would have well...probably just died.

[arithmancer]

Originally Posted by MCDahB

It is entirely possible (and consistent with my understanding that people's motivations often have many aspects and reasons simultaneously) that Snape left Voldemort because of Lily's situation and because her situation showed him how evil what he was doing was.

I can imagine that Snape and likely many other Death Eaters had moral objections to what they were doing as DEs.

This is what I believe. He might actually have been convinced he was doing evil things before the threat to Lily, but it is a big step from knowing that, to not doing it anymore, when the alternatives are as unattractive as Snape's were. Yes, he chose to become a Death Eater, but once he did, tendering his resignation was not an option. It is, as someone (I believe Sirius) once said, "a lifetime of servitude, or death". I think, at that point in his life, the principle of the thing was not something Snape considered worth dying for. Lily, was.

And I see the hint of it in Snape's first scene with Dumbledore. He does not try to offer any excuses or explanations of his behavior, and it seemed to me this was because he did not feel there were any.

We know Dumbledore seems quite satisifed with his (entirely offpage) career as a spy in the first war. I think Snape threw himself into it not only because it would help Lily, but because it was something he would rather have been doing anyway.

Originally Posted by GrimeldaDursley

And you know, I don't think Snape would have remained a Death Eater if he hadn't helped Dumbledore. Actually, I think he would have well...probably just died.

I am not sure what you mean here...

[GrimeldaDursley]

I am not sure what you mean here...

I meant he seemed so utterly destroyed by Lily's death, the Snape I saw in Dumbledore's office after it happened, wished he was dead.

I might add, it was a very painful scene to read.

[WelkinCooper]

Originally Posted by GrimeldaDursley

I meant he seemed so utterly destroyed by Lily's death, the Snape I saw in Dumbledore's office after it happened, wished he was dead.

I might add, it was a very painful scene to read.

Intense emotional pain might make you wish that, but it always subsides, the pain lessens, and you find a reason to go on because you always hope for something better. I have no reason to believe that Snape wouldn't feel the same way over time.

[FurryDice]

[quote]

Originally Posted by MCDahB

I've already stated that I don't think a good act is equivalent to an act that has no personal motivation. All acts have personal motivation, and as far as those personal motivations go, loving a person and not wanting them killed isn't a bad one.

My problem is not that Snape had a personal motive for doing something good. My problem is that it took personal suffering to stop him from doing something evil.

Second, I'm hesitant to say that Snape leaving the DEs because of Lily's plight means that he didn't suddenly realize that it was completely evil and leave it for that reason.

I don't think he did realise it was completely evil at that point. if he had realised that, he would have asked Dumbledore to keep the entire family safe, not just Lily.

People deep in the heart of darkness don't tend to leave it because they just realize one day that "oh, this evil stuff is bad." No, it takes something big to pull someone back once they've gone that far and usually something hugely personal.

That is true of all the DEs/DE sympathisers who acted against Voldemort - Snape, Narcissa, Regulus. However, I think it says something deeply negative about them that it takes personal suffering for them to have any problem with the evil they are perpetrating.

Snape can be faulted for joining and serving Voldemort, yes, but I at least can't bring judgment upon him for his motivations for being pure enough when he ceased fighting for Voldemort.

I can imagine that Snape and likely many other Death Eaters had moral objections to what they were doing as DEs. That is because I thing that that path to being deeply evil is exactly that: a path. The idea that Snape as a boy at school understood what it meant to be a Death Eater and was gung-ho for everything that would entail is, I think, rather unlikely if his case has any resemblance to the way most people in the real world go bad.

I don't see it. While Snape was in his fifth year, people were living in fear of Voldemort and his Death Eaters. Snape knew he was joining something violent and destructive. Perphaps he thought he'd get power from it, or impress Lily - whatever his reasons, IMO, I can't see him or other Death Eaters having moral objections. if they had moral objections, they wouldn't have joined in the first place.

Snape chose to walk down an evil path, but that doesn't mean his path wasn't fraught with second-guessing, guilt, fear, pain, a periodic desire to stop, and a realization that it might be to late.

I see no evidence of a desire to stop until he got a taste of his own medicine. Snape carried the prophecy to Voldemort - knowing that it would put a child and his family in mortal peril. That's not the action of someone who's feeling regret for his actions.

Originally Posted by CastlePhoenix

As I said before, I think that Snape was unnecessarily harsh on the students, particularly Harry and his friends. However, I stand by my assertion that his protection of Harry and his work as a spy against Voldemort outweighs this. On this, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't think his work against Voldemort outweighs his bullying of students. I see them as two separate issues. Snape should not have behaved as he did, he had no excuse to behave as he did, no matter what good he was doing elsewhere.

Originally Posted by WelkinCooper

Granted, Snape is occasionally a bully as a teacher, but I do think saving someone's life repeatedly rather compensates for that in a big way.
Somebody could hurt my tender little feelings all day long, and make me cry into my pillow every night, but if they pushed me out of the way of a speeding truck I think I'd be inclined to cut them some slack.

I think it would be going down a dangerous path to say that a person should just "shut up and put up" with bullying from someone who has done something to protect them. I think there is never a situation where anyone should be expected to just put up with bullying out of gratitude.

IMO, cutting someone slack is not the same as forgiveness, cutting someone slack strikes me as making excuses and pretending it's not that bad, or that Harry should just not have a problem with being humiliated and belittled in public because Snape tries to keep him physically safe. I don't think Harry should go down that path.

Also, if I had caused a child's family to be murdered, I would be inclined to cut that child a bit of slack.

Originally Posted by arithmancer

This is what I believe. He might actually have been convinced he was doing evil things before the threat to Lily, but it is a big step from knowing that, to not doing it anymore, when the alternatives are as unattractive as Snape's were. Yes, he chose to become a Death Eater, but once he did, tendering his resignation was not an option. It is, as someone (I believe Sirius) once said, "a lifetime of servitude, or death".

This is servitude that they themselves chose. They chose to be branded like animals, in the expectation of power. My sympathy is very limited. It seems a lot like joining the Mafia, in that sense - there's only one way out.

And I see the hint of it in Snape's first scene with Dumbledore. He does not try to offer any excuses or explanations of his behavior, and it seemed to me this was because he did not feel there were any.

Or perhaps he still has the "it's only wrong if it hurts Severus Snape" attitude. I think this is shown in his request for the safety of Lily only. He could have asked Dumbledore for the safety of the entire family, if he had genuinely felt remorse.

I find it likely that at this point, Snape's problem was that Voldemort had chosen Lily's family, and not that he himself had done something evil.

We know Dumbledore seems quite satisifed with his (entirely offpage) career as a spy in the first war. I think Snape threw himself into it not only because it would help Lily, but because it was something he would rather have been doing anyway.

I can't recall any evidence in canon that Snape would rather have been spying for Dumbledore. Not until Lily was in danger, and then it was for her only, for a long time.

Originally Posted by GrimeldaDursley

I meant he seemed so utterly destroyed by Lily's death, the Snape I saw in Dumbledore's office after it happened, wished he was dead.

I might add, it was a very painful scene to read.

While it was sad for Snape, I found it to be poetic justice, personally.

[leah49]

Originally Posted by WelkinCooper

Granted, Snape is occasionally a bully as a teacher, but I do think saving someone's life repeatedly rather compensates for that in a big way.

Really? When did he save Harry's life or Neville's, for that matter.

[MerryLore]

Originally Posted by leah49

Really? When did he save Harry's life

I think this was the first time it's mentioned in the books:

Harry's broom gave a wild jerk, and Harry swung off it. He was now dangling from it, holding on with only one hand.

Quiddich, SS

“But Snape tried to kill me!”

“No, no, no, I tried to kill you. Your friend Miss Granger accidently knocked me off as she rushed to set fire to Snape at that Quiddich match. She broke my eye contact with you. Another few seconds and I'd have got you off that broom. I'd have managed it before then if Snape hadn't been muttering a counter curse, trying to save you.”

The Man with Two Faces, SS

Quirrelmort says he would have managed to kill Harry, if not for Snape muttering a counter curse. Quirrelmort thinks he would have overcome Snape if given a "few seconds" longer, but if Snape had not been there, Harry would have died.

[Hes]

I want to remind everyone that Snape vs Marauders is still a banned topic, so don't go there.

[silver ink pot]

Originally Posted by leah49

Really? When did he save Harry's life or Neville's, for that matter.

Harry in PS/SS:

"Snape was trying to save me?"

"Of course," said Quirrell coolly. "Why do you think he wanted to referee your next match? He was trying to make sure I didn't do it again."

Dumbledore in PS/SS:

"I do believe he worked so hard to protect you this year..."

Neville (maybe not saving his life, but noticing he was apparently being throttled by someone):

OotP:

'Fighting, Potter, Weasley, Longbottom?' Snape said in his cold, sneering voice. Ten points from Gryffindor. Release Longbottom, Potter, or it will be detention. Inside..."

"Crabbe, loosen your hold a little. If Longbottom suffocates it will mean a lot of tedious paperwork and I am afraid I shall have to mention it on your reference if ever you apply for a job."

And don't forget Ron! He gives the "Prince" credit for the bezoar, with which harry saved Ron's life in HBP:

And there it was, scrawled right across a long list of antidotes.
"Just shove a bezoar down their throats."
Harry stared at these words for a moment. Hadn't he once, long ago, heard of bezoars? Hadn't Snape mentioned them in their first ever Potions lesson? 'A stone taken from the stomach of a goat, which will protect from most poisons.'

"Blimey, it was lucky you thought of a bezoar," said George in a low voice.

"Lucky there was one in the room," said Harry, who kept turning cold at the thought of what would have happened if he had not been able to lay hands on the little stone.

Ron: 'He was a genius, the Prince. Anyway ... without his bezoar tip ...' he drew his finger significantly across his own throat, 'I wouldn't be here to discuss it, would I?

[mirrormere]

Originally Posted by MCDahB

I can imagine that Snape and likely many other Death Eaters had moral objections to what they were doing as DEs. That is because I thing that that path to being deeply evil is exactly that: a path. The idea that Snape as a boy at school understood what it meant to be a Death Eater and was gung-ho for everything that would entail is, I think, rather unlikely if his case has any resemblance to the way most people in the real world go bad.

Originally Posted by FurryDice

[I don't see it. While Snape was in his fifth year, people were living in fear of Voldemort and his Death Eaters. Snape knew he was joining something violent and destructive. Perphaps he thought he'd get power from it, or impress Lily - whatever his reasons, IMO, I can't see him or other Death Eaters having moral objections. if they had moral objections, they wouldn't have joined in the first place.

I've often thought that Kreacher seemed a metaphor for Snape. When Harry doesn't understand why Kreacher passed on information about Sirius after the way Voldemort left him to die, Hermione says "Harry, Kreacher doesn't think like that . . . He's loyal to people who are kind to him."

I really think Snape was so damaged by his abusive parents that when he was accepted by Slytherin house, he gave them, then the Death Eaters and then Voldemort, his loyalty. I don't think he would have changed this course no matter what was going around him for a very long time, if ever, due to the circumstances of his early life--except for one thing.

He had given Lily his loyalty first. I believe Lily represented everthing good in Severus and everything that could have been good in his life. He was drawn to that goodness, but so many of his thought patterns had already been set in such a neglectful home that it wasn't enough. I think JKR shows this in nearly every interaction he has with Lily--there is always something that he doesn't quite understand about her reactions; he's always a bit awkward, "catching up" to what she is thinking and feeling. He is constantly trying to fix his blunders (at the same time he keeps making them)--right up until she feels the need to break off their friendship.

I don't think Severus even understood how loyal he was to Lily until Voldemore threatened her and the realization of what could happen to her hit him. And I don't believe he could fully process the accompanying feelings. Yet despite his emotional and social defects, he doesn't let anything stop him from doing his part--and an extraordinarily dangerous part--to destroy Voldemort.

And, like Kreacher, Snape ends up fighting and helping to defeat the Dark forces because of someone who was kind to him.

[salazar71963]

I think Snape is if anything a victim of bullying.
He is not sadistic at all, whatever he may have done that seemed cruel, was done out of anger or sometimes necesity. As Harry put it he was the bravest man I knew. James was cruel to Snape and helped create the problem, and seemed to take pleasure from Snapes torment.

[SusanBones]

one more time -

Originally Posted by Hes

I want to remind everyone that Snape vs Marauders is still a banned topic, so don't go there.

[NiteShade]

Originally Posted by mirrormere

I've often thought that Kreacher seemed a metaphor for Snape. When Harry doesn't understand why Kreacher passed on information about Sirius after the way Voldemort left him to die, Hermione says "Harry, Kreacher doesn't think like that . . . He's loyal to people who are kind to him."

I really think Snape was so damaged by his abusive parents that when he was accepted by Slytherin house, he gave them, then the Death Eaters and then Voldemort, his loyalty. I don't think he would have changed this course no matter what was going around him for a very long time, if ever, due to the circumstances of his early life--except for one thing.

Agreed.

I don't think Severus even understood how loyal he was to Lily until Voldemort threatened her and the realization of what could happen to her hit him.

Or you can say...how much she mattered to him. Lily was the only person who ever really cared about him, and who he ever really cared about, up to that point. To lose the person that mattered to him most, especially when all others around him (his family...etc etc) were not so caring towards him...was an immense blow. It was a blow that turned him around and put him on the road to redemption.

IMO of course.

[ignisia]

From the Snape and Dumbledore thread.

Originally Posted by mirrormere

Unless, of course, I've just missed it in the canon--entirely possible. I hope I'm wrong! Do any members know of instances where Snape uses the first name of anyone besides Death Eaters, Dumbledore in particular? Please, please share!

With the understandable exception of Lily, I think Severus sticks with surnames (unless there's a stray "Minerva" floating about? ) but I don't see it as a particularly bad thing. He strikes me as the type of person who prefers to maintain some level of distance, even if he feels friendship or regard for someone. Not only might this tendency be strengthened by the necessities of his spy job, but it's also just the way some people are, whether by nature or experience. Also keep in mind that most of the action occurs in his place of work, and some people like to use last names among colleagues.

By using first names with the DEs, he is both lulling them into a false sense of security as well as putting on a smoother persona, IMHO. Although I'd make the case that his use of Bellatrix's name in "Spinner's End" is meant to be a little jab at her for not playing nice.