Severus Snape: Character Analysis Reboot v.5

[mirrormere]

I agree with Merrylore and think it's very likely that the only reason Snape shared his more vulnerable memories with Harry was because he knew Harry would also die soon and take that information to the grave with him. And this is pure conjecture--but perhaps there was no portrait of Severus in the headmaster's office after his death upon his own personal request.

[wolfbrother]

I believe Jo said that Harry campaigned to have Snape's portrait in the headmasters office.

[BrianTung]

Originally Posted by MerryLore

I'm sorry, Brian, but i completely disagree with this. Snape is a spy, and much of his life was based around people not really understanding him.

Well, fair enough; I will have to give that some thought. But I would point out that being a spy and having no problem with any of spy-dom's aspects are two entirely different things. (EDIT: I mean to say, that being able to carry out spy actions, and having no personal problem with the consequences of those actions, are two different things.)

By way of example, consider his killing of Dumbledore. His reaction in Dumbledore's office is one thing--I might have reacted that way (a bit more wryly than angrily, though, I'd like to think). But after the necessity of the killing, and moreover the safety of his soul, had been explained to him, his reaction in the tower just before casting AK seem over the top to me. Rowling takes pains to indicate the depth of his revulsion, and it seems to me that it was not merely acting to satisfy the other Death Eaters.

Nonetheless, that's just one case, and I will have to think (and likely read back) to see what we have learned about Snape following each of his actions.

EDIT: Oh, to answer someone else's question, I've read the series about four or five times. I say "about" because I don't always read the books serially, so each book may have been read a slightly different number of times. I've read DH, for instance, most often. [Follow-on comment self-redacted.]

[silver ink pot]

Originally Posted by BrianTung

Well, fair enough; I will have to give that some thought. But I would point out that being a spy and having no problem with any of spy-dom's aspects are two entirely different things.

By way of example, consider his killing of Dumbledore. His reaction in Dumbledore's office is one thing--I might have reacted that way (a bit more wryly than angrily, though, I'd like to think). But after the necessity of the killing, and moreover the safety of his soul, had been explained to him, his reaction in the tower just before casting AK seem over the top to me. Rowling takes pains to indicate the depth of his revulsion, and it seems to me that it was not merely acting to satisfy the other Death Eaters.

Many readers think Snape's look of revulsion was self-loathing for having to kill his friend, and not just to satisfy or fool anyone else, so. It was an honest emotion, in my opinion, and a mirror to Harry's own feelings in the Cave when he had to make Dumbledore drink the evil potion.

[MerryLore]

Originally Posted by BrianTung

By way of example, consider his killing of Dumbledore. His reaction in Dumbledore's office is one thing--I might have reacted that way (a bit more wryly than angrily, though, I'd like to think). But after the necessity of the killing, and moreover the safety of his soul, had been explained to him, his reaction in the tower just before casting AK seem over the top to me. Rowling takes pains to indicate the depth of his revulsion, and it seems to me that it was not merely acting to satisfy the other Death Eaters.

I agree - I think Snape was very angry at killing Dumbledore. He didn't want to kill someone he had valued and relied upon for several years. He had always wanted respect, IMHO, and had found some of that with his colleagues but he knew that would be coming to an end. I also think he was upset he couldn't save Dumbledore, and that Dumbledore couldn't have offered a different plan.

The very fact that Snape was able to kill Dumbledore without falling apart is an example of someone who has a higher that average ability to handle being misunderstood, I think. I could not have done it.

[mirrormere]

Originally Posted by wolfbrother

I believe Jo said that Harry campaigned to have Snape's portrait in the headmasters office.

Completely true! But Snape's portrait didn't immediately, magically appear as did Dumbledore's, and, we can possibly presume, all the other portraits. One prominent question has been why that was so. Since the headmaster's office allowed Snape entrance, which courtesy it did not grant Umbridge as it did not recognize her as the legitimate head of Hogwarts, and we now know Snape was Dumbledore's choice as his replacement, why didn't the portrait appear? My theory is Snape himself requested that it not be. Complete conjecture, but I feel, from how I read the character, that would be what he would want.

[BrianTung]

Originally Posted by mirrormere

Completely true! But Snape's portrait didn't immediately, magically appear as did Dumbledore's, and, we can possibly presume, all the other portraits. One prominent question has been why that was so. Since the headmaster's office allowed Snape entrance, which courtesy it did not grant Umbridge as it did not recognize her as the legitimate head of Hogwarts, and we now know Snape was Dumbledore's choice as his replacement, why didn't the portrait appear? My theory is Snape himself requested that it not be. Complete conjecture, but I feel, from how I read the character, that would be what he would want.

I thought that Rowling said it was because he did not die in office, but left it (tendered his resignation, so to speak)--and under less than auspicious circumstances, no less. That's another quote I gotta hunt for.

[mirrormere]

Originally Posted by BrianTung

I thought that Rowling said it was because he did not die in office, but left it (tendered his resignation, so to speak)--and under less than auspicious circumstances, no less. That's another quote I gotta hunt for.

I had not heard that, but would certainly appreciate the reference if you could find it. I'll hang on to my pet theory until then, however short-lived it may be.

[ignisia]

Here it is:

Bloomsbury Live Chat, 2007 Laura Trego: Was the absence of snapes portrait in the headmasters office in the last scene innocent or deliberate J.K. Rowling: It was deliberate. Snape had effectively abandoned his post before dying, so he had not merited inclusion in these august circles. J.K. Rowling: However, I like to think that Harry would be instrumental in ensuring that Snape's portrait would appear there in due course.

Personally, I think it's a silly explanation, but there we are.

ETA: For future reference, Accio Quote is a great site for finding interview quotes. It's where I do my quote hunting.

[MerryLore]

Originally Posted by ignisia

Here it is:



Personally, I think it's a silly explanation, but there we are.

I guess it never bothered me, because I never saw Snape as a true headmaster - only someone who is having to pretend to be one. Snape would have never had the dementors or the Carrows at his Hogwarts, IMHO. Students would never have been cructioed. And he never would have deserted his post if he were truly running the school. I saw it as one of the darkest periods of his life.

That being said, I do think his portrait would do an excellent job of advising the headmaster, and I can see it being added later.

[mirrormere]

Originally Posted by ignisia

Personally, I think it's a silly explanation, but there we are.

ETA: For future reference, Accio Quote is a great site for finding interview quotes. It's where I do my quote hunting.

Bookmarked! Thanks for the info!

Right now I think I like my explanation a bit better so I'll mull it over a while longer. Perhaps she was put on the spot and that was the first thing to come to mind.

Although he abandoned his post because he was driven out (though in the movie I love how he takes the Carrows out before he goes, leaving McGonagall in charge) I think he was, in reality, still acting to protect the school and so hadn't abandoned his duties at all--anymore than Dumbledore did when Fudge came to arrest him in OotP.

[FurryDice]

Originally Posted by MinervasCat

Carrying that prophecy was not attempted murder. It may have been complacency, but, it was a far cry from turning your friends who trust you over to Voldemort on a silver platter. That doesn't lessen the responsibility of Severus in carrying the prophecy, nor that he may have known if would lead to someone being killed -- he didn't know for sure what action Voldemort would take as the prophecy was pretty vague. But, to betray the trust of friends is something entirely different, and, IMO, would have been looked on with horror rather than just disdain.

I see it as far more than complacency. IMO, it was accessory to murder. Snape passed a bomb onto somebody that he knew would use it. He was intelligent enough to know that Voldemort would not let a prophecied threat against him live. IMO, being involved in the murder of a child would be looked on with horror, whether one was trusted by the victims or not. To betray a trust is especially horrific, but IMO, to be a party to the murder of a child is also horrific.

I'm not sure all of the inferi in the lake were people killed by Voldemort and the DEs. Inferi are just "animated" dead people, as far as I know. Voldemort didn't have to kill them to reanimate them. They could have been from anywhere.

While GoF shows that Voldemort had no problem with desecrating graves, I can't imagine him grave-robbing to provide Inferi, not when he and his followers were murdering people, and it was probably more "convenient" from his persepctive to murder people than to dig up bodies to act as Inferi. It was mentioned in HBP, I'll have to check for the quote, that Voldemort murdered enough people in the first war to make an army of Inferi. Add to that, half of the Muggle killings were for fun, in the first war. Voldemort had no need to go grave-digging, he was murdering enough people to use as Inferi - and many of them disappeared - perhaps many of those who disappeared ended up in that lake?

I'm not sure where the "murders of Muggles and unarmed witches and wizards" comes in as there is no canon that I know of that says Severus killed anyone as a DE, either Muggle,magical, armed, unarmed. But, Bella's deep resentment of his closeness to Voldemort over her makes me believe that she felt he did not earn it and stated such at Spinner's End.

Maybe he did, and maybe he didn't. But, as the DEs engaged in murder regularly, and for fun, I believe it is very possible that he was, at the very least, present when such things occurred. As for Bellatrix, IMO, she seems to have felt that anyone who didn't go to Azkaban for Voldemort did not earn his favour.

He was giving his biased opinion. That was the way he saw Harry, and it was, as we know, colored by his hatred for James and his assumption that Harry had been spoiled by his Aunt (a logical assumption since it was her dead sister's son and most people might have done more in that case to help make up for the loss of a child's parents).

I don't see this as logical or rational, as Snape knew exactly how Petunia felt about Lily and about magic.
Snape's statement that a child was delighted to be famous, even though Snape knew full well that fame was in connection with the murder of his parents is something I find irrational and offensive.

I would say it was more the fact that he was being laughed at for the boggart appearing as him dressed in Neville's gran's clothes than Neville's fear of him. Severus didn't like to be ridiculed (who does?) and this left him open for both the students and Lupin to do so. He was a bit of a laughing stock. IMO, that's what he was angry about.

Again, I see this as an example of Snape making everything about him. Why was Snape humiliated? Because he was the worst fear of a child. A child who was studying boggarts. The method of dealing with boggarts is to make them funny or less intimidating. It was not Neville's fault that Snape was his worst fear, and he dealt very well with the task set him in class. Preventing Neville from tackling the boggart would have lent credence to Snape's belittling of him in front of another teacher.
Snape was again more concerned with himself than with the effects of his actions on others.

And, we have only Harry's opinion, as this part is still seeing the action through his eyes, that he bullied Neville more than ever. We are not given specifics as to how he did this.

It is stated baldly in the text that Snape was bullying Neville worse than ever. It was not presented as Harry's opinion, or as Harry or Ron complaining. It was a simple, direct statement in the text, not an opinion, and therefore, I take that as what happened.

The members of the Order were being picked off in the first War because they were being betrayed by the same individual who betrayed the Potters. I'm sure there were many incidents of violence if those people were fighting for their lives. But, we are never told that either James or Lily participated in any actual combat, and we know they spent at least several months in hiding and were not able to fight.

I can't imagine that the Order members and innocent civilians who were murdered all died in the last year or so of the war. The war lasted eleven years. That, to me, indicates that people were being targeted and murdered by the Death Eaters for those eleven years. And, as Lily and James thrice defied Voldemort, I imagine they saw some fights with the Order. I cannot imagine that the Order did nothing but sit around talking, any more than I cannot imagine that was all the DEs did.

If information had come out that Severus Snape was a double agent for Dumbledore, I have no doubt his life wouldn't have been worth a plugged Knut, if the DE who'd escaped punishment was a strong follower of Voldemort. I doubt all of the loyal DEs who got away did so because they pleaded "Imperius." Some probably just escaped and went underground.

But it seems to have been known among the DEs that Snape was working at Hogwarts under Voldemort's orders, as they believed. He says as much to Bellatrix - when Voldemort fell, he was at Hogwarts, as he was ordered to be.

But, that was only in the scene right after Lily's death. We know he went into his agreement with Dumbledore initially only for Lily's protection. Once that was no longer and issue, he could have walked away. He said he didn't want to go on. But Dumbledore channeled his grief and remorse into protecting Harry. He gave Severus something to continue to live for. It continued to be about protecting Harry for Lily until later. When Severus said that he'd only watched people die that he couldn't save, that was the indication that he work was no longer just for Lily or Harry. It was, IMO a sign that he'd learned the value of human life, in general.

Right after he learns that Harry must die, Snape twice expresses his belief that it was all about keeping him safe for Lily.

[wolfbrother]

Originally Posted by mirrormere

Bookmarked! Thanks for the info!

Right now I think I like my explanation a bit better so I'll mull it over a while longer. Perhaps she was put on the spot and that was the first thing to come to mind.

Although he abandoned his post because he was driven out (though in the movie I love how he takes the Carrows out before he goes, leaving McGonagall in charge) I think he was, in reality, still acting to protect the school and so hadn't abandoned his duties at all--anymore than Dumbledore did when Fudge came to arrest him in OotP.

I don't think it mattered to Snape whether his portrait appeared or not. A portrait seems to be a copy of the person, not the actual person itself. As far as Snape was concerned, he himself would not have had to interact with anyone.

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by MerryLore

I guess it never bothered me, because I never saw Snape as a true headmaster - only someone who is having to pretend to be one. Snape would have never had the dementors or the Carrows at his Hogwarts, IMHO. Students would never have been cructioed. And he never would have deserted his post if he were truly running the school. I saw it as one of the darkest periods of his life.

That being said, I do think his portrait would do an excellent job of advising the headmaster, and I can see it being added later.

I think we have clear indications that Snape was the actual headmaster that year. First, the castle permitted him entrance to the headmaster's office, which was denied to Umbridge as mentioned earlier. Also the headmasters' portraits are required to assist the current headmaster and they did so.

Snape did the best he could under terrible conditions.

IMO YMMV

[flimseycauldron]

Originally Posted by FurryDice

Again, I see this as an example of Snape making everything about him. Why was Snape humiliated? Because he was the worst fear of a child. A child who was studying boggarts. The method of dealing with boggarts is to make them funny or less intimidating. It was not Neville's fault that Snape was his worst fear, and he dealt very well with the task set him in class. Preventing Neville from tackling the boggart would have lent credence to Snape's belittling of him in front of another teacher.
Snape was again more concerned with himself than with the effects of his actions on others.

It should have been a wake up call to Snape. "I am this child's worst fear. Beyond Voldemort, beyond DEs who tortured his parents, beyond Draco and his bullying friends, beyond all manner of dangerous creatures." And Neville didn't even know that Snape was once a DE or Voldemort's servant.

[MerryLore]

Originally Posted by snapes_witch

I think we have clear indications that Snape was the actual headmaster that year. First, the castle permitted him entrance to the headmaster's office, which was denied to Umbridge as mentioned earlier. Also the headmasters' portraits are required to assist the current headmaster and they did so.

Snape did the best he could under terrible conditions.

IMO YMMV

I'm sorry - what i meant was that he was the headmaster in name only, and couldn't run the school the way he wanted. He was under Voldemort's thumb the entire time, and had to appear loyal.

[Brigid]

I truly believe that Severus shared his most vulnerable memories with Harry because he wanted him to know the truth.

[mirrormere]

Originally Posted by wolfbrother

I don't think it mattered to Snape whether his portrait appeared or not. A portrait seems to be a copy of the person, not the actual person itself. As far as Snape was concerned, he himself would not have had to interact with anyone.

Yes, it is a copy, and in the case of the headmaster portraits we know they are all dead, but I find it rather spooky that the portrait of Dumbledore gives such specific instructions to Snape about the Sword of Gryffindor after he is dead. It's like the portrait is still in control of things on Dumbledore's behalf. So can the portrait be questioned about it's subject's life and does it have to answer? If so, that is what I think Severus would object to.

Plus-I think Snape was still beating himself up over everything that happened and I don't think he felt he would deserve such an honor. But I side with Harry and would campaign to have it added.

Originally Posted by Brigid

I truly believe that Severus shared his most vulnerable memories with Harry because he wanted him to know the truth.

I agree with that sentiment as well! I don't see the two viewpoints as mutually exclusive.

[MinervasCat]

Originally Posted by FurryDice

I see it as far more than complacency. IMO, it was accessory to murder. Snape passed a bomb onto somebody that he knew would use it. He was intelligent enough to know that Voldemort would not let a prophecied threat against him live. IMO, being involved in the murder of a child would be looked on with horror, whether one was trusted by the victims or not. To betray a trust is especially horrific, but IMO, to be a party to the murder of a child is also horrific.

The prophecy does not specify a child and, again it was pretty vague since Severus only heard part of it. So, again, while it was wrong for him to carry it and not to have any concern about the aftermath, it was also wrong for him to be a DE in the first place. Therefore just about anything he did during that time was wrong until he met with Dumbledore and turned against Voldemort.

I don't personally see it as even being an accessory. He didn't build a bomb. At best he provided a piece of it. I don't think carrying the prophecy is being "party to a murder."

Once that was turned, by Voldemort, into a direct threat to Lily, Severus, IMO, then began to blame himself for having had even the slightest part in it and never forgave himself, even though he did everything he could to stop it. Yes, he should have thought about the danger to her family as well when he approached Dumbledore, but, like so many flawed human beings, his major concern was for his loved one and not for others.

While GoF shows that Voldemort had no problem with desecrating graves, I can't imagine him grave-robbing to provide Inferi, not when he and his followers were murdering people, and it was probably more "convenient" from his persepctive to murder people than to dig up bodies to act as Inferi. It was mentioned in HBP, I'll have to check for the quote, that Voldemort murdered enough people in the first war to make an army of Inferi. Add to that, half of the Muggle killings were for fun, in the first war. Voldemort had no need to go grave-digging, he was murdering enough people to use as Inferi - and many of them disappeared - perhaps many of those who disappeared ended up in that lake?

There is nothing, that I'm aware of, that states the Inferi in the lake were all victims of Voldemort and the DEs. We don't know, that I can tell, where the bodies came from. I do remember it being mentioned that Voldemort incorporated Inferi into his forces, but not that they were all people he'd actually killed.

Maybe he did, and maybe he didn't. But, as the DEs engaged in murder regularly, and for fun, I believe it is very possible that he was, at the very least, present when such things occurred. As for Bellatrix, IMO, she seems to have felt that anyone who didn't go to Azkaban for Voldemort did not earn his favour.

I actually do understand that Bellatrix was a radical follower of LV. But, again, I base my trust of her berating Severus for his lack of participation in the first Voldy War in the depth of her resentment that Voldemort should confide in him, someone who had shirked his duties, as far as she was concerned, over trusting her with the same information. I feel this resentment is based on actual knowledge of his not participating in the more violent activities, but "slithering back into his hole." I think that he, like Draco, did not have the stomach for the more gruesome things that many DEs seemd to glory in and avoided them whenever he could get away with it.

I don't see this as logical or rational, as Snape knew exactly how Petunia felt about Lily and about magic.
Snape's statement that a child was delighted to be famous, even though Snape knew full well that fame was in connection with the murder of his parents is something I find irrational and offensive.

He'd had no contact with Petunia as an adult so he wouldn't have known of her and Lily's feelings toward each other. He knew how much Lily cared for Petunia when they were young, and, for all he knew, once Lily came home and told Petunia she was completely rid of "that Snape boy," everything was okey-dokey between them again. He had no way of knowing the continued friction that magic caused between them. And, besides, Harry was her only sister's orphaned son. It was, IMO, logical to believe that he was treated well, if not spoiled a bit. As I said before, many people would take extra care with a child who'd lost both his parents like that. How would he know that Petunia wasn't one of them?

Severus had full control of himself during his discussion with Dumbledore. He wasn't ranting or irrational. As I said, he might not have been thinking logically, but, IMO it wasn't irrational.

Again, I see this as an example of Snape making everything about him. Why was Snape humiliated? Because he was the worst fear of a child. A child who was studying boggarts. The method of dealing with boggarts is to make them funny or less intimidating. It was not Neville's fault that Snape was his worst fear, and he dealt very well with the task set him in class. Preventing Neville from tackling the boggart would have lent credence to Snape's belittling of him in front of another teacher.

Snape was again more concerned with himself than with the effects of his actions on others.

Again, we disagree. I see it as an overall embarrassment which he may have felt was initiated by Lupin to make him look foolish in front of his students dressed as an eccentric old lady. I don't think it had much at all to do with what Neville's worst fear was but with having people laugh at him behind his back. If it's wrong to be upset and embarrassed over having himself made a fool of, then I guess he was wrong.

As for belittling Neville, McGonagall was also guilty of this in front of others, so it wasn't only Severus who did it. That doesn't make it right on her part, either, but shows that Neville was taxing on the patience of at least two of his teachers and not only Severus.

It is stated baldly in the text that Snape was bullying Neville worse than ever. It was not presented as Harry's opinion, or as Harry or Ron complaining. It was a simple, direct statement in the text, not an opinion, and therefore, I take that as what happened.

I guess we have to agree to disagree on this. Almost all of the text is the story as seen through Harry's eyes. There are only a few parts that are actual "objective narrative" and not through Harry's viewpoint. I see Severus' bullying Neville more than ever in the same vein as his being the one who was after the Sorcerer's Stone for Voldemort, or trying to poison Lupin with the wolfsbane potion, or not being worthy of Dumbledore's trust.

I can't imagine that the Order members and innocent civilians who were murdered all died in the last year or so of the war. The war lasted eleven years. That, to me, indicates that people were being targeted and murdered by the Death Eaters for those eleven years. And, as Lily and James thrice defied Voldemort, I imagine they saw some fights with the Order. I cannot imagine that the Order did nothing but sit around talking, any more than I cannot imagine that was all the DEs did.

As you said in one of your other posts, it is fun to speculate, but, as we are given no specifics of Lily and James' actual actions in defying Voldemort or how much action the Order did or did not take during the entire 11 years of Voldemort's most treacherous time, that is all we have to go on.

But it seems to have been known among the DEs that Snape was working at Hogwarts under Voldemort's orders, as they believed. He says as much to Bellatrix - when Voldemort fell, he was at Hogwarts, as he was ordered to be.

He was known to be at Hogwarts, but not as a double agent. Not as Dumbledore's true confidante and co-conspirator in attempting to bring down LV. Only that he stayed there "to keep and eye on Dumbledore" during the time LV was in exile.

Right after he learns that Harry must die, Snape twice expresses his belief that it was all about keeping him safe for Lily.

Yes, he does say he thought all those years they were protecting him for Lily. But, once he realizes that Harry must die in order to vanquish Voldemort for good he follows through with Dumbledore's plan. He puts his own wishes to protect Harry for Lily's sake aside and moves on with the plan to eliminate Voldemort, giving Harry the memory which tells him what his fate is to be.

[flimseycauldron]

Originally Posted by MinervasCat

Again, we disagree. I see it as an overall embarrassment which he may have felt was initiated by Lupin to make him look foolish in front of his students dressed as an eccentric old lady. I don't think it had much at all to do with what Neville's worst fear was but with having people laugh at him behind his back. If it's wrong to be upset and embarrassed over having himself made a fool of, then I guess he was wrong.

As for belittling Neville, McGonagall was also guilty of this in front of others, so it wasn't only Severus who did it. That doesn't make it right on her part, either, but shows that Neville was taxing on the patience of at least two of his teachers and not only Severus.

So McGonagall does it and that makes it okay for Snape to do so or vice versa? Again Snape is a child's worst fear. If I ever found out that a child was AFRAID of me I would certainly rethink my interactions with said child and I would certainly put any personal embarrassments aside to help the child get over this fear. As was pointed out earlier Neville can't help his worst fear. And dealing with a boggart the premise is to make it less intimidating for the victim of the boggart. In what way could Neville have made Boggart Snape less intimidating to himself that spared Snape's feelings?