[HPforGrownups] SS's cruelty

[Horst or Rebecca J. Bohner]

No: HPFGUIDX 13629

I wrote:

>> I'm interested in Snape because I think he is actually a good boy ... who
is willing to ... pretend very convincingly to be ... a bad boy in the
service of
Dumbledore and of the greater good... I believe that Snape's behaviour to
date has been largely a theatrical performance. <<

Amy Z replied:

> I think Snape is good in the ultimate sense (i.e. is on the Right Side and
will even sacrifice himself to defeat V), but I just can't buy the idea that
he's really a nice guy.  There is no earthly reason why he has to treat his
students so cruelly just to convince the world that he's a baddie. <

I don't think Snape is "nice", even at his best:  and I don't personally
agree with his methods.  But I think the cruelty he shows to Harry and the
other Gryffindors like Neville is something he believes is actually
necessary.

I think Snape really *was* that cruel when he was at Hogwarts, and
especially when he was a Death Eater, before he repented and joined the good
guys; so he scarcely has to think about it in order to play his part
convincingly.  And I think that although he might not absolutely *have* to
be as cruel as he sometimes is in order to convince the world he's a baddie,
he is determined not to leave the DE's (and DE's in training, like Draco)
any possible shadow of doubt -- and if that means Neville's toad gets
poisoned along the way, so be it.  (I think he knew that he would very
likely not have to go that far, with someone like Hermione around to help
Neville out; but he was still prepared to carry through on his threat
without hesitation if need be.)

IMO, Snape's commitment to his role is so absolute that he won't settle for
merely keeping up appearances:  he's ready to seize every available
opportunity to underline and reinforce his reputation as a bad guy in front
of his audience (the Slytherins in general and Draco Malfoy in particular).
What do you bet that Snape deliberately planned to have the Slytherins and
Gryffindors always do Double Potions together for just that reason?

The stakes for which Snape is playing are so high, I think, that he's
prepared to be ruthless in smaller matters, to make sure his reputation as
an evil git is airtight.  And if that seems unlikely to you, consider the
actions of (not) Mad-Eye Moody in GoF, who was aiming for the opposite
effect.  Some of his "good" actions were just as excessive and unnecessary
to his alibi as anything Snape ever did (or threatened to do) on the bad
side.  But not-Moody was determined to maintain and fortify the illusion of
authenticity at all costs, and it worked -- or nearly did, anyway.

Maybe I've been reading too much Dorothy Dunnett, but I think every one of
Snape's actions to date can bear some other interpretation than him simply
enjoying being nasty for nastiness' sake.

Uh-oh.  Now we're all in trouble:

IF DOROTHY DUNNETT WROTE THE HP BOOKS...
...Harry's glasses would be bifocals.
...By four books into the series, Harry would have more scars than Mad-Eye
Moody.
...Snape, driven by self-loathing at the cruelty he must show to the
Gryffindors, would be taking massive doses of opium and ranting in his
sleep.
and
...In the giant chess game at the end of PS, Ron would have DIED.

(Apologies to those who have no idea what I'm talking about, but I couldn't
resist.)
--
The Marauder's Map
rebeccaj at pobox.com