Snape & the DEs, Reprise (With Bits of Where's The Canon?)

[lucky_kari]

No: HPFGUIDX 35236

> My sense of 
> disappointment at the notion that because my interpretation was so 
> unusual, it was therefore likely to be running contrary to Authorial 
> Intent -- to be, in fact, fairly subversive -- was a disappointment 
> with the author.  

While I have to review my Eileenocentric viewpoint, I have a feeling 
that JKR is with us about "the emotional resonance". No idea why. I 
just feel it. I have a strong rational stance against fate and 
intuition, and a strong emotional tug towards the two. It complicates 
my life way too much. 

I have a lot of very subversive readings in my background, including 
the highly controversial but completely uncontradictable observation 
that the Galactic Empire, as shown in the current Star Wars movies was 
a force for good in the galaxy, not a force for evil. But it belongs 
to that class of subversive materials that I can't bring myself to 
believe, though I can seriously argue. On the other hand, there's some 
that I do believe, but I came to after some thought. For example, 
there is definitely revisionist history going on in C.S. Lewis's 
"Prince Caspian" and "The Voyage of the Dawn treader". The facts about 
the Telmarines just don't add up satisfactorally, so I began to 
speculate,  "Well, of course, Caspian, Drinian, Rhynelf and the rest 
wouldn't really want to face up to their past." Lewis obviously didn't 
intend for me to go all subversive here, but I almost feel it's a 
legitimate response to the text. 

But to take a subversive view without even noticing it's subversive is 
another matter. Your essay inspired me to speak up in Shakespeare 
class, and explain my subversive reading of "Antony and Cleopatra", 
picked up when I was only 11, and found the play at my granparents' 
cabin. I just cannot see that play the way every critic I've read sees 
it. I'm trying to work hard on developing the ability to see it as 
it's supposed to be seen, just for the sake of understanding people, 
but in such cases, I often feel like a blind person hearing talk about 
colours. 
 
> That does make sense to me, on an intellectual level.  It doesn't 
> happen to work for me emotionally or viscerally -- JKR's Whites are 
> themselves quite grey, so for the blacks to be blacker than black 
> just feels...oh, unbalanced somehow, in a way that is perhaps far 
> more aesthetic than philosophical, and in a way which does 
absolutely 
> nothing for me *personally* in terms of appreciating Snape's 
Greyness 
> or his Indeterminacy -- but I can understand how that could work 
> differently for other people.

I agree. Was I the only person to be disappointed by Lord Voldemort's 
most frequent appearance? I wasn't disappointed by the content of the 
scenes in a major way. I still love them, but I missed the greying of 
Voldemort that we saw in Chamber of Secrets. It bugs me that there is 
so little of Tom Riddle left in Voldemort. The most frightening image 
of V. in GoF for me was "a teenage boy, a stranger, dark-haired and 
pale." I keep wondering what happened to that kid, who started out 
like Oliver Twist and was still only a teenager when he had the blood 
of a least four people on his hands. You noted that "lazy" is the HP 
dark side marker. But what fascinated me about Riddle was that he 
wasn't described as moving "lazily." He seemed so eager. The thing 
that made me flinch the most in GoF was Voldemort's "red eyes." 
Ughhh... Voldemort the dumb cartoon villain was back. There were some 
Riddlish lines in the proceedings, but mostly Voldemort "lazily" 
talked to Lucius, tortured Avery etc. 

> And I think that that tension, that contrast between Snape's 
> instincts and his intellect, has always been central to how I've 
read 
> the character.  I do not, for example, tend to see Snape as a person 
> struggling with conflicting impulses, precisely.  Rather, I tend to 
> see him as someone whose *impulses* all lead him in one unerring 
> direction -- but in a direction that he has chosen to reject on 
> abstract and purely philosophical grounds.  In other words, I see 
him 
> as a Dark Wizard.  In instinct.  In impulse.  In inclination.  To 
> some extent, perhaps even in essence.  But by choosing not to act on 
> those instincts and inclinations and tastes and desires, he manages 
> to be something slightly different.  Grey.  Neither fish nor fowl, 
as 
> you wrote, but neither fish nor fowl in a slightly different *way,* 
I 
> think, than many others have read him.

A very interesting intrepretation, and one that, having not thought 
about before, I now judge to correspond to my feelings. This reading 
seems a meeting of two currents of thought that you appraised as being 
at odds with each other. "Choice" vs. "Blood" again. 

Arggggghhh, but this is problematic for me. You see, your analysis 
that strikes me as completely true is rather at odds with my own 
attachment to LOLLIPOPS. I'll have to think about this one awhile. But 
unlike Ambush theories, which can be modified and reorganized to suit 
anyone, they may be unreconciliable. Captain Tabouli, help! I feel 
this uncontrollable urge to jump ship, to this nice little rowboat of 
Elkins's. A warm fuzzy voice is sounding in my mind. "Jump! Jump!"

You're Imperiusing me! You! 

> The suggestion that Snape left the DEs because when it came right 
> down to it, he lacked a taste for torture or murder, for example, 
has 
> always left me a bit cold because in my reading of Snape, of 
*course* 
> he has a taste for it.  A taste for it is *exactly* what he's got.  
> His taste for it...well, that's sort of his problem, isn't it?

Very good reading. Now, what can prompt a man to change then, who does 
have a taste for it? 

> I mean, really.  What sort of heartless monster *wouldn't* 
sympathize 
> with Snape at the end of PoA, when he disintegrates utterly into his 
> raving "Curses, Foiled Again, and Damn You, You Meddling Kids" 
> hysteria?  You'd just have to be made of *stone,* wouldn't you?

A lot of my friends least sympathize with him here. Very strange, from 
my point of view.

> For a woman with no name -- not even a maiden name, for heaven's 
> sakes! -- and only one line of dialogue, she certainly is Dead Sexy. 

Oh, btw. It occured to that here is another Canon instance of a 
married couple who knew each other at Hogwarts. Of course, we don't 
have dates for when they were married. Mrs. Lestrange could have been 
Miss. Someone at the height of You-Know-Who's power, and only married 
afterwards, so that she and Mr. Lestrange could live a comfortable 
life searching for Voldemort together. 

> Going back to a few of the things you were saying earlier about 
JKR's 
> taste for misdirection, I really do believe that Slytherin=Evil is a 
> bit of a red herring in the books.  

I agree it is that, but I also think, and I have no evidence for this, 
that JKR's vision of things is growing throughout the books. I think 
it very likely that is started out a bit more simplistic than it gives 
evidence of becoming now. While I don't thing she takes suggested 
plotlines from fans, I think she does react to the questions of people 
who have read her books: from someone at a book signing, to an 
interviewer, to her publishers, to her friends and family. All people 
do that. They get motivated to really start digging, even if the 
digging is all of their own doing. 

I expressed that really badly. I know. 

> (Although I remain convinced, on the basis of no actual canonical 
> evidence, that the Crouches, both Sr and Jr, were Slyths.  Given 
> Sirius' denunciation of Crouch Sr's performance in his role as a 
> battler of Darkness, however, this supposition is still hardly a 
> rousing defense of the House as a whole...)

I once tried to convert my friends and family to Crouch Sr. as a 
Slyth, and only my brother signed up. He does have the Slytherin 
characteristics, and we bleeding hearts must remember that he wasn't 
ALL bad. Wouldn't want to be caught dead living under his government, 
but.... 

We need some likeable Slyths, btw. Snape is good, but he ain't 
likeable. And the others are just unlikeably evil. Well, except for 
Riddle before he became Voldemort. He struck me as quite likeable. 
That's why he gave me the shivers. Perhaps, Mrs. Lestrange.

But good and likeable? We could go through Canon and pick out 
Slytherins from side characters. 

How about Frank Longbottom, the Slytherin?

> Has he cracked down 
> on Draco's bullying within House Slytherin (assuming, that is, that 
> Draco does bully the younger Slyth kids, which I'm sure that he 
does,
> if he's allowed to get away with it)?  Is he as unjust in his 
> administration of discipline on his own students when House 
> Gryffindor *isn't* involved?  There's just no way to know.  That 
> issue's a black box.

This might be the answer to that perennial question. With such blatant 
favouritism, how does Slytherin not win the House Cup handsdown every 
year? Perhaps, Slytherins get their dressing down in private. It would 
fit the House character as seen so far. 

BTW, is there any Canon Evidence for the strange impression I find 
myself stuck with, that Snape is much more of a presence in Slytherin 
than McGonagall in Gryffindor? One reason for McGonagall's lack of 
inclination to favouritism might be, sorry to say this, that she 
doesn't even seem to know her kids.

Now, Tabouli writes:
> And when Harry turns out to be a Parselmouth, Snape doesn't seem 
>surprised... he looks "shrewd and calculating". Does Snape know 
>something we don't? (actually, he knows a helluva lot we would dearly 
>like to know) Did he pick that spell in order because he wanted to 
>test a theory he had about Harry, or Voldemort, or the failed curse?

I had always taken it as Snape's final confirmation that Harry SHOULD 
be in Slytherin, not in Gryffindor. At least in his eyes. And, if 
Snape had suspected it for awhile, that could go a long way to 
explaining his hate of Harry. If you thought he should be in your 
house by rights, and he flippantly thwarted his destiny by objecting 
against the hat's choice, thereby perhaps endangering the future as 
you see it, you might say those bitter things about "our new 
celebrity." Harry Potter, who considered himself too good for 
Slytherin. "Crossing lines from the moment he arrived," says Snape. 
Was crossing the hat's will the first offense to Snape?  And that 
belief grows and grows, watching him displaying so many Slytherin 
qualities, until finally, Snape gets the goods on him. A parselmouth. 
Definitely should have been Slytherin.

This theory can, of course, be melded with any other one of your 
choice. Compatibility is everything. 

Elkins again:
>The fact that Rowling's taking a long
> time with Book Five really just doesn't bother me.  She'll get it 
done
> eventually, and I'm not planning on dying anytime soon, so all is 
> good, as far as I'm concerned.

Though I long to know what will happen, fear has gripped me. I want 
her to keep writing till she has it as best as it could be. I don't 
want to read it and dislike it. I just don't. Please, don't let it be 
like the time I watched Star Wars for the first time, when I was about 
11. I jumped out of my seat when Darth Vader revealed the Secret to 
Luke. The next day we got my parents to get Return of the Jedi, and I 
was so disappointed. One of those traumatizing experiences.....

Right, I won't say what I was going to say about GL. But that man 
ruined my fun.

Eileen