[HPforGrownups] Re: Where was Snape?

[Amanda]

No: HPFGUIDX 36555

Okay, I hate and despise combining messages, but just this once I'll make
the effort, since they all deal with my favorite topic.

Finwitch staunchly maintained:

> We do know about Harry's scar - during Potion's exam it burned.
> Quirrell wasn't there (and wasn't killing anyone) - so it had to do
> with Voldemort (who might have been going with Snape for a chance).

Me:
Nope. Nice try. In the book, it discusses all of the exams, and then in the
summation of how things had gone, says "Harry did the best he could, trying
to ignore the stabbing pains in his forehead which had been bothering him
ever since his trip into the forest." (first part of Ch. 16, book 1).

So it was not particularly the potions exam, or potions class; it was a
residual effect of encountering Quirrel&Voldemort in the forest. Snape had
nothing to do with this.

In another post, Finwitch said:

> Does Snape *care* for anyone?

Me:
We have hardly been in a position to know. I presume you mean care fondly,
as opposed to simply having a bond to anyone. The only thing we know for
certain is that he does *not* care for Harry or Hermione or Ron. They also
know this for certain, and return the sentiment. Our viewpoint is colored by
Harry's, whose interpretation of a passionate kiss, were Snape involved,
would manage to be on the negative side. We simply do not know anything else
for certain about Snape's interpersonal affairs, with a few exceptions, such
as
--it's a fair bet that he dislikes Lockhart intensely;
--he baits McGonagall when Gryffindor loses at Quidditch [which must itself
feel odd for him, considering he was her student not all that long ago,
too];
--the other teachers have absolutely no problems or compunction about
leaping in to join him when he intiates the Lockhart-removal-action in the
staffroom scene.
--not only does Dumbledore trust him, he seems to trust Dumbledore, given
the number of times he obeys him against his better judgement.

None of these make it seem that he is anything but normal in his dealings
with other teachers, at least, although probably a bit on the reserved side.
But off the top of my head, that's all I can think of.

So I'd be inclined to say yes, Snape does care about certain people. I'm
betting his bar is set pretty high, though.

Porphyria defended:

> Eloise has covered this, but I need to reiterate it in my own words.
> There is absolutely nothing psychopathic about resenting the guy who
> saved your life.

Which reminds me. It struck me after watching the movie, but it is true for
the books. Harry never said boo to Snape, even after he found out Snape had
saved his life. Personally, even if I hated someone, if they'd pushed me out
of the path of a car or kept me from falling to my death, I'd thank them. I
don't believe that this was an "off the page" occurrence, as Hermione's and
Ron's birthdays must be, it's too important a detail of Harry/Snape
interaction to let slide.

So. Snape saved Harry from death and Harry doesn't even acknowledge it.
Little self-centered brat.

Then in PoA, Snape tries to save all three from what he perceives as a very
dangerous situation. He truly believes that Sirius is a demented murderer
(and a demented wizarding murderer is an order of magnitude above your
average axe-wielding nut), and he knows for certain that Lupin is both a
werewolf and unprotected.

I am not for a minute saying he didn't want to be the one to catch Sirius
and expose Lupin. Nobody over the age of three has truly single-minded
motives. He is doing both; his effort to protect the children is genuine.
And they do not listen and they do not appreciate what he's doing and they
turn on him, attack, and injure him.

Even if I'd had a very, very good reason for injuring someone I hated, I
still would tell them I was sorry I did it. Again, I don't believe this
would have been an "off the page" understood thing, like Dumbledore's
filling Snape in on the truth between PoA and GoF.

So. Snape tries to save the kids, they knock him out, and not only do they
never appreciate what he did, they never apologize for their attack. Little
self-centered brats.

He has some justification for his attitude, I'm thinking.

And lastly, only slightly related:
Porphyria opined:

> I have a slightly different take on this. The way that Dumbledore had set
up
> the Mirror of Erised protection, Quirrell *couldn't* have gotten the stone
out
> by himself. Ironically, he needed Harry's help.
> So I'm wondering if maybe after Snape got bitten by Fluffy Dumbledore
> pulled him aside and said something to the effect of 'look, this isn't
worth
> your getting injured over; the Mirror will keep Quirrell from getting the
stone.

Hmm. This tickled me into a realization.
Snape got bitten before Harry found the mirror.
Fluffy was in place at the time. I don't believe the Stone would have been
in the mirror in an abandoned room; I think it was under the trapdoor, and
Dumbledore hadn't had his stroke of genius about using the Mirror yet.
Snape may well have been less concerned after the Mirror was part of the
defenses of the Stone, even if he didn't know the details (Quirrell sure
didn't, and he was one of its defense team, but he's not the lieutenant to
Dumbledore that Snape is, either).
This might explain why Snape wasn't in evidence; he was trying to block
Quirrell from the Stone more than anything; Harry's involvement was kind of
incidental.

I've wondered why Harry was apparently an afterthought for Quirrell--you'd
think Voldemort would want him dead--but from what Quirrell says, he went
after Harry because Harry was an obstruction to his purpose. I'm guessing
that Voldemort wanted a body first, and figured he could cook the kid
later..? Thoughts?

--Amanda, B.S. (Bastion of Snapology)