Poison intentions? (was Re: What does Snape owe Harry?)

[caesian]

No: HPFGUIDX 97125

Potioncat quotes GoF, chapter 18, pp 300-301 (American Edition??):
> > > This is just after the incident with Hermione's teeth.
> > > "Antidotes!" said Snape, looking around at them all, his cold 
> black 
> > > eyes glittering unpleasantly. "You should all have prepared your 
> > > recipes now. I want you to brew them carefully, and then, we will 
> be
> > selecting someone on whom to test one..."  Snape's eyes met Harry's 
> > > and Harry knew what was coming.  Snape was going to poison *him.*
> > > snip 

Carol:
> snip<
>  I think you're right that it was a pressure tactic (and Snape, IIRC, 
> was
> > also particularly angry with Harry because he suspected him of 
> having
> > robbed his office to steal boomslang skin), but I think it's 
> extremely
> > unlikely that Snape would really poison any student, particularly
> > Harry, whose importance he recognizes and whom he has actively tried
> > to save more than once. If he tested a student's potion, IMO it 
> would
> > be one he knew was not deadly. It might not even have been a 
> poisonous
> > potion--he may have only been saying that to be sure the students 
> got
> > it right.
> snip
> 
> 
Potioncat:
> I snipped sections of both our comments. You're right, and we agree.  
> The kids are making antidotes.  Snape could give someone a Babbling 
> Potion and test the antidote on that.(OK, or something totally 
> unpleasant but not deadly) <snip>

Caesian replies:
I must agree 100% that there is no evidence to prove that Snape was about to poison Harry 
(and if I was a secretary of defense I might also add there is no evidence to contradict it - 
but here I only mention that to be humorous).  I do think Snape might enjoy - eh - testing 
Harry for various reasons obscure to me.  To give a fresh example, in the dueling club 
scene:

'Don't move, Potter,' said Snape lazily, clearly enjoying the sight of Harry standing 
motionless, eye to eye with the angry snake. 'I'll get rid of it...' [CoS UK HB page 145]

Some have suggested that Snape was "probing" in this scene.  It was probably on his 
suggestion that Draco produced the snake in the first place, and it has been suggested 
that Snape wanted to see whether Harry was a Parselmouth - evidently assuming he has 
some reason to suspect this.  Of course we don't know whether this is the case, and we 
have at least an equal dose of the original confound - Harry's perspective.  

In fact, all our news of Snape suffers from this difficulty to some degree.  The opinions of 
others - and our general understanding of the relative reliability of each source - are an 
excellent method used by JKR to temper the limitations of Harry's impressions.  For 
example, prior to the *poison* scene that has been discussed, when Harry *knew* that 
Snape was going to poison him, we get this passing mention:

'Professor Snape was forcing them to research antidotes.  They took this seriously, as he 
had hinted he might be poisoning one of them before Christmas to see if their antidote 
worked." [GoF UK HB page 207]

In this case, the other Gryffindors also took Snape seriously - at least enough to prioritize 
their Potions homework.  I agree with the consensus that it probably was a) a completely 
hollow threat or b) a partially hollow threat - in that Snape may have intended to actually 
give someone a poison, but have the antidote on hand himself, in case the student's did 
not work.  (Like the gas-mask example given by Potioncat.)  IMHO, this is the case as it fits 
with my read on his character.  I also do not think a teacher feeding a student poison in 
class - with the antidote on hand - is out of the scope of normal classroom activities / 
risks in the Potterverse.  Hagrid, for example, exposes them to all sorts of fanged and 
taloned sorts and doesn't even seem to be trained for first-aid - his sterile procedure 
certainly leaves much to be desired.  I think we can be clear that Snape did not intend to 
murder Harry in Potions class - unless JKR writes me a letter stating the contrary.

But, I think that, *if* you accept the general assumption of the other students that Snape 
would actually poison someone, and *if* you accept the point of view of Harry (and Ron, 
and Hermione...) that Snape particularly singles out Harry for unpleasant attention, Harry's 
conclusion that he would be the poisoned student seems reasonably valid.  

We are left wondering, what is the point of this scene - other than to make us wonder?  If 
Colin Creevey hadn't removed Harry, would Snape have tried to poison him?  Would Harry 
have reacted uniquely to it - as he did to the snake at the dueling club?  Or, deprived of 
his best defense against a poison (Hermione not being present to brew him the antidote) 
would he have been saved by Snape?  This scene seems like one of the interrupted 
moments that leave something hanging just out of our grasp.  The glint of triumph, 
McGonagall's "Dumbledore always said ... " interrupted by Lockhart, how long Snape would 
have let Harry stand in front of the snake at dueling club if Lockhart hadn't blasted it to 
Justin Finch-Fletchley.  

Even Snape is an unreliable witness.  In Umbridge's office:

"'Unless you wish to poison Potter - and I assure you I would have the greatest sympathy 
with you if you did - " [OotP US HB 745]

Who knows whether he is being untruthful because he is speaking to Umbridge, or being 
completely truthful because while he is speaking to Umbridge we cannot necessarily 
conclude he is being truthful.  And even if he is telling the truth - would he actually 
do it?  I don't know.  

I tend to want to like Snape, because it just isn't logical, given what we know now, for him 
to be a horrible character.  He's a member of the Order, Dumbledore hired him and 
defends him, and it's stated over and over that he saved Harry's life.  But, logic is just a 
system which is based on the accuracy of starting points.  A perfectly logical conclusion 
based on inaccurate or incomplete antecedents can therefore be spectacularly wrong (not 
to mention being an excuse to have a great deal of fun).

I'd like to be a Snape apologist.  It would be a much nicer world if poisonous 
mushrooms could change their spots, and if so, I wouldn't put it past him.  But, Snape is 
the one character that Dumbledore and JKR seem to be in disagreement on.  I may trust 
Dumbledore, but I trust JKR even more - because she *is* omniscient in the Potterverse.  
I'm sure they both have their reasons, but I just can't bring myself to defend Snape's 
character when JKR has stated that we are entirely too fond of him, and may probably 
change our minds.  I can't even begin to imagine (logically without wildly extrapolating 
from canon as in my previous post) what mind-altering revelation about Snape awaits 
Harry - but I'm sure JKR can.