Why ole Snapey is a vamp was Re: No fire in the office

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 88126

> Kneasy:
> Most readers and watchers of film and TV have very strong
> images of what a vampire is and how a vampire behaves. 
>Does Snape fit the profile? Again, I don't believe so. 

Then it's odd that so many people have indepently made the 
connection.

Kneasy:
> (Oh, and there's a possible alternative explanation for the
> blood sweeties in Honeydukes too. Hags. They just love
> the taste of blood (one gets served raw liver in Diagon Alley).
> They also seem to be fairly common in the WW.)

Well, I've got to go with Hermione here. She said they were for 
vampires, and on matters of fact she has never yet been wrong.

Kneasy:
> Canon and near-canon suggests Snape cannot be of the 
undead persuasion:
> 1. The Lexicon states that vampires are beasts, not human.

It does??? FBAWTFT states explicitly in the footnote on page xiii 
that vampires are creatures which  have "being" status. This tells 
us two things. They are considered intelligent and they are alive. 
Not undead spirits, whatever Muggle legend may relate.  Since 
as "non-wizarding" people they would presumably be forbidden 
to use wands, that would be an powerful motive for Snape to 
keep his vampire status secret, would it not?

I don't really see why being a vampire would be too much--not 
from Rowling. She is the one who put two monsters in the 
castle, two hidden animagi, etc, etc. I wouldn't discount child 
abuse as an explanation for Snape's temperament, but does it 
have to be the only reason? 

 Carol wrote:
>> If there are any foils involved, they would reflect
Snape, not the other way around. Sirius, for example, 
resembles Snape in more ways than Lupin does, even to details 
of physical appearance and a tendency to be angry. Since he's 
the less developed characterand appears in fewer books, it 
makes sense to have him as the foil to snape rather than the 
other way around. As for Lupin, he's just a decent person and 
competent teacher who has the misfortune to be a
werewolf and is again out of a job<<

Oh yes! it's the  similarity between Lupin and Sirius in 
relationship to Snape (and Harry) that first made me suspect that 
Lupin might be other than a decent person. <g>

Carol:
> Nope. Snape is sufficiently complicated without adding being a 
vampire to the mix. <

This part I don't follow. One might as well say that Hermione is 
sufficiently complicated without being  Muggleborn . Rowling has 
given a great many of her characters conditions  which they  did 
not choose,  can't change, and against which there is very strong 
cultural bias. 

Carol:
>And as I'm sure you'll admit, there are alternative
> explanations for all the "clues" on your list.

Of course! Rowling is much too clever to give us unambiguous 
evidence. Snape is a mystery and she is not ready to reveal 
everything she knows.

 Carol:
>> I just want to know why he joined the Death Eaters and why 
he quit and what he's up to now. That's plenty, don't you think?<<


And you don't think being a vampire could have a teensy weensy 
bit of something to do with that? <g>  I am not saying that being a 
vampire is the sole explanation for his bad attitude or that it  
gives him an excuse for joining the Death Eaters. That's too 
simple. But suppose, as a young man, Snape believed  that   
wizarding society  would never,ever accept or value him for what 
he truly is,  and that Voldemort and his followers would. 
Tempting, I think.  And there is plenty of relevance to the real 
world. 

There seems to be a feeling on the list that only a "monster", a 
psychopath like Barty Jr.  or a criminal opportunist like 
Lucius Malfoy could become a Death Eater. But in the real world 
there never seems to be a shortage of morally educated and 
supposedly civilized people willing to  do dirty work for the Hitlers 
and Stalins and the other blood-stained horrors of the past and 
present.

Pippin