Vampire/Half Vampire/Schvampire -was all the other vampire Snape stuff

[junediamanti]

No: HPFGUIDX 88556

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "junediamanti" 
> <june.diamanti at b...> wrote:
> d why do the Vampire!Snape adherents take such 
> > an insistent approach to it being necessary to the plot and the 
> > story?  There can be a vampire or not - 
> <snip>
> > 
> > Still waiting for EVIDENCE...
> 
> "Evidence" is any fact which might be helpful in forming a 
> conclusion or judgement. It seems to me that by "evidence" you 
> mean  "evidence which leads to an inescapable conclusion." 
> That is not simply evidence. That is *proof*.   The fact that other 
> explanations can be devised for the vampire Snape clues does 
> not exclude them as evidence. 

We must agree to differ on our definitions of evidence.  Evidence 
and "clues" are not the same.  Your theory is based on clues that you 
have chosen to extrapolate into a theory that Snape is a vampire.  

I'm not even convinced the clues are there unless you choose to see 
certain passing remarks and actions as supporting this theory, and 
then putting a spin on them to make them fit.
> 
>  Occam's razor is not a terribly useful instrument in 
> solving mystery stories, rather we must follow Sherlock Holmes 
> and procede by eliminating the impossible and going with what 
> remains, however unlikely. 

I am.  And I have to admit I do not particularly believe that the 
sage of Baker Street would have much to do with this type of 
theorising.  You cannot for instance eliminate the real possibility 
that Snape is a mixed up human being.  
> 
> I think we can eliminate the possibility that vampires will play no 
> major role in the story.   If a major character turned out to be,
> say,  a heliopath, that would be sloppy storytelling, IMO, but the 
> grounds for a clandestine vampire are well-laid. 

And may also be a misleading blind alley to nowhere.  I don't 
actually think the story is inescapably leading to vampire 
revelations, be they regarding Snape, Voldemort or any other 
character.  That's not to say "There won't be vampires" it's merely 
to say that there is no certainty in my mind that there will be.

And why oh why does there HAVE to be?  Understand it is not essential 
to my enjoyment of the rest of the saga that there aren't - but I can 
live without a vampire.


> 
> How vampires will be necessary to the plot we don't yet know, 
> because we know so little about JKR's vampires. After all, we 
> didn't know why it would be important that Hagrid is 
> kin to giants until the very end of Book Four. And it didn't turn 
out 
> to be  size that was important. It doesn't have to be their 
appetite 
> for blood that makes vampires significant.
> 
> As for what the Potterverse vampires *are*, we've been told that  
> centaurs make little distinction among humans, so it's 
> doubtful that vampires can be some  sort of diseased human 
> like werewolves. They must be a race, like Giants  or Veela. And 
> if so, then there may be "part" vampires. Just as an aside, "part" 
> creatures are not a  JKR invention. The folklore of the British 
> Isles is full of them. 

I'm actually aware of the idea and concept of "part vampires" - the 
adherents of the vampire theory seem to be very confident that only 
they know the ins and outs of vampirism.  Whilst I do not claim to be 
an expert, I would say that I am reasonably well informed - I have 
not made it a particular area of personal study.  Why should I - I'm 
not trying to prove that Snape or anyone else in canon is a vampire 
or half of a one, or any part of one.  

I would personally say, with as much right to do so as any of the 
Vampire!Snape lobby that it is unlikely that JKR will pick up on the 
more obscure alleyways of vampire canon should she present the 
vampire mythos as part of her own.  Why is that?  Because generally 
she seems to actually play very litte with the standard concepts 
associated with magic creatures.  Generally, in the HP universe, 
magical creatures behave largely as we expect them to:  werewolves 
change with the moon, and are dangerous, and become ravening beasts 
without a shred of their own humanity - this is to some extent 
neutralised by the Wolfsbane potion - only partly though.  That 
potion is a comparative innovation by the way.  The merpeople live in 
the water.  Giants are big and probably lack advanced social skills.  
And so on.  Nothing out of the way of what I would call standard 
conceptions of these creatures in the general understanding.  

However, the Vampire!Snape lobby asserts that JKR will in fact make 
considerable alterations to all the standard traits of the vampire 
for the sake of her story.  Now I am not saying that won't happen - 
but I will continue to insist that it is unlikely and ask what 
purpose it would serve in the story.  
> 
> So, if there is a vampire or part-vampire concealed among the 
> characters, where is it? Possibly Voldemort has transformed 
> himself into something like a vampire. But he  cannot be a  born 
> vampire. His parents were a wizard and a Muggle.  If either of  
> Viktor Krum's parents were vampires surely someone at the 
> Third Task would have remarked on it.  But we know nothing 
> about Snape's ancestry-- we don't even know if the people Harry 
> glimpsed in Snape's memory were his parents. 

Well that could be argued,  like anything else when you want a theory 
to be true.  For me, I'll take the description of the angry man to be 
Snape Senior, thanks.   I believe the revelation there, was that 
Snape's childhood was unhappy and that he had been on the end of 
abuse at home, not unlike Harry.  Not that he was brought up by 
distant relatives because his parents tended to lie around in coffins 
all day. And there's a new spin on the concept of neglectful 
upbringing I suppose.  

Again, another attempt to (as I see it) tweak vampire lore until it 
squeals for mercy:  "Born vampire"?  Vampires breed in a different 
way surely - by infection, or by dying outside the rites of the 
church - I understood standard sexual reproduction was denied to the 
vampire.  But of course, the Vampire!Snape theorists know better than 
me.  It's just I think if these overturnings of vampire lore are used 
in these books, in a world of child readers who probably have very 
strong conceptions of vampire lore (Buffy - and too bad if you all 
despise it - it exists), JKR is going to take a book and a half to 
explain.  
> 
> Now it won't make much difference to me if JKR comes up with 
> some other explanation for Snape's vampire-like characteristics, 
> but I do insist that such  an explanation exist and  be coherent. 
> Red herrings have to lead *somewhere*.  The characters have to 
> be hiding *something.* It wouldn't be very satisfying to the reader 
> if no explanation for Bagman's furtive behavior in GoF had been 
> given, or if it had been only coincidence that Percy was in the 
> dungeons and  trying to shush Ginny in CoS. 

Here's an explanation:  He's tall, dark, pale, prefers the indoor 
life, doesn't particularly go for the great outdoors, non-sporting.  
Favours rather old-fashioned in Wizarding terms dress modes.  Tends 
to move in a dramatic way. He's graceful and rather imposing in 
manner.  I know a number of people like that in real life, indeed 
many academics tend to carefully cultivate such mannerisms.  That 
doesn't make them vampires.  

Is Snape's outside persona "deliberately cultivated"?  Not that much, 
though I do wonder what gave him the make over from the awkward 
spidery twitching adolescent in "Snape's Worst Memory" to the 
swooping and gliding person he is as an adult.  Of course, you will 
not doubt assert that vampirism is the reason.  Well go ahead. Don't 
expect me to give it houseroom though. And I also think that he may 
well adopt a "scary" persona to discourage anyone from getting too 
close.  When your life is such a matter of secrecy then it is well to 
discourage the curious.  
> 
> If there is no hidden vampire at Hogwarts, then I want to know 
> why vampires are mentioned in all five of the books and both 
> school books. Why  has JKR gone out of her way to assure  us 
> that the Hogwarts Elves can accommodate special diets? Why, 
> though she's emphasized that most wizards cannot easily alter 
> their appearance,has she made a positive exception for "fangs"?

No idea, but why should that lead to Snape being a vampire, unless 
you want it to.?

> 
> Why has she taken such care not to show us Snape in the 
> sunlight, except for one occasion when he was in obvious 
> discomfort? Snape's an enthusiastic Quidditch fan, so why 
> should he be wearing a "very grim smile" when his team is 
> going for the Final?

The "grim smile" is really scraping the barrel for clues I think.  
And by the way, I do not think attendance at matches demonstrates he 
is an enthusiastic or even luke-warm Quidditch fan.  However, his 
support of his own house is definite.  Grimly smiling because he has 
to sit through what to him is a boring few hours perhaps, or because 
he is grimly satisfied that Slytherin are going to win.  Show me a 
genuine smile on Snape's face, other than grim or twisted...

Certainly not "Oh bloody hell, I have to sit in the sun, hope I don't 
melt and I'll certainly have to top up on the old potion if the match 
goes on for longer than three hours..."


> I do think it's interesting that the anti-vampire contingent has 
said 
> their feelings about this are so strong because thinking of Snape 
> as a vampire would significantly change the way that they 
> perceive him. Could JKR devise a  stronger illustration of the 
> insidious power of  preconceived ideas?
> 
There you go again - even opposition to the idea provides proof for 
you!  Oh dear.  In the immortal words as memorably paraphrased by 
Bart Simpson "Well, I guess you're damned if you do, and damned if 
you don't"

Try this for size:

In GOF, Percy Weasley recites some piece of official Ministry 
information and says that vampires are "non-wizarding part-humans" 
who can't even use a wand.  So what was Snape brandishing in the 
Shrieking Shack?  A cucumber? 

So he's a half vampire then, you will say.  Which implies that either 
his mother or father is a vampire, if - and this is a pretty big huge 
if - vampires can sexually reproduce (and don't anyone even try to 
convince me of this - I got drawn into this, I will not come and play 
out if the game is called "vampire sexuality").  Am I expected to 
believe that the other parent would have polluted their pureblood 
bloodlines by miscegenation with a non-pureblood?  How would that 
square with  Slytherin pride?  

Vampire potion:  Deus ex Machina - deluxe model with handtooled 
leather seats and nodding head dog in the back window.

June

Still not believing in Vampire!Snape - but cordially thanking the pro-
Vampire!Snape contingent for giving her a reason to carefully study 
the issue and now feel 100% certain that she is right. 

"Why sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before 
breakfast"  The White Queen,in Through the Looking Glass, by Lewis 
Carroll.