Snape's Destiny/JKR quotes

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 105227

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vituperative404" <mbenkin at a...> wrote:
> 
> My guess is, one good flashback of Snape crucio-ing a Muggle toddler 
> will be enough for even the most die-hard Snape advocates to start 
> looking over the evidence for the Defense. And while I think Snape 
> is endlessly entertaining and a complex character if there ever was 
> one, anybody who's done torture/murder/what-have-you with a smile on 
> their lips and a song in their heart is not going on my Christmas 
> card list.
> 


Oh, I don't know. To  quote W.C.Fields "Anyone who hates children and
animals can't be all bad."

In the constant to-ing and fro-ing about Snape and Sirius which seems 
to be one of the dividing lines between the fans, I think there's a basic 
mis-understanding of where some people are coming from. I think that
I can claim credit for first using the identifying labels "Siriophiles" and 
"Snape-aholics" that highlights the difference.

Siriophiles *like* Sirius; they think he's lovely, sexy, maltreated and for
all his faults basically cuddly.

Snape-aholics find ole Sevvy fascinating, they can't  get enough of him,
but they're under no illusions - he is a deeply unpleasant character.
Most of them would/will probably be disappointed if he ever reforms. It's
not often that you find a well written, credible villain in fiction these days
and when one does turn up, it's lip-smacking time.

When the Anti-Snape Alliance flail away, castigating him for the way he 
treats Harry and Neville, nurses his grudges against James and Sirius,
they're really missing the point. We know all that. It's not news - it's canon.
For Snape-aholics the nub of the question is - why? What is the back-story,
what are Snape's motivations? 

When the ASA over-simplify (IMO) with "he hates Harry, James, Sirius and
abuses kids - away  with him," they're possibly ignoring something that
could be central to the plot. He's probably the most three-dimensional 
character in the  books, certainly IMO the best written, he's believable
in a way that say, DD isn't. This is why he provokes so much reaction. The
counter-reaction generally doesn't claim Snape to be nice but responds
in terms of comparing him with memories of RL teachers and trying to 
explain why Snape could be behaving in this way.

Lots of theories, of course, but no proof. 
Is he acting or at least exaggerating, in his attitude towards Harry? 
Quite possible. Why does DD trust him so completely? Why has no-one
complained about his teaching methods? Why did he leave Voldy  and the
DEs yet still be able to remain on good terms with Malfoy *and*  perform
some critical and dangerous yet still unspecified anti-Voldy missions? We 
don't know, and it's highly likely that when we do get the answers it still 
won't make Snape a pleasant person, but it might make him understandable.

I posted some thoughts about a year ago 80835 "The worst is yet to come"
saying in effect that Sevvy has probably done some truly horrible things
as a DE. That it's not credible that hanging up-side down and showing grey
underwear is his worst memory, that there must be ones that are,  from
Snape's point of view, bowel-churningly worse. It's just that we haven't
seen them yet.

Snape has been a central figure in nearly book, yet how much do we really
know about him? Not much - all we see is the surface; underneath that it
should get a lot more interesting. Now you may not agree; that's up to you.
But ask yourself this - why has JKR expended so much effort in presenting
us with an apparently monstrous anti-Harry figure on the surface yet left
so many tantalising loose ends dangling from behind the mask? That, I
think, is what attracts the Snape-aholics. We want to know more.

IMO to dismiss Snape because of how he appears to Harry (this is the only
POV we have, remember) is to take a sledge-hammer to miss a nut.

Kneasy