Why Snape doesn't have to be human

[potioncat]

No: HPFGUIDX 107588

 
> > Alla:
> 
> > By the way, after her answer, I don't really believe that he is 
a 
> > vampire, although I could never figure out why people are so 
> strongly 
> > opposed to that theory.
> 
Melpomene wrote: 
> Read through the archives. There are many arguments against the 
idea-
> - far more "against" arguments than "fors" and all of them 
supported 
> by canon and far more substantial than the stand-bys, "he must 
take 
> a potion" and "we haven't seen a vampire yet, so he must be one," 
> which pro-vamps *always* end up coming back around to in the end.
> The arguments against run the gamut from folklore and literary 
> examples, to plot development and exposition all the way to simple 
> logic. 
> 


Potioncat:
I will defend, to the last key on my keyboard, the right of the pro-
Vampires to say their say.  And if I were one (pro-vampire) I would 
not think what JKR said proved anything.

Snape probably isn't a vampire, but there is a heck of a lot of 
vampire-like descriptions surrounding him.  So it's leading to 
something.

Besides, we need something to argue/discuss.

Potioncat (who is certain that Mark Evans is not a vampire.)