Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!]

[nrenka]

No: HPFGUIDX 127407


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" 
<horridporrid03 at y...> wrote:

> Betsy:
> I'm afraid the Prank is too important to Snape to so easily 
> dismiss. Especially when talking *about* Snape.  I'm also curious 
> as to how you can judge my scenario of the Prank when I've never 
> actually shared it. 

I don't buy *any* possible scenario for the Prank.  There's too much 
information missing in the accounts given to make anything make 
sense.  I've been here for a while (where's my rocker?), and think I 
have seen almost every single possible possibility banded around.  
One or more of them is likely right in some aspect or another, but 
there is absolutely no way to choose from them at the moment.  
The 'unknown unknowns' are another potential factor screwing with 
us.  Only the exposition fairy can solve this quandry.

>> Nora:
>> Of course, we have no idea what happened next, to be pedantically 
>> insistent upon textual support; what is implied by the lack of 
>> continuation is a blank to be filled by any reader.  Parallels and 
>> differences.
> 
> Betsy:
> What the text tells us is that James and Sirius treat Snape to the 
> same kind of sexual humiliation that the Death Eaters treated the 
> Muggle woman to in GoF.  The text tells us that James threatened to 
> take things a step further into a realm I would catagorize as 
> *aggressive*, sexual humiliation.  And the text tells us (as Pippin 
> has already pointed out) that after seeing this scene Harry thought 
> his father capable of rape.  I don't think JKR is pulling her 
> punches here.

With the one difference being, of course, that unlike a helpless 
Muggle woman, Snape has some small degree of success at fighting 
back.  The text does not tell us to what extent it's taken--that was 
the basis of my objection.  We don't know what happens next.  I 
suspect we shall agree to disagree about the connotations of Harry's 
musings; it strikes me as less a pondering of rape and more "she ever 
liked him at all...but they got together...".  YMMV.

> Betsy:
> And that proves my point.  JKR is *quite* capable of pointing 
> out "fussiness" as you call it, and making fun of it.  Since she 
> has never done it regarding Snape's title of Potions Master, I'm 
> quite confident his title is legitimate.  *How* he got the title 
> is, of course, a matter of speculation.  It could very well be that 
> anyone teaching Potions is called Potions Master.  But it does 
> nothing to suggest Snape's ego, inflated or otherwise.

I won't quibble that point (I don't think I did in the first place, 
really).  I will insist that the puncturing of his ego regarding the 
DADA position is rather deliberate, though.

<snip>

> Betsy:
> Harry didn't find it easier to *learn*, he found it easier to 
> *perform*.  He was taking a test, not learning a lesson.  And the 
> fact that Harry was comfortable within the test-taking environment 
> also speaks to Snape being a good teacher.  His students can 
> perform under pressure. 

I am disinclined to make such a strong distinction between learning 
and performance, in this case.  I think it's probable that Harry 
could have learned more (certainly in Occlumency, if not in Potions) 
with a more amenable teacher.  Demand for precision does not require 
a 'snarky' temperament.

>> Nora:
>> I never said it's that he wasn't really bothered.  I said that his 
>> reaction to them makes sense with some of the aspects.  It's bad 
>> enough that Fudge is calling Snape unhinged, and Snape has also 
>> gone around Dumbledore to try to get his way.
> 
> Betsy:
> But wouldn't going around Dumbledore negate the "craving for 
> validation" part of NPD? :)

There was a fascinating thread, I forget where, explaining Snape's 
actions as a kind of twisted attempt to support Dumbledore.  In this 
scenario, Snape considers that Dumbledore has, in his soft-hearted 
tendencies towards mercy, let himself be fooled; Snape will then work 
it out as it *should* go, and Dumbledore will come around to see how 
right Snape was in the long run, and how wrong he was to think of 
valuing that disgusting Black above his devoted Snape.

It's an idea.

> Betsy:
>
> That's my entire point.  It *is* personal.  Very personal.  Snape 
> and Black have a relationship that goes back years, none of it 
> good.  It effects Black just as strongly.  Sirius disobeyed 
> Dumbledore and sabatoged the Occlumency lessons because of his 
> hatred of Snape.  

I don't see some well-intentioned if unproductive comments as 
direct 'sabotage', being as Sirius couldn't actually *do* anything 
regarding the lessons.  Are you putting it forward that without 
Sirius' comments, Harry would have been a model student and 
automatically trusted in Snape just because he was told, regardless 
of their past history and the general way that Snape treats him?

I don't think Harry would have trusted more in Snape without Sirius' 
comments.  Trust is something built between people over a period of 
interactions and depends on everyday behavior just as much as the Big 
Things.  Harry in particular functions with trust more along the 
lines of Ron's objections to Snape; he is not really content to take 
someone else's word for it, but needs personal knowledge.  Harry is 
not Dumbledore, after all; he does not have the ability or luxury to 
be able to deal with things the same way.

>> Nora:
>> So here's a question for you: why does Dumbledore hang Snape out 
>> to dry in the way that he does?
> 
> Betsy
> I assume you're talking about the end of PoA.  I didn't see 
> Dumbledore hanging Snape out to dry.  I did see him gently pulling 
> Snape back under control.  The fact the Snape still holds 
> Dumbledore in high regard in GoF, and that Dumbledore still 
> considers Snape a strong ally in his fight against Voldemort 
> suggests that neither men considered Dumbledore's comments a 
> betrayal.

Dumbledore lets Snape vent and scream and generally make a public 
fool of himself.  It may well have been explained later.  You might 
be interested to know that some fans out there in the ether read 
Dumbledore's actions as an extremely cruel betrayal of the loyal 
Snape, who has no reason to remain loyal to the mean bastard.

<snip>
 
> Betsy:
> But it doesn't matter what Snape's motivations were.  You were 
> arguing that once Snape picked a position he stuck with it.  And we 
> have canonical evidence that he *can* and *has* changed positions.  
> Fairly dramatically.  The whys and wherefores are unimportant here.

The whys are extremely important.  We could have something like 
Kneasy's revenge scenario, where Snape switches because his own self-
interest (wife'n'kids) has been wildly violated.  We could have 
another variation of the self-interest scenario, possibly involving 
something with Snape's own person.  We could have the BANG-y sudden 
shock situation, whereby one dramatic event overwhelms Snape and 
causes a change of alliance, but the underlying way that Snape sees 
the world remains fundamentally the same.  (That is certainly not 
unknown--big events change the way that people behave towards some 
things, but leave the rest of their thought patterns the same.)

George or Diana becoming canon would knock serious holes in this 
diagnosis, because each depends on a profound level of 
introspection.  There are other options which do not.
 
<snip>

> Betsy:
> It's a leap, I for one, do not make.  I do not think Snape sees 
> Harry as an opportunity to take vengence on James' wrongs.  I *do* 
> think Snape worries that Harry will be filled with the same 
> overblown arrogance and self-centeredness that did James in.  
> There's a profound difference.

There is a statement oft repeated by me: when you assume, you make an 
ass out of you and me.  It still strikes me as suiting Snape's 
position towards Harry perfectly.  He assumed from the beginning, and 
wonder if that doesn't help make it true.  From my experiences in the 
classroom, it's always nice to wait and see how people behave and not 
try to bait or goad them before deciding what kind of student and/or 
person they are.
 
> Betsy:
> It's exactly this kind of unrealistic demand that I just cannot 
> comprehend.  You expect Snape to be at his most logical and 
> reasonable when confronting some of the worst demons of his past, 
> in a place he very nearly died.  I think you expect to much.

I expect enough out of Snape that given the profound trust Dumbledore 
seems to rest in him, he has the ability to distinguish between his 
own personal investment in an issue and the responsibility to things 
like actuality and justice.  I do expect that a more mature person 
would be able to distinguish between punishment for a crime in the 
past and punishment for a different crime, although Snape may well 
subscribe to the "I don't care if he's guilty of what is charged, he 
should die anyway" school of thought.

I find it absolutely overpoweringly ironic that Snape is furious at 
Dumbledore for believing Black's story, when Snape himself is on a 
second chance (and has most likely done worse things in the past than 
Black ever did; having been a DE at all is a minimum of aiding and 
abetting to murder).  Of course, if you agree with Pippin's sadism 
argument, you have a reason for why he starts threatening Lupin and 
Black so profoundly--he really likes to see them squirm, he enjoys 
their emotional distress.
 
<snip>

> Betsy:
> "Yes, Snape, your attempted murderer just escaped.  Again.  Do stop 
> sulking."  I just can't fathom it. 

One would think that Snape has the ability to distinguish between 
guilt for one crime and for another...but maybe I'm giving him way 
too much credit and putting him too high on the ethical totem pole.  
Maybe he is just a poor damaged soul who really can't help it, so 
traumatized by his past and unable to get past it.  I wouldn't hold 
him to high moral standards if Dumbledore didn't keep telling Harry 
(and thus us) to trust in him, after all.

-Nora notes that Faith seems to be eyeing the skies with interest 
these days