Medieval attitudes was Saving Harry

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 137870

 
Lupinlore wrote:

I really don't see anyway that JKR 
could come down squarely  on EITHER side without it being a contrived 
and somewhat mechanistic  ending.  That is, I find both ESE!Snape and 
DumbledoresMan!Snape to be  unsatisfying and uninspired -- although I 
will admit that  DumbledoresMan!Snape strikes me as more contrived 
and uninteresting than the  other.  
 
Julie says:
And I see DumbledoresMan!Snape as quite satsifying and  inspired,
and not contrived at all, for reasons I'll point  out in a moment...
 


Lupinlore wrote:
In any case, I am hoping that JKR takes advantage of  the rich 
potential that exists BETWEEN those two visions of Snape to craft a  
truly believable and interesting character.  It is true that all of  
Snape's actions can be explained within the framework of  
DumbledoresMan!Snape AND/OR within the framework of ESE!Snape.  In  
both cases the explanations get forced and tentative at times due to 
the  fact we have a paucity of information.  But maybe with Snape 
what you  see is what you get?  Maybe the good actions he has taken 
are evidence  of genuine Good in the character and the evil actions 
concurrently evidence  of genuine Evil (capital letters very much 
intended in each case).  A  character who never changes and remains 
absolutely loyal and steady to one  goal, whose every action can be 
explained by reference to one decision made  sixteen years ago 
(whether that decision was to be loyal to Dumbledore or to  
Voldemort) is not a real person.  That kind of character is only a  
walking plot device, perhaps contrived for some moral message or 
another  (either nice is not the same as good or tolerance can be 
dangerous if taken  to extremes, both of which are literally true but 
both of which are also  equally simplistic).
 
Julie says:
I don't agree that DumbledoresMan!Snape is simplistic. Nor
do I believe that designation demands that the character must
remain static. DumbledoresMan!Snape may be guided by a
decision he made sixteen years ago, and that decision may
keep him on the side of ultimate Good, but it doesn't prevent
him from taking evil actions from time to time, motivated not
by his larger goal, but by his petty prejudices and his frequent 
and all too human mistakes in judgment (e.g. the Unbreakable 
Vow). 



Lupinlore wrote:
A character torn BETWEEN conflicting good and evil  urges, whose 
actions swerve from one side to the other, is a much more  believable 
and interesting individual.  
 
Julie says:
But this is EXACTLY who Snape already is--a man too often torn
between his urges, from all accounts (up until the uncertain events 
in HBP) fighting on the side of good, yet unable to overcome his 
prejudices, or to stop from venting his bitterness on those  unable to 
defend themselves--his students. Rarely has a literary character 
been shown to act in so many conflicting ways. This is the reason
why we STILL haven't figured Snape out, and why this argument
over whether his character and deepest intentions are more  good
or more evil continues unabated HP book after HP book (and I
predict will continue NO matter how JKR resolves his character
in book Seven).  
 
 
Lupinlore: 
Frankly I'm not the slightest bit 
interested in an evil DE who has been  fooling Dumbledore for sixteen 
years, nor am I attracted to a super spy who  has remained rock-solid 
loyal for sixteen years despite evidence and  appearances to the 
contrary.  A spy who was, for instance, basically  loyal to 
Dumbledore but who, in the press of the moment, just couldn't bring  
himself to die for the old man, who perhaps rationalized that he was  
only doing what he must for the Cause even though deep in his heart 
he  new he was being a coward, who must now find a way back to the 
light through  his own mistakes and the hatred of others -- now THAT 
would be character  worth reading about!


Julie says:
And if Snape turns out to be a spy basically loyal to Dumbledore,
who in the press of the moment is forced to do something horrible
because of his own error in judgment, an error in judgment that
precipitated a chain of events (not a plan) leading to the death of
the one man who truly trusted him--a man who accepted his own
potential fate and demanded Snape accept the responsibility for
his own error as part of that shared trust--and is left to live, and 
probably die, with only one piece of knowledge to assauge the 
heavy burden of that responsibility and trust and all it  cost him--
that he remained to the end Dumbledore's man...is THAT not a
character worth reading about?


In my opinion, it is.
 
Julie  

 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]