Levels and contradictions in JKR's writing ( was Re: It's over, Snape is evil )

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 138327

Sienna:
<SNIP>
> 
> Now me:
> From what I've read of JK's interview transcripts regarding Snape, 
it 
> seems to me that these logical holes that get in the way of Evil!
> Snape are just that – holes. And, like I said before, for me it 
bears 
> too much resemblance to other logical holes in character behaviour 
> and motivation that I had thought to explain away by coming up with 
> alternative theories about other plot developments. I think the 
> ambiguity in Snape's character has essentially been leading to this 
> point in HBP to surprise us (what's more surprising than Harry 
being 
> right about Snape after all these years?). I would not be surprised 
> however, if there is similar backlash, once that has been proven 
post-
> Book 7, by those who wanted and thought they'd found something else 
> in the books.
> 
> Again, just my opinion and I'd love to be proven wrong because 
> frankly I find Evil!Snape more than a little boring.
>

Sienna brings up an excellent point, and one that I think gets to the 
heart of the Snape debate.  Where you stand on the question of Snape 
seems to relate very strongly to where you stand on two other 
questions: 1)On how many levels do you believe JKR is intentionally 
writing, and 2)Your tolerance for contradictions in the plot and 
themes of the HP saga.

I'm not going to argue for one interpretation or the other -- at 
least not much.  I just want to lay out the issue for discussion.  It 
seems to me that for Good!Snape to be the case one must postulate 
that JKR is writing consciously on multiple levels.  In order to 
argue for Evil!Snape you don't have to necessarily DENY that JKR is 
operating on multiple levels, but as Sienna points out, Evil!Snape 
does fit with a straightforward narrative whereas Good!Snape does not.

Personally, I am somewhat at sea on this question.  I think Sienna is 
right that the outcome of many subplots, particularly those involving 
shipping, support the idea that JKR is writing a more straightforward 
and "obvious" story than many fans have expected or believed.  This 
is further supported by many of her interview statements, 
particularly her most recent comments where she says (and this is an 
extreme paraphrase): "It's a childrens' book and people need to just 
get over it."  On the other hand, the outcome of one kind of plot 
doesn't necessarily herald the outcome of another, and the ultimate 
proof will be in the seventh book.  I confess I am among those who is 
hoping that things are somewhat more multi-leveled than they appear, 
but I may well be one of those to whom she is talking when she says 
it's just a childrens' book and I need to accept that and go on.

In terms of your tolerance for contradiction, I think the situation 
is more complicated.  Both Good!Snape and Evil!Snape face a number of 
plot holes and contradictions.  You can either try to solve these 
holes and contradictions in a way that supports your position or you 
can simply take the position that the saga will have numerous holes 
and contradictions regardless of how it comes out.

Personally I have a tendency to try and "correct" plot holes and 
thematic inconsistency, or at least criticize them.  I am beginning 
to believe, however, that the second position is the one that will be 
proven correct.  Sienna makes a marvelous and telling point in her 
early comments about Voldemort.  We have had an emphasis on the 
importance of choice and JKR's statements about how no one is born 
evil.  But in Voldemort we have a character who seems, from all 
evidence and appearances, to be genetically evil, a corrupt product 
of a degenerate and inbred family.  Furthermore Dumbledore, the very 
character who is associated with statements about the power of choice 
and the importance of trust, seems to relate to him from the very 
first as a dangerous and deeply flawed child, a child who is in some 
way corrupt in his very essence.  In other words, we have a powerful 
and glaring contradiction woven into the basic fabric of the 
narrative, in which choice and trust is emphasized but the main 
villain is a monster from birth, the son of a poisoned bloodline.

Anyway, these are the issues as I see them.


Lupinlore