More Snape Defense, regarding Snape's childhood. (Long)

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 122859


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "TrekkieGrrrl" <trekkie at s...> 
wrote:
> Some of the discussions here has made me wonder if Snape is 
capable of making a patronus at all.
>

Valky:
Like Alla said, there is a JKR interveiw that gives confirmation of 
this for you. Snape makes a patronus, but we aren't allowed to know 
what it is.... yet.. 

http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2004/0304-wbd.htm

'Ernie: I wonder if you can let us know what form will Professor 
Snape's Boggart and Patronus take? I am very curious.
JK Rowling replies -> Well, I'm not going to tell you Ernie, but 
that's because it would give so much away. I wonder whether Ernie is 
your real name? (It was my grandfather's).'

World Book Day Chat 2004


Trekkiegrrl:
> Now, I haven't been am member of this group for long, but it 
amazes me that noone has mentioned more about Snape's childhood.

Valky:
ROFL! That because you haven't been a member long! , not because 
noone has mentioned it before. Look back through the archives, if 
you don't find a *very* large proportion of messages to be Snape 
defense, then I will eat my keyboard! ;D

Now on to your issue... LOL 

Trekkiegrrl:
> I find it rather obvious that his own childhood has been the one 
of an abused child. And his behavioral pattern fits this very well.
> No wonder Snape hides behind his sarcastic mask. Better not let 
anyone get close to you - that way they can't hurt you!
> 

Valky:
In spite of that we can logically argue that we *don't* really know 
that, I believe you're right. I'm fairly sure that the hints can be 
taken quite for granted, Snapes childhood was very unpleasant... as 
were Lupin's and Sirius' in their own way. To some extent I will go 
down the path you suggest and imagine Snape's behaviour to be a 
psychological mask, but certainly not so far as you might. He's no 
angel underneath. And OcarWinner!Snape, IMO is about as wholly 
contrived and ridiculous as you can get. There is no calm spring of 
detachment guiding him in his inner being.  
OTOh there is a good point to what you're saying and Sevvie does 
keep the distance between him and others to prevent himself being 
vulnerable to them. But he does it to his detriment, really, because 
he is all too nice to some very unpleasant people and vice versa to 
the ones who *would* respect him. 


Trekkiegrrl:
> I don't think he's sadistic in the usual sense of that word 
either. But again it's the typical pattern: People who are beaten as 
kids are far more inclined to slap their own children, and though 
I´m not saying Snape was physically abused (though I would very much 
think so, 


Valky:
And I would agree with all you have said except one thing, but how 
can that defend Snape. In the end he chooses his own consequences. 
It is right be considerate of the typical pattern of abuse, but to 
accept it as an end of a persons existence is a gross 
underestimation of human potential. Snape has the power to change, 
he has a right to be loved and respected, the thing is he chooses to 
waive those things for whatever reasons, they are his own. 

And he does have a sadistic streak, actually IMHO that is the very 
thing that is the problem here. In the shrieking shack for example, 
the temptation is too strong for him, he could take the whole party 
up to the castle and have the whole ting promptly sorted, the 
children safe, justice served... but he craves his bitter revenge on 
Sirius and it comes first.

Just put Dumbledore in Snape's place in that Chapter and you will 
see how someone *without* a sadistic streak would handle the 
situation. See how Snape pales in the light of logical Dumbledore 
steps...?


> Trekkiegrrl:
> Abused children show many "abnormal" patterns in their behaviour. 
and though some may grow up and act as "normal" responsible adults 
later on, some just can't. They do not have the basis for that. And 
Snape was one of the latter.
> 

Valky:
That, I am afraid, is just your basic narrow minded cop out. Nothing 
personal Trekkiegrrl.


> Trekkiegrrl:
> I doubt Snape had many friends in Slytherin too. Noone 
> seems to have in any way come to his defenses when the Marauders 
were picking on him at the "upside-down" episode. And int IS canon 
that it wasn't the first time they'd chosen Snape as their favourite 
victim. Some kids are natural victims, often kids from abusive 
households. I guess wizards can be alcoholics too, or be addicted to 
illegal potions and whatnot. And Snape's home might very well have 
been like that. it DOES fit his behavioral pattern  as the "victim"
> 

Valky:
Children are afraid of Adult!Snape, Child!Snape knew more "scary" 
curses than even most of the oldest children in the school. I think 
its safe to presume that at least some of these children were afraid 
of Snape and James. Snape because he was a "scary dangerous weird 
boy" and James because he was dangerous to the dangerous. 
You must remember when reading the scene that Lily Evans was an 
exceptionally brave girl and bravery is not a key Slytherin trait 
while self-preservation IS.


 Trekkiegrrl:
> And then comes this "Führer" in the shape of Voldemort and all of 
a sudden the underdog gets a chance to get POWER!
> 
> WHO can't REALLY blame Snape for grasping that? 
>

Valky:
I agree, but Snapes past does not colour my veiw of his present. All 
in all he *is* still what he is now, and for as much as any reason 
it is by choice.

 Trekkiegrrl: 
> No, he's not an ideal teacher after our standards. But again, 
remember how old fashoined the Wizarding World is. Go back 75 years 
and he would have been a MILD teacher. 

Valky:
A fair enough statement, and I am not so passionate, really, about 
it all. I prefer Harry to Snape and thats that.