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

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 122928


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "TrekkieGrrrl" <trekkie at s...> 
wrote:
> 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! > 

> TrekkieGrrrl again:
> OK so some things have been answered before. Sorry. Also sorry 
that I find Yahoo groups a pest to search in. I wasn't aware that it 
was a laughing matter to ask for something just because it has been 
discussed before.
>


Valky:
There's no need to be sorry, it's not called Yahoomort for 
nothing. ;D 
My laughter wasn't meant to come across as rude, really. I was just 
trying to let you know that you are in good company here, there are 
many Snape admirers at HPFGU, and each plenty as passionate as the 
next one. I guess my message didn't come across well.

 
> Valky then:
> 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...?
> 
> TrekkieGrrrl again:
> I do not agree fully that Snape has the power to change. I agree - 
of course - that he has a right to be loved and respected, but I 
don't think he's AWARE of why people doesn't like him.
> 
> And sorry but I just don't LIKE Dumbledore all that much. I'm not 
sure he hasn't got a sadistic streak too, depending of course of how 
you define that.
> 

Valky again:
Just a question for question's sake. If Snape is such a hopeless 
case in your opinion, then what exactly *is* good about him. I mean 
if you don't see him as intelligent and independently cognisant.... 
how can you see him as intelligent and independently cognisant?

 

> > 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.
> 
> TrekkieGrrrl again:
> Personal or not I find that a strange accusation. I DO know about 
abused children FYI.
> 

Valky:
It would be a strange accusation, if it was an accusation. 
I was directing the point at the point. 
Again, if Snape is not able to think for himself, then how does he 
think for himself?
I know about abused children too, believe it or not. There are boys 
who, as you say "can't" act as normal responsible adults, but normal 
is a farce anyway, if they choose to accept love and respect when it 
is given to them they *do* become better for it, better than normal.


> > 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. 
> >
> 
> Valky:
> I think its safe to assume 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.
> 
> TrekkieGrrrl again:
> I'm sure there were many who were afraid of Child!Snape - and many 
of Child!James. But likely not the same children.
>

Valky:
My point was in answer to your question why the Slytherins didn't 
come to his rescue. yes Kids were afraid of Snape and James, they 
were both fearfully powerful for a couple of 15 year olds. Lily came 
to Snapes defense because she was a brave girl. And among the 
Slytherins that weren't afraid quite probably was a bunch of self 
interested kids who weren't going to put themselves in harms way for 
anyone. 

Trekkigrrl also said: 
>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:
I just wanted to isolate this for a moment and comment. I agree that 
Snape does fit the victim pattern of a child from a household with 
someone akin to a drug abuser. But his reaction to Lily suggests 
that young Snape was also in a pattern of refuting the worth of 
genuine kindness towards him, he takes this attitude with Dumbledore 
too. Later in your post you say we can't really blame Snape for 
jumping at the opportunity being a DE gave him to have power. Which 
is true, especially since Snape as an adult is able to see it in 
hindsight as some kind of a mistake. 
The only thing is none of that negates Sevvies preoccupation with 
weilding power and having a sense of supremacy and personal glory, 
he conciously chooses those things and always has. The difference 
between him and James/Dumbledore/Lupin as adults is that they 
embraced humility, conciously. Even Sirius had a go at it. Snape is 
afraid of humility.
(Just as an aside: That is why I think Oscar!Winner Snape is just a 
bad joke. I know you haven't cited OW!Snape here trekkiegrrl so its 
just an offhanded comment in general.)

 
>  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.
> 
> TrekkieGrrrl again:
> And this is where we differ. I don't think he HAS this choice. He 
has never HAD much of a choice as I see it.
>

Valky:
Yes that is definitely where we differ. Just again, if Snape *never 
had* choice then what was he exercising when he defected from the 
DE's? Or do you believe he is an ESE DE and always will be?


 
>  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.
> 
> TrekkieGrrrl again:
> Oh I like Harry too, though I think he did an unforgivable thing 
by putting his nose into Snape's Pensieve. It is Harry's everpresent 
curiosity that makes him disregard the necessety of the Occlumency 
lessons and it's the same curiosity that makes him peep in the 
Pensieve. It just doesn't make it right.
> 
> I won't say I prefer Snape to Harry. I like both of them for very 
different reasons. But if I have to choose, I would save Snape ;o)
> 

Valky:
I don't think *anything* is entirely unforgivable. And I am sure 
that sometime in a future book Lily will make this point for us.