JKR Interview on Mugglenet; Snape = Evil?

[Richard]

No: HPFGUIDX 133765

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" 
<patientx3 at a...> wrote:
> pookasmorning wrote:
> > Has JRK been playing with the readers' expectations regarding
> > narrative conventions (i.e. the guy who seems bad must in fact be
> > good) this whole time? Someone smart needs to weigh in; I need a
> > cookie.
> 
> Milz replied:
> >>I think the readership has been playing with their own 
expectations.
> The best example is the Harry-Hermione shipper thing.<<
> 
> HunterGreen:
> Though this wasn't your exact point, I think the Harry/Hermione 
> shipping is a wonderful example of the traditional conventions. 
The 
> main character should be the one to "get the girl", not 
> the "sidekick". 

Richard:
I still wouldn't count the H/Hr ship as fully sunk.  JKR is 
consistently surprising.  As I've said elsewhere, I think the only 
two logical ships for Harry were H/Hr and H/G.  These are the only 
two relationships thus far where the four classical requirements for 
love (knowledge, concern, respect and pro-active responsibility) can 
be demonstrated.  We also have no guarantee that ANY of the main 
characters will be alive at the end of the tale.  There is some 
canonical support for Ron not surviving.  Who's to say that Ginny 
must survive?  Only JKR really knows at this point.  It is also 
possible (though I think unlikely) that JKR could leave Harry bereft 
REGARDLESS of who survives, or that there might be some other match 
that she would introduce in the course of book 7, OR EVEN that The 
Good Ship Harry/? will be built, christened, launched and sail off 
into the radiant sunset in the "after the dust settled" chapter JKR 
has repeatedly discussed.

Part of what I've enjoyed about this series is that JKR usually gets 
things pretty dead on, and still manages to surprise us.  (I fear 
that there will be a serious flaw in a R/H ship, if these two do not 
change significantly 'ere this ship (probably) sails (I think many 
under-rate the importance of respect in love), but war, and 
particularly combat, are among the generally accepted and quite 
limited things that can significantly change personality.)  Thus, 
part of what I have tried to do in a prior post is get people to 
keep an open mind and let the story JKR is telling play out as she 
chooses.  Once the tale is done, then the WHOLE story can be picked 
over like a carcass on the Serengeti (sp?).  Until we have only 
clues for speculation, but cannot count on such speculation 
yielding "truth."

> Milz continued:
> [snip] >>So I think they build their own expectations up and
> reinforce these expectations by constant rumination on their 
beliefs.
> When Rowling is unequivocal, they head for denial and make up even
> more theories why they are still right to cling to their hopes and
> desires. The Draco and Snape apologists have the same problem (see
> Rowling's idea on that subject---it's very true and I share her
> concern as well).
> 
> I try not to read between the letters because I've learned that 
these
> books are best enjoyed when taken at face value.<<
> 
> HunterGreen:
> I think so too. While she is tricky, she's not THAT tricky. Though 
I 
> have been guilty of looking too hard for secret sub-plots (ahem, 
ESE!
> Fudge), its better taken with a grain of salt, knowing that the 
> elaborate wild explainations are not likely to be true. It reminds 
me 
> of all the theories that Snape wasn't really a spy for the death-
> eaters (and that he wasn't the one Voldemort referenced in the 
> graveyard), or that the mauraders weren't in Gryffindor, or the 
> James/Lupin switching spell (I won't mention the Vampire!Snape 
> theory, because that one had a lot of seeming clues in the text). 
> 
> Sure, perhaps it is true that Snape and Dumbledore put together 
his 
> death and Snape was acting on Dumbledore's orders and all that, 
but I 
> just cannot see how that would play out in the text, especially 
with 
> Dumbledore being dead. I would really like it if Snape went back 
to 
> being a jerk who is fighting hard for the side of good, I liked 
him a 
> lot better that way, but I have a sinking feeling that it isn't 
true.
> 

I think the ESE!Snape debate is still wonderfully open.  Personally 
I think he is ESE, but the fact is that we won't know until the end.

We may find (perhaps through DD's portrait) that the reason DD 
trusted Snape was that he knew Snape would not betray DD in any way 
that could be traced back to Snape, so long as DD lived, precisely 
so as to maintain his position as a spy for LV, AND that the fly in 
that ointment was Narcissa's visit to Snape and the resulting 
unbreakable vow ... which DD did not know about.  DD's first 
realization of disaster impending would thus be Snapes appearance at 
Draco's side when he knows that Draco is there to kill him.