Bullying WAS: Re: Prodigal Sons

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 141036

 

Julie says:
> A lot of us think  Snapes a "good guy" because  he is on the *side* 
> of Good, not because  there is anything  remotely nice about him. 
> And there is plenty of canon to support that  possibility beyond 
> Dumbledore's trust in him, including  Snape  saving Harry from 
> Quirrel, saving Dumbledore from the ring horcrux,  saving Katie 
> Bell from Draco's potion, refusing to brew more  veritaserum
> for Umbridge, and quite a few other incidents that conflict  with 
> the concept of a unilaterally "bad" Snape.

PJ  replies:
All of that loses value of any kind when I ask myself why Snape has  tried 3 
times *in canon*(that I can remember) to give Voldy the automatic  win...

1) We know from canon that Snape heard at least a part of the  prophesy and 
that if he hadn't handed that nugget of information to LV, Harry's  parents 
might still be alive today. That the plan to rid himself of his nemesis  early 
backfired had nothing to do with Snape's being on the side of good.   In fact, 
if you think about it, the reason Snape has been so snarky to Harry  since day 
one *could* be because Harry had the gall not to die quietly in  GH.  
 
Julie says:
You can interpret it that way if you like. But canon (if we  take Dumbledore's
word) also says that Snape didn't know who the prophecy referred to,  thus
he was never *planning* to rid himself of his nemesis. Canon also states  that
Snape told Dumbledore of the prophecy before GH, which gave  Dumbledore
the opportunity to put the Potters into hiding (at which point, one could  
argue,
Snape absolved himself of much of the responsibility for James and Lily's 
deaths, since he made a sincere effort to prevent it from happening.  
Thereafter
it was largely Peter's fault for revealing the hiding place, though  
ultimately 
only Voldemort actually committed murder). Snape also implied he  warned
James himself about Voldemort and about Sirius as secret-keeper, so 
again Snape made what he *thought* was a sincere attempt to save the
Potters (even if James didn't believe Snape, and Sirius wasn't actually 
the betrayer). 
 
Again, you can go with your idea that Snape was angry Harry didn't  die
with James and Lily, but that takes a lot more twisting of canon than 
the straightforward reading that Snape tried to save the Potters. 

PJ:
2) In CoS he tries to have Harry expelled. (Ch5 pg81  Scholastic)    
It's canon that once you're expelled your wand is  snapped and you aren't 
allowed to perform magic anymore.  So the one person  who, according to the 
prophesy Snape heard with his own ears, can defeat LV is  the same person Snape 
wants expelled and permanently disarmed.    Hmmmm..... 


Julie:
Snape tried to have Harry expelled half a dozen times, though I have  no
doubt he knew very well Dumbledore wasn't about to do such a thing,
particularly not for the minor things Snape always cited, like being 
spotted in the flying Ford (though McGonagall was equally  white-lipped
over that episode). Snape's not stupid enough to think Dumbledore
would actually expelled the Boy Who Lived and is expected to 
save the WW, unless it is for doing something truly bad. Which 
makes it more interesting that the one time Snape would have had an 
*extremely* good case against Harry (when he almost killed Draco)
Snape made no effort to get him expelled? Carol also mentioned 
how Snape could have supported Umbridge's desire to see Harry
expelled, yet he never once did in OotP. Methinks this was just 
one more way Snape stressed Harry tendency to get into trouble,  
whether it was out of pure dislike for Harry, or an effort to show 
Dumbledore that Harry wasn't so great (the old jealousy thing) or 
because Snape thought the tactic would intimidate Harry into 
changing his behavior, I don't know. Maybe all three. 
 
In any case, I think this is a pretty weak argument for Snape trying
to give Voldemort an "automatic win," given that it had as much  chance
of working (which Snape well knew) as I have of learning to fly  a broom. 
 
 
PJ:
3) Add to that the fact that in canon Snape takes the UV and follows  through 
by performing the AK on Dumbledore.  Not canon but still suspicious  to me is 
the question of whether Snape made sure Harry would not learn  Occlumency 
even though he knew the reason behind that need.
 
Julie:
Sorry, but this again isn't much of an argument. We have no proof  Snape
*made sure* Harry would not learn Occlumency. Not even much evidence
in support. He actually made a pretty good effort with Harry at first,  even
if his methods were of questionable worth, and he  even backhandedly 
complimented Harry's performance for the very first time. It all fell  apart
later, and Snape may have gladly taken the opportunity to stop  teaching
Harry (who was making very little effort anyway), but he did try at first. 
Also, it's interesting that JKR blamed Harry's failure to learn  Occlumency
not on Snape, but on Harry's own personality--his inablility to hold  his
emotions in check (which in itself isn't a failure, but does preclude Harry 
from becoming a good Occlumens).
 
The Tower scene and Snape's AK remain shrouded in doubt. Yes,  we
know what Harry *saw*, and what we saw through him, but we have  no
idea what Dumbledore or Snape were thinking, what conversations  they
may have had before the Tower scene that might be relevant, or if  they
communicated by Legilimency right before Snape's AK. We can't even
be sure if it was an AK, or if there was more than one spell at work. 
Nor do we know for certain the exact state of Dumbledore's health-- 
dying throughout the book, dying from the cave Horcrux curse, still
able to be saved by the right antidote or time for the antidote has 
expired, in danger of turning into an Inferi from the lake water,  even
faking the whole thing! Some of those seem more likely than others,
of course, but the bottom line is that we just don't know for sure.  

Until we do know more facts about both Snape's intentions and  
Dumbledore's state of mind/health, we're left with a scene that may
ultimately support Snape as DD's man just as well as it could 
support Snape as ESE or OFH. 



PJ:
Sorry, but with all this canon to show how Snape has *seriously*  undermined 
the side of good in favor of LV, the fact that he saved Harry's life  on the 
Quidditch field, patched up his boss's hand, helped a student he knew to  be 
"collateral damage" and balked at helping a bossy, overbearing female means  
nothing to me.  It's just not in the same class as the things we know from  canon 
he did against them.


Julie:
I agree that saving Harry's life is not in the same class as  repeatedly
asking Dumbledore to expel Harry. Very obviously, saving Harry's life
is an act of a far higher order. And he didn't *patch* up Dumbledore's  hand, 
he saved Dumbledore's life with a skill that very few wizards  possess,
at a very critical moment when he could have easily let Dumbledore 
die and no one would have been the wiser. (Same with Harry during the
Quidditch match, BTW). Snape has saved half a dozen lives (perhaps
several dozen, if he deliberately the DEs out of Hogwarts before  they
could overpower and kill the various students and Order members still
fighting them). 
 
If Snape turns out to be ESE or even OFH, these may prove to be 
self-serving moments, but if he turns out the be DDM, then these all
become supportive moments, showing Snape risking himself and 
making an effort he wasn't obligated to make to save lives. Odd how
that works, but it does work that way. Whether Snape turns out ESE,
OFH or DDM, canon will support it! What really matters is Snape's
state of mind as he does these things. And *that* remains a mystery,
a very critical one the story, I might add. 
 
In closing (see, I'm almost done!), I believe everyone has the right to 
interpret events and characters as they see fit, i.e., however it  works
best for each of us. But I wish we could all agree that canon, which
JKR has made more conflicting about Snape than any other  character,
does not conclusively support any one single view, and very much
*deliberately* so on JKR's part. 
 
Julie 

(who does not expect all of her own interpretations of characters
and events to be accurate once Book 7 is released, maybe only
a quarter of them--which would be better than I did with Book  6!)


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