Hearing from the Great Middle

[lealess]

No: HPFGUIDX 140119

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" <bob.oliver at c...> 
wrote:
> I'm interested in hearing from this 2/3.  We have seen multiple and 
> vehement arguments from the die-hards on either end of the
> spectrum ... <SNIP> What factors 
> are keeping people from passing judgment, or what factors are 
> convincing people that Snape probably won't come down firmly on 
> either side?
> 

And now for something completely different


In spite of the moral ambiguity of many characters in the books, I do 
not think Rowling is writing a morally ambiguous tale.  She herself 
has said the story is "highly moral" (Today program interview on July 
18, 2005).  So, much as I am fascinated by the multiple facets of 
Snape's character, which appear contradictory under different lights, 
I often try to look at Snape in the stark black and white of good and 
evil.

And yet, I can't.

Certainly, Snape is a powerful wizard.  Had he the light touch, he 
might have been another Dumbledore.  Had he been darker, he might 
have been Voldemort.  As it is, he is human, all too human. 

"Enough, I am still alive; and life has not been devised by morality: 
it wants deception, it lives on deception--but wouldn't you know it? 
Here I am, beginning again, doing what I have always done, the old 
immoralist and birdcatcher, I am speaking immorally, extra-
morally, 'beyond good and evil.'"  [Source: Friedrich Nietzsche, 
Human, All Too Human: A Book for Free Spirits (1879)]

Snape for me is a Nietzschean figure, a seeker after knowledge (much 
as Saraquel posts in the excellent No. 139635), an artist as much as 
a thinker, a man capable of greatness but constrained by the 
circumstances of his existence and events of his past.  In order to 
gain the self-discipline to exist as he feels he must, in order to 
prevent the repetition of previous grief, he has shut himself off 
from social life to favor pure intellect.  This, what he perceives to 
be a source of strength, is perhaps his greatest weakness.  I think 
he set his eyes on nobility, but has been held to baseness.

Nietzsche was a questioner and rejecter of labels.  The labels that 
apply to Snape I similarly question and reject.  In the end, in a 
black and white book, one label will apply.  As for which one, I have 
hope for good on the one hand, and fear for bad on the other, but I 
really cannot say which prevails in the author's mind.  The "clues" 
frankly argue for either, and all one is left with is an emotional 
response to the character, probably based on personal history, which 
may even be how Rowling approaches him.

As for whether Dumbledore was a fool or not, in my framework of 
thought, it really doesn't matter.  I question all of the moral 
underpinnings of the series, and to some extent, even discount the 
plot. My viewpoint on punishment for murder is even unorthodox, being 
closer aligned to Brehan law than anything else. So what am I doing 
reading HPfGU?  Up until this last book, it has been Rowlings' 
characters and the nature of the magical world that have interested 
me.

Nietzsche came to a sad end, fallen prey to madness caused by an 
insidious disease acquired in youth.  I believe Snape will similarly 
come to a tragic end, and its cause will stem from an event or events 
in his youth.  I also think it will culminate a life which was 
largely wasted, compared to what his character might have 
accomplished.  But such is the wizarding world.

Now, back to Thomas Hardy.

lealess