Snape's canon opposite/ Proving loyalty (Re: Hearing from the Great Middle)

[zgirnius]

No: HPFGUIDX 140210

Comments and responses on several posts about Snape and the value of 
JKR interviews...

Nora wrote:
> On the other hand, this *is* the author who gave us the absolute 
> exact important question before HBP that was answered in it.  She 
> deliberately steers us away from useless speculation, such as Vampire!
> Snape and intricate theories about the Longbottoms.  

zgirnius:
Oh, I did not mean to suggest I would not consider anything in 
interviews. I think if JKR comes out and makes a bald statement of fact 
(Snape is not a vampire) that's good enough for me as well.

Nora wrote:
> Personally, I think the whole "JKR is deeply sneaky" thing is 
> massively overrated.  It's really pretty clear where the ambiguity 
> and tricksiness lies, in the books, and the interview refusals to 
> clarify match up.  Then there are the things that we've obsessed over 
that get a simple "No, not important".

zgirnius:
It's everything other than bald statements of fact that I tend not to 
put to much stock in. As you point out above, where her interview 
answers get ambiguous is precisely where the books are ambiguous or 
misleading as well. As I see it, I prefer to dissect the ambiguous 
clues in the books because I tend to think there she's spent some time 
getting things exactly the way she wants them. 

I think Potioncat's Christmas present analogy in another post says it 
better than I could:

Potioncat wrote:
> But to me it's like Christmas time at our house. The kids are 
> making guesses at what's under the tree. Some times we
> string them on, knowing it will make the surprise even better;
> sometimes we come out right and tell them they're wrong, knowing
> it'll be a bigger disappoinment later if they're anticipating a
> special present that isn't coming. But we don't really deal with 
> each guess in the same way. And I don't think JKR does either. 
> Sometimes we realise we're about to say too much, or we just did 
> say too much. I think that happens to JKR too.

> zgirnius:
> > As an example (the one Vivian brought up earlier) she calls Snape 
> > a 'deeply horrible person'. For many fans this is obvious...so is 
> > it really misleading to say this?
> 
> I'd put that comment into a different category, myself.  She's 
> obviously both bemused and confused by the fan perception of and 
> reaction to certain characters, particularly both Draco and Snape.  
> As such, she occasionally comes out and gives us a partial view of 
> her perspective upon a character.  I think this is a really valuable 
> predictive heuristic.  

zgirnius:
I'm not so sure, and it contributes to my unwillingness to rely muchh 
on interviews. I do seem to recall she has made comments about Draco 
before HBP came out which were along the lines of the Snape comment I 
refer to above. And yet (to me at least) Draco has become a much more 
interesting and sympathetic character than before the book came out. 
Possibly I am getting a picture other than the one she intends, of 
course! (I am not saying she lied to us about Draco, or was excessively 
misleading. Any number of negative things she might have said about him 
*are* true IMO even though at the same time she has managed to make me 
feel sorry for him, and care enough that I now hope that he may in the 
end get out of the mess into which he has gotten himself.)

I do agree with your comments about Hagrid (she likes him, so betting 
against him is a losing proposition). But then, before I really got 
interested in the HP series to the point of going online to discuss it, 
or read interviews, I would have guessed that JKR really likes Hagrid. 
(Inexplicably, to my mind, I have never cared for him.) I could see 
making a case that she really likes him without invoking interview 
comments, though, just based on the way she has written him and the 
role he has played in the story.

And (as your and my differing interpretations of the import of the 
Snape comment illustrate) with interview comments, we even need to 
debate 'is this just being ambiguous in the same way the books are, or 
is this letting us know a personal feeling about the character? or 
something else?'. We'd need to agree about that on any particular quote 
before we went to the next step of working out its implications. 
(Though here I am, doing just that...)

Alla:
> I am not saying that the interviews would be hundred percent fool
> proof, but I do think that she knows quite well where she is going
> with Snape and when she does not refuse to answer about his
> character, I guess, I honestly do not understand how is it possible
> to ignore it completely?

zgirnius:
Oh yes, I too am sure she does know where she is going with Snape. 
Everything I have read her saying about him, though, seems to me to be 
consistent with preserving the ambiguity and possibilities which (IMO) 
she has so carefully written into the books. I don't believe that she 
chooses to answer these questions because she wants to give us 
additional information about her intentions at this time. I think 
Potioncat's "Christmas present clues" analogy is a better explanation 
of why she does not just refuse point-blank to say anything about 
Snape. I expect that some answers about Snape are definitely among 
the 'presents under the tree' which we will be opening when we get our 
hands on Book 7.