Hearing from the Great Middle...well not really...

[Ceridwen]

No: HPFGUIDX 140222

> vmonte wrote:
> > > "Something that I find interesting in the Snape debates is that 
> > > nothing JKR says in her interviews about Snape is ever 
considered 
> > > as canon evidence. "
>  
> m replied: 
> > For me, it's not that I think she ever lies, but just that "he's 
a 
> > deeply horrible person" doesn't tell me what actions he will or 
> > won't commit.

Ceridwen:
Neither does something like 'you read it, what do you think?'  
Throwing a question back as an answer is a sure sign of hiding 
something, if that person then doesn't start a discussion on the 
topic.

m:
> <snip> 
> > But I don't feel like I yet know all the things that were going 
on 
> > in HBP, particularly exactly what Snape's motivations were.  I do 
> > think DD had good reason to trust Snape the way he did that we 
> > don't know yet.  
> <snip> 
> > Sometimes it's only in retrospect JKR's comments become clear. 
> > It's not like Snape being horrible isn't already there in the 
> > books, really.  So I think when she says that she's not revealing 
> > what's going to happen so much as saying things that are 
important 
> > that we should already know.

Ceridwen:
Someone has been saying all along (pippin?) that perhaps JKR only 
answers questions about characters and situations that are consistent 
with the latest published HP book.  I think that could be true.  If 
so, then it would also explain why the comments can be clear in 
retrospect - we've moved beyond that particular 'year'.

> 
> 
> SSSusan:
> *(snip)*
> OTOH, the key question for me is what m. asked here:  How do these 
> juicy tidbits help us understand Snape, particularly in terms of 
> *predicting his behavior* or *understanding his motivations*?  The 
> truth is, I think (and it's knee-jerk here, I'll admit -- I've not 
> thought this through much), that they DON'T help us much in those 
two 
> areas.
*(snip)*
> But the trouble is, does knowing he's sadistic in her eyes, or does 
> knowing that he bears watching help us to PREDICT what he will do 
> from here on in or even to UNDERSTAND what has motivated him to 
this 
> point?  I would argue:  No, it really does not. 

Ceridwen:
I don't think they help us out at all.  These are things we really 
ought to have noticed by now.  Snape is mean, nasty, vengeful, 
spiteful and hate-filled.  'Who would want Snape to love them?'  I 
don't know, but the one who asked that question went on to say that 
Snape had been loved at one time.  I *assume* that whoever loved him 
would not have minded if he loved back, in whatever type of love it 
was (mother-love or friendship or romance or...).  '...bears 
watching...'  Watch him do what?  Backflips?  What we don't 
understand about Snape is how all these negative characteristics 
blend in him to make him what he is, and even more, what actions that 
blend will back up for him come book 7.  There's nothing in this 
toward understanding the character.

SSSusan:
> I mean, I'm a DDM!Snaper myself, and I think there's oodles of 
> evidence for it in HBP.  Some of my best HP buddies are ESE!Snapers 
> now, and they also firmly believe they've gotten there by taking 
HBP 
> in its simplest presentation of the story and the evidence.  
> Similarly, there are those who're OFH!Snapers, and I'm sure they 
> think that's pretty straightforward, too.

Ceridwen:
I think, after all of this, ESE! and ESG! just can't work as tags.  
Alla, I think, said she thinks Snape is evil, just going by what 
she's seen of his actions all along.  And, I can see acknowledging 
that someone who browbeats children, etc. is 'evil'.  No one, I 
think, doubts that he's evil in the horrible man sort of way if no 
other.  That has no bearing on whether he's on LV's side or DD's 
side.  He'll never be ESG! even if he rides Harry into the fray 
piggyback using his own body as a shield so Harry can get right on 
top of Voldemort.  His Creatrix has said he's a horrible man.  And 
she ought to know.

All of that to say that I like the alternate DDM! (Dumbledore's Man!) 
title a pinch better, though I'm not so oblivious that I don't 
understand the ESE! and ESG! tags.  I just can't find a good 
alternative to ESE! other than LVM!  And that may be stretching 
things too far, because someone's already mentioned that probably the 
only DE who would stand for LV at the crucial end would be Bellatrix, 
no matter how they feel about the issues.

> SSSusan:
> *(snip)
> But again, I think m. has really nailed it here.  These comments 
from 
> JKR, while certainly additional clues or evidence or backup for 
> something and for some positions, just don't give us ENOUGH to say 
> definitively "I *know* what is motivating Professor Snape" or "I 
> *know* what he's going to do next."

Ceridwen:
Yes!  SisterM does have a way of getting it right out there, doesn't 
she?  And, this is why I, too, don't take what is said in interviews 
as absolute.  I do admit everything JKR has stated about Snape.  I 
can see it in canon.  But she never goes beyond what we're able to 
*see* in a straightforward reading.  Spinner's End should have made 
this all much clearer, yet it only served to muddy the waters.  And 
interviews only keep the water muddy.

> SSSusan:
> Yeah, JKR's words corroborate the surface Snape -- he's a nasty, 
> snarky teacher -- but they don't illuminate the inner workings.  
And 
> JKR has done it that way ON PURPOSE... don't you think??

Ceridwen:
Absolutely.  The Christmas Present analogy is so fitting.  Pippin 
again?  Or Potioncat?  And here we sit, with no one in the room but 
us, picking up packages and shaking them to try and guess what's 
inside.

Ceridwen.