The Unloved Son (was Re: Could I be wrong about Snape being evil?)

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 156673

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "winleaf" wrote:
> winleaf (speaking earlier of the immaturity of sibling rivalry)
> > This works well, until Snape has to be 
> > portrayed in his ongoing work as a spy, having to make difficult 
> > decisions, having to stay very focused and keep emotions in  
> > check, etc.  At that point, that degree of immaturity no longer 
> > seems to fit the character.  
> 
> winleaf
> And there's the problem -- just how emotionally immature can a 
> person be and still carry on -- even as a 19 or 20 year old -- as 
> a spy against a Voldemort who's also a master at legilimency?

Mike here:

The term is called 'compartmentalising', Snape has the ability to 
focus on the problem at hand and to 'put in a compartment' things 
that are not pertinent to the task at hand. When he is doing his spy 
gig, he locks away all his other problems and his emotions attached 
to them. Pilots (I used to be one) are known for this ability. And 
as much as I hate to admit it, pilots (especially fighter pilots) 
aren't really known for their maturity. Tom Cruise's Maverick isn't 
too far off the mark if you want an scale to measure maturity level. 
Being able to compartmentalise is not the same as being mature, 
although they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Speaking from 
experience, compartmentalisers often get accused of being both 
immature and unable to multi-task. To some degree, both are correct. 
<g>

Also, Draco has shown that he could perform Occlumency well enough 
to block Snape by Christmas. Although Draco grew up alot during the 
course of HBP, he can hardly be described as mature, especially 
during the time he would have been learning Occlumency from Aunt 
Bella. And he wasn't exactly acting maturely during that Xmas scene, 
was he?

I concur with Alla, Sherrie is dead-on with her analysis of Snape's 
maturity.

<big snip>
> 
> winleaf again:
> Snape seemed to be the only one in the Shrieking Shack who was 
> actively aware that there was a werewolf about to transform in the 
> room.  Think about it from his perspective.  He comes into the 
> room having only heard about the animagi information -- nothing  
> about Pettigrew being alive.  He sees who he thinks is a mass  
> murderer accompanied by Lupin who he has just heard confess to  
> knowledge about Black that Lupin never, in the past 9 months, told 
> Dumbledore.  So naturally his suspicions that Lupin was in league 
> with Black seem affirmed.  So there's the mass murderer, his 
> accomplice, Lupin, about to transform into a werewolf, a child  
> with a badly broken leg, and two other students -- all of whom  
> want to go back to a nice long *discussion*, of all things, 
> utterly ignoring the fact that if Lupin turned into a werewolf, 
> the only one who'd be safe would be Black, the animagus. 
<snip>

Mike again:

I don't want to go into my long list of problems regarding the whole 
Shrieking Shack scene. But I will ask this one question: If Snape is 
really considering all this, especially about 
Lupin_soon_to_be_werewolf, why does he only tie up Lupin and prepare 
to drag him outside like that? Surely, if he has all this on his 
mind, he knows the werewolf transformation will allow him to break 
free, endangering himself and the 3 'children' he's trying to 
protect. I don't think you can have it both ways. If he is 
supposedly concerned only for the trio's safety regarding the 
werewolf, why is the only protection he performs so obviously 
inadequate for that safety?

No, I think he 'incarcerouses' Lupin to shut him up, so he can't 
further plead his case, so Snape doesn't have to consider anything 
other than his preconceived notions. In a way he compartmentalised 
again. He already put Lupin and Sirius in the *hated_enemy box* so 
he doesn't have to hear anything they say, it's irrelevant.

Mike, who can't resist mentioning one pet peeve: What part of 
Pettigrew did Lupin tie up? Think about it <g>