Is Snape good or evil? (longer)

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 148786

Pippin:
> > Can you explain how  this would make dramatic or psychological 
> > sense? If Snape's betrayal on the tower was his big dramatic 
> > moment, it's awfully flat -- after sixteen years of treachery, or 
> > indecision, or whatever non-DDM!Snape is supposed to be playing at, 
> > he blows Dumbledore away without a word?

Nora:
> Dramatic and psychological sense are both things which mainly run on 
> the mileage of the reader.  You find it flat, I find it interesting, 
> particularly when I think about possibilities for where it could go.  

Pippin:
Yes, exactly. It's those possibilities I was asking you to expand on, if
you would. I don't doubt that you find your interpretation interesting,
dramatic and psychologically consistent with Snape's other behavior,
I'm just asking how you think it would be more dramatically powerful
for the reader to see Snape to gloat over his betrayal when the
shock of his betrayal has had a chance to wear off rather than at the
moment when it took place. I'm just failing to think of an example
from literature or film where we see the betrayal in one installment
and get the gloating in the next installment, two years later. Do
you have one in mind?

You seem to be supposing that  Evil!Snape  killed off the most 
powerful wizard in existence, established his cred as an evil wizard  
now and forever, and then with Harry whom he hates so much at his mercy, 
demanded the recognition he's been denied so long -- for the spells 
he invented in high school! 

I suppose you could see that as twisted, but the thing is, he could
have used sectum sempra on Dumbledore, and if he's been longing
to come out as a dark wizard, why not? 

Pippin: 
> > The most powerful feeling Snape expresses in the concluding chapters
> > is *anguish*. Here's the passage, in case you've forgotten it
> > 
> > "DON'T--" screamed Snape, and his face was suddenly demented,
> > inhuman, as though he were in as much pain as the yelping, howling
> > dog in the burning house behind them--"CALL ME COWARD!"

Nora:
> You read that as 'anguish', but it can be read any number of ways, 
> particularly if you follow a line of thought from the text proceeding 
> which you didn't provide.  Pain is something which can come about in 
> intense anger, for instance, or even rage--and if there's any 
> character who seems to have a substantial base of rage built up, for 
> me it's Snape.  Is that a scream of anguish about what he's had to 
> do, or a scream of rage that he can finally vent at that godforsaken 
> child, the spitting image of a man he's still obsessed with?

Pippin:
Um,  "anguish" means intense mental or physical pain. And "pain"
is what canon refers to.

I was not speculating about the cause, it could be rage, of course, but
Snape's been looking at Harry for six years, now --
clearly it's what Harry said, not how he looked (which we don't even
know) that set Snape off.
  
Nora:
> No, I think he's caught up in emotion, but it's a deliberately open 
> subject what that emotion is centered upon.  I don't think he brought 
> up James as a feint, for instance--I think that idee fixe is genuine.

Pippin: 
Agreed. But then, is it being accused of killing *James* that provokes
Snape?

Nora;
> Argument from absence, particularly in JKR's style of writing and 
> character development, is a dangerous and delicate thing, so I think 
> I'll leave it at that.

Pippin:
But the whole "Snape isn't really remorseful, or he got remorse and
changed his mind later" set of theories is an argument from absence.
Beware  -- that  way lies vampires :)


Pippin