High Noon for OFH!Snape

[Sydney]

No: HPFGUIDX 149436

Me:
> > The taking of the Vow makes one thing very clear-- Snape is willing 
> > to die.

Nora:
> Really?  It could also imply that he's willing to do everything to 
> fulfill the Vow so that he himself doesn't die.  You do have a gap 
> there in terms of necessity.

*furrows brow*  Sorry, I must have missed the part where you explain
why he took the Vow in the first place. That was my point.  He
wouldn't have taken the Vow unless he was willing to die.

Me:
> > Not necessarily suicidal, but definitely not holding his life at
> > a particularly high value.  Anyone who sees a way around this, be
my guest.
> 

Nora:
> Sure.  He doesn't think that he could possibly fail in his task, so 
> the whole death thing is more of an idle threat.  

Is this arrogant!Snape or idiot!Snape?  When people argue things like
this, which was done with the DADA curse, I'm always a bit stymied.
Because I don't think, pardon me, that you're really making any
attempt to make sense of Snape here.  You're fine with him taking Vows
that he's not even sure what they're going to contain, that he dies
automatically if he fails them, because he's 'arrogant'.  Wouldn't an
arrogant person say, "I don't have to take a Vow, I'll just do it, and
I don't care if you need that extra assurance because I sure don't"? 
Writers have to get into the heads of both nice and nasty people, and
to date JKR has done an admirable job of both.  I'll bring up Bagman
again, because I like him <g>-- he was arrogant to think that making a
huge bet with the goblins was a good idea when he didn't have the
money to pay them back.  But we all know people who do this;  and,
getting into his head a bit, I can even see why-- it was worth the
risk to pay the debts he had already; if he lost he could put the
goblins off until his ship really came in, etc. etc.  You can pretty
easily see how he could rationalized himself into it.  The version of
arrogant Snape who takes Unbreakable Vows because he just assumes he
can do absolutely any old thing he's going to swear to, and he just
ignores the 'dropping dead automatically' bit.. I'm sorry, that may
ring true to you, but it doesn't to me.  But I don't have any real way
to argue this to your satisfaction, so you may continue on your merry
way on that one.

Me:
> >People who are
> > out for themselves simply do not, under any circumstances short of 
> > the absolutely unavoidable, make promises that they drop dead if 
> > they don't fulfill. 

Nora:
> Here's the classic problem I feel obliged to raise over and over 
> again.  OFH!Snape is defined by wanting what he wants (at least to 
> me); this does not preclude actions which might be read as 
> altruistic, if they're towards an end which he's interested in <snip>
> OFH!Snape may well *get* something out of this action with the Vow; 
> this is not an option which can be automatically dismissed, because 
> frankly, none of us have a clearer window than anyone else into his 
> psyche, because he's such a sketchily drawn character.  That's 
> deliberate.

And here's the classic problem with OFH!Snape posts-- to a large
extent it seems to be all about saying, "I'm not even going to try to
get into this person's head, because obviously he's nothing like a
normal human being, or certainly nothing like ME, so he doesn't have
to make any sense.  OFH=just a rotten guy, and if he's being rotten in
no logical fashion, who cares?"  The old, "How am supposed to
understand how a werewolf's mind works" out.  

As I understand the theory, OFH!Snape is trying to figure out which
side is going to win so he can pick one, so he can survive.  Well,
here he's taking an Unbreakable Vow which widens that "won't survive"
door a whole heck of a lot.  And the only thing it seems to gain him
is a measure of protection against Draco dying, because by taking the
Vow Voldemort can't kill Draco without killing Snape as well.  If he
just wants to make nice with the Malfoys, I still don't see why it's
worth it to him to take the Vow rather than just assume he can protect
Draco and reap in the gratitude afterwards.  Snape is really putting
his head on the block here-  because there's a very good chance
Voldemort will be so angry at Narcissa for going behind his back, and
at Snape for putting this private loyalty above him, that he really
will kill both of them.

This is just plain not "out for himself".  That's, you know, my point.
 Now perhaps we can replace this OFH!Snape with "ready to die for the
Malfoys" Snape.  Which is a bit left field, but actually offers an
explaination for what's going on here!


Alla:
>Well, sure. But the way I see it if Snape took the UV to protect
>Draco and to kill Dumbledore, it does not exclude OFH!Snape at all.
>I mean, Okay, it is in Snape's best interests for some reasons we
>don't know yet ( or I should say I don't know yet) to protect Draco.
<snip>
>I mean, there must be a reason why Sirius called Snape "Malfoy's
>lapdog". ... Something connects Snape and
>Malfoys. 

Thank you!  This is actually constructive.  Although, again, because
of the sheer volume of risk involved, this looks a bit more like "out
for the Malfoys" Snape than "out for himself" Snape.  There is indeed
some mysterious connection between Snape and the Malfoys (that pesky
'sudden movement' in GoF), that may explain why Snape is prepared to
die to protect Draco.  Care to come up with a theory?  Because I sure
don't have one yet!  Need... more... data...  

And, just in case this isn't really clear:  Snape is willing to die to
protect Draco.  That's what the Vow means.

But this doesn't conflict with my basic issue with OFH!Snape, which is
that I just plain don't see him as the sort of person who is
calculating what's best for himself in a material or survival sense. 
I've never seen him act this way in canon, the way we clearly see
Slughorn or Lockhart act.  I don't see him this way in the way he
teaches-- the main context we see him in the books.  Teachers who are
'out for themselves' don't ride their students and give them long
essays and work above their level;  they give them stupid, simple work
that they can't go far wrong on and is easy to grade.  Why is
'out-for-himself' Snape teaching at all for that matter?  Brilliant
Nazi scientists had no difficulty getting lucrative work after the
war;  Snape has these great and well-known connections with the
Malfoys;  Karkaroff was actually convicted as a DE and simply left the
country and got himself a Headmaster gig.  What's Snape DOING, hanging
around teaching grade school for 14 years, when he has demonstrably
rare and valuable skills in both Potions and DADA?  

>This is the Utilitarian problem AGAIN.  I cannot define what makes
>you happy.  I can look and say "You're crazy to enjoy that, how can
>that make you happy?", but that has absolutely no impact on you.
>Happiness is incommensurable.

Um, yeah.  From this angle, EVERYBODY is 'out for themselves', in the
sense that some people are made happy by money, and some people are
made happy by feeding the hungry.  But if we're defining down
OFH!Snape to this point, then, gee, I guess I'M an OFH!Snaper because
I think trying to do the right thing to relieve his unbearable guilt
is what motivates him, which is selfish at bottom.  And Sirius was
selfish at bottom because helping his friends made HIM happy.  Paging
Dr. Kant!

Neri:
>You waste your ammo on that guy. LID!Snape is a much more able contender.

Geez, that grey little guy that looks like a lawyer? Seeing as the
LID!Snape theory is so vague, it's hard to counter it with canon,
except to point out that this assumed Life-Debt doesn't seem to act
anything like Pettigrew's canonical Life-Debt.  Far from having his
actions restricted, nobody has done more to endanger Harry than Peter
has.  Why is Snape forced to act by the LD, where Peter can tie Harry
to rocks and cut him with knives and resurrect folks whose maing goal
in life is to kill Harry?  Who knows!  LID!Snape doesn't seem to
propose anything specific enough to contradict.  If it's a magical
compulsion, how come it acts so differently from Peter's?  If it's a
debt of honour, how is that different from, well, decent!Snape, which
is what DDM!Snape comes down to?

Is there any other character in all of canon-- and that is a lot of
characters-- who is driven not by a normal human motivation, but by
magical compulsion?  Well, sure there are-- Crouch Sr., under the
Imperius;  Ron with the Love Potion, Dobby under the House-Elf
enslavement.  And they all-- ALL-- behave extremely strangely when the
compulsion kicks in, showing overt changes in their personality. 
They're like people under the influence of powerful, nearly
incapacitating narcotics.  I just don't think Rowling writes the sort
of fantasy story that is driven by vague, subtle magics.  Magic is a
pretty blunt instrument in the HP world.  The subtle stuff is the
human stuff-- thank heaven!-- motivations and personalities.  

I don't have a problem with a LifeDebt angle that acts rather like the
DADA curse-- by creating circumstances that are fortuitous or not. 
But as a Grand Unified Snape theory, it lacks both a human angle and
an explanation for the basic Snape mysteries.  Like why Snape wanted
the DADA job, why he took the Unbreakable Vow, and basically, what
actually motivates Snape. 

>And Dumbledore's lack of shock suggests, as I wrote here recently,
that he
>had never trusted Snape to be loyal to him, only to keep trying to
>repay the Debt.

Dumbledore has not been only assuring Harry that he trusts Snape; 
he's been, according to both McGonnegal and Lupin, giving Order
members repeated assurances of this, in the face, it seems, of
argument.  Was the conversation only about Harry every single time
this came up?  Would Dumbledore be assuring McGonnegal or Moody for 14
years that he trusted Snape when he meant, only in Harry-related
manners?  I just can't see this.


Alla:
>And Snape being ready and willing to protect their
>child at the expense of killing Dumbledore does not really look good
>for me at all.

Just to remind you, it's by no means sure-- it is in fact highly
unlikely, going by the hand jerking, that Snape thought he was
promising to do anything other than protect Draco.  That's what makes
it a rich situation!  Because here he is trying to do a good thing,
and, being poor old Snape, he winds up the bad guy again!  It's classic.

Back to Neri:
>For some reason you don't give your theory a name. Would Noble!Snape
>be fair? He took the UV in order to save Draco's life, without any
>additional reason. My problem with this is, as I wrote above, that
>Noble!Snape, when taken in combination with DDM!Snape, is no less a
>pathetic jerk than Suicidal!Snape. He wanted to save the life of his
>student, so ended up killing his headmaster instead. Oops.

Let's call him atonement!Snape.  And the way you describe it, I'm
like, OMG that's an AWESOME situation!  It's classic Snape.  Because
he's going about everything in exactly the wrong way.  He's trying to
follow a Dark Magic path to make up for his Dark Magic mistakes.  He's
trying to calculate and force and repress and do damage, even if he
thinks he's doing it for the right reasons.  That Vow sure looked like
Dark Magic to me, and even if it seemed logically like an excellent,
efficient plan, it was bound to go wrong.  *shakes head*  Why are you
trying to talk me out of this theory by making it seem even MORE
ironic and awful and tragic?  You've got the wrong end of the stick
there, lady. <g>

>Nora waits with amusement for the potential scream of "That's IT?"
>when Snape's mysteries collapse, just like the screaming onlist after
>the Prophecy

-- Sydney, who can well understand why people who don't like Snape
keep falling back on the "nothing to see here folks" write-off for all
the many dramatic, mysterious, and emotional scenes JKR lavishes on
him, seeing as they can't really seem to explain it any other way.