Snape's Request/Ungrateful Werewolf/Sorting and Snape/Dumbledore Duel

[lanval1015]

No: HPFGUIDX 175869

> Lanval wrote in:
> Re: Snape's Request gave Harry a second chance? (Was: 
> Snape/Dumbledore thingummy) 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/175810
> > Not too ambiguous, is it?
> 
> > This, I believe goes for all the short Pensieve vignettes. They 
are
> meant to clear things up, to give crucial information that had been
> lacking -- not to provide red herrings, steer the reader off the
> trail, confuse, raise doubts, whatever. 
> 
> zgirnius:
> It is all crystal clear and open to only one interpretation? I 
don't 
> find them so at all. They are meant to clear big picture things 
up, 
> and they do. 

Lanval:
No, of course not. :) As you put it, they 
clear up the big picture and that's it. For example, Lily and 
Severus argueing in the aftermath of the prank:

p.541:
Lily's bright green eyes were slits. Snape backtracked at once.
"I didn't mean -- I just don't want to see you made a fool of -- he 
fancies you, James Potter fancies you!" The words seemed wrenched 
from him against his will. "And he's not...everyone thinks... Big 
Quidditch hero --" Snape's bitterness and dislike were rendering him 
inconherent, and Lily's eyebrows were travelling further and further 
up her forehead.

"I know James Potter's an arrogant toerag," she said, cutting across 
Snape. "I don't need you to tell me that. But Mulciber and Avery's 
idea of humour is just evil. *Evil*, Sev. I don't understand how you 
can be friends with them.

End of quote.

So, what is IMO beyond discussion here? For once, the obvious -- 
Lily going snake-eyed on him, Lily interrupting him, Lily and Sev 
actually having this conversation (as opposed to, for example, Sev 
and polyjuiced Sirius. This kind of speculating was great while we 
were dealing with a WIP, but now it would be just... silly, IMO). 

Also Severus' description of 'bitterness' and 'dislike'. Just as the 
author saves us the trouble of figuring out whether little Sev lied 
about being involved in the branch-dropping incident, she gives us 
his emotional state here, and I think we are simply meant to accept 
it (as opposed to, say, he's just faking the jealousy thing, and 
really kind of admires James Potter). Why? Because it's crucial for 
the plot delevopment. Severus *must* be understood, IMO, as bitter 
and disliking James Potter, because it matters to the plot.

Same goes for Lily detesting Avery and Mulciber. 

What's open for further speculation? A lot, really. We can debate 
what Mulciber actually did (I must add here my apologies to Avery, 
creepy little future DE that he is; I previously had him involved in 
the Mary Macdonald incident, but canon names only Mulciber. *g*), we 
can debate whether that beats the Marauders' idea of fun in Sheer 
Evilness, we can debate whether Snape would have been involved in 
similar acts, whether Mary was hurt (not much, I'd say, since Lily 
says he 'tried' to do something to her), whether Sectumsempra 
measures up to whatever Dark Deed it was... The possibilities are 
endless.

But, if Lily says she finds it evil, then that's exactly what she 
thinks, (again, because her disgust is vital to further plot 
development), and I can't see it as a very useful to argue she's 
perhaps just being tought with him, or is secretly having a laugh 
but wants Sev all to herself and is trying to talk him out of his 
friends, or is bewitched by James and just trying to tick poor Sev 
off.

The same can be extended, IMO, to things not said -- if, for example 
JKR had wanted for Snape's main problem with Werewolf Lupin 
to be concern for Lily's safety, she would have said so. Since 
she does *not*, I think it's fruitless to argue that Snape wasn't 
acting out of malice, trying to catch James & Co, but *mainly* 
worried about Lily's safety. He may have done so as an aside, but 
what's the point in making it his prime motivation, except to make 
him look good? And it goes totally against the rest of canon.

Sorry for extreme wordiness; hope I've made my point a bit 
clearer. :)


> zgirnius:
Snape loved Lily, he was a true Death Eater, later he 
> was loyal to Dumbledore and killed him on his orders, Harry has to 
go 
> die. The business of George's ear and the sword is explained. 
> (Personally, I don't see what the function of excusing the ear bit 
is 
> in the larger story. Dumbledore told Snape to play the part in the 
> raid, it could have been left at that, though I am so grateful it 
was 
> cleared up, because it really ran counter to my ideas about Snape 
and 
> was a big source of doubt while reading the book).
> 
> What is being discussed (about why he turned and what he cared 
about, 
> and to what extent that changed by the end of the series) is finer 
> detail of Snape's character and relationships as they come across 
in 
> the text. I think it is clear that Rowling was attempting a bit of 
> that as well. (That cutting off George's ear was shown not to be a 
> Machiavellian act to help Snape's cover, but a rescue attempt for 
> Lupin, surely says something). But that's less crucial to her 
> project, and also far more subjective. Someone who came into the 
book 
> thinking the worst of Sev may need more along those lines than 
> someone who came in with a rosier view of the guy. 
> 


Lanval:
Precisely, and I think it's important. She saying, See, Snape really 
*was* doing something good here. No use trying to twist this 
into, "Oh, he was just throwing around spells, trying to appear 
fighting so as to not blow his cover, but wasn't really concerned 
about what happened to anyone save Harry." 

The DE's hand was pointed at Lupin, Snape's curse is described 
as *intended for the DE's wand hand* but missing and hitting George.

And dammit, that's what happened. :) 


> zgirnius:
> Finally, the scenes are still, also, a work of art. It does not 
(to 
> me, anyway) read like an infodump, since I find it the single most 
> beautiful chapter in the series. The dialogue and interactions are 
> carefully presented and convincing, we see evolution in how Snape 
is 
> presented (he was rather inarticulate as a boy and young man), 
> Dumbledore's relationship with him changed, etc. Something like 
that 
> is going to be ambiguous. 
> 

Lanval:
Oh, agreed. I find them a work of art too. I really admire her 
skills of characterization, especially in little Snape and Tuney.



> zgirnius:
> OK, examples
in the second scene, by your rules (all that is said 
is 
> true), we learn that Snape had no prejudice against Muggleborns 
> personally, and even, lived blissfully unaware that such a thing 
as 
> blood prejudice existed in the Potterverse, before he came to 
> Hogwarts. After all, he tells Lily that it makes no difference. Of 
> course, if we start thinking what his hesitation, followed by his 
> eager look at her, mean, we might draw a different conclusion. 
> 


Lanval:
Yes, exactly. The moment of hesitation makes all the difference. 
What we are meant to understand and take as fact here, IMO, is that 
he is *not* utterly certain that it makes no difference. As to 
*why* -- start speculating. :)

A pointless argument here would be, again IMO, to say: Oh, he 
probably got whacked about the head by his evil dad so badly just 
that morning that he didn't catch what Lily was saying; of *course* 
he sees absolutely no difference!


> zgirnius:

> In that same scene, we learn that things are fine at the Snape 
house. 
> Snape says so. The leaves? Snape must just like playing with them. 
> And Snape did not drop a branch on Tuney, accidentally or 
otherwise, 
> it was a remarkable coincidence. Oh wait, the narrator calls that 
a 
> lie. But we should not consider the possibility that anything else 
> is, I guess.
> 

Lanval:
No, I don't think we should. If she tells us flat out that Severus 
is lying, IMO there's no point is arguing that he is not. Why would 
the author lie to us here? She doesn't write: "But his words did not 
convince Lily". She does not write "His words sounded false to 
Harry, and Lily seemed not convinced either." 

She very clearly writes "his lie".

*What exactly* was he lying about? Why was he lying? What was he 
feeling? Hey, let's start discussing.


> zgirnius:

> The discussion about whether Snape trusted Voldemort happening on 
> another thread is a waste of time – Dumbledore says he did in 
their 
> second meeting, so that's it. (Care to enlighten the posters on 
that 
> thread why, then, Snape seemed to desperate to obtain Dumbledore's 
> protection for Lily in the first meeting?)
> 

Lanval:
Hm, can you point me to the exact words in the text, and the posts 
in question? Not sure I remember what was said there.

> Lanval (previously):
> The story is almost over, here's what *really* happened. If Snape
anwers DD's question whether he has come to care for Harry with a cry
of "For *him*?", and produces the doe patronus, to which DD
replies, "After all this time?", then that's exactly what it means.
Snape only cared for Lily, and not for Harry.

> zgirnius:
> That scene, by the way, has a very interesting omission, which I 
> noticed yesterday night. Snape does not agree to the plan. Not in 
> that scene, not in any other scene. I wonder what that means. 
Seems 
> like a really big thing to leave open if we are supposed to have 
all 
> our answers
maybe she just forgot.
> 

Lanval:
Are you referring to DD's plan that after DD's death, Snape must 
tell Harry about his intended sacrifice, when the time is right 
(once LV starts keeping Nagini under magical protection)?