Killing Snape (was Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape)

[Ceridwen]

No: HPFGUIDX 165377

Lupinlore:
> The situation with Boromir in LOTR, much discussed in other 
threads, is perhaps more to the point. That is that offering up one's 
life is the final act of penance.

The objection, often voiced by Pippin I believe, is that such a 
storyline would not leave us with an example of someone who reforms, 
does penance for their actions, and is then reintegrated into the 
world to a greater or lesser degree. That is true, and would indicate 
a certain moral harshness.

The other criticism is that killing Snape would be, as Carol 
observes, unoriginal and uninventive writing. But once again, such 
standard developments, unoriginal and uninventive or not, often occur 
at key points in the saga. *(snip)*

So, to this point we have plentiful precedent for moral harshness and 
uninventive and standard plot developments. 

Ceridwen:
I'm having a hard time snipping your post.  You raise some 
interesting issues.

These days there are plenty of genre-bending stories out there, so 
the morally un-harsh solution would be just as hackneyed as the 
morally harsh solution.  It's just as possible that, if JKR writes 
Snape as living beyond the end of DH, we'll see CareBears!Snape and 
group hugs all around.  With each issue she faces in the story, she 
has at least two ways to go, and a possible third by dividing the 
results of genre-bending and a traditional telling.  IF Snape lives, 
and of course this is a very big IF, I would want him to remain true 
to character, given any natural changes that would occur to a 
combatant in wartime.

I'm taking a class about Fiction right now in school.  The teacher 
has talked about Archetypes, and I think that what you, Carol and 
Pippin are saying is there is a certain storyline that seems to go 
with the Snape or Boromir characters that resonate in the 
unconscious.  Rather than being 'uninventive and unorigional', then, 
this storyline would be expected and, on some level, satisfying for 
the majority of readers.  Even if the readers like the character (I 
liked Boromir very much, both book and movie, but he was cuter in the 
movie), the usual ending, death, would be satisfying on some level.

But not everyone agrees with the Collective Unconscious and stories.  
I would thoroughly enjoy an inventive and original ending, with Snape 
living and finally having a life.  Yes, I know he made his bed, but 
sometimes we do get to sweep out the cracker crumbs before we have to 
lie in them.  *g*

Lupinlore:
> What would be the narrative purpose? To close off Snape's story, I 
suppose. After all, what place would he have in a world where all the 
developments that define him, all the questions that frame his story, 
are resolved? He would be a being out of his time, a relic from a 
past now thankfully put to rest.

Ceridwen:
And, this sort of ending would go along with the gradual decimation 
of the Marauders, also of Snape's time.  But, Snape was not part of 
the Marauders, unless you consider him to be a part by being seperate 
but engaged by them.

Do all of the developments that define Snape live in the past?  He is 
still a powerful wizard; he has been shown to be handy with an 
apparently complex healing spell; he is young enough, especially in 
the WW, to move on and create another life for himself.  Simply 
leaving would be as radical a change.  In my opinion, of course.

Lupinlore:
> *(snip)*There are plenty of other ways to look at redemption. For 
instance you could argue, as certain understandings of Catholic 
penitential doctrine would have it, that redemption is a matter of 
forgiveness, which requires no price other than confession and 
contrition. Well, we haven't seen either of those from Snape either, 
although DD claims to have done so.

Ceridwen:
In the doctrine of confession, only the priest, not the public, hear 
the confession.  If Dumbledore 'heard Snape's confession', then it 
isn't up to Harry to hear it, or by extension the reader.  That may 
change in DH.  In fact, if that is the way it is, then I think Harry 
and the reader will get to see that moment, or somehow be informed of 
it, since this is Harry's story.  If we're supposed to learn 
something from Snape's story, then we'll see inside the confessional.

Lupinlore:
> But all of this may miss the point. God may forgive any sin for the 
price of sincere contrition (under one set of theories, not 
universally held), but the world and human society does not. Boromir 
could only be a worldy hero by purchasing redemption at the cost of 
his life -- and that in the hands of a good Catholic like Tolkien. If 
you believe in a DDM!Snape, or a Grey!Snape, then Snape is under the 
same burden and owes the same price. And if he's evil, then he still 
owes the price, albeit as a matter of punishment and not penance.

Ceridwen:
I was going to go an entirely different direction, but I got to 
thinking about famous Guys Who Died.  The most obvious to me is Judas 
Iscariot.  He betrayed his lord, and suffered the ultimate punishment 
for it.  In fact, he suffered the ignomy of taking his own life, from 
remorse.  I suppose that if someone is seeing ESE!Snape, then this 
could very well be the outcome.  In fact, I think this has been 
suggested by a few posters already: the last-minute saving of Harry 
or someone in the Order, or suddenly breaking Voldy's wand, and dying 
for his trouble.

But if Snape is DDM! all along, then how would this sort of archetype 
fit?  The main conflict overall is the war with Voldemort and if 
Snape is on Dumbledore's side from before the series begins, then why 
would he have to be redeemed or suffer from the archetypal effects of 
extreme remorse?  Boromir suffered his crisis on-page, though he came 
to the page with a dream already in place which seemed to be answered 
by the Ring.  IF Snape is and has been DDM! since before the Potters 
died, then should the usual expectations for the redeemed or 
remorseful apply to him?

Ceridwen, enjoying the discussion.