Re: Rowling’s Debunking of the Marauders

[leslie41]

No: HPFGUIDX 172834

Dana:
I do have to say that I understand your euphoric feeling about Snape
not being ever-so-evil but to me the text is not so clear that no
other interpretation of said text is possible. So therefore I share
mine and respect that you will probably disagree.

Leslie41:
Of course!  But some interpretations hold more water than others.  

Dana:
Snape is not selfless in what he did. He did not do it for Harry. He
never grown to care for Harry and he truly hated Harry as he was a
constant reminder that Lily was never his because she chose James
Potter.  <snip>

Leslie41:
I'm not understanding here
if Snape did what he did purely for Harry, 
that would be okay
but if he does it because of Harry's mom instead 
that somehow impugns his manifold acts of bravery?  I'm not following 
that line of reason.  

Dana:
He tried to safe Lupin but you also have to remember that it was
because of Snape that Lupin was in danger in the first place. Snape
not wanting to be responsible for anymore deaths because of what he
had to do to keep Lily's sacrifice from being in vain is not a clear
sign that he developed a sense of empathy or respect for people's
life. 

Leslie41:
He didn't "try" to save Lupin.  He actually *saved* Lupin.  Deflected 
a curse that would have killed him. I think a clear sign that he 
developed "empathy and respect for people's lives" is when he tells 
Dumbledore that he has suffered through having to witness the deaths 
of people he was not able to save.  People that have nothing to do 
with Lily Potter, like the Muggle Studies professor.

Dana:

<snip>

JKR did not vindicate Snape through Harry in the sense that Snape was
truly a good man at heart. His redeeming quality was his extreme
loyalty to Harry's mother not to Harry himself. 

Leslie41:
Actually, that's only partly so.  What Harry says to Voldemort is not 
that Snape belonged to Harry's mother.  He says that "Snape was 
Dumbledore's."  His loyalty is to Dumbledore. I'm not saying that 
this wasn't because of Lily and his love for her (which Harry also 
acknowledges), but Rowling clearly marks Snape as Dumbledore's here, 
first and foremost.  There are so many other ways that she could have 
done it to blur that.  She makes it pretty clear.

Dana:
PS: I just want to suggest to you when you accuse people of being
bias against Snape when they reflect the marauders vs Snape that you
should not do the same yourself. And although not canon I'm pretty
sure that James second name is Sirius and Teddy already carried Remus
as a second name. 

Leslie41:

It wouldn't surprise me!  But as you say, at this point that is not 
canon.  And in the epilogue we see that she doesn't want to muddy the 
waters by making it canon in the book.  She wants the testament 
of "Albus Severus" to stand alone.  And if James turns out to be 
James Sirius that certainly wouldn't do anything to change that, 
because it will, essentially, have the weight of an afterthought.

Dana:
Also I did not see Snape showing up in the scene
where Harry calls upon his loved ones to help him go through with his
sacrifice, I did see Sirius and Lupin.

Leslie41:
Of course!  Because Snape is not his "loved one".  And Harry is not 
Snape's "loved one."  

Alla:

So, if Lily's affection for James is the proof for you that he was
worthy, is Lily's loving letter to Sirius proof to you that he was
worthy as well? 

Leslie41:

I like Sirius myself!   And I am willing to grant that perhaps he 
revealed some aspect of remorse about the prank to her.  But he 
doesn't do it in the books.  No remorse at all.  We have to infer 
that.  

Alla:

Nobody is trying to twist Snape into **evil** guy anymore, if by evil
we meant loyalty to Voldemort. I would love to, but how can I?

Leslie41:

Actually, I see a lot of people on this board turning him into a 
potential sexual abuser of children, a stalker, etc.  That's 
pretty "evil," and it's based on very little (or no) 
evidence, "evidence" easily refuted by even the tiniest knowledge of 
the way stalkers behave.  As Snape has been proven loyal to 
Dumbledore, those that hate Snape are scrambling around, inventing 
scenarios, and seeing all sorts of nastiness that is absolutely not 
in the book.  One board member posits that if Harry had been a girl, 
Snape would have sexually abused her.  Oh really?  Geez!

Alla:
But Snape who is loyal to Dumbledore did what he did out of his love
or obsession for Lily. That I read differently from you. I think it
was obsession, not love, or at least for the most part.  

Leslie41:
To Voldemort, Harry says "he loved her for nearly all of his life, 
from the time that they were children."  I would guess that if Harry, 
who has hated Snape for years, realizes the truth and the depth of 
that love (which he never sees as anything but the deepest and truest 
emotion), then certainly *we* should.  But your mileage may vary.


Alla:

Harry calls him a bravest person he ever knew, so he was brave, who
can doubt that now?

But if Harry thinks he loved his mother, I can **certainly** disagree
with that interpretation, or at least think that this "love" was much
more ambiguous that Harry, noble soul, chose to believe.

Leslie41:
And I would say that to doubt Snape's love for Lily is to doubt every 
single credible sign in the text that presents Snape's love for her 
as so.