Victory for TEWWW EWWW

[nrenka]

No: HPFGUIDX 173001

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "colebiancardi" <muellem at ...> wrote:

> colebiancardi:
> yep, I saw that interview and thought, wow oh wow.  So, what is the
> definition of a hero, I wonder? 

I would suspect that it has something to do with doing the right thing
for the right reason.  I've always thought that intention plays a
major role in JKR's worldview, as magic seems to respond to it, among
other things.  Take Neville standing up to his friends and showing
courage for the right reason.

The way that Snape's love for Lily is presented, it's on an
uncomfortable line.  It motivates him to a lot of risks, but it
doesn't make him a better person in areas such as treating students
well, etc.  It's more along the lines of obsession than love.

True love reminds me of the Marschallin's lines at the opening of the
Rosenkavalier Trio, near the end of the opera:  "I swore to love him
in the right way, so that I could even love his love for another..." 
(This is a woman giving up her young lover, who has fallen in love and
risked a lot to save a young woman from an unwanted marriage.)

> And basically, is JKR stating that placing Snape in Slytherin doomed
> and sealed his fate as a bad person with no redeeming qualities
> whatsoever, if he didn't *love* Lily?

I didn't get the feeling that it was specifically his placement in
Slytherin House that did it.

> I guess JKR is cementing the idea that Snape did not mature in the 
> last 16 years since Lily's death.  That there is nothing but Lily.  
> That was my rant earlier about the lack of personal growth & 
> maturity and making atones and moving on.  She doesn't give certain 
> characters that possibility, based on that interview this morning. 

What confuses me a bit about this line of argument, seen here and
elsewhere, is the assumption that every character *has* to have the
option to grow and mature and move on, or it's the author being
cosmically unfair and mean.  Well, we knew as far back as book four
that we were not operating with a strict calculus of punishment and
reward, and that was cemented in book five.  (The first few books
operate more along those lines, but the system breaks down as the
world gets more confusing and darker.)  My objection here is much like
PACMAN (Perfectly Angelic Characters Make Awful Novels): novels in
which everyone makes the hard climb to profound self-betterment are
not usually the most interesting things in the world.

I think a good portion of Snape's story IS that he was stunted and
unable to let go, and he was kept running by his own personal
interests and motivations.  Being as the series is not "Severus Snape
and the...", we don't get the internal view into what's going on in
his head throughout, but his end story is rather tragic, although he
is a profound force for the victory over Voldemort.

-Nora says: you want to see unfair, look at the amount of death in
opera...