Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero

[leslie41]

No: HPFGUIDX 173151

As for JKR's comment on the Today Show regarding Snape, I find it 
very interesting, fascinating in fact, but pretty much irrelevant.

Though it makes for excellent television, *any* author's opinion on 
their own text is only of limited value. Authorial intent is not even 
considered in any serious literary criticism. What's considered is 
what's actually in the text.  

If Rowling, for example (and I don't know if she's spoken about this 
or not) swore up and down that Harry, and his journey, weren't 
somehow analagous with Christ's, there's still plenty of evidence in 
the text for many to interpret it as such.  I'm sure Jane Austen 
would be horrified to hear that anyone was making a Freudian 
interpretation of her work. She'd roll over in her grave. Does that 
mean that we don't make Freudian interpretations of her work?  No.  
And not just because she's dead.  Because authorial commentary and 
opinion on a text, or on an interpretation of a text, is pretty much 
worthless. 

But for argument's sake (and I don't necessarily agree, mind you), 
let's agree with Rowling and say that even at the end Snape is 
motivated purely by love for Lily.  So?  

Rowling's idea of "heroism" seems to the standard Christian ideal 
of "doing good for the right reasons".  Any dip into any heroic 
literature at all will reveal that most heroes do no such thing.  

Would Achilles have fought in The Iliad if Patroklos had not been 
killed?  No. Does that make him less of a hero?  Obviously not.  He's 
manifestly the greatest hero in all of Ancient Greek myth.  Want more 
examples?  I got a million of 'em.  

It's dangerous for us to take what Rowling says about her own 
characters too seriously.  She's not the best person to ask, any more 
than a mother is the best person to ask about the behavior of her 
children.  She does not have the perspective required.