Snape - a werewolf bigot?? Was: Say it isn't so Lupin!!!

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 170180

> Carol responds:
> 
> But Hagrid *does* place a great deal of importance on blood, both in
> terms of relationships and in terms of how it makes people what they
> are, in his view. "Whatever yeh say, blood's important," he says to
> Harry at the time that Grawp is beating him up. And he talks about
> "all Malfoys" as being bad because of their "bad blood." 

Mike:
OK, but what does this have to do with Hagrid's bigotted remark? It 
was aimed at a Squib, someone born to two people with wizarding 
blood. It's Filch's lack of magical prowess that Hagrid is calling 
out, not Filch's ancestry.


> Carol
> I'm not sure that he's generally prejudiced against Squibs, 
> but he's certainly using it as a generalized insult against Filch,
> for whom, no doubt, he has some sort of personal antipathy, and, 
> unlike Teen!Severus calling Lily a Mudblood--at which she blinks 
> in surprise--he is not under duress, humiliatingly being rescued 
> by a Gryffindor girl who has just been flirting with his tormentor.

Mike:
So Snape is not only bigotted towards Muggleborns, but is insulted 
because a *girl* is trying to help him. Hmm, not improving his 
position methinks. ;)

As to being in humiliating positions; I wonder what you think of 
Snape's "I see no difference" remark? You suppose that might be a 
little cold-hearted dig at Hermione's large front teeth? No need to 
answer. :D 

Now, I'd like to ask what you think of "And what difference does that 
make?" Sounds awfully similar, doesn't it. That's the remark that got 
under Hagrid's skin and caused his "Squib" outburst. To say Hagrid 
was not under some duress is an unfair analysis imo.


> Carol:
> Also, while calling someone a Mudblood is comparable to calling 
> them a "sneakin's Squib" (or "a filthy Half-blood," as I think 
> Phineas Nigellus calls Mundungus Fletcher), <snip>

Mike:
And let's compare invectives. Filch and Figgy both call 
themselves "Squib". No doubt Hagrid's use is meant as an attack on 
Filch's status, just as Filch has led with an attack on Hagrid's 
status. But, I have yet to see any Muggleborn's refer to themselves 
as "Mudblood". In fact, it seems to be one of the worse terms 
available in the WW to use against another person. It is also been 
used by only the most ardent and obviously bigotted people. 

Magpie put it best: as far as I remember, don't we have three student 
characters who ever use the term? Snape, Draco and Tom Riddle. I 
can't even remember any adults using the word--oh wait, Kreacher and 
Mrs. Black. It seems unlikely the word could ever be dismissed in 
canon as not being serious.

Quite the company Snape is keeping here. And, as Magpie also pointed 
out, Snape has signed on with pure-blood superiority group - the DEs. 
Might Snape have re-evaluated his bigotted beliefs, like he probably 
re-evaluated his affiliation with Voldemort? Possibly, but he sure 
appears to be a bigot in his school days.


> Carol cont:
> calling someone a werewolf when that werewolf has endangered your 
> life, <snip>

PoA p. 357: "Snape glimpsed me, though, at the end of the tunnel."

Mike: Sounds like Snape barely found out that Lupin was a werewolf.

Had he gotten farther, "he *would* have met a fully grown werewolf", 
*but* *he* *didn't*. Sounds like what Dana has pointed out, Snape is 
more indignant for what *might* have been, than actually coming close 
to mortal danger. He's pissed at the *prank* and for James being the 
one to save him from his own stupidity in taking Sirius up on his 
information, and probably his goading.



> Carol cont:
> and then that werewolf has the nerve to think that Snape's
> suspicions of him are based, not on his own sneaky conduct

Mike: Sneaky conduct? What sneaky conduct has Snape witnessed?


> Carol:
> Anyway, it may not be right to speak of Remus Lupin to his face as
> "the werewolf," but considering that Snape has faced him in the form
> of a murderous monster and thinks he's an accessory to a "murderin'
> traitor," it seems just silly to call him a "werewolf bigot." 

Mike:
A lot seems to hinge on Snape fearing for his life, based on a 
glimpse of a werewolf at the end of a tunnel. I hardly classify this 
as "facing" a werewolf. And his *wrong* opinion, based on his 
prejudicial view of the evidence, that Lupin was helping Sirius get 
into the castle does not exonerate him from speaking derogatorally of 
the "werewolf".

> Carol:
> As for the pureblood superiority ethic, there's no evidence 
> that he believes it (calling Lily a "Mudblood," which he does once,
> is IMO no worse than the personal, and to me revolting, insult 
> "Snivellus," which Sirius Black uses repeatedly, even as  an adult.
> (It's not an insult to a group and therefore it's okay? I think 
> not. It's as mean-spirited and snide and cruel as anything in 
> the books.)

Mike:
Huh? Mudblood is no worse than making fun with someone's name? Using 
the WW equivalent of the "N" word is no worse than someone calling 
me "crud"? <shakes head>

And, as said above, Snape's use of the term is in very rare and 
bigotted company in canon. We only see Snape "once" as a student - so 
he's one-for-one in his vile language batting average. And Snape 
joined a terrorist organization that spouted pure-blood elitism. 


> Carol:
> But I still don't think that "werewolf" is a bigoted term.
> It's a fact. Lupin, as both he and Hermione state, *is* a werewolf.

Mike:
Filch is a Squib. That's a fact. Was Hagrid using a bigotted term 
when Hagrid called him such? I seem to remember you arguing that it 
was a bigotted term, even if Hagrid is not truly bigotted.


> Carol:
> 
> Where's the canon that shows he is? 

Mike: 
I've presented the evidence that Snape was a bigot, even if he has 
changed his ways, since. You gave me a litany of Draco's uses of the 
term, thanks, but I didn't need convincing that Draco or Mrs. Black 
or Tom Riddle were bigots. Now add Severus Snape as the only other 
humans in canon to call another human a "Mudblood" and you have the 
complete list.


> Carol responds:
> Why in the world would Lupin be suspicious of Snape? 

Mike:
Because Snape was famous for his interest in the Dark Arts. Because 
Snape hung around with people that became DEs. Because Snape could 
have joined the DEs and still have been cunning enough to evade 
prosecution. (Oh, wait, he did join the DEs and did avoid a stint in 
Azkaban). Do you think Sirius was alone in this evaluation of Snape's 
character and capabilities? I don't.


> Carol:
> It makes sense for Snape to suspect Lupin of trying to help 
> Sirius Black, but *Snape* isn't going to do it.

Mike:
Why? Wasn't Sirius suppose to have switched sides? Wasn't Sirius 
supposed to have at least been a Voldemort supporter if not a DE? So 
why should Snape suspect that Lupin had also switched sides? Snape 
should suspect that Lupin was also a Voldemort supporter and 
Dumbledore hired him anyway? Or should Snape be the only former DE 
that Dumbledore could trust? 

Face it, Snape *suspects* Lupin because Lupin was friends with those 
two boys that tormented him, while they were in school. Snape 
suspects Lupin because of that "schoolboy grudge" and makes all his 
evidence fit his theory. And Snape lobbied against Lupin before the 
school term even started. What evidence did he have for his pre-term 
conviction besides that *Prank*?


> Carol:
> [Lupin] knows that Snape suspects *him* and he *is*
> suppressing information, but Snape is doing his best to keep Harry 
> in Hogwarts and away from Sirius Black. <snip>

> and Lupin doesn't know that Snape was a DE. He does, however, 
> think that *Sirius Black* became a DE. and he knows that Snape
> is not about to help Black. Can you give me the smallest shred
> of evidence that Lupin suspects Snape of having been a DE before 
> OoP,


Mike:
I also think Snape is suppressing information. I find it very hard to 
believe that Snape wouldn't know that Black was never a Death Eater. 
As many have pointed out, the enmity between the two was unsurpassed 
in their generation. The idea that Black could have snuck into the 
Death Eaters and Snape not know about it...?

And I also find it highly dubious that Lupin would believe that Black 
had turned DE and Snape had not. What in their past would hint that 
that is the likely way things would fall out? From everything we know 
of their early years, which isn't much, it seems that an ordinary 
observer would guess that Snape would be far more likely to have 
become a DE. (And they would be right). So why would Lupin, a friend 
of Sirius Black and an antagonist of Severus Snape, pick Black as the 
one more likely to become a DE?


> Carol:
> Which ones *could* have been more costly if Lupin had attacked a
> Hogsmeade resident or HRH in werewolf form or Sirius Black had 
> really been out to murder Harry?

Mike:
Could've and would've but didn't and wasn't. Conjecture versus hard 
fact. Lupin made a mistake and came close. Sirius Black was thought 
to be after Harry but wasn't. Severus Snape made a *choice* to join 
the Death Eaters and purposely brought word of the prophesy to 
Voldemort. No amount of regret over those choices will bring Lily and 
James back to life.

And while Sirius Black screwed up by convincing the Potters to switch 
to Pettigrew, he did not do it out of malice towards the Potters. 
Severus Snape cannot say the same thing with regards to his choice to 
join the DEs. That choice was a rejection of decency, a self-
alignment with evil.


> Carol:
> And Snape, assuming DDM!Snape, tried to prevent the Potters' 
> deaths and is still trying to protect Harry. Setting aside the 
> tower because we still don't know what's up with that, I give 
> Snape the moral high ground. He rightly sees Lupin as weak.

Mike:
I notice we always have to add caveats to Snape's credentials. Two in 
two sentences above. And where in canon can you show that Snape did 
anything to prevent the Potter's death? We must *assume* that Snape 
was the one to tell Dumbledore of Voldemort's interpretation, leaving 
aside the notion that Dumbledore would know how Voldemort would 
interpret it. Dumbledore knew what the prophesy said and Dumbledore 
can count the months. There also seems to be an assumption that Snape 
tried to convince the Potters not to use either Black or Pettigrew, 
whichever. I can't think of what else Snape *might* have done, but I 
don't see any actual canon the backs up any of these assumptions. Can 
anyone point me to some?

And Lupin being weak does not come close to Snape being a DE, when 
sizing up the two for which gets the moral high ground

*************************************

> wynnleaf
> <snip>
> 
> Back to bigotry and Snape.
> 
> A bigot, technically (yes, I know people use the term more 
> broadly), is a person who is unfairly judging based on people's 
> *opinions.*  

Mike:
IMO a bigot is someone who denegrates others based on race, color, 
creed, sex, etc. In the WW we have to add blood staus and non-human 
sentient beings such as giants, centuars, goblins, merpeople, elves, 
etc. I include werewolves in that mix as part humans.


> wynnleaf
> I assume that what everyone is actually saying is that Snape is 
> prejudiced.  <snipping the prejudice explanation>

Mike:
No, I don't call it prejudice. It's bigotry.


> wynnleaf
> I, instead, would say that Lupin's condition, and factors related 
> to growing up with that condition, any prejudices against Lupin, 
> etc., offer a possible *reason* for his actions, but absolutely are 
> not an *excuse* for his actions (the reasons do not "excuse" him, 
> iow).

Mike:
We have a different understanding of the word "excuse". I use it when 
I think someone is trying to give a reasonable explanation, but falls 
short. An excuse to me is a false rationalization. That's how I use 
the term.


> wynnleaf
> What term is bigoted?  "Werewolf?"  The term itself isn't bigoted.  
> Lupin uses it himself.  That is, in fact, what he is.  He says so 
> himself.  The problem, is that Snape calls him "werewolf," in such 
> a way as to take away from his humanity, imo.  Rather than call him 
> by his name, as Snape usually does, he calls him werewolf. <snip>

Mike:
Right. Snape uses the term just as Hagrid uses the term "Squib". You 
can use almost any term that defines one, in a derogatory fashion, 
making that term a bigotted utterance. 



> wynnleaf
> Well, as I point out above, there's lots of evidence that James and
> Sirius were bullies. As far as I can tell, there's only one word 
> of evidence that Snape was biased against muggleborns (biased 
> against people *because* they are muggleborn, that is).

Mike:
And as I pointed out above, in my response to Carol, there are other 
indications that Snape was bigotted, at least in his early years. 
And, as I also pointed out, Snape was one-for-one in our view of his 
school days. In baseball, that's called batting a thousand.


> wynnleaf
> Hm.... Snape at age 15 uses the word "mudblood" in a moment of 
> great stress, toward a girl who is "saving" him and flirting with 
> his attacker all at the same time.  Then 17 or so years later, 
> Snape calls a werewolf a "werewolf," in circumstances where that 
> werewolf is about to transform into a deadly beast.  And from that 
> we know he's prejudiced?  <snip>

Mike:
Well, how many other times do we see Snape in his school days? Oh 
yeah, that was it. And who else have we seen use the term "Mudblood" 
and what do we think of their character on the bigotry scale? They 
are all called bigots, iirc. And what do we think of those that have 
joined up with the Death Eaters? Rampant bigots, many of which joined 
up for that very reason.


> wynnleaf
> No, in my opinion, that's not particularly convincing.

Mike:
How about now? ;)


> wynnleaf
> That's not the secret passage most in question.  Dumbledore 
> *didn't* appear to know about the secret passage into Hogwarts 
> castle itself.  All the time the staff were patrolling the 
> castle, there is no indication that anyone knew about the 
> passageway to Honeydukes, which Sirius could have used to get into 
> the castle. <snip>

Mike:
As I've postulated before, I find it highly unlikely that MWPP were 
the only kids in a thousand years to discover that passageway. And 
clearly it is a known fact that the castle has secret passageways.

Besides, though we are not told, which is more likely - Sirius 
slipped past the Dementors onto the grounds as a dog, or Sirius as a 
man snuck into Honeydukes with the Dementors patrolling the streets 
at night and his picture plastered everywhere during the day?


> wynnleaf
> In fact, we have no evidence that Filch or anyone else 
> knew those passages other than the Marauders, Fred and George, and 
> later the Trio.  <snip>

Mike:
Filch knew four of the seven, according to Fred and George's 
*reckoning*. F & G didn't know who knew about the blocked one and 
didn't care because it was blocked.  Unbeknownst to Fred and George, 
a lot of people knew about the Willow's. So, how sure are we that F & 
G's "reckoning" was correct regarding the one beneath that "old 
crone"? And Ron pointed out that Honeydukes had not been broken into. 
And after all this ratonalizing <g> if Sirius snuck onto the grounds 
as a dog, he didn't need and couldn't use those secret passageways.

 
> wynnleaf
> In a broader sense, Snape was right. <snip>

Mike:
If you broaden out the meaning of "right", then yes, Snape was right. 
But he wasn't right about what *he* thought he was right about. And 
I've always agreed that Snape's likely overall opinion of Lupin's 
character was right on.


> wynnleaf
> <snip the passageways - covered>
> He was also at fault for concealing the map instead of turning 
> it over to Dumbledore who could have had the map watched 24/7.

Mike:
I think Lupin rightly thought of the map as *his*. Besides, it's the 
same argument as telling about the secret passageways. And as 
ingenious as the Marauders may have been, if Dumbledore had wanted a 
map that showed where everybody was in the castle and grounds, does 
anyone doubt that he could have made one himself? And how do we know 
that Dumbledore doesn't have something just like the Marauder's 
Map? "I've watched you more closely than you can have imagined" sound 
familiar? How did DD know Harry went after the stone before Ron and 
Hermione could say it? How did DD know where the CoS was and that 
Harry was in there? Maybe DD had a *Headmaster's Map*.

In fact, after what we witnessed in the Cave in HBP, I really don't 
have any good reason for why Dumbledore should remain ignorant of any 
secret passageways. But in GoF, Dumbledore takes a certain pride in 
not knowing all his castle's secrets. Might not that be a little 
irresponsible on his part in light of things in PoA? But it's still 
Lupin's fault for not telling about the passageway?! Why not put the 
blame on the man who hired Lupin?


> wynnleaf
> However, completely unlike Lupin, when Snape realized that his 
> actions were endangering innocent people he decided to do something 
> about it and confess his secrets.  And when Snape confessed his 
> secrets to Dumbledore, it was at the likely risk that Dumbledore 
> would just take the warnings about the Potters and send Snape on to 
> Azkaban.  

Mike:
As I questioned above, where's the canon that it was Snape's warning, 
and why do we think Dumbledore needed any insight on LV's plans?  


> wynnleaf
> Neither Lupin nor Snape knew, at the time of their mistakes, what 
> the final cost would be.  Lupin *knew* that not telling Dumbledore 
> needed information was endangering innocent school children.  He 
> did nothing for 9 months.  Snape knew that his actions had 
> endangered two families and he went to Dumbledore.

Mike:
You presume, as Harry did and Dumbledore "believed", that 
Snape "returned" because of the prophesy. I'm not convinced that is 
the whole reason or necessarily the main reason. And regrets aside, 
Snape was still a proximate cause of the Potter's death. Lupin has 
nothing approaching that *mistake* to atone for.


> wynnleaf:
> In the end, Snape's actions -- even though he confessed to 
> Dumbledore -- brought about the deaths of the Potters, but 
> ultimately also led to 13-14 years of peace with Voldemort gone.  
> So many more lives were saved.  That wasn't to his credit, but it 
> was the result.

Mike:
A brief calm between two wars, was Firenze's interpretation. But this 
is happenstance not of Snape's doing nor his ability to cause. The 
only foreseeable outcome was the Potter's death. 


> wynnleaf:
> In the end, Lupin's actions brought about the escape of Peter, who 
> went to Voldemort and helped him rise again, leading to the deaths 
> of many more people.  

Mike:
And if Harry hadn't stopped them, Lupin and Sirius would have killed 
Peter before all of it. And if Snape hadn't shown up, maybe the 
festivities would have ended earlier, and they would have made it 
back to the castle before Lupin transformed. This could go on 
forever. The point is that Snape *chose* to inform Voldemort, Lupin 
did not *choose* to cause Peter's escape.

> wynnleaf:
> Looks to me like Snape has the highground in some sort of cosmic 
> balance.

Mike:
At this point, I cannot disagree. A charmed life for an uncharming 
guy.