Snape's the Rescuer - Really?/Justice to Snape

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 170790

> Magpie:
> But how can you interpret this "image" differently? The image is 
> totally removed from the context of the story. If Snape was nailed 
> to a cross, for instance, the image would be Christlike. It's the 
> image itself that makes the association, not Snape. Snape's 
> character can add meaning to the image that's negative, just as 
> Voldemort being Voldemort turns the idea of a baby on its head, 
but 
> the imagery is still infantile. The imagery is based not just on 
the 
> situation but on what the associations the author or reader can be 
> assumed to have. I have hard time believing that someone shown a 
> picture of three unknown figures, two on stretchers and the third 
> carrying them away, would be able to interpret that image as 
having 
> anything to do with hypocrisy, and barely that they would say it 
was 
> about practicality. More like they'd identify the people on the 
> stretchers as injured or dead and the other person carrying them 
to 
> the hospital or the morgue. 
> 
> Sure when you put it into the scene in canon, as I said, it's easy 
> to come up with reasons why Snape's really just trying to look 
like 
> a caring or responsible person and really he hates everybody 
inside. 
> But even in that interpretation you have to admit that the image 
> he's projecting is one of responsibility and care. Though Rowling 
> puts no particular twist on it.


Alla:

I think we nailed at least our disagreement finally or I hope that 
we did.

I cannot remove this image from the story, AT ALL. Of course, if you 
would say that you are talking about the image of some nameless 
person putting other people on the stretchers, this image would give 
me medical associations, no question about it.

But you said it - we are **not** talking about any image of any 
person, or at least I was not doing that.

I am talking about image of Snape and in the context of the story it 
gives me **zero** medical associations, that is why I do not think 
JKR may necessarily put them in there for that purpose as well.

It is not just image of somebody we do not know, we **know** the 
context in which Snape puts people on the stretchers and it does not 
give me any healing images.


 
> Magpie:
> Snape's healing people seems obviously something more emphasized 
in 
> the text than Snape being practical in this way (which in this 
case 
> means Snape coming up with handy ways of carrying things or 
> transporting people etc.). The image of carrying people on 
> stretchers has more associations with the care of injury and 
> sickness than it does with practicality. There's not even anything 
> necessarily practical about them--JKR could have had him just 
> levitate them on their own. Snape's also good at Potions, which 
both 
> heal and poison (poisons and antidotes being common things he's 
> teaching), and good at Dark Arts, both hurting and reversing 
curses. 
> It just seems like going to a lot of effort to deny something 
pretty 
> consistent for Snape because it sounds too positive when I don't 
> even think it needs to be that positive.


Alla:

Um, I am not going into any effort to deny anything. I am genuinely 
interpreting this scene as Snape's ultimate hypocrisy and 
practicality - to look good in front of Fudge and get the reward.

This image of Snape putting Sirius on stretchers honestly disgusts 
me **a lot**.

By the way, if you were to ask me about Snape in HBP, I would 
totally say Snape in HBP can be IMO associated with healing (and 
killing as well LOL). As you said, I do not think something 
particularly positive can be said about Snape based on that, since 
he mainly heals IMO the fruits of his own labor directly or 
circumstantially, but he **heals** Draco, so how can I not say that 
he does?
In this scene though – no way, not in my opinion. Something that 
seems obvious to one person is really NOT that obvious to another. 



> colebiancardi:
> 
> I mentioned this a couple of days ago - I think that Snape 
embellished
> this bit.  After all, he was explaining the whole adventure to 
Fudge
> and he already told the whopper of the kids being under Sirius's
> Confundus Charm.  As I stated before, I think that Snape is making
> himself look better for Fudge - after all, it isn't everyday one 
gets
> an Order of Merlin, First Class!!
<SNIP>

Alla:

Well, this all comes down to how you see Snape, does it not? I mean, 
why would I think that Snape embellished it if he says it himself?  
It is not even Snape talking to Bella and Narcissa, where even 
though I do not believe Snape was lying, I at least see the argument 
how he can be.

He is talking to Fudge, to Fudge of all people. Why would he lie to 
him?


Oh, and as Lanval said (maybe I should just let Lanval speak, LOL we 
have the same thoughts anyways), Fudge would be the first one to see 
Snape coming in, no?

Didn't he already see gagged Sirius then and if he did not, would he 
not correct Snape?



> Ceridwen:
> I hate to open this can of worms again, but with all the ideas on 
the 
> list for why Snape might gag Sirius, this one took my 
> fancy.  "Floating someone requires some concentration"... so, gag 
the 
> guy who is most likely to break that concentration, especially 
when 
> you're floating four people, one with a broken leg.  We know from 
> canon that Sirius is... talkative... with Snape, to put it 
mildly.  I 
> think you might have hit on at least one good reason why Snape 
used a 
> gag.

Alla:

Oh dear, oh dear. Do you **have to** be so convincing?

I do not think we closed **gagging** can of worms yet by the way 
<g>, so no worries.

Sure, if the reason for the gag was not to silence Sirius before 
being kissed to make sure he is silenced forever, which is still 
takes my fancy, I at least **can** buy this one.

I mean, not quite, because Sirius is unconscious at the time, but I 
suppose Snape could expect him to wake up eventually, LOL.


JMO,

Alla.