On being Lucky (was On lying and cheating)/ Snape and his importance.

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 165910

> Alla:
> 
> Right and I am questioning that Snape ever protected Harry to 
protect 
> Harry ( except of course saving his life in PoA). I am saying that 
it 
> is possible that Snape first and foremost did things  to save 
himself 
> or to further his goals and if it is protected Harry by extension, 
it 
> is not really protection IMO.

Magpie:
But that fits my point as well, which is that Snape is in the 
position of power over Harry--James is not. Because James is dead 
and Snape is alive and free and in the position that he is in. 
Whether Snape is protecting Harry for Harry's sake doesn't matter to 
the point I'm making. I'm just talking about Snape's position and 
power as opposed to James'.

 
> > Magpie:
> > No, I wasn't positing Snape and the Annoying Little Gryffindor 
at 
> > all. I was not suggesting that Snape is the one who's going to 
> > destroy Voldemort. Voldemort hasn't been destroyed yet, 
obviously, 
> > nor have the Horcruxes been destroyed, and I wasn't claiming 
that 
> > Snape would be the one to do it. I am saying that like it or 
not, 
> > the story over and over comes back to Snape and Snape's actions. 
> > Snape gave the Prophecy to Voldemort, and told Dumbledore that 
he'd 
> > done so, setting the Fidelius in motion. Snape was put in the 
key 
> > position of double agent in the war. Snape's actions *matter*. 
That 
> > does not make him a hero or give him Harry's role. But Harry's 
role 
> > has up until now often been *reactive*. So yes, Snape's actions 
are 
> > very important to the story. It's his mistake that put Voldemort 
> > onto Harry's trail, possibly his decision to take the Vow that 
made 
> > things turn out the way they did in HBP, certainly (imo) his 
action 
> > that kills Dumbledore. I find it difficult to look at HBP in 
> > particular and *not* see Snape's actions as very important. By 
> > contrast Harry in HBP is still playing catch up. He's not quite 
in 
> > the loop yet.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Sure it does come back to Snape's actions - what I am questioning 
> though is that Snape's actions are **more** important than Harry, 
not 
> that they are important initself. Yes, Snape started the circle of 
> Harry's misery. In that sense, the story of Harry's life may not 
have 
> happened, but isn't the argument like that often given by Snape 
> defenders?
> 
> That Voldemort could have learned the prophecy anyways, that he 
> already targeted the Potters and could have attacked regardless 
and 
> that is why Snape's actions are not that important?
> 
> I mean, I guess if you would say that Snape's actions are more 
> important for plot development so far, I guess I would agree, but 
if 
> you are saying that Snape's actions are more important for 
ultimate 
> resolution of the story, then we are in disagreement.

Magpie:
I'm just saying that in general Snape's actions are very important 
to the story. Within his world his actions have affected a lot of 
people and things that are central to the central Voldemort arc. I 
compared him to Harry in that limited way, but I wasn't meaning to 
set them up against each other competing for the real hero of the 
story or anything like that. However Voldemort might have learned of 
the Prophecy, what happened was Snape, the same Snape waiting to 
hate Harry and also (seemingly) protect him when he gets to 
Hogwarts. And because Snape has been in "the story" a lot longer 
than Harry (in terms of being older and having a part to play in a 
past before Harry was born) he's often a few steps ahead of Harry.  

Alla:> 
> Snape is the loyal to DD superspy or stinking traitor and 
murderer, 
> take your pick, but he is not the one who saved Peter from being 
> killed and thus probably set in the motion the mysterious ancient 
> magic that can play key role at the end.
> 
> Snape is not the one, whom young mother heroically defended and 
thus 
> set in motion another incredibly important ( hopefully) magic.
 
> So, whether Harry is playing catch up or not in regards of 
> information, I am still not agreeing that his actions are in 
general 
> more important that Harry's.

Magpie:
I'm regretting making the throwaway comparison (even though I know I 
put in some kind of qualifier I don't remember like "in some ways" 
or "sometimes"--thinking that would make it clear I wasn't saying 
what I'm taken to be saying). My point was *not* to start a 
competition between Snape and every other character because *they're 
all necessary for the story.* Or to make Snape the number one hero 
or character. It just seemed obvious to me that Snape's personal 
story is hugely important in the series, and the series comes back 
to it even more as it gets towards the climax because of where Snape 
is positioned. The Snape/Harry dynamic is so central to the plot it 
just didn't occur to me that saying Snape's actions were important 
(or that Snape's actions as a character sometimes had more effect on 
the greater story than Harry) would be taken as forgetting about 
what Lily or James or the DA or what anyone else did. 

I'm not claiming Snape is better than Harry, and obviously there are 
plenty of areas of the narrative where Snape doesn't matter at all 
the way Harry does. Snape isn't involved in the interactions between 
the students, or the R/Hr romance, or Harry's romances with Cho or 
Ginny, or the saving of Buckbeak etc. I'm just saying that when it 
comes to the Voldemort/Harry story, Snape's pretty important and was 
before Harry arrived at Hogwarts. At the risk of starting the whole 
thing up again, Harry's getting people to follow him with the DA 
really isn't affecting things on the level I'm saying Snape's 
actions have, even if it's obviously important in its own way. 
Snape's actions have at times set up the story of which *Harry* is 
the protagonist. Snape is one hard-working *antagonist* who acts as 
an opposing force to Harry and causes him to generate action back

-m