What did you like about Harry Potter?

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 183814

Winterfell wrote:
<snip> 
> I also enjoyed Snape's character in the Harry Potter books
immensely.  but Snape is one of the most inconsistent characters in
modern fiction.  Funny though, his inconsistencies don't seem to
bother some readers nearly as much as do those of other characters. 
Whether you love or dislike Snape, you can't objectively deny his
inconsistencies.  He's a DE, then he isn't. He's a valued member of
the OoTP yet he killed it's leader.  He loved Lily yet he treated her
son terribly while protecting him from danger.  He could have turned
Harry in for using the potion's book, yet he didn't.  And I'm sure all
of you can come up with dozens more, as these aren't even the best
one's I'd bet. <snip>

Carol responds:
It's all in how you look at it. We know as early as GoF that he was a
DE and "returned to our side" to spy for DD "at great personal risk."
So the question arises, why did he switch sides (which happens
frequently in real life, and not only among timeservers who serve the
person in power out of fear or desire for personal gain) and where do
his loyalties really lie? He's at once ambiguous and conflicted, torn
between his instincts and his given word, between love and duty on one
side and his natural unpleasantness and his bitter hatred of his
childhood enemies on the other. Most of the time he's either
inscrutable or sarcastic; he only gives his bottled up rage free rein
on rare occasions, and then it's not for the reasons that Harry and
the readers think it is (not a childhood grudge but the belief that
Sirius Black betrayed Lily to her death, for example).

His being a valued member of OoP and killing its leader is not an
inconsistency buy an irony which, unfortunately, cannot be revealed to
the other members, who must continue to believe that he's Voldemort's
loyal servant. That he treated Harry badly (I wouldn't say
terribly--Harry suffered no lasting damage from either his sarcasm or
his detentions, in contrast to the scar that Umbridge's cruel quill
left on his hand) and protected him at the same time is also an irony
(though I think that Snape could not have gotten close to Harry if
he'd wanted to given their resspective personalities and histories,
Harry's feelings about Slytherin, and Snape's need to maintain a
distance from any but his Slytherin students to avoid arousing the
suspicions of students with DE parents in case Voldemort rose again.
Protecting Harry was a *duty* and Snape was old-fashioned enough to
value that outmoded virtue. (He was probably celibate, too.) Snape had
an excellent work ethic. He never shirked or procrastinated. (Wish I
could say the same.) He didn't have to like what he did (though I
rather think he enjoyed the challenge of *acting*, fooling people,
especially Voldemort, with regard to his loyalties and intentions. And
he had an almost Gryffindor courage, too, seeming to like risking his
life, not for the sake of reckless fun but for a cause (Lily, if you
like--I think it was more complex). And I particularly enjoyed seeing
him in new situations, with Narcissa and Bellatrix (and, briefly,
Wormtail) at Spinner's End (what was the point of Wormtail's being
there, anyway?), Umbridge near the end of OoP, with Voldemort and the
DEs in "the Dark Lord Ascendant." I didn't like most of his scenes
with Dumbledore, but that wasn't Snape's fault. But I loved, "Would
you like me to do it now, or would you like a few moments to compose
an epitaph?"

Certainly, there were contradictions in his character. There are
contradictions in Dumbledore's, too--wisdom and folly, tenderness and
ruthlessness. That's realistic. Most of us have contradictory
qualities, some more than others.

Now if Snape had suddenly cheered for Gryffindor or awarded Hermione
twenty points for a clever answer or behaved in a friendly way to
Sirius Black, he'd have been inconsistent. Instead, he's an amazing
character, I would even say, a *great* character, with all due credit
to JKR for her creation, in a series that is not otherwise a literary
masterpiece.

For the person, and I'm sorry I don't remember who it was, who started
the thread on why we like the Harry Potter books, that's what it boils
down to for me--Severus Snape. Not that I don't like other characters
or certain scenes that don't include him, but he's the reason that I
read and reread the books and was in terrible suspense for the fifteen
years (okay, I'm exaggerating) between HBP and DH.

Carol, grateful that characters, unlike people in real life, can be
brought back to life by the simple turning of a page