Snape, while he may do good in the cause of right (or the expedient), is not a good person. He’s unhinged and cruel, and enjoys it. Having just reread the entire series, I’ve changed my G!Snape leanings; he’s too complex, and his motives and past are too complex, to be pure in allegiance to good.

The only thing that keeps me hanging like a thread to G!Snape is his helpful warning to Harry before he fled Hogwarts and the controversial look of revulsion and hatred before killing Dumbledore.

But that look could say a lot about E!Snape. Like Snape’s resentment toward James for saving his life, could DD’s kindness have engendered deep resentment as well? Especially because he couldn’t escape it? It’s easy to resent those who seek our good, if we feel it enchains us. Resentment turns to hatred, hatred to murder in the heart…and sometimes literal murder.

I feel sorry for Snape the child and student; I don’t feel sorry for Snape the man, who has chosen to nurture an adolescent state.

Time magazine had an interesting editorial, “It’s All About Him” by David von Drehle in their April 30 issue about the Virginia Tech shootings (I only got around to reading it recently). It’s about killers being narcissists. I’m not putting it here because I don’t know if it’s okay, but it would be interesting if you could post it. I feel this could very much apply to Snape.

Oops, the kitties are biting the blinds again…gotta go!

Sorry for the delay, but I do have a L.O.O.N.ish correction on your essay.

Yup, leave it to me.

Boiardo did not include any hippogriffs in his epic poem “Orlando Innamorato.” Ariosto was the first author in literature to use that magical beast as a character in his masterpiece “Orlando Furioso.”

As for the underpinning question of whether or not Snape is good or evil – I tend to think he is amoral.

I do think that he fell in love with Lily, in spite of himself. I think he did not want to love her because she was Muggleborn, but could not help where his heart led him. She may have reciprocated at some point, and then rejected him for James.

This would set Snape up for really wanting to seek revenge against Dumbledore’s pet students who got away with almost killing him with the notorious Prank.

Then when he realized that Voldemort was intent on killing Lily and James it was at that point he did the right thing and made a confession to Dumbledore. It was out of love for Lily and his Life Debt to James.

I do not trust Snape, because I do not think he is trustworthy.

He may have done the right thing in warning Dumbledore about Voldemort’s plans against James and Lily, but he would not have done so for Alice and Frank Longbottom.

He is simply out for himself at this point. I do not think he has any allegiance to anyone.

His soul is as black as his robes.

He may wind up doing the right thing and redeeming himself in the end to save Harry, but it will be to end his lifetime of pain for causing the death of the only woman he ever loved.

And it has got to hurt to look at Harry and see the face of his rival while having the eyes of the woman he loved.

Linda

I’m not referring to weak people like Peter. I mean heritage-rich, proud, self-confident people such as Bellatrix and Lucius, and brilliant, cold, calculating people such as (again) Lucius, Barty Jr. and Snape. That these people, who revel in their feelings of superiority to others, would humbly engage in such slavish pandering, fearful self-deprecatory, brown-nosing behavior is startling. Especially to Lord Thingy who makes clear he cares not a jot for any of them.

It seems most of the Death-Eaters aren’t the type to be second to anyone. Yet Bellatrix’s scene with LV in OotP is almost unbelievable (pitiable in its own way); I don’t think her post-Azkaban madness is a factor; it just enhanced her anxiety that she be seen as the most faithful.

Sure, they crave power. But what they’re willing to be and do to get it! I’ll never understand how people get to be that way.

Given that Percy is also heritage-rich, proud, cold and calculating, he’d make fine Death-Eater material and feel completely at home. Perhaps he’s a dementor-in-training, with all his practice in sucking up….

Goodness! The kitties are having a Hawking Hairball Competition–must fly!

It could be that the Deathly Hallows could be subtitled The Choice of Severus Snape. It’s not a done deal that Severus will make the right choice or the right series of choices, but so far I believe he has. I also believe that he does have an inner-Machiavellian nature that he is works hard to control. He is by nature bad, not good. And his choices for good are what makes his character so identifiable to us. Human nature, left to its own devises is Machiavellian and what is astonishing is how we choose a different way.

And that choice comes to us because of love. For Christians, it is based on Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, because He loved us first we can love. For Harry, who knew no love in his childhood (perhaps like Snape, and most especially like Voldemort), was still loved first by his mother, Lily – her sacrifice has literally been the gift that keeps on giving. Harry loves because he too was loved first.

Jo Rowling has told us that Snape, unlike Voldemort, has been loved in his life. We are fairly certain that Dumbledore loved him – and it’s clear that Snape is in incredible pain following Dumbledore’s death (and he keeps saving Harry’s life even then, giving him advice on how to defeat the Dark Lord even as he is running with Draco for the out perimeters of Hogwarts so that they can escape). He only completely looses it when Harry calls into question Snape’s courage – and one can imagine that even at this point Snape is doing all he can to control his Machiavellian nature. That is what makes his character so compelling. He is a bad man doing good.

And aren’t we all in a similar place, if the Scriptures are true?

ZR
BabyBlueOnline

Quite some time ago I read a great fan analysis of Ms. Rowling’s use of the “spider” to point to Snape’s role as a “spy.” In re-reading Sorcerer’s Stone recently, I came across the passage in the beginning describing Harry’s existence inside the broom cupboard. He starts to get dressed, and there’s a spider in his sock, but he’s used to spiders – when you live in a broom cupboard, you get used to seeing them. Also, in HB-Prince after Dumbledore collects Harry & takes him to the Burrow, they stop in a shed before going to the house. The shed is full of spiders. As Dumbledore speaks to Harry, Harry notices a spider crawling down Dumbledore’s hat.

I think that’s just one “symbolic” example of how Ms. Rowling demonstrates the importance of paying attention to what children sense and know. The lessons in Phoenix show us the importance of appropriate adult action & guidance – even, or perhaps especially, for young teenagers.

As for Harry knowing more than Dumbledore, it is possible, but not likely, in my opinion. Not sure if Snape told Dumbledore everything or if he was always acting on Dumbledore’s orders. But Dumbledore probably knew him better than anyone else did and while he was a very trusting person, he wouldn’t have fully trusted a Machiavellian character, I suppose.

Harry, Ron, and Hermione knowing more about the danger to the Philosopher’s Stone than McGonagall would be just one example.

Harry’s mistakes at the end of Order, ultimately, were not because he didn’t have adult help, but because Dumbledore himself made huge mistakes. I actually think Dumbledore was quite accurate when he said it was mostly his fault that Sirius died.

I can definitely see professor_mum’s point: Harry knows something that Albus doesn’t? Seems unlikely, which is while I still lean towards Albus being, on the whole, correct about Snape, and there being some sort of plot in which Albus’ death was planned. That said, I won’t be surprised if Rowling goes that way, nor will I think it inconsistent with her beliefs as demonstrated thus far. The books are about Harry, after all.

Overall, I’m still a bit baffled by the UV…Snape had to prove to Bellatrix…what? That he was willing to subvert Voldemort’s plan to let Draco die in an attempt to kill Albus? I’m not sure where Snape was going with this. It would have been easy to wriggle out of the UV in front of both Narcissa and Bella. “I can’t make that vow, because I’d be undermining the Dark Lord’s plan for Draco!” See? Easy enough. Unless his statement, “I think he means me to do it in the end” was his getting caught in his own words, and he felt he had to prove this point with the vow…

I agree with Pat: jeez, would I be disappointed that this was the literary twist. Travis and I don’t align on Albus’ infalability, but I agree that it would be difficult to internalize that Dumbledore has done something stupid by waving aside Harry’s POV. If he is Evil!Snape, Jo’s spin is that young Harry saw Snape as the Emperor without Clothes, but wise Albus was unable to. Is that where she is going? Errr…..?

However, I don’t think he really knew, even when he agreed to the final part, just what he was vowing. That was never spelled out, only implied, from their conversation. He kept saying that he knew all the plans, and Narcissa, desperate to save her son, made a lot of assumptions. The way the final part is worded, I thought they were talking about killing Harry, not Dumbledore. I hadn’t really thought that Voldemort would want Dumbledore out of the way before he wanted to rid himself of Harry. It makes sense, of course, but there was nothing in their conversation that definitely stated who was being talked about and just what Draco’s mission was.

That was either a very foolish or very brave move on Snape’s part, and we’ll have to wait to see how it all plays out. I do think that the hand twitch before he accepts the last one was because he realized he had backed himself into a very dark and dangerous corner and had no way out. Had he refused, Bella would have had all the ammunition she needed to rat him out to Voldemort, and he knew it.

And esme, I agree–I’d never make an Unbreakable Vow with anyone, for any reason. A little side note–I don’t think that Dumbledore would ever have asked anyone to do that either. The nature of the UV is so negative, that it doesn’t fit with Dumbledore’s faith and trust that he has in others. So whatever was going on between Snape and Dumbledore was on a higher level of ethics than the Unbreakable Vow requires.

Pat

But Snape didn’t just vow to kill Dumbledore–there were two other clauses to the vow before that. He vowed to help and protect Draco. No light thing to do when Voldemort himself has just sent the kid off on a doomed-to-fail mission in the expectation that he’ll either die in the attempt or be killed for his failure. And even taking out the whole “suicide mission” angle–there’s a million other things that can trigger the vow in the meantime–what if Draco gets on the bad side of another Hippogriff? what if Snape hadn’t been so close by when Harry sliced Draco open? What if Draco lets a really bad cough go untreated?

It’s still not entirely clear why Snape took the vow, but he did risk his life in taking it. It’s the nature of the Unbreakable Vow. I’d be risking my life by vowing to pick up the milk on the way home, even though I’m really, really sure I’m going to do it anyway, because sometimes Stuff Comes Up. Which is why I’d tell anyone who asked me to make such a vow to get lost–and I’m hardly a model of Machiavellian ingenuity.

(Plus, Snape’s hand twitches when Narcissa springs the third clause on him–his first and only slip throughout this scene–which suggests that the request does matter.)