Snapedom

Part IV: Love

Love: who did he care about saving?

 

Having dealt with Severus' actual ability to save each of the Potters, let us turn to the issue raised by Dumbledore's other specific accusation, that of who Severus cared about saving. As I said at the beginning of this essay, the outright demonization of Severus in some quarters based on the fact that Lily was the emotional focus of his efforts bothers me. I don't argue 21-year-old Severus actually did care hugely about James and the infant Harry (we are dealing only with the end of the first war here, not his attitudes later) and simply hid it well. When it comes to his actual feelings (versus actions) in the matter he was, as I mentioned above, mostly concerned for Lily. What I do disagree with is the conclusion that this makes him a monster, a moral incompetent hardly better than Voldemort himself or at least seriously behind most others on the "light" side in moral development.

 

I'm not arguing that at 21 he was a saint, either, of course. I think he was in many respects a rather ordinary, if isolated, abused, insecure and desperate young man who was angry, who'd made some seriously bad choices, but who had an innate capacity for gentleness (when treated well) and extreme loyalty and a marvelously strong will to survive, and to whom doing the right thing eventually came to matter very much. That as a very young man, faced with the fact he had put a family in danger, he focused the greatest share of his emotional energy on the woman who apparently had been one of the few people to ever treat him with anything approaching compassion or respect for him as a human being is, to me, perfectly understandable and natural.

 

So yes, he does focus on Lily. It may not be the ultimate height of moral and spiritual development to be concerned mainly with those whom you have had positive relationships with in the past, above others, but it is not the depths of perversion, either. It's...rather depressingly normal human nature to focus first, and mainly, on those closest to us and to be concerned for those who have no relation to us, or even who have hurt us, later if at all.

 

With regard to the accusation that he does not care at all about James or Harry: it is true that he goes silent when Dumbledore accuses him of not caring, indicating most likely that this accusation struck home in some way, that he cares less about what happens to James and Harry than about what happens to Lily. Dumbledore certainly has more to go on here than he does with his specious argument about exchange. I'm not entirely certain that the text makes absolutely clear that he does not care at all, in the least, what happens to either of them, or if he feels a niggling twinge of something, perhaps particularly about Harry (he obviously feels guilty enough about it to go silent in the face of Dumbledore's accusation). But no, at this point he does not seem to be deeply concerned with them the way he is about Lily, I grant that.

 

I find his lack of concern least defensible with regards to the infant Harry, an innocent one-year-old child and the son of the woman he loved. He ought to have felt something, even if he could have done nothing directly to save him (beyond warning Dumbledore) the way he attempted to save Lily by asking Voldemort for her life. Perhaps he did feel some twinge, but it does not seem to have been very strong.

 

However, while I wish he had felt something, and must condemn him somewhat for not being more concerned, I also don't think that this is proof of depravity or utter callousness on his part. I find it understandable, if lamentable, that he failed to be deeply moved by the possible fate of an infant he had likely never even seen and so who existed for him only in an abstract way. Severus is not only a rather young man at the time (and unconditional love, real love for strangers and for one's enemies, is something I believe does need to be learned over time), he is also someone with pitifully little experience of love, not only in the giving but also the receiving. That he is able to go as far as he does, now and later, in loving others who have not loved him based on what little love he does receive is rather astonishing to me; the fact that he tries at all, ever, indicates that he's not lost completely; he recognizes its importance and does his best, eventually. But to expect someone with his history, in his position, to suddenly develop an enormous concern for the fate of what is to him an abstract entity is, I think, unrealistic. I doubt he knows how to love like that at this point, and to seriously demand it of him as if he were someone with much greater experience of love to draw on is, I think, just a touch unjust. He ought to feel more, yes, but a certain (small) allowance can be made for him I think.

 

I'm surprised he's as unswerving in his love for Lily as he is, really, considering that what we see of their relationship does not give one the impression of deep, unbounded affection for him on her part, ever. (I rather think lingering guilt over the over the mudblood incident may play a slight role here, actually, but I think he does truly, deeply care about her as well.) After all, he's otherwise seemingly the type to become bitterly angry over any snub or injury, and he did try to apolgize to her before being turned away (whatever we think of that incident, I'm saying, I'm surprised it didn't become a point of bitterness towards Lily for him. In fact, perhaps it did and he's simply in deep denial. That would rather help explain his behaviour towards Harry at school).

 

His lack of concern for James, while hardly noble, is to me less troubling. Let's be frank: whatever the man was like after he left school, he made Severus' life a living hell for seven straight years, abusing him physically/magically, verbally and sexually (though forcibly exposing his genitals to half the school is not quite on the same level as rape, it is a form of sexual assault). All for the crimes of 1) fighting back when attacked, 2) trying for his expulsion in retaliation for being attacked, 3) being interested in things James did not approve of (given no coherent definition of the Dark Arts I cannot take James' dislike of them seriously as a specifically moral issue), 4) belonging to a House James did not approve of, and 5) "existing." We are clearly shown that James was the one to initiate the conflict, and that his normal method was to fight dirty, four-on-one. At one point the abuse became life-threatening. Even if James himself was not directly involved in the planning/execution of it, certain of his friends were, and apparently James approved their conduct enough to continue to associate closely with them afterwards. Any argument that his dive into the tunnel to save Severus indicates that he ever had any regard for Severus' worth as a human being is, I think, fatally undermined by the fact that he continued to flagrantly and unrepentantly abuse him afterwards, no longer even bothering with excuses but simply attacking him for "existing."

 

Failing to ask Voldemort specifically for the life of his torturer, even if he could have gotten it, is not perhaps an illustration of the highest virtue, but I find it quite understandable and more excusable than his lack of concern for the infant. Failing to be deeply concerned about his possible death, again though not noble, extremely understandable. I just can't quite condemn a man with little experience of love for failing to be deeply torn about the fate of the man who unreasonably tormented him for years and never expressed remorse for it. I wish that he could have reached that level of spiritual development, the way I wish most other people and myself would get there. But I can't condemn him as a monster for not doing so. Otherwise I'd have to condemn every other person who ever failed to express regret at the suffering or death of someone who viciously hurt them - and most such people seem to go right along being considered normal, generally morally healthy people. After all, while we never see Severus express concern for James, he's not shown salivating at the thought of having put his life at risk either, wondering how he can make sure James is killed and Lily not (notice how even in his little "exchange" speech Dumbledore never mentions James?) If he ever actually wished for James' death, it was in the abstract, and not deeply enough to refuse to act to protect him.

 

Severus hated James, clearly. He never considered him anything other than a mortal enemy, and there is no indication that James ever felt anything but the same towards him. Nor do I think Severus ought to have considered him differently; James never treated him like anything but an enemy. And while unilaterally forgiving your enemies and risking your life to save theirs are generally considered morally good things to do, they are not considered the basics which you are simply expected to follow as part of being a normal, fallible person - they are usually things considered quite rare and correspondingly extremely noteworthy signs of high moral achievement (though we are all urged to attempt to reach this level eventually, failing to do so is not a mortal sin). Considering the fact that it was partly Severus' own actions that put James' life in jeopardy in this particular instance (James was no innocent civilian in the war after all), perhaps he did have slightly more responsibility to save it than he otherwise would have. But he did not at the time know it was James (among others) he was putting into danger, and when he did learn this he acted to save him in that he warned Dumbledore of the danger, and in fact asked him to preserve the whole family. That warning alone, regardless of how it was phrased, would have alerted Dumbledore to the danger James (among others) was in and would have cost Severus his life if it had been discovered. There simply was no way he could have risked his life there only for Lily, regardless of what he felt about James (or the child). Yet knowing that he would be putting himself at risk in part on behalf of his hated torturer, Severus chose to risk his life anyway. That's more consideration than James ever showed him (for James, as an animagus, was never in true danger in the tunnel, remember. And having never actually been at risk, I can't say that James is owed a "life-debt" by Severus whatever Dumbledore says, even setting aside James' atrocious behavior after the incident.)

 

I'm sorry, but that all doesn't add up to "monster" to me.

Love Thine Enemy: risking oneself for an enemy in the Potterverse

Considering that we are being asked to judge Severus for failing to care about the fate of his mortal enemy, who he nevertheless risks his life in part to protect, it may be enlightening to examine who else in the Potter books risks themselves for an enemy, and their reactions afterwards. janus and I went through the named characters, doing our best to find everyone who could conceivably be seen as having knowingly risked their lives specifically for their enemies (rather than for friends or for the nameless, faceless mass of ‘the greater good’). Here is what we found, stretching our definition to the breaking point to include extreme generosity in consideration of 1) risk (not only death but merely serious risk to reputation and freedom), 2) who could be classed as an enemy (to the point where Triwizard Tournament opponents count), and 3) circumstances of rescue.

Character – Enemy/Enemies in Question – Circumstances

Harry – Draco, Dudley, Fleur, Stan Shunpike – rescued from RoR Fiendfyre; rescued from Dementors (though he had limited option of only saving himself); rescued her sister from drowning despite merpeople; disarmed rather than killing DE-Stan

 

Severus – Harry (if you insist he considers him an enemy), James, Lupin, Sirius? – multiple times, including years of spying and the original warning; the warning again; failed attempt during flight of 7 Potters; whatever risk he incurred from Umbridge and/or Voldemort in his managing of the DoM fiasco

 

Pettigrew – Harry – cellar of Malfoy Manor (problematic, since Voldemort supposedly wanted Harry alive, but he pays with his life anyway)

 

Narcissa – Harry – lies to Voldemort

 

Petunia and Vernon – Harry – take him in and shelter him for years (abuse aside) despite terror of magical world and threat of Voldemort, at risk to themselves and their own son (it is implied that Petunia must consent for the magic to work, and Vernon never goes against her)

 

Draco – DA, Trio – knew about the Protean-charmed coins 7th year but never betrayed the DA (which would have cost his life likely if discovered); possibly lied at Malfoy Manor (tho he may also have simply been uncertain of their identities)

 

Remus – Sirius (at time believed him Potters’ betrayer) – kept animagus abilities secret at risk to his reputation, freedom and possibly (as werewolf) life if discovered

 

Scrimgeour – Order/Harry (who he was not allied with, tho not an enemy like Voldemort) – tortured to death for information

 

Barty Crouch's parents – Barty Crouch Jr. – believed him a faithful DE, father risked reputation and freedom to hide him at home, mother died in Azkaban for him

 

Firenze – human children (Trio) – risked herd’s vengeance for protecting them, was driven out of Forest

 

Regulus Black – anyone fighting against Voldemort (tho perhaps this is ‘greater good') – drank potion and died in cave to get at locket Horcrux

 

Ollivander – Voldemort/Riddle (assuming he was not simply a true neutral/slightly on his side) – knew who Riddle/Voldemort was (by the wand) but never told

 

Voldemort (to be extremely generous) – Lily – offered to spare life of his declared enemy, a choice that had magical consequences disastrous for him (tho he could not have predicted the specificity of them, he may have been aware of the theoretical possibility of ancient magic coming into play. A stretch.)

 

James: no, because he was never in danger in the tunnel.

Dumbledore hiring Severus, an active DE: no, because 1) Severus was working for him at that point, not Voldemort, and 2) he’s weathered that criticism and others before and had little problem regaining his status. He (like Remus with Stan Shunpike) in fact warns Harry away from showing compassion towards an enemy (Voldemort’s helpless, screaming remnant of soul).

 

So, apart from Severus himself and Harry, who is widely lauded as (supposedly) being extremely pure of heart and loving, who do we see risk their lives for an enemy? At our most generous we have: Remus (in a situation where his risk is actually part of an immoral abdication of responsibility); Ollivander (protecting Riddle); Crouch’s parents on behalf of their own son; Scrimgeour; a centaur; the adult Dursleys; four Death Eaters; and Voldemort himself.

 

Wow. I mean, the unconditional love is just flowing off the page. One of the few moments where a character other than Severus actually seriously risks his life for the sake of a declared mortal enemy is the moment (one of the few worthwhile lines in DH) when Harry dives into the burning Room of Requirement to rescue his long-time enemy and new DE recruit, Draco. This rather makes up for his attack on him in HBP, and is one of the few moments of real selflessness we see from him. That Harry, the pure and oh-so-loving Chosen One, is perhaps the only character I can compare to (adult) Severus in terms of selflessness speaks volumes about 1) Severus’ eventual growth and 2) (more pertinently here) the books’ moral…incoherency is the nicest word for it.

 

Are we seriously supposed to condemn young Severus, fresh from the DEs, as an inhuman monster for failing to be as perfectly selfless as the authorially-anointed Christ figure of the entire series very occasionally is? How then are we supposed to judge the rest of the Order, and those like Dumbledore and Remus who urge our Hero™ not to be compassionate?

 

I mean really?