![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
Author mary-j-59
Genre informal essay, probably about 500 words long.
warnings none
We've been having a fairly heated discussion about Severus and Remus - and it struck me just now that no one has mentioned the trait these young men have in common. It's a lot more obvious in Severus, at least to me, but Remus shows signs of it, too, if you look carefully.
They are both depressed.
I've gone into detail, in an earlier essay (February 09, on Snapedom) about Severus and his grief. Jodel from aol was perhaps the first to spot Remus and his. He looks worn, tired, and shabby; he suffers from a chronic illness that isolates him - what could be a clearer metaphor for depression? Jodel remarks that In fact there was a curious lack of enthusiasm about Remus John Lupin altogether. There was no “fire” there. She also remarks that, in spite of his strengths, Like both Severus Snape, and Sirius Black, Remus Lupin was a profoundly damaged man
As I've said, one of the things that Severus Snape struggles with is depression - he is a man in mourning. Jodel points out that Sirius, too, is depressed, at least in OOTP, when he is trapped in his parents' house and sliding into alcoholism. And Remus Lupin is like them!
Tonks, too, becomes depressed when Remus rejects her - or so we are told. And what happens to her? She and Remus are both killed. Sirius, too, is killed, and so is Severus. In all four cases, we never see anyone mourn for the dead - not really - and there is no funeral described.
Isn't that odd?
But that is how mourning is treated in the Potterverse. Albus Dumbledore praises Harry when - just about a month after his beloved godfather's death - Harry puts all thought of Sirius aside. It is wrong to mourn, it seems, and if you do, you will be punished. The hero is a person who is able to put aside his grief at will.
So there you have it. Much as they dislike each other, Remus Lupin and Severus Snape do have something in common. They are depressed. And, in the Potterverse, depression is a weakness for which you will be punished. The punishment is death.
As I said, this is just an informal essay, and I may be overstating my case. But I really don't like the way Rowling approaches grief and mourning in these books. What do you think?
Genre informal essay, probably about 500 words long.
warnings none
We've been having a fairly heated discussion about Severus and Remus - and it struck me just now that no one has mentioned the trait these young men have in common. It's a lot more obvious in Severus, at least to me, but Remus shows signs of it, too, if you look carefully.
They are both depressed.
I've gone into detail, in an earlier essay (February 09, on Snapedom) about Severus and his grief. Jodel from aol was perhaps the first to spot Remus and his. He looks worn, tired, and shabby; he suffers from a chronic illness that isolates him - what could be a clearer metaphor for depression? Jodel remarks that In fact there was a curious lack of enthusiasm about Remus John Lupin altogether. There was no “fire” there. She also remarks that, in spite of his strengths, Like both Severus Snape, and Sirius Black, Remus Lupin was a profoundly damaged man
As I've said, one of the things that Severus Snape struggles with is depression - he is a man in mourning. Jodel points out that Sirius, too, is depressed, at least in OOTP, when he is trapped in his parents' house and sliding into alcoholism. And Remus Lupin is like them!
Tonks, too, becomes depressed when Remus rejects her - or so we are told. And what happens to her? She and Remus are both killed. Sirius, too, is killed, and so is Severus. In all four cases, we never see anyone mourn for the dead - not really - and there is no funeral described.
Isn't that odd?
But that is how mourning is treated in the Potterverse. Albus Dumbledore praises Harry when - just about a month after his beloved godfather's death - Harry puts all thought of Sirius aside. It is wrong to mourn, it seems, and if you do, you will be punished. The hero is a person who is able to put aside his grief at will.
So there you have it. Much as they dislike each other, Remus Lupin and Severus Snape do have something in common. They are depressed. And, in the Potterverse, depression is a weakness for which you will be punished. The punishment is death.
As I said, this is just an informal essay, and I may be overstating my case. But I really don't like the way Rowling approaches grief and mourning in these books. What do you think?
There is something going on here, yes, you've put your finger on something. It also perhaps ties in with the general dis regard for things like compassion? (Look at what Dumbles tells Harry in Kings Cross).
However, you don't cover Dumbledore's funeral or the memorialization of the Potters. Do they get special treatment for being amazing and powerful heroes in some way (the Potters with the Savior child, Dumbles as, well, Dumbles)? Or is it that people only usually mourn family and very close friends, and only to a degree, and those who continue to mourn after a relatively short time has passed are seen as different/unhealthy/obsessed?
Or Sirius! The possibility that Tonks might be mourning Sirius is in fact used as a red herring.
Harry is traumatized by Cedric's death, heralding a year of Capslock. Then he quickly pushes aside Sirius' death and has a year of Quidditch and the chest monster. Not sure where his reaction to Dumbledore's death fits in.
--_--
Some good thoughts in your essay. While the deep, gut-gnawing grief doesn't always persist very long - it's important to get past that - to show no sign of mourning or grief in a month is - well, unhealthy, though it does depend on degrees of closeness. I know a woman who lost her husband of 25 years, and was dating 2 months later (FTR, I think she's a jerk).
As far as Remus and Tonks' death....who WOULD mourn them, aside from Harry? The book didn't show anyone else being close to them, and Harry had spent a year on the run, with little contact with them, widening the emotional gap. And the Weasleys - the more emotional family - were dealing with a much closer loss (and that's a missing funeral I think I resented even more - the loss of one of the twins. I'm a twin myself, damnit, and I wanted to know how the one surviving was!!!).
Dumbledore I didn't mourn at all. I saw him as a manipulative coot, allowing things that shouldn't have happened for a 'greater good'. Of course, I chalk most of that up to JK having the 'emotional capacity of a teaspoon'. I feel she condones bullying...so long as it happens to someone you don't like. Bullying greasy, sarcastic Snape? No problem! Bushy, bossy Hermione? Now, that's just not on, we'll grow a conscience now, ta! .....ironically, Snape has one of the most developed personalities in the series. Likely because he was at least based on someone real...and someone she had a profound dislike for. Enlightening, that...
I think Snape was (or should have been) mourned by more after the revelations Harry shared....even those who genuinely hated him would, probably, for the sake of public opinion for "a misunderstood war hero", claim that he "wasn't all bad".
And I'm probably wandering way off subject, mourning and all. I need to think more on the theme of depression, though. I felt like JK seemed to imply that angsty teens was ok, but depressed and grieving adults were not. Which really makes me question if she really understands how it works.
Lupin's death
I have no idea why we are meant to see Harry as some sort of noble warrior. He's really not very competent!
I remember my own mother telling me many times that a mother doesn't have the 'luxury' of grieving, of 'letting herself get depressed', because people need you. Your children need you. Your husband needs you. And even now, with her children grown and gone, I see her sweeping her grief over her father's death and her mother's swiftly failing health under the carpet, and covering it up beneath the illusion of duty and business.
I'm not saying I agree with that point of view at all, but I grew up with a mother who held it, and from what I have seen of Rowling, and heard from her in interviews, it is possibly that she might view grief and depression in the same way - that depression, or even letting one's self properly grieve is a 'luxury'. Something that a responsible mother and wife can not afford to indulge in.
Honestly, that makes me incredibly sad.
BUT the books also have a very 1930s/1950s social background. A time when most British families had coped with death in wartime, and had had to put it aside quickly to get on with life (and the task of winning a War). Certainly no one of my (1950s) generation is expected to grieve (openly) for long - the 'cry if you need to and let it all out' style of unrepressed grief is very modern and I can't see Dumbledore, Sirius, Snape or Lupin having much sympathy. I don't see it, in ther terms, a sign of 'depression', so much as 'shell-shock' (PTS) - yes, it is something that they have in common - and yes, if they don't put it aside, the consequences will most likely be death.
We see several people in the books turn away when someone else cries - with the idea that it is the polite thing to do - that one should pretend that one has not noticed and that it is practically indecent to watch them cry. (Albus for Harry's tears, Snape for Narcissa's and practically everyone in the infirmary, but we get Harry's feelings on it when Remus cries - and Remus' tears are specifically about Albus' death) -- Hwyla
re: Tonks
I think Tonks's upset is not just over Remus's rejection but other factors as well:
1. Her cousin died recently.
2. She was injured and had to spend time in the hospital recuperating.
3. She survived a battle in which her cousin died, but failed to protect him.
4. Lupin is not only rejecting her, but becoming increasingly careless with his own life. It's unlikely he'll survive the war, which of course is just another reason to reject her.
5. She's grown up a bit since we last saw her, having had her first taste of battle.
6. Mad-Eye, her mentor, will probably die soon as well.
It was irritating to see it reduced to 'silly lovesick girl' by characters like Ron.
re: the morality of these books
What's troubling is that values like duty, hierarchy, obedience and loyalty are never really challenged or complicated by alternative moral systems. And those are perfectly good values, but in a book that purports to represent liberal values of tolerance and equity, it's all a little jarring and reactionary.
Combined with the Calvinism, the emphasis on abstract devotion to duty makes the books very colorless and lacking in human feeling. I mean, Harry isn't a hero because he saves people (after the earlier books, he doesn't pull off too many daring rescues, anyway). He's a hero because he's willing to sacrifice himself. Oh, and because he's burning with the desire to kill Tom.
If the books really committed to a chivalrous, medieval framework of symbolism and values, this would be fine, but it's jarring and discordant next to Hermione's 'save the elves' campaign, the inclusion of ecological issues, etc.
Or in some cases, Harry just is not present. For instance, We don't get to see Andromeda's grief over her husband, daughter or son-in-law. Nor do we see the full reaction of the Weasley's after Fred's - simply because Harry was not there. The deaths during the battle really have not sunk in while everyone must continue fighting.
Also, Harry is an unusual case. He is a bit disassociated in general because of his upbringing. We see him react strongly to the deaths of those that really 'matter' to him (Sirius, Albus and Dobby), just not for very long. And the books would also be quite different if he was actually incapacitated by grief.
And I think she does a pretty good job of displaying depression. As has been mentioned, Snape is obviously depressed and yet functioning. Sirius turns to alcohol - even when he has Harry with him. I'm not sure I would count Remus as depressed throughout the books. I think he was functioning at a pretty good level in bk3 & 5.
I think his is more grief. We get more of a glimpse of it in bk6. He has apparently 'broke off' with Tonks within 2 weeks of Sirius' death - depending upon whether one believes they had something going on before that or whether one believes it was all on Tonks' part. He has OTHER 'people-pleasing' issues, but I'm not sure I would label him depressed.
I am NOT happy that we only see women lose their powers from depression. Especially since it shows Tonks in a very weak position as an Auror. However, it then shows Snape in a good light - for managing to keep his powers going. But then I believe he watched his mother 's powers become useless from depression - and he learned young (I think) to battle it because he needed his own protections. -- Hwyla
Yes, Hwyla, but it is Rowling's choice to end the book where and as she does! And it struck me as very strange, even on first reading. Why on earth don't we get to mourn Colin and Tonks and Lupin and the other defenders of Hogwarts? Why is Severus apparently left in the shack to rot? (Well, I know the answer to that one - he's not dead.:)) Rowling did not have to end her book as she did. That she refused to show Harry dealing with the deaths is a flaw in her work, IMO.
And yes, it does seem to be women, and only women, whose powers suffer as a result of grief. (Tonks, Merope and possibly Eileen,though we can't be sure of that.) And that is rather disturbing, too.
I got the impression from her interviews that the death of her mother was one of the major issues that JKR was working through while she was writing the books. I've always assumed that's why there is so much emphasis on death in the books. Daniel Hemmens' remark springs to mind: "JK then insists on making it very clear to us that there is Death happening and that Death is a very important part of the book, because it's important that children be told about Death." (review posted at ferretbrain.com)
But if the many deaths in the books are a reflection of the pain JKR experienced with the loss of her mother, then it's strange that mourning is portrayed in such a negative light.
That she refused to show Harry dealing with the deaths is a flaw in her work, IMO.
I agree. The message that "Death happens, so get used to it" may be valid, but then the question that remains is, "So how do you deal with it?" She gave us no answer.
But then again - I am not sure just how much of this might be a cultural divide. I don't really think the Brits (in general) must all maintain a 'stiff-upper-lip' these days - but it does seem to have part of the literary culture.
Anyone from there want to give us some input? -- Hwyla
stoicism
Also, surely in most cultures it's considered admirable for family/close friends to help out the bereaved in the immediate aftermath of the death? Or at least, doing such would not be considered offensive or intrusive?
The whole absence of a proper funeral for Cedric, I think, was very problematic for me. I wonder if JKR did not want to draw attention to the fact that Harry's actions got the boy killed. It also puts Dumbledore in a rather terrible light, - this is a kid who got killed in the course of a Tournament which took place at his own school. Presumably he was a part of the long months of planning and organizing and analyzing safety precautions and emergency procedures. I just thought it was...distasteful.
stoicism
Also, surely in most cultures it's considered admirable for family/close friends to help out the bereaved in the immediate aftermat of the death? Or at least, doing such would not be considered offensive or intrusive? I suppose it might depend on the person, though. Some people need to withdraw for a little while after something like that, so it all depends on a number of factors.
The whole absence of a proper funeral for Cedric, I think, was very problematic for me. I wonder if JKR did not want to draw attention to the fact that Harry's actions got the boy killed. It also puts Dumbledore in a rather terrible light, - this is a kid who got killed in the course of a Tournament which took place at his own school. Presumably he was a part of the long months of planning and organizing and analyzing safety precautions and emergency procedures. I just thought it was...distasteful.
Grief and the English
It is true that in the 1950s, and I would say up to the late 70's, the 'stiff-upper lip' attitude pervailed. My father and other friends and relations saw combat service in WW2 and must have all seen some truly horrific things but they were never talked about - you got on with life. I don't however think that grief was considered wrong, it was considered private.
I think that this English attitude (and I can only talk about England, N. Ireland, Scotland and Wales are culturally different) was born out of two world wars and the depression. The Victorians after all indulged in lavish public displays of mourning.
Attitudes have certainly changed in the last twenty years or so, so that counselling, public grieving etc are very much the accepted norm. The Queen got a lot of flak at the time of the (hysterical IMHO) reaction to the death of Princess Diana because HM was displaying the old style way of mourning and the country wanted public wailing. Harry's attitude to grief is puzzling for someone born in 1980. My daughters are of Harry's generation, and they, and I think their male friends, would not have found anything off-putting about Cho's tears. Even I, as someone completely brought up in the stiff upper lip mentality, found Harry's attitude very uncaring.
I suspect as Lily Evansnape says, that this is more to due with JKR's attitude to her own difficulties than to a cultural reflection. She certainly seems to feel that Tough Spirited Response Good, Weeping Bad. Of course, Slytherin is the house of water, and water= tears, emotion.
Incidentally, I read an article recently (New Scientist?) which suggested that while many people benefitted to new attitudes in terms of speaking about grief and trauma, receiving counselling and therapy etc, some people actually were better at avoiding PDST if they did just get on with it. So possibly Harry is just one of the latter group, whereas I suspect Severus really needed to talk
Maidofkent
some of my friends suffer from depression and if i would have gotten a cent for each time somebody said to me: "xy should snap out of it." i'd be a millionaire today :D
also one of the commentors mentioned a connection between dementors and depression. what does the fact that only highly talented and powerful wizards are able to produce a patronus to protect themselves say about jkr?
Plus I don't know about the anti-social part either. We never really see him in any adult interactions, apart from Narcissa and Bella in Spinner's End, and with Dumbledore. But that isn't to say he didn't have any friends at all. It's just that the book is so focused on Harry Potter's point of view. We don't really get to see Severus much outside of the classroom.
I feel he was an incredibly focused man, certainly, and he definitely had a sharp intellect and didn't suffer fools easily. But dirty, smelly, etc? I feel that's really a view that fanfiction supports more than anything in canon.
Alison
In CoS, he's with the other teachers (don't remember exactly how many of them) who basically taunt Lockhart into leaving the Staff Room once Ginny has been taken into the Chamber of Secrets. He's the front man with the others backing him up. Nothing is said for his appearance (that I specifically recall), but the other teachers either like Snape enough (or despise Lockhart enough) to side with Snape.
And again - I'm not British - however I visited London in 1989 (just before the stories are set) and whereas in the USA (at the time) most adults had probably grown up with braces and the like - it seemed less so in the UK. There's even a point at that time where comedians in the UK often make fun of the general state of many Brits' teeth.
It is highly unlikely that young Sev had much chance to go to dentists as a kid. It doesn't appear that any kids of Hogwarts age actually do. And while Poppy was able to shrink Hermione's teeth, it is partly because Hermione is the one telling her when to stop. We have no indications that any students are aware that they can go to Poppy and get their teeth straightened or cleaned. -- Hwyla
Even if it is really quite greasy, this needn't be lack of personal hygiene. I figure he got the short end of the genetic stick on this and has the kind of hair which is oily again a few hours after you wash it. I agree that we're not told of any kind of body odor or anything which would be more telling, I think (and I doubt Harry-narrator would scruple to tell us if it were so).
On that note, I have a theory about the graying underpants: Since Severus seemed to inherit some of his Muggle clothes from his parents (I suspect the odd smock had been his mother's and the over-sized jacket had been his father's), I think he might have inherited the underpants from his dad, who likely worked a dirty job at the [textiles] mill. Perhaps the underpants were clean, but could have simply benefited from a bleaching. Just a theory, while we're on the subject.