Re: The redemption of Severus
![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
That's a very interesting idea, Pasi! Unfortunately, I think what we've heard from Rowling after the publication of DH tends to negate it. Just wondering - have you read my essay, "J.K. Rowling and the Mores of the 19th Century"? If not, I'd love to know what you think. Here is what I think:
Rowling does know a fair bit of literature, and she managed to come up with at least one vivid and interesting character by borrowing wholesale from several books. As many other readers have noted, Snape's literary antecedents are Dante, Heathcliff, and Saint Exupery's little Prince. So-
At the end of Wuthering Heights, it is ambiguous whether Cathy and Heathcliff are at peace. Are they? or are they wandering ghosts, haunting the moor? Or has Heathcliff gone to hell, like the devil so many think he is? We never know for sure.
In The Little Prince, the little boy is, of course, bitten by a serpent and falls. But then his body vanishes. Did he go back to his planet, and is he happy there with his rose? The narrator says that sometimes he thinks yes - and then it seems all the stars are laughing. But when he thinks no- well. I'm not going to mangle it further by misquoting; I don't own the book.
So, since Snape is based on these characters, his redemption has to be ambiguous, like Heathcliff's. His body has to vanish, like the Little Prince's. But Rowling completely misses the sense of consolation and completeness we (or at least I) get from those other books. What she does to Snape is just plain frustrating. It's notable that, in those earlier books, the dead have mourners - people who truly loved them and weep for them. Not so in DH. Not for Snape.
And there's one more thing, as far as his redemption goes. The poor guy never knows that Voldemort is defeated. As far as he knows, he has sent Harry to his death while Nagini is still alive and Voldemort seems triumphant. I thought that was awfully cruel.
Rowling does know a fair bit of literature, and she managed to come up with at least one vivid and interesting character by borrowing wholesale from several books. As many other readers have noted, Snape's literary antecedents are Dante, Heathcliff, and Saint Exupery's little Prince. So-
At the end of Wuthering Heights, it is ambiguous whether Cathy and Heathcliff are at peace. Are they? or are they wandering ghosts, haunting the moor? Or has Heathcliff gone to hell, like the devil so many think he is? We never know for sure.
In The Little Prince, the little boy is, of course, bitten by a serpent and falls. But then his body vanishes. Did he go back to his planet, and is he happy there with his rose? The narrator says that sometimes he thinks yes - and then it seems all the stars are laughing. But when he thinks no- well. I'm not going to mangle it further by misquoting; I don't own the book.
So, since Snape is based on these characters, his redemption has to be ambiguous, like Heathcliff's. His body has to vanish, like the Little Prince's. But Rowling completely misses the sense of consolation and completeness we (or at least I) get from those other books. What she does to Snape is just plain frustrating. It's notable that, in those earlier books, the dead have mourners - people who truly loved them and weep for them. Not so in DH. Not for Snape.
And there's one more thing, as far as his redemption goes. The poor guy never knows that Voldemort is defeated. As far as he knows, he has sent Harry to his death while Nagini is still alive and Voldemort seems triumphant. I thought that was awfully cruel.