Snapedom

Reply to sailorlum about Remus, because the comments were getting tl;dr

The World of Severus Snape

********************
Anonymous users, remember that you must sign all your comments with your name or nick! Comments left unsigned may be screened without notice.

********************

Welcome to Snapedom!
If you want to see snapedom entries on your LJ flist, add snapedom_syn feed. But please remember to come here to the post to comment.

This community is mostly unmoderated. Read the rules and more in "About Snapedom."

No fanfic or art posts, but you can promote your fanfic and fanart, or post recommendations, every Friday.

Reply to sailorlum about Remus, because the comments were getting tl;dr

Previous Entry Add to Memories Tell a Friend Next Entry
I didn't want to take up any more of the thread in terri's post, or make other commentators there uncomfortable, so I've moved my reply here.

ETA to avoid any misunderstanding: THIS IS NOT A STAND-ALONE ESSAY. It is a REPLY to a long discussion on terri's Remus as Parent post. Please, if you think something is missing or unclear, please read back in the discussion to be sure, for the sake of avoiding misunderstandings. Link is

http://asylums.insanejournal.com/snapedom/260607.html?thread=2032639#t2032639

Thank you.

There are a couple of points I want to make, sailorlum. I was trying not to tl;dr but I did it again. Sorry. :( Thank you for not taking my rantiness personally.

The first point that occurs to me reading your response is "how could Remus NOT assume he'd be traumatized to some degree?" Not, let me be clear, that Remus ought to be able to judge the specific degree of it to a millimeter. Just that, knowing the *fact* that Severus had nearly lost his life to a werewolf, Remus could reasonably be expected to assume that maybe Severus might have a less than enthusiastic response to living in the same castle as the werewolf again, and that this would need to be respected and addressed somehow.

And no, Severus wouldn't have cried about it in front of everyone. That's not the point. It's a normal, standard human reaction to deeply impacted by such a near miss, even if you don’t talk about it constantly. So much that we would consider abnormal someone who *wasn't.*

But. People do heal, yes. Usually, after such a near miss, when they have a good deal of support and counseling and time. Which Severus didn't have. But, as you point out, Remus hadn't been in contact with him (as far as we know) for over a decade. He wouldn’t necessarily *know* he still hurts. Ok. Maybe he thought Severus had gotten over it? Let's start over, again assuming the best. Let's assume Remus did not *know* how traumatized Severus really was. I'll do more that take that as my new starting point, I'll grant you without retraction that, up through the end of that scene, it's as possible/valid as the reading that he did *know.* As you say, he hadn't been in contact with Severus in years. So you’ve adjusted my thinking with that.

But. My second point, after having considered how your point affects my previous argument: What did he do, upon returning to Hogwarts and encountering Severus again? Did he (from the indications in the text), in re-establishing his relationship to Severus, attempt to discern how the man really felt, now that he was present? (Regardless of how Severus might have responded, did Remus *try*)? Did he give an indication of considering *the possibility* that Severus, still wary and suspicious of him, might be reacting to the presence of the werewolf who nearly mauled him? That is, did he even once attempt to put himself in Severus' shoes and think about the *possibility* that the man was still suffering?

No. He made *assumptions* about Severus. He *assumed* that Severus either was not traumatized (as a normal person would have been) or that he was over it. There is no sign in the text that he attempted to get confirmation of this fact from Severus, no sign that he ever accorded Severus the human respect of *asking* him how he felt. Even if Severus wouldn't have responded well, that's not the point - Remus had a duty to think of the situation from Severus' POV for a moment rather than make assumptions about the feelings and state of mind of another person regarding a life-threatening incident.

His failure here is exactly the same at base as if he had *known* for certain. He failed to accord Severus the human respect of thinking of him as a separate person who can feel pain, who has his own POV on things, and whose pain *matters.* He failed to consider Severus' possible pain as real or *worthy of thought* - whether he knew for certain that Severus was in pain or whether it was merely possible that he was, based on a normal person's reactions to things. He did not think of the mere possibility that Severus might hurt as something *he needed to investigate,* however minimally. He assumed. And acted, on the basis of that assumption, to deny and invalidate Severus' pain when he was brought face to face with it - regardless of motive or of his conscious awareness that that was what he was doing.

People are often emotionally dumb, as you put it, and far far too often fail in exactly this way. They fail to think of other people as truly, fully *human* beings who feel pain and have their own perspectives. It's a very very common failing, and I do not exclude myself from that. It is also, most of the time, not a particularly conscious failing. That still does not excuse it. It may be human to fail in this way - I'm not saying Remus is the worst person in the world for failing like this. He’s not Voldemort, and he has positive traits. But it is a failing, and I won't let him off the hook for it even when I assume the best motives.

Regarding your argument that he later realized what he'd done and tried to make up for it...well, perhaps it holds in the moment. No longer. It doesn't actually impact his behavior - because he again fails to respect Severus' pain even after this incident. He again makes Severus track him down with the potion at the last minute. And we get words from his own lips, that second evening, that confirm that he *still* does not think Severus' pain (which, in your argument, he was now conscious of) worthy of regard. He is still failing to respect Severus as a human being that evening. Because, having seen that Severus is indeed still traumatized and hurting, he explicitly tells Severus *to his face* that he needs to get over it, that it is just "a schoolboy grudge." Here it's not a question of not realizing Severus was hurt; Remus (now) knows he's hurt. He simply thinks, and says, that Severus has no *right* to be hurt. He trivializes the impact of a life-threatening encounter, to the man's face. Severus' pain *does not matter to him.*

As you say, Remus certainly minimized the Prank in his own mind. That is precisely my point, overall. He minimized another person's life-threatening experience, and in so doing necessarily minimized the meaningfulness of that person’s pain. An action which, conscious and deliberate or not, is a step towards dehumanization. And he continued to do this even after seeing for himself that the person was still hurting. You can argue that, before the tussle over the potion, it was merely a failure to do his human duty and consider things, not a deliberate act. I...don’t entirely agree with that reading, but it’s certainly possible. But after that encounter he ought to have realized and acted, but he did not. And in the Shack, when he explicitly acknowledged and then dismissed Severus’ pain to the man’s face, it utterly ceased to be a passive failure. At that point, if not before, it was willful refusal. A refusal we never see him apologize for, nor recant. - Had he repented and changed, that we could see, I would not come down so hard on him. I would also be more willing to accept arguments that it was unconscious, passive failure most of the time, such as in the first tussle over the potion. The fact that he never significantly alters his attitude or behavior (speech is another thing) that we see inclines me to read it as a consistent aspect of his character, not an unconscious failing he’d likely repent once awoken to it.

See, I understand that you want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that you like him and want a flawed but human Remus. Of course that’s your right. Even more than that, I agree that he *is* flawed but human. He is not Voldemort, and does have good points. He’s willing to risk his life to defeat Voldemort, for one thing. He’s loyal to his friends (for better or worse). For those in his pack, he does care, even if he is not always perfect about fulfilling his responsibilities to them. He wants to make the WW a better place. And he suffers, yes, decidedly, and sometimes beyond anything deserved. But he has his flaws. This is exactly my point. He has flaws, and these are his flaws. He can be insensitive to other people. He has recurring moments of moral cowardice that he repeatedly gives into. And if you aren’t in his pack (like Severus), he can fail to accord you the respect due another human being, at times willfully. The *reasons* for these failings, and his various motives at any point in time, may add shades of grey, but they don’t excuse his behavior towards Severus. Perhaps we see him at his worst with Severus. If you want to grant him that, I’ll go along with it. It’s these complexities that make characters fascinating to me - and I am fascinated by Lupin, even if I *like* him less and less with time.

I don’t mean to pick on Remus. None of the characters in the books are shining angels, Severus included. But I tend, personally, to point out the flaws in seemingly-blameless characters like Remus, and to emphasize the pain of those like Severus who are discarded by other characters, for a reason. If we go along with the bias that the narrative voice, and JKR’s pronouncements, encourage and tolerate or cover over failings like the one I’ve described because the characters are otherwise sympathetic to us, we fall into a trap that IMHO is very, very dangerous. The books encourage us (in behavior) NOT to think of other people as human beings unless we *like* them, or if they are close to us in some way. The people who might seem unpleasant - bitter, or pompous (Percy), or what have you - are shoved off to the side, and we are encouraged to distinguish between our & our friends’ pain (real, terrible, worthy of vengeance) and the pain of people we don’t particularly like (exaggerated, they need to get over it, they have no right to criticize US). When, IMHO, it is our human duty to at least try to put ourselves in other people’s shoes even for a moment, to respect a fundamental baseline humanity in every person. When a character fails at exactly this, and the narrative either whitewashes it or *encourages* us to go along with it, I hit the brakes. (And, obviously, go tl;dr on everyone. ;) ) It’s a common failing that I’m sure I’ve been guilty of myself, but when I am conscious of it I won’t tolerate it. And I see it in these books.

Which is why I’m not letting go of your argument. Not that you are consciously doing this, not at all. I understand that you sympathize with Remus, and have your own reading of the books - totally fine and your right. And maybe I’m taking it more seriously than you want to - I tend to get really serious about these things, maybe because I’m a lit student. :) But it seems to me that your argument is still...not really acknowledging the real failing that I see here, nor satisfactorily explaining away the evidence that leads me to see that failing. Really damning IMHO is Remus’ comment in the Shack, and the fact that in the scene before Severus *twice* drew his attention to the potion. Even with your argument that Remus wasn’t aware at first of Severus’ pain, after the potion incident he ought to have realized his failing and acted to change it (knowing and not acting being another kind of failure). But he didn’t. And even if at that point it was not a deliberate *refusal* to see, it was still a *failure* to consider - a passive fault rather than an active one, but very real nonetheless. I’m not asking Remus to be a mind-reader (at least, not anymore. I grant I hadn’t considered the years apart. But he still can be faulted IMHO for assuming rather than considering Severus’ possible POV.) I’m asking him to stop and think of Severus as a real human being for a moment, and act in consideration of that. Something I think every person has a duty to do towards others (and which just about every character in the series, Severus included, at times fails to do). Which Remus repeatedly fails to do. And...I don’t see how your argument acknowledges/gets rid of that lack of consideration here. Which is slightly frustrating for me - I feel like we’re talking past each other. :( Your arguments acknowledge that Remus has his flaws, but discount or explain away every concrete instance of those flaws, which makes the acknowledgment seem hollow.

So how about this, to be fair to you. If, after all this debating, I still haven’t convinced you....Why don’t you give me a couple of concrete instances in which you see Remus really, really failing? What are his worst moments, to you? And I mean tell me in detail - don’t worry about tl;dr. :) The things that you, personally, *can’t* bring yourself to explain away, make light of, or give him the benefit of the doubt on? You say (earlier) that Remus can be passive-aggressive towards Severus, just that the potions scene isn’t an example of it. So what WOULD be an example of it? Give me some real dirt. Convince me that we really do have two very different interpretations of the character, including where his real flaws are. If you don’t want to fill up the thread here, make a separate post or email me - moviemaedchen@gmail.com

If you want to, of course. Obviously this stops having a point when you start to not enjoy it, and I don’t want to wear you out. Sometimes (like Severus), I have a hard time letting go of something. ;) But I do genuinely enjoy debating with you, and if you haven’t convinced me of your reading in toto you’ve still made me consider things from different POVs, and taking more things into account. Which IMO any good debate should do, for all involved. It helps strengthen skill at reasoning, always a good thing, right? :) I thought the Lily thing went pretty well, am I right? I hope I’m not upsetting you, and that I haven’t slipped up somewhere and said something about you personally rather than your argument. I know you really don’t like that, and I can be sensitive that way myself, so I’ve done my best to keep it about the argument. Please correct me if I have - or if I have misunderstood you somewhere along the line.

Thanks for reading and responding to all this. Wow, tl;dr to the tenth degree. *sigh*
  • Re: The redemption of Severus

    Perhaps these quotes will shed more light on what JKR thinks about when she's talking about considering bravery the highest virtue. And what, therefore, she most likely meant in having the final words of the book indicate Snape as the highest standard of that virtue. Remember, with this point I'm making, it's not what Harry is saying so much as what JKR *means* to convey that is important:

    "I would want to be in Gryffindor and the reason I would want to be in Gryffindor is because I do prize courage in all its various ramifications. I value it more highly than any other virtue and by that I mean not just physical courage and flashy courage, but moral courage."

    Now of course, many of us would immediately start wondering where exactly she found so much "moral" courage in Gryffindor. But the point I'm making isn't just that JKR thinks courage is important, but that she values it "more highly than any other virtue"! And further, that she means a courage that is not just physical (Bellatrix) or flashy, but "moral courage". So when she has Harry proclaim Snape as the penultimate example of courage -- especially when she makes such a point of this by giving this statement as the big supposedly surprise ending of the entire series -- I think you can bet that she didn't mean for Harry to be saying that Snape had the greatest "physical or flashy" courage, but the greatest "moral courage".

    Now granted, if a reader isn't pretty well up on JKR's interviews, it's not terribly difficult to miss the point. But JKR almost certainly did intend the point of Snape's moral courage to be there.
    • Re: The redemption of Severus

      I see what you're saying. But I think we're coming at the text from two very different angles. JKR may have *meant* it to be this - I could buy that. My problem is not with what she intended. It is with what she *wrote.*

      For me, extra-textual information about the author's intentions may be interesting to compare with the text, but it has little bearing on how I actually interpret the text itself. Only what is in the text count for me. Statements of authorial intention enlighten us only to the contents of the author's mind, not of the actual text. The text, since it is fixed in specific words and phrases with multiple connotations, and cannot include everything in the author's mind, is necessarily less than a perfect representation of the author's imagined world and is open to the reader's interpretation. Even given the best editing and so on...which is not really the case with HP.

      JKR may very well think bravery is the highest virtue, especially moral courage, but the books themselves do not give us a sufficiently unambiguous presentation of bravery as moral for it to stand as the representative of moral virtue more generally, IMHO. Had she fully done her job as an author here, it would be fully clear *from the text alone* that by acknowleding someone's bravery you are also implicitly granting them very high moral status. The fact that many readers don *not* get this signal points to the text being rather more ambiguous or open on this subject. I'm not saying you are wrong - I can totally see where you are coming from with you reading - but my response is to cry out "She shouldn't have to TELL us this!" It should be leaping out of the text at us. An author's job is to *communicate* through their *works.*

      She can do that - the idea of Snape/Lily arose with PoA! But it doesn't happen here, in the text. Which is, IMHO, where it *should* happen. Otherwise it simply is not there for me. I don't think a book ought to be something you have to plug the author's official set of Interpretation Coupons into in order to get the "real" story. There may be redemption for Severus in JKR's mind, and I may write my own mental fanfic to give him redemption in my own, but it is not there *in the text* for me.
      • Re: The redemption of Severus

        First, I totally agree that meaning has to come from the book itself. A book has to stand on it's own, without all sorts of commentary from the author. And the HP series is pretty messy, in my opinion, about these sorts of themes. It's messy about loads of things. Even the basic mechanics of her magical inventions JKR couldn't keep straight.

        Nevertheless, for me, I do think after having bravery/courage trumpeted through the series as a Really Big Ideal, and also having Dumbledore - who is at least supposed to be giving the reader and Harry words of wisdom - make broad statements about a person's choices and about the courage of standing up for things (moral courage), the ending of the book is making a strong statement about Snape. When the protagonist makes a big proclamation in the final page about the one character he's been at odds with the entire series, and that is to proclaim said character the prime embodiment of the courage/bravery that's been trumpeted through the series as being a big Ideal, as well as the supposedly Primary characteristic of the supposedly Good Guys in Gryffindor -- well, whether you agree with the Gryffs being good or brave, or bravery being so highly important, the book does seem to be saying Snape is the best of the best.

        Now I totally agree that JKR didn't do a very good job with this. It's messy and the whole Snape-as-the-embodiment-of-the-greatest-good-thing wasn't prepared enough for the reader to really believe that's what Harry thought. In part, because we never get to see Harry arrive at this conclusion. JKR wanted it to be a big surprise ending for the reader. But instead, I'm afraid it just struck a lot of readers as "where did that come from?" and "what's that supposed to mean?" And for readers who didn't like Snape in the first place, it's too easy to discount all the parts in the book that go on about moral courage and just think "well sure, Snape was brave and on the right side, but he was still evil." So for that person, Harry calling Snape the "bravest", need mean no more than that Snape is simply physically brave, like Bellatrix.
        • Re: The redemption of Severus

          It is very messy - which is precisely my problem with it. Bravery is trumpeted as an ideal, yes, and as a virtue and the issue of moral courage does come up. But we also have presentations of different, more morally problematic, forms of bravery. Things like Sirius' recklessness, physical bravery a la Bellatrix, etc. The text doesn't leave out the idea of moral bravery - but it is nowhere near being *clear* enough about equating any given instance of the unqualified term "bravery" with specifically *moral* courage as the default for it to play the role she is trying to make it play here.

          I see where you are getting your argument. I just find that the text is not unambiguous enough on this issue in order to make Severus' redemption unambiguous. Nor was the issue of his moral redemption ever clearly framed in terms of bravery beforehand - had she done that, "the bravest man I ever knew" would have really carried a ton of weight. But it doesn't - we need her explanations to fill the gap, which disappoints me as a reader.

          (I'm also less inclined to take Dumbledore seriously on moral topics, given what I saw of him in DH, and I think this was building up for me over the course of DH. So his statements on moral issues carried less weight - something JKR perhaps ought to have considered when giving her voice of morality so dubious a personality...but oh wait, he's still the epitome of good. I think JKR doesn't realize half the things she does in the text.)

          The fact that JKR missed the mark on so fundamental a point of the narrative really skews things for me, because big points like this are precisely where I expect her to be making it as perfectly clear as possible. The fact that a huge point is left so unambiguous, intentionally or not, just makes me miss it all the more.

          I can totally buy that JKR thought she was doing what you say. But it simply isn't there for me.

          But thanks for discussing it with me. ;) I do see where you're coming from. I just need to have it in the text.
Powered by InsaneJournal