Snapedom

Jodel has a very nice analysis about what was going on behind the scenes in PS:
http://www.redhen-publications.com/QuirrellDebacle.html

I agree with a lot of it, but as a Snape fan I have a problem.

Quirrell was first an agent of Riddle’s and then possessed by him. He was working in Riddle’s interests, and trying to steal the stone.

And trying to kill Harry, on the side.

Now, in retrospect it’s clear why that fact wouldn’t much worry Dumbles. But Snape? The man who’s pledged his life to “help [Dumbles] protect Lily’s son”? Why did Snape continue to go along with Dumble’s insistence on setting a clever little trap and spending months trying to lure Riddle into it rather than getting rid of the man, after the first time Quirrell tried to murder Harry?

When did Snape realize Quirrell was Tom’s agent? When did he realize Quirrell was Tom’s possession? And why was he content to do no more than just “keep an eye on Quirrell” and interfere with such murder attempts as he spotted? I mean, keeping his cover only goes so far: what's Snape care if his reputation with Tom is intact when Lily's child is dead?

What did Snape think was going on?

Answers, anyone?

Sorry to go off on a tangent only slightly related to Severus, but a line of discussion raised over on deathtocapslock about Severus not revealing Lupin's secret before PoA keeps nagging at me. It made me realize that there is a bigger gap here than the one we usually find as inferring that Severus never told about Lupin even as a DE. Bear with me if I seem to ramble or rant.

Note: here I'm mostly focused on the time up to the end of PoA. Much of the bit about Voldemort failing to use this information still applies after PoA, naturally, but what really gets to me is the fact that nobody even apparently *knew.* And Voldemort post-Albania seems to be missing a few screws to me, so perhaps I'm willing to overlook that lapse a bit more.

But theories are welcome! Please, help me explain this giant hole in JKR's narrative, please. It just floors me.

( Read more... )

I remember reading somewhere a list someone had compiled of canon punishments at Hogwarts and the misdeeds for which the miscreant had been punished. I think it might have been just for Snape, although if anyone has bothered to make one that includes all staff, for all time periods(canon mentions transgressions and/or punishments in the times of the Marauders, Arthur & Molly Weasley, and Tom/Hagrid) that would be even better.

I'm working on an essay on the implications of Dumbledore's/Hogwarts' disciplinary philosophy, and I'd very much like to make sure I'm not leaving any data points out. The canon I remember/have reread points to certain conclusions, but I'd like not to overlook anything.

Does anyone remember such a list? Can you point me to it?

Thanks if you can!

Slytherin House is, of course, the bastion of “those whose blood is purest”… right? Only purebloods need apply, and if anyone else ever sorted there by accident (like those notorious alumni Tommy and Sevvie) they keep their secret “dirty” heritage a, well, secret. Right?

Well, maybe in Salazar’s day. But now? Not only does the house necessarily contain non-purebloods—it’s entirely possible that purebloods may even not be in the majority any more.

At least according to what JKR has told us, and a very little basic math.


Part I: Are (Almost) All Slytherins Purebloods?

( Consider: JKR”> <lj-cut text= )

Part II: Threat as Theatre

Let us hypothesize that Dumbledore had a quadruple agent among the Death Eaters. This spy’s life—more importantly, his mission—depended on his ability to persuade the Death Eaters (and the Dark Lord, should he return) that he was on their side, really. Whatever Dumbledore thought, whatever lip service he might pay to Dumbledore’s ideals, at heart the spy shared their values and tastes. Or so they must be made to think.

( In Harry’s class”> <lj-cut text= )

We had a debate going on the PoA spork about the “poisoning Trevor” Potions lesson. It sparked some thoughts: first on cruelty to animals in the Potterverse; secondly, on how JKR chose to highlight some incidents and downplay others (part I). And then I thought about how Snape used this particular incident to establish a reputation for cruelty, and why he might have wanted to do so… (part II) . So I thought I’d bring the debate about the “poisoning Trevor” potions class over here, and let everyone join in.


Part I: PETA has no Branch in the Potterverse

( When I was”> <lj-cut text= )

Has anybody thought about who does the laundry at Hogwarts? I was discussing Snapes Worst Memory with a friend and we remembered Lily's comment about "I should wash my pants if I were you, Snivellus."

I had always assumed that the house elves did the laundry, but my friend disagreed, since that would mean that if they touched the clothes, the elf would be free. I thought that maybe there was a special dispensation or something, such as, dirty clothes were okay to touch, but then of course in CoS, Harry's old slimy sock is used to free Dobby, so that can't be right.

Do the children do their own laundry, perhaps? Never having attended a boarding school in my life, I don't know what the procedure is, but I couldn't imagine Harry or Ron doing much in the way of laundry. Maybe that's how Severus's pants got into such a state, if he had the typical teenage male's "relaxed" approach to personal hygiene!

Can anybody remember anything in canon where laundry is discussed? The only one I can remember doing anything like that was Molly, when she'd ironed all of Ron and Harry's uniforms in one of the books before they went off to Hogwarts, and Hermione, who I think packed Ron's jeans for him in the last book. So maybe laundry and clothes et al are specifically a female-oriented chore in the Potterverse? Perhaps wizards implode if they have to do their own? What do others think about the state of laundry in the Potterverse?

Alison ;D

This started as a response to Elethian’s defense of Remus as a potential father in this month’s challenge. It got so long, I’m posting it separately. And it’s only at the end that I actually address Lupin’s (and indeed, lycanthropes as a group) potential as parents.


“Though, honestly, I think we see a great difference between his behavior at 16 and his adult behavior.”

( Good try )

There was one comment I wanted to pull out from the recent Lily threads for separate discussion.

I’m glad Hwyla pointed out that Lily almost had to have been a prefect in SWM. I’d been wanting someone to bring that up.

Warning: Lily-bashing ahead. At least I can't come up with any way to have Lily look good in SWM if she's really a prefect as well as Snape's supposed best friend.

( Is it credible )

Would be in an even worse place, I think. More and more people prejudiced and scapegoating them.

Would McGonagall and the other Heads of House feel compelled to become protective of Slytherin out of guilt over disbelieving Snape that had been on their side the whole time?

Would Slughorn stay as Head of Slytherin? Part of me can't see that, but a larger part of me wants it--I just can't think of another Slytherin replacing Snape as the Head of House (and really, Slughorn's only considered since he's done it before). Slytherin needs a Head of House, doesn't it? And it can only be a Slytherin as their Head, right? If no Head can be found for them right away, are all the other Heads of House simply obligated to sort of substitute until a replacement is found?

And assuming Snape is dead, his portrait--since this comm. is about Snape--would be influential, wouldn't it?

This period of time I'm thinking of post-the Battle at Hogwarts; I'm uncertain if it's implied enough in the epilogue whether things are in fact better or worse (or heck, neutral/medium) for Slytherin House at that time, 19-20 years later. Would things be better for them by the epilogue, enough time passed for resentment to cool down to some degree?

Thoughts, opinions?

We all remember the great Snape debates before DH came out. About where his loyalties were as of the end of HBP, when they changed if ever, how many times they changed. I think we agree that DH settled this question (even if we don't know the exact time-point we know which events triggered the turning points in his path). Another question was how far he went as Death Eater. After DH the consensus in this forum seems to be that canon suggests either at that he did not go as far as killing, or that if he did he fully repented for such killings and healed his soul to the extent that is possible. It is clear from canon that whatever he was as a Death Eater, the man we see during Harry's Hogwarts years is a man with a strong conscience, with a clear view of right and wrong (despite having to act on the edge due to his role as a spy), who does not make light of having to commit harmful acts for a long-term beneficial goal.

But even without ever killing anyone directly, with his own hand/wand, there is much he could have done. The most obvious is the brewing of poisons and other harmful potions that were then administered to innocent victims by others. Then there is the invention of new harmful, potentially lethal spells, and teaching such spells to other DEs, thus resulting in injuries and deaths among their victims. I think the worst I have seen in fanfics is Mengele!Snape - Snape in his DE days using captives (mostly Muggles) to test properties of newly invented potions. Some scenarios get extremely gruesome, with a team of DEs at Snape's command cutting through a still living victim so that Snape could observe damage to internal organs as it took place.

So my question is, would knowing something like that change anything in your attitude to Severus Snape? Is his complete repentance enough for you as a reader to disregard anything, however cruel, he may have done in his dark period, or would the thought that this was a man who may have been capable of such horrors disturb you enough to feel you cannot forgive him completely? Do you think a man who had commited such actions is capable of abandoning them for good or would he always be at risk of backsliding?