![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
torchedsong.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslock(I've been lurking in this community for a couple of days now, reading posts from way back and enjoying the discussion [and snark]. I know this topic has been done before numerous times, but I hope it's okay for me to offer my thoughts as well.)
It is over a decade later and I am still disenchanted with how Severus Snape was flattened as a character in DH by having everything connect to Lily. I rarely encounter fans of Snape on Tumblr who feel the same way, so I decided to post this here to find other people who can empathize.
From books 1-6, I found Snape to be a fascinating character. He was a mean teacher and a bitter man, but also (seemingly) on the side of the good guys with his own mysterious agenda. Despite his cruel nature, he was presented as capable of protecting and helping those whom he loathed or did not care for. He had a sense of right and wrong when it counted, even while remaining bitter. This unpleasant man left a group of prejudiced and dangerous criminals because even unpleasant people are capable of stepping away from evil. All of this made him an intriguing character full of potential, and I hoped that JKR wouldn’t waste that potential by making everything he’s done be for the Love of a Good Woman that Got Away.
But then she did, and I ended up disappointed. Snape’s character was demolished for me. No longer was he a complex man capable of both good and bad, but a man reduced to a static lovesick figure who never changed at all. Defecting from the Death Eaters, protecting innocents, working for the good guys, striving to win the war, risking his life… all for Lily. All for an ongoing obsession that made him look pitiful. He had no sliver of light or goodness of his own merit as a person; everything was for and about Lily.
It didn’t help matters that Lily was nothing more than a cardboard cutout of a character. She had no flaws. She was an angel that every (male) character was meant to adore. James, Sirius, Remus, Peter, and Snape were all presented as men who made mistakes. But Lily? Everybody loves her because she’s always right and a symbol of Purity and Goodness for every man in the vicinity!
And you mean to tell me that Snape, a man known for holding grudges and festering in his vindictive anger, would continue to love a woman who chose his tormentor, popular and privileged Gryffindor bully James Potter, over him? Really? Another way Lily was presented as perfect and exceptional; even Snape couldn’t dislike or hate her. How convenient (and, in my opinion, out of character).
Snape, the lower-class, ugly, greasy, mean, miserable, and unhealthy mess of a man wasn’t allowed any redeeming qualities of his own volition. No, it all had to come back to Lily, the middle-class, beautiful, popular, kind, pleasant, and perfect mother and wife. Who needs character development, growth, and depth when you’ve got the “power” of Loving the Good Woman?
I never expected Snape to become a selfless and nice saint. Of course not. What I did expect and hope for was the lesson that "good" is not always pretty and pleasant, just as "evil" is not always ugly and mean. That bravery can be found in the unlikeliest and darkest of people; that even the people you hate can still be heroic and do the right thing. I thought that was the lesson readers (and Harry himself) had to learn through Snape, whether he survived the war or not.
But I was wrong. It wasn’t meant to be complex and profound. It all came down to Loving the Good Woman. Lily was the linchpin for everything. Instead of finding it interesting or meaningful, I found it insulting, trite, and boring. Snape went from being a character full of potential to another shallow example of a brooding, broken man following the whims of obsessive love as a stand-in for morality. I couldn’t agree with other Snape fans who liked his reasoning for turning ex-Death Eater, but I couldn’t stand with people who hated every aspect of his character either. I was torn (and still am).
My ideal ending for Snape would’ve been him surviving the war and walking away from everything. With no masters, no obligations, and no need for atonement, he would have the freedom to finally control his life. He would have to question his purpose in the new world. Death is the easy way out for a complicated messy character; it’s easy to honor Snape when he’s dead, but how to deal with him alive? How would Harry see Snape if Snape had survived and remained unpleasant as ever, despite his bravery and loyalty? What would have their final interaction been like?
But that would’ve been too difficult for JKR to deal with, so let’s kill Snape off in a lame way and let’s give him the power of Loving the Good Woman to wrap everything up quick and easy. How painfully lazy.
I have long speculated that JKR never wanted her major Slytherin characters to have any depth or redeeming qualities of their own because it would overshadow the heroic Gryffindors or send the "wrong" message. Slytherins are regulated to two roles: evil (e.g. Voldemort, the Death Eaters, Umbridge, etc.) or pitiful (e.g. Snape and the Malfoys). Snape couldn't make his own choices, have his own motivations, or live his life on his terms; it had to revolve around Lily to give him the worth he didn't "deserve" for being a Slytherin.
Anyways, if anyone has read this long overdue rant of mine, thank you for taking the time. I had to let it out after re-reading the series and experiencing great frustration all over again.
Edit: Fixed some mistakes and changed to a different layout. Forgive me, I'm rusty with LJ.
It is over a decade later and I am still disenchanted with how Severus Snape was flattened as a character in DH by having everything connect to Lily. I rarely encounter fans of Snape on Tumblr who feel the same way, so I decided to post this here to find other people who can empathize.
From books 1-6, I found Snape to be a fascinating character. He was a mean teacher and a bitter man, but also (seemingly) on the side of the good guys with his own mysterious agenda. Despite his cruel nature, he was presented as capable of protecting and helping those whom he loathed or did not care for. He had a sense of right and wrong when it counted, even while remaining bitter. This unpleasant man left a group of prejudiced and dangerous criminals because even unpleasant people are capable of stepping away from evil. All of this made him an intriguing character full of potential, and I hoped that JKR wouldn’t waste that potential by making everything he’s done be for the Love of a Good Woman that Got Away.
But then she did, and I ended up disappointed. Snape’s character was demolished for me. No longer was he a complex man capable of both good and bad, but a man reduced to a static lovesick figure who never changed at all. Defecting from the Death Eaters, protecting innocents, working for the good guys, striving to win the war, risking his life… all for Lily. All for an ongoing obsession that made him look pitiful. He had no sliver of light or goodness of his own merit as a person; everything was for and about Lily.
It didn’t help matters that Lily was nothing more than a cardboard cutout of a character. She had no flaws. She was an angel that every (male) character was meant to adore. James, Sirius, Remus, Peter, and Snape were all presented as men who made mistakes. But Lily? Everybody loves her because she’s always right and a symbol of Purity and Goodness for every man in the vicinity!
And you mean to tell me that Snape, a man known for holding grudges and festering in his vindictive anger, would continue to love a woman who chose his tormentor, popular and privileged Gryffindor bully James Potter, over him? Really? Another way Lily was presented as perfect and exceptional; even Snape couldn’t dislike or hate her. How convenient (and, in my opinion, out of character).
Snape, the lower-class, ugly, greasy, mean, miserable, and unhealthy mess of a man wasn’t allowed any redeeming qualities of his own volition. No, it all had to come back to Lily, the middle-class, beautiful, popular, kind, pleasant, and perfect mother and wife. Who needs character development, growth, and depth when you’ve got the “power” of Loving the Good Woman?
I never expected Snape to become a selfless and nice saint. Of course not. What I did expect and hope for was the lesson that "good" is not always pretty and pleasant, just as "evil" is not always ugly and mean. That bravery can be found in the unlikeliest and darkest of people; that even the people you hate can still be heroic and do the right thing. I thought that was the lesson readers (and Harry himself) had to learn through Snape, whether he survived the war or not.
But I was wrong. It wasn’t meant to be complex and profound. It all came down to Loving the Good Woman. Lily was the linchpin for everything. Instead of finding it interesting or meaningful, I found it insulting, trite, and boring. Snape went from being a character full of potential to another shallow example of a brooding, broken man following the whims of obsessive love as a stand-in for morality. I couldn’t agree with other Snape fans who liked his reasoning for turning ex-Death Eater, but I couldn’t stand with people who hated every aspect of his character either. I was torn (and still am).
My ideal ending for Snape would’ve been him surviving the war and walking away from everything. With no masters, no obligations, and no need for atonement, he would have the freedom to finally control his life. He would have to question his purpose in the new world. Death is the easy way out for a complicated messy character; it’s easy to honor Snape when he’s dead, but how to deal with him alive? How would Harry see Snape if Snape had survived and remained unpleasant as ever, despite his bravery and loyalty? What would have their final interaction been like?
But that would’ve been too difficult for JKR to deal with, so let’s kill Snape off in a lame way and let’s give him the power of Loving the Good Woman to wrap everything up quick and easy. How painfully lazy.
I have long speculated that JKR never wanted her major Slytherin characters to have any depth or redeeming qualities of their own because it would overshadow the heroic Gryffindors or send the "wrong" message. Slytherins are regulated to two roles: evil (e.g. Voldemort, the Death Eaters, Umbridge, etc.) or pitiful (e.g. Snape and the Malfoys). Snape couldn't make his own choices, have his own motivations, or live his life on his terms; it had to revolve around Lily to give him the worth he didn't "deserve" for being a Slytherin.
Anyways, if anyone has read this long overdue rant of mine, thank you for taking the time. I had to let it out after re-reading the series and experiencing great frustration all over again.
Edit: Fixed some mistakes and changed to a different layout. Forgive me, I'm rusty with LJ.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Thank you!
Date: 2019-01-18 02:00 pm (UTC)The Slytherins being treated as a lost cause is strange and unsettling. I find it hard to believe how an eleven year old is already "doomed" just by being sorted into the house of cunning and ambition. Bravery is elevated above all else to the point where Dumbledore's comment of "sorting too soon" to Snape doesn't help the Gryffindor bias within the books.... As if Snape is only "worthy" when he's brave and dedicating his life for another Gryffindor.
It's another reason why I can't stand Snape/Lily. I wanted there to be one major Slytherin character who chose to reject the Death Eaters on their own terms and principles. I thought the message JKR wanted to send with Snape is how a mean bitter man who dislikes children is still capable of having a moral compass and rejecting evil values. I thought Snape was the epitome of the "Good is Not Nice" trope; a man who's harsh and cruel, but not immoral.
Instead, what I got from JKR is the message that Snape's only saving grace was his childhood crush - a pure, perfect, pretty, and popular Gryffindor girl whom everyone adored. I found it so underwhelming, off-putting, and asinine. Everything about Snape's character - his motivations, feelings, and background - became all about Lily Evans. And now that's what his character is known for. "He loved Lily!" Ugh, no thanks.
However, he knows that when it comes down to getting Dumbledore to believe he's reformed, or to get Harry to trust him enough to carry out Dumbledore's plan, Snape knows that only a simple black-and-white "true love" reason will convince them.
I've seen this headcanon before, and I like it as well. I can picture pre-DH!Snape rolling his eyes at over-sentimental Gryffindors and having everything be about the Power of True Love.
I've also seen some fans headcanon Snape's devotion to Lily not being one of romantic love, but rather using her as a symbol of goodness. Since her friendship was the one positive thing in his life, he puts her on a pedestal and deifies her as a saintly figure to follow. I can see that being closer to canon, even though I am not fond of Snape/Lily in any form.
His patronus is a doe. A shy, gentle, cautious doe. That is nothing like Lily whatsoever. Harry assumes it stands for her, of course, because he views her as James' One True Mate (tm) and James is a stag, therefore Lily is a doe (which is so problematic anyway).
Lily's identity being subsumed in relation to James is gross, and I don't even like or care for Lily as a character! And I agree - a doe doesn't suit the glimpses we get of her. When I think of a personality type relating to a doe, I think of someone who is gentle, timid, and sensitive, and that doesn't sound like Lily to me. Lily's seen as fierce, vivacious, and tenacious. Not doe-like at all. She's only a doe because James is a stag; she doesn't get her own identity, which pretty much describes her role as a female character. She exists to guide the men around her without having a personality of her own. Wife, mother, and crush.
And I fail to see how Snape would be comfortable with having a patronus that connects back to James Potter and Harry, since both of them have stags. Congratulations Snape, your One True Mate is a Potter. :p
But seriously, I don't like the idea of "soulmates' being expressed through patronuses (patroni?). Does this mean Hermione's otter patronus turned into a dog to match Ron? And is it always the woman in a heterosexual relationship who gets her patronus changed to match her male partner, just as we see with Tonks having her patronus change into a wolf to match Remus?
Also, how did Dumbledore and the rest of the Order not know about Snape's patronus? Did he never communicate with anyone using it? I'm imagining Snape sending a message to Sirius with his doe patronus and Sirius flipping out. That's a scene I'd want to see. Ah, missed opportunities.
Anyways, thank you for your response! I enjoyed reading it and I'm grateful to hear from others what they think about this topic.
Re: Thank you!
Date: 2019-01-18 06:48 pm (UTC)I think that's what keeps me in the fandom and writing stories: the missed opportunities. I can see the series as starting with fairly simple morality and choices and getting slowly more complex as the books went on... but that just never panned out.
Just imagine what we could have had if Rowling actually got close to addressing the Slytherins as human characters - a fantasy series examining how teenagers get targeted and radicalized by extremist groups, and how hard it is to get out again. Instead we got the ridiculously reductive black-and-white House morality that no one in the series questions because the author doesn't question it herself.
And then there's Rowling's very simple conception of love, or maybe that should be Love. It's pretty clear that she was going for a "greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends" thing with Harry. But of course, isn't it in fact a greater love when someone lays down their life for their enemies, just because they know that it's right? And that's what Snape does(and even Draco got close to this, risking his life to not identify Harry).
Oh, the patronuses... I think I remember Rowling saying something very silly in an interview at one point about how Snape is the only Death Eater who has a patronus (because Evil People (tm) have no happy memories??? Who knows.) I can kind of see that if a patronus is a generated by a very happy memory, and you happen to be head-over-heels in love with someone when you're casting and use a memory of that person, then the patronus would be a symbolic representation of that person or relationship. I remember one fanfic from way back that managed a plausible explanation of the doe as a genuinely sweet friendship moment when young Snape and Lily found an injured doe in the woods and healed her... but really, I think all Snape/Lily patronus explanations have to be a bit forced because of Rowling's sloppy characterization. I prefer to think of the doe as a representation of a hidden part of his own personality that he never gets to express.
Ugh, anyway, I could go on for quite some time on all the missed opportunities and bizarre choices (don't get me started on the stupid elder wand, my friend).
Re: Thank you! (Part 1)
Date: 2019-01-19 01:43 am (UTC)Exactly what I think! It's so frustrating going from the potential for maturity shown in OOTP to the disappointment in DH.
Just imagine what we could have had if Rowling actually got close to addressing the Slytherins as human characters - a fantasy series examining how teenagers get targeted and radicalized by extremist groups, and how hard it is to get out again. Instead we got the ridiculously reductive black-and-white House morality that no one in the series questions because the author doesn't question it herself.
Yes to everything here. It seems that JKR never planned for her Slytherin characters to be anything more than antagonists for Harry. They're a myriad of bullies, villains, cowards, bastards, buffoons, and faceless goons.
Regulus Black and Slughorn are often given as examples of "good" Slytherins, but Regulus is deemed heroic for his sacrifice, not for any typical traits associated with Slytherin. And Slughorn, despite his niceness, is portrayed as bumbling, vain, and too focused on status. To be fair, Slughorn does stay behind at the Battle for Hogwarts and I believe is the only Slytherin to do so. Even so, exceptions are just that - exceptions. Similar to how Peter Pettigrew is the sole example of a bad Gryffindor because of his cowardice.
Overall, Gryffindors are overwhelmingly shown as the good guys while Slytherins are either the bad guys or just plain unpleasant and/or pathetic. Harry's choice to reject Slytherin in the first book is seen as the right choice.
And then there's Rowling's very simple conception of love, or maybe that should be Love. It's pretty clear that she was going for a "greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends" thing with Harry. But of course, isn't it in fact a greater love when someone lays down their life for their enemies, just because they know that it's right? And that's what Snape does(and even Draco got close to this, risking his life to not identify Harry).
Rowling's idealization of love confuses me. Her depiction of romantic love comes across as adolescent and static. The person you become infatuated with as a child or teen is the person you'll be stuck with for the rest of your life. Ron/Hermione, Harry/Ginny, James/Lily, and Snape's unrequited love for Lily - all of it seems so... humdrum (for a lack of a better word). Even the "side" relationships the characters have (Ron/Lavender, Harry/Cho, Hermione/Krum, Ginny/Dean) are treated as superficial because their "rightful" mate has already been chosen from the first meeting. I don't know, maybe this is just my way of saying that Rowling's vision of romance is not interesting enough for me. And if she struggles to follow through with her characters as individuals, the romances suffer for it too.
And motherly love is placed on a pedestal to the point where Merope is admonished by Dumbledore for daring to die in childbirth, while Lily is exalted for doing what nearly every parent in the world would do for their child. Every time I read that passage in HBP where Dumbledore tells Harry that Merope "never had your mother's courage" it makes my blood boil. The fact that JKR places so much praise on sacrifice and throwing one's life away rubs me the wrong way. Except, of course, that praise does not extend in a profound manner to "unfavorable" characters like Snape.
Oh sure, Harry calls the man brave and names his son after him, but Harry is never forced to reconcile with Snape while he's alive. It's easy to idolize an unpleasant man who died in a war, but it's not easy to look the same man in the eye and accept him for who he is and what he's done, both terrible and valiant. I am convinced that JKR killed off Snape to make it easy for Harry and to avoid any teamwork or equality between a Gryffindor and Slytherin.
Re: Thank you! (Part 2)
Date: 2019-01-19 01:44 am (UTC)Oh, the patronuses... I think I remember Rowling saying something very silly in an interview at one point about how Snape is the only Death Eater who has a patronus (because Evil People (tm) have no happy memories??? Who knows.)
I remember that! You would think that even "evil" people have the capability to feel happy like everyone else on the planet, but apparently not? Bellatrix seemed pretty damn giddy at times to me. But she's evil, so any happiness or love she feels is rendered irrelevant. Evil people aren't human, after all....
And that's a cute idea of Snape and Lily healing a doe. Maybe if their friendship was shown as an actual friendship instead of Snape clinging onto a girl who was too good for him, maybe, just maybe, I could've warmed up to it. But, to me, it's another example of a Gryffindor being too Good and Pure for the Dirty and Doomed Slytherin....
As you can tell, I can go on and on too. Sorry for the long response, I couldn't help myself and was forced to split it into two parts! (I'm with you there on the elder wand. The whole business with wands and wand ownership in DH was needlessly convoluted.)