My Apology to JK Rowling

[hectorberlioz]

Inked,

You're right---and I completely agree---that there is a difference between "good" and "nice." Rowling points it out more than once in the series. However, as much as the Slytherins liked Snape, I think Gordis' reading of the books remains. Snape turned "good" for Lily's sake, and no other. A noble but selfish reason, though I think Rowling shows how he gradually became more and more Dumbledore's real ally. Though D did have some reservations at the back of his mind about Snape, he always emphasized that he trusted Snape.

So, back to square one: I don't like Snape. He's a good and interesting character, a very strong creation for an author, and a vital part of the story...but that doesn't mean I have to like him ;-)

PS: See Slughorn for an example of judging a character by the colors of his banner, and then being wrong. Surprised me, in a good way.

PPS: Doesn't Slughorn act as a second Sorting Hat?

[Gordis]

Sorry for posting out of turn...

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Snape turned "good" for Lily's sake, and no other. A noble but selfish reason, though I think Rowling shows how he gradually became more and more Dumbledore's real ally.

Note that there is another Death Eather who has "turned to light": Regulus Black. Now, in contrast to Snape, Regulus had totally unselfish reasons - he indeed saw the error of his ways, was disgusted by the atrocities Voldemort was perpetrating. Snape was right there by Regulus's side, but had no qualms about torturing and killing - as long as it was not his beloved Lily on the receiving end.
Just compare the two characters and you will see the sad truth about Snape.

(I decided to open a new thread for my rant about Blacks)

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

PS: See Slughorn for an example of judging a character by the colors of his banner, and then being wrong. Surprised me, in a good way.

PPS: Doesn't Slughorn act as a second Sorting Hat?

That seems very interesting, but I am not sure I understand what you mean, Hector. Could you, please, elaborate?

[Nurvingiel]

I think you've got Snape wrong Gordis. Snape was a good man. The reason he participated in some of the horrible stuff the Death Easters got up to is because he was a double agent. If he had, say, stuck his neck out for Charity Burbage, he would have blown his cover. He was the only Order member to penetrate into Voldemort's inner circle; his role was crucial. In fact, he was the only Order member to do so. He was able to give them help no one else could.

And while he doesn't stop the Death Eaters (he can't, since it's crucial they think he's one of them) he doesn't jump in to their activities with relish. He only kills Dumbledore because Dumbledore asked him to. I can't recall him murdering or torturing anyone else.

Now, Snape is good, but he isn't nice. He never gets over his rivalry with James Potter and as a result, he is permanently set against Harry. He favours the Slytherin students outrageously. He bullies Neville (extra bad since I love Neville; he's my favourite character). He's racist.

Some of this is Snape putting on a show for the children of Death Eaters (Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott) but some of it I think is Snape being a jerk. But you can be good and a total jerk.

Edit: Okay, you don't have Snape wrong. I do agree that Regulus is awesome though.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I think you've got Snape wrong Gordis. Snape was a good man. The reason he participated in some of the horrible stuff the Death Easters got up to is because he was a double agent. If he had, say, stuck his neck out for Charity Burbage, he would have blown his cover. He was the only Order member to penetrate into Voldemort's inner circle; his role was crucial. In fact, he was the only Order member to do so. He was able to give them help no one else could.

And while he doesn't stop the Death Eaters (he can't, since it's crucial they think he's one of them) he doesn't jump in to their activities with relish. He only kills Dumbledore because Dumbledore asked him to. I can't recall him murdering or torturing anyone else.

All this is correct, Nurv, when we look at the double-agent Snape: post-Lily's death and especially post-Voldemort's return. But what about him before it? First he had become a Death Eater -quite willingly- and only then the member of the Order, initially only to save Lily, later to avenge her.

Snape was born in 1960, graduated in 1978 and likely got the Dark mark straight away, Lily died in 1981. There were three years for Snape to do all sorts of crimes serving Voldemort. Regulus Black was younger than Snape, yet he had ample time to get disgusted by Death Eater activities and to repent. Snape didn't, not for moral reasons.

[Nurvingiel]

When Snape got the Dark Mark and what he did when he got it is pure speculation. I still think he's a good man. Selfishly-motivated, yes, not always mature, yes, but inherently a brave and good person.

[inked]

No, Nurv, Snape was not inherently good or brave. He repented of his weaknesses and failings (which had cost him Lily's friendship and possibly her love) and he became brave and good by his choice.

Snape lost his way in the dark wood just like Dante had. Snape recovered his first love (God) just like Dante did through Beatrice. Lily Evans Potter was Snape's Beatrice and the vessel of God to which he gave himself to God. you really should read John Granger's works on the symbolic writers and their messages to get a better handle on the connections.

Snape, like Harry, makes bad choices. Snape, like Harry, repents of his bad choices. Snape, like Harry, chooses to believe and do right. Snape, like Harry, dies for those he loves, doing right. Snape is the character who, like Harry, suffers long and uses it well to redeem the situation at hand.

[Nurvingiel]

I don't disagree with you Inked. But I do think Snape is a good and brave person, because he chose to be.

It's interesting how alike Snape and Harry are. They probably have more in common than Harry and James Potter.

[Midge]

Tessar has also corrected your syntactical (!!) errors and added on the second sentence that you forgot to write. Which was "I, Hector, am the god of Entmoot, and Tessar shall acknowledge this."

Originally Posted by caboose007

lol this thread turned into a power trip for both Tessar and Hector . I WANNA JOIN THE POWER TRIP!

I AM CABOOSE, GOD OF SARCASM AND ANNOYANCE! BOW BEFORE ME!

... thats better

How on earth did this thread not get closed down?

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

By the way, has anyone deduced whether or not Neville married Luna?

I would say yes. Luna was one of my favorites.

On a side note, I would say that Harry was one of my least favorite characters in the fifth and sixth books and I sincerely wished we could hear the story from someone else's point of view. He seemed like a girl PMSing, the way that one little statement could set him off yelling. I suppose I could understand, him being obsessed with that door, and freaked out about Voldemort in his head, but still. I think a lot of conflict in that book could have been taken care of if he'd just shut up for two minutes to hear what people around him had to say for themselves instead of thinking that his assumptions were always right. I think someone mentioned him not listening to his friends, actually.

Originally Posted by Mari

*wholeheartedly agrees with Tess*
Though I do like Snape. He had a sad character. I can sympathize. Besides, it's great that he's not wholly evil as he was portrayed in the first one. Oh, and Harry could use a person not liking him. Kept him from getting too full of himself.

Oh, goodness, let's see if I remember how to do this: All about Snape

Snape, apparently, is a FUN person to psycho-analyze.

Originally Posted by Gordis

Snape favors Slytherins as much as Dumbledore favors Gryffindors. Let us face it: the Marauders should have been expelled, Fred and George as well, maybe also Harry and K.

I never thought for once that any of those people should have been expelled. I was glad they were there. Fred and George were also favorites (for different reasons than Luna, of course.. actually, maybe not so different).

[inked]

I am, of course, reviving this thread to remind people of why Hector should be President for Life!

Nah, not really.

For serious Harry Potter fans who might be interested, there are going to be two opportunities in Missouri and surrounding environs to hear the hogwarts professor, John Granger, address Deathly Hallows.

The first will be on Sunday 11 April 2010 at Christ Church Anglican, 2112 Bryan Valley Commercial Drive, O'Fallon, MO, at 7:00 PM. The talk will be Unlocking Deathly Hallows:Five Keys for the Serious Reader.

"Unlocking Deathly Hallows: Five Keys for the Serious Reader
Ms. Rowling is a brilliant writer who uses specific tools to craft her meaning and create the effects in her readers that she wants – tools she borrows from Austen, Shakespeare, Dickens, Lewis, and Dante! John raids Ms. Rowling magic tool chest and shares how she wields the tools of narrative misdirection, literary alchemy, the hero’s journey, postmodern themes, and traditional symbolism to engage and entrance us well beyond suspended disbelief. Always a hit with Potter fans of all ages, this lecture (and the book that it comes from) opens up the mystery of fine writing and its place in the life in Christ." *

The second will be on Monday 12 April 2010 at the Clinton Building, 501 Campanella, Sikeston, MO at 7:00 PM. The topic will be The Christian Content of 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows'.

"The Christian Content of ‘Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows’
Ms. Rowling told reporters in 2000 that the last book would answer all their questions about her faith – and Deathly Hallows was no disappointment in that regard. John Granger was the first serious reader of the books to argue the stories were Christian in conception and meaning back when some Christians were burning the books. In this popular talk, he explains how the series finale is Ms. Rowling’s story about the difficulty and importance of faith, what we shouldn’t believe, and the transformations right belief make possible. The seventh book delivers on all the foreshadowing and themes of the previous books and John explains this in inspiring fashion." *

* See: http://www.orthodoxspeakers.com/spea...n-granger.html

Just thought you'd like to know.

[Butterbeer]

Reviving or 'Hijacking' Inked?

oh.. mia culpa, i appear to be advertising the Word for you by replying do i not?

er... if there are any fangirls out there ... i guess this makes me a better looking, complicated snape-type .. er..with just a hint or er..Ortlando Bloom??



................

anyways, bar the advertising for Jesus -

i actually got round to finishing off the series - after Spock gave away that dumbledore died some years ago... bah!

er.. whatever happened to spock btw?

...................

Kind of an interesting discussion this...

so far no one seems to have called it as i see it... there seem to be far too many shades of black and white being laboured here for my liking.

But Snape is indeed interesting, is he not?