DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Dumbledore's Army Refugees
HTML https://darefugees.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: HP Miscellany
*****************************************************
#Post#: 33534--------------------------------------------------
Snape was not "good."
By: will Date: August 6, 2012, 3:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just saying.
#Post#: 33535--------------------------------------------------
Re: Snape was not "good."
By: Salbob Date: August 6, 2012, 4:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I agree.
It irritates me when people say he was, because it takes away
from the complexities of his character. He wasn't good, but his
motivations and feelings were completely different to the
impression he gives to begin with, and it makes him interesting.
What I find bizarre is that Harry named his kid after a wizard
who, although was less evil than he originally thought, only
changed his ways due a fairly selfish desire for Lily, not
because he thought was on the wrong side or anything :\
Also I don't think I'd name my child after someone that fancied
my mum, I think that'd be strange.
That being said, once Lily died and Dumbledore convinced him to
continue helping him to protect Harry, I do think he was
incredibly brave to work as a double-agent risking his life and
whatnot, but I don't think his motivations were particularly
pure and I don't think he's entirely 'good', which makes him an
interesting character.
#Post#: 33538--------------------------------------------------
Re: Snape was not "good."
By: Winter_Is_Coming Date: August 6, 2012, 4:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Getting a real sense of deja vu. We've talked about this like, a
million times before.
#Post#: 33551--------------------------------------------------
Re: Snape was not "good."
By: The Dude Date: August 6, 2012, 9:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Snape was never good. He was selfish. Everything he did in the
books was out of a selfish motive and that is his lust for Lily.
He hated Harry because of his father, he wanted them both dead,
and if Lily hadn't died, he would have gladly thrown himself
into the dark arts.
I really got pissed when after the 7 book came out and people
were like 'OMG his sacrificed himself out of his love. How
romantic!!!' OK so he was on good side but that doesn't make him
good.
#Post#: 33552--------------------------------------------------
Re: Snape was not "good."
By: kamikaze ginny Date: August 6, 2012, 9:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What pisses me off is when Dumbledore implies that Snape could
have been a Gryffindor. I'm paraphrasing here but he says
something like, "I think we sort too early" and it's heavily
suggested that he means Snape was not a Slytherin through and
through. I think that speaks to Dumbledore's main weakness -
trusting too much. Snape never protected Harry for Harry's sake,
he never went to Dumbledore for Harry's sake or really for
Lily's. Lily was an object to Snape he loved her like a guy
would love a car or a trophy. There was never enough of a mutual
relationship for him to love her the way you love a spouse. It
was never don't kill her it was always don't kill her because I
love her, I need her. Snape was neither good nor bad, he was
working for one person: Severus Snape, and what a true Slytherin
he was, selfish to the very end.
#Post#: 33558--------------------------------------------------
Re: Snape was not "good."
By: Salbob Date: August 6, 2012, 1:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]Getting a real sense of deja vu. We've talked about this
like, a million times before.[/quote]
Yeah...but we are a HP board, and people shouldn't really be
criticised for wanting to discuss a HP topic :\
But yeah like Dayna said, he looked out for himself and that's a
very Slytherin trait - what I find weirdest about that is the
way that Dumbledore implies (specifically in this part, but
quite a bit through the series) that Slytherin equates to bad
rather than Slytherins having the potential to be good or bad
like any other student, but that their traits typically make
them less courageous.
#Post#: 33576--------------------------------------------------
Re: Snape was not "good."
By: Winter_Is_Coming Date: August 6, 2012, 4:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]Yeah...but we are a HP board, and people shouldn't really
be criticised for wanting to discuss a HP topic :\ [/quote]
I wasn't criticizing, just pointing out that we've discussed
this before and we will all inevitably agree Snape is not
"good." Just like we did last time. The problem is that there
isn't really anything new to discuss in the fandom. All HP
discussions we're ever going to have again will probably just be
rehashes of old discussions, lol.
#Post#: 33626--------------------------------------------------
Re: Snape was not "good."
By: will Date: August 7, 2012, 1:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I know we've talked about it before, but I was just talking
about this with a friend the other day that I didn't really know
liked HP extensively. We both agreed on HBP being our favorite
book, but then he said Snape was his favourite character because
he was so complex, risked everything, and was actually good. I
agree with the first 2 things, but not the "good" thing. If
Voldemort has chosen Neville as his equal and killed his parents
instead, Snape would've given 0 fucks about it and would not
have been a double agent/considered "good." It baffles me how
people fail to see that.
#Post#: 33630--------------------------------------------------
Re: Snape was not "good."
By: StealYellowMen Date: August 7, 2012, 7:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I just really can't get behind it when people say he's good. I
definitely understand relating to him and his upbringing and/or
his outsider status. And that there's more to him than meets the
eye. He's a layered character. But he's also selfish and
incredibly cruel. Anyone who treats kids the way he does
throughout the books is the complete opposite of sympathetic and
good. Blatantly choosing favorites, tearing down students based
on intelligence/looks, going out of his way to humiliate them,
etc. If you're getting some sort of pleasure out of that,
there's something way off. You've become no better than the
bullies (aka James/Sirius) who tormented you in your youth.
Obvious difference being James and Sirius were his peers at the
time and now Snape is a full grown man tearing down 11 year
olds. And it doesn't make you a very good teacher either. And he
sort of acted like a petulant child over never getting the Dark
Arts position. I felt like his cruelty came from that as well.
Like grow the fuck up Snape. Welcome to adult hood. Its
disappointing as shit. Sit in the dungeons and cry in your
cauldron about it.
This is obviously all in addition to the stuff he "does for
Harry", which isn't for Harry at all. He claims its always been
for Lily. But lets be real, we all know its to absolve himself
of the guilt he's felt since Lily's death.
But as a character is way interesting (in fact that we can
dissect him and his actions, especially).
#Post#: 33635--------------------------------------------------
Re: Snape was not "good."
By: kamikaze ginny Date: August 7, 2012, 8:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've said this before but Snape = Briony Tallis.
It's a fact. Atonement starring Severus Snape.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page