![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Why do we love Snape?
This was a question asked over on the whysnape board, and here was my answer. I have expanded it a bit as a result of the bitter word's excellent essay on Dunbledore and the comments that resulted. It is an informal essay/meditation, g-rated and probably about 500 words.
Why love a fictional character? In what sense do we *love* characters in books?
Some people will never understand this love because it has never happened to them. When I was in library school, I learned about the levels of engagement and understanding children - and teenagers, and adults - go through in their reading. First it's just basic comprehension. Then you get lost in the story; you are caught up in the adventure you are reading. Then you come to the stage where you "find yourself in a book". Then, as a young adult, you begin to see layers of meaning in the story and the characters. You begin to read on more than one level. It's my guess that all Snape fans are reading on at least the third level and more probably on the fourth. Many readers never get there. They read for information and amusement, and don't necessarily identify strongly with the characters, never mind analyzing them! That's a perfectly reasonable way to read these books. It's also true that not everyone who "finds him/herself" in the potterverse will find themselves in Snape. Why would any reader identify with him, rather than with more (apparently) likable characters such as Harry or Hermione or Sirius?
Yet many of us identify with Snape more than any other character in these books. I certainly do, and here are some of my reasons. For one thing, Severus Snape is a bullied geek, and, as Jodel remarks, many of Rowling's adult readers self-identify as geeks or nerds. I dare say quite a few of us were bullied by people like James, Sirius and Lily; as a result, we may well have strong fellow feeling for young Severus when we see him in the same situation. He is also, very clearly, a man in mourning. His irritability, poor grooming, choice of clothing, and apparent insomnia all point to clinical depression, and anyone who has ever been even slightly depressed can't help but feel for him. Most of all, I find him fascinating because he is the most morally and emotionally complex character Rowling wrote, and because he (like Neville, and unlike Harry) is truly on a hero's journey. He is the only character she wrote who actually chooses to change. This is compelling. But that's true of characters in other books, isn't it? There are certainly heroes who become better people by their own efforts and who love without being loved in return. Then why is Snape so fascinating?
I think Snape's grip on the reader's imagination is so strong because of the dissonance between what Rowling apparently intended and what she actually did. As I've said so many times before, in Severus, Rowling had the chance to write one of the greatest characters, and greatest heroes, in all of English literature. It's all there on the page - the courage, loyalty, intelligence and capacity for love*. And yet, she makes it clear in the adjectives she uses about him, in the torments and humiliations she puts him through, and in Harry's viewpoint, that she doesn't want him to be seen as a hero. Never mind what she says in interviews, which is even worse!
So, those of us who, for whatever reason, identify with Severus want to see justice for him. We want him to achieve some peace and happiness, and that never happens in the text. This is frustrating, so we can't let go. We keep struggling to affirm his heroism and discover other possibilities for him.
*He's got a great sense of humor, too. That helps.
Why love a fictional character? In what sense do we *love* characters in books?
Some people will never understand this love because it has never happened to them. When I was in library school, I learned about the levels of engagement and understanding children - and teenagers, and adults - go through in their reading. First it's just basic comprehension. Then you get lost in the story; you are caught up in the adventure you are reading. Then you come to the stage where you "find yourself in a book". Then, as a young adult, you begin to see layers of meaning in the story and the characters. You begin to read on more than one level. It's my guess that all Snape fans are reading on at least the third level and more probably on the fourth. Many readers never get there. They read for information and amusement, and don't necessarily identify strongly with the characters, never mind analyzing them! That's a perfectly reasonable way to read these books. It's also true that not everyone who "finds him/herself" in the potterverse will find themselves in Snape. Why would any reader identify with him, rather than with more (apparently) likable characters such as Harry or Hermione or Sirius?
Yet many of us identify with Snape more than any other character in these books. I certainly do, and here are some of my reasons. For one thing, Severus Snape is a bullied geek, and, as Jodel remarks, many of Rowling's adult readers self-identify as geeks or nerds. I dare say quite a few of us were bullied by people like James, Sirius and Lily; as a result, we may well have strong fellow feeling for young Severus when we see him in the same situation. He is also, very clearly, a man in mourning. His irritability, poor grooming, choice of clothing, and apparent insomnia all point to clinical depression, and anyone who has ever been even slightly depressed can't help but feel for him. Most of all, I find him fascinating because he is the most morally and emotionally complex character Rowling wrote, and because he (like Neville, and unlike Harry) is truly on a hero's journey. He is the only character she wrote who actually chooses to change. This is compelling. But that's true of characters in other books, isn't it? There are certainly heroes who become better people by their own efforts and who love without being loved in return. Then why is Snape so fascinating?
I think Snape's grip on the reader's imagination is so strong because of the dissonance between what Rowling apparently intended and what she actually did. As I've said so many times before, in Severus, Rowling had the chance to write one of the greatest characters, and greatest heroes, in all of English literature. It's all there on the page - the courage, loyalty, intelligence and capacity for love*. And yet, she makes it clear in the adjectives she uses about him, in the torments and humiliations she puts him through, and in Harry's viewpoint, that she doesn't want him to be seen as a hero. Never mind what she says in interviews, which is even worse!
So, those of us who, for whatever reason, identify with Severus want to see justice for him. We want him to achieve some peace and happiness, and that never happens in the text. This is frustrating, so we can't let go. We keep struggling to affirm his heroism and discover other possibilities for him.
*He's got a great sense of humor, too. That helps.
no subject
I'm not really a FAN of Snape, mostly because I identify him as a sort of worst-case scenario for myself. I mean, no offense, but he does have deep-running flaws. I don't see the poor grooming, irritability, and insomnia as signs of depression - I had a good deal of all of the above as a child and early teenager, and I was hardly depressed THEN. (On the other hand, I do think Snape had an emotionally abusive father. Not physically, just emotionally. Emotionally can do a lot of damage in and of itself.)
I never really appreciated Snape's humor* because I've been on the receiving end of snarky and/or harsh humor, and found it very NOT enjoyable. Then again, some people dislike the Twins due to having been on the receiving end of "practical jokes", and while I'm not QUITE sure what my opinion of them is (I slot them into my 'Slightly... Off-Kilter' archetype and thus like them - note that said archetype says NOTHING about their moral status), I do see them as less ambitious (due to anti-Slytherin conditioning) Grindelwalds. I certainly LOATHE James, though - ugh! I could never stand people like Draco, and no matter WHAT JKR says in interviews, she LITERALLY wrote him as Draco in Gryffindor's clothing! *shudders* How she can STILL call him one of the heroes of his generation... bleurgh. And she makes comments about not equating Draco with Tom Felton (who, personally, I never found attractive in the slightest). She has an entirely valid point, but she's an utter hypocrite.
I don't agree that there IS a dissonance with what she actually did - then again, I'm a tad cynical due to choking down massive amounts of bad fanfiction. I realize there's a strong distinction between the fans who somehow enjoy Draco's personality and want to write him IC and develop him and those who just want to bang a pale pretty boy in leather, so there's a distinction between those who love the book!Snape and those who... well, have a crush on Alan Rickman. :P
To go slightly off-topic, I DO see dissonance in Harry Potter, but not about Snape. (I swear, I think she WAS trying to make him more sympathetic, but overshot and now can't figure out why people love him more than her pwecious gang of "cool" bullies.) For instance, in DH, I was quite intrigued by the Dumbledore backstory. *laughs* Yes, I know I'm one of the few in fandom who doesn't view it as unnecessary fluff, bad storytelling, blah-blah-blah. But it was CLEARLY setting up comparisons to the present! It was one of the few times I've seen a story that has been playing "For the Greater Good" fairly straight to turn around and say "But atrocities HAVE been justified as For the Greater Good, and no, I'm not just mouthing that line, HERE SOME ARE!". I thought we would see Our Heroes reevaluating their means to the end of the Greater Good, and - maybe "maturing" isn't quite the right word, but coming to realize that they've done or were doing wrong.
What do I get?
A ****ING "GALLANT" CRUCIO, in DIRECT contradiction to the canon that you CANNOT power a Cruciatus off of righteous wrath! ...Or perhaps it isn't even a contradiction. What THAT would say about Rowling's mindset - that torture for the sake of seeing someone suffer is "gallant" -, I don't what to think about. *shudder* And, of course, Harry telling poor Aberforth that "sometimes you've GOT to think about the Greater Good!". That moral lesson just rebounded off Harry's forehead, didn't it?
(cont.)