Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows - Part 2

[Marvolo]

If Snape wouldn't have insultes half-bloods and mudbloods he could have got the girl. He did alot of things but that was the straw that broke the camels back. He ended up with the qrong crowd and started drinking the koolaid.

 

[Marvolo]

i've read the 5th book and have no idea what you're talking about.

I think he was asking me whether my teacher was as bad as unbridge.

Sorry about making two seperate posts back to back. Wasn't paying attention.

 

[Fanticon]

but referring to snape torturing harry in book 5? idgi

 

[DarthSkywalker]

If you go by the timeline, Harry's parents were only married for about three years. For most of the time Snape lusted after Lilly, she was not with James. And they were FRIENDS. They didn't stop being friends until her fifth year. You make it sound like he was some sort of crazy stalker, but it's not like they didn't have a relationship of their own. As I've said, JKR even said that had things worked out a little different for Snape, she could have seen him and Lilly ending up together. So obviously Lilly had affection for Snape as well. You can't ignore that fact.

And I'm talking about Snape's home life. Yes, Harry had Voldermort after him, and that is indeed horrible. But you can't discount the fact that if you grow up in an abusive family it can seriously screw you up. I'm not saying it justifies Snape's adult behavior, it doesn't. But it at least makes things a little clearer when you realize this.

Again, I'm not saying Snape is a completely noble and selfless hero. He was capable of great cruelty. I fully acknowledge that, but you seem to want to ignore all the good he did as well, which would be just as preposterous as me only looking at the character for the good he did and ignoring the bad.

I believe in intentions, motivates, why people do what they do.

Snape's good all comes from one source. Another man's wife. That is it. Snape did do some good things, but why he did them keeps him from being a good man in my eyes. I mean, the way some talk about him you would think Snape was Stark of Winterfell or Jon Snow.

Also you seem to forget that Lily saw Snape for what he was. Why they weren't friends anymore.

 

[Marvolo]

but referring to snape torturing harry in book 5? idgi

He was talking to me because I said my teacher was evil incarnate and he asked me whether I missed book 5. The only thing he could have meant aboyt snape in book 5 is the legilimency lessons which I don't thibk are that bad. Yes snape was being a *****e but Harry was 15 at the time. If your 15 and can't take some smack talk from a *****e I would question your resolve. I was 8 and my third grade teacher on a daily basis told us how stupid we were literally. This woman didn't hint at anything. Blunt and just generally vindicative.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

but referring to snape torturing harry in book 5? idgi

Oh Snape does plenty to Harry in the 5th book. You don't remember occlumency lessons?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

He was talking to me because I said my teacher was evil incarnate and he asked me whether I missed book 5. The only thing he could have meant aboyt snape in book 5 is the legilimency lessons which I don't thibk are that bad. Yes snape was being a *****e but Harry was 15 at the time. If your 15 and can't take some smack talk from a *****e I would question your resolve. I was 8 and my third grade teacher on a daily basis told us how stupid we were literally. This woman didn't hint at anything. Blunt and just generally vindicative.

If I remember correctly it was Snape who called off the lessons, because he got his wittle feelings hurt. You know this really important thing Harry needed to learn? Yeah forget it.

 

[Marvolo]

Oh Snape does plenty to Harry in the 5th book. You don't remember occlumency lessons?

Read my above post. He's a dick but honestly what snape was doing isnt torture. Harry was 15 not a little kid. He was trying to rile Harry up because Harry needed to learn to control his mind even in his rage. He wasn't torturing him.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I believe in intentions, motivates, why people do what they do.

Snape's good all comes from one source. Another man's wife. That is it. Snape did do some good things, but why he did them keeps him from being a good man in my eyes. I mean, the way some talk about him you would think Snape was Stark of Winterfell or Jon Snow.

Also you seem to forget that Lily saw Snape for what he was. Why they weren't friends anymore.

And see, I don't believe that Snape, at the end of his life, was doing all his good purely for selfish reasons. If it was really only that, then why try to save Lupin during the flight from Privet Drive? Why care if you protect the children of Hogwarts or not? Why try to save Draco's life and soul? If it was purely for selfish reasons, he would have only done what he could to protect Harry. Keeping the children of Hogwarts as safe as he could while being headmaster doesn't fall under protecting Harry, helping Draco doens't fall under protecting Harry etc.

And Lilly saw Snape for what he was at the time. She didn't know Snape when he died. Again, the line I posted earlier between Snape and Dumbledore really sums it up. Snape's intentions started out purely selfish, but by the end he's evolved into a man who genuinely wants to protect human life.

"Only those whom I could not save."

If he was still doing everything for purely selfish reasons, he wouldn't care about others. He'd only care about Harry.

Again, let me make it clear I am NOT saying this makes Snape's other behavior okay. He was cruel, immature, and just a right down slimy jackoff at times. But he also was capable of great nobility, and I do not think it was all for a selfish reason. I believe he genuinely evolved into a better person.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

And see, I don't believe that Snape, at the end of his life, was doing all his good purely for selfish reasons. If it was really only that, then why try to save Lupin during the flight from Privet Drive? Why care if you protect the children of Hogwarts or not? Why try to save Draco's life and soul? If it was purely for selfish reasons, he would have only done what he could to protect Harry. Keeping the children of Hogwarts as safe as he could while being headmaster doesn't fall under protecting Harry, helping Draco doens't fall under protecting Harry etc.

And Lilly saw Snape for what he was at the time. She didn't know Snape when he died. Again, the line I posted earlier between Snape and Dumbledore really sums it up. Snape's intentions started out purely selfish, but by the end he's evolved into a man who genuinely wants to protect human life.

"Only those whom I could not save."

If he was still doing everything for purely selfish reasons, he wouldn't care about others. He'd only care about Harry.

Again, let me make it clear I am NOT saying this makes Snape's other behavior okay. He was cruel, immature, and just a right down slimy jackoff at times. But he also was capable of great nobility, and I do not think it was all for a selfish reason. I believe he genuinely evolved into a better person.

Intentions being tainted my selfishness, makes them selfish imo. Afterall the Potters showed one can be purely selfless.

 

[Marvolo]

The way I look at it Snape paid for his mistake every day for the rest of his life. If that isn't enough penitence IDK what is. In a way a Snape saved the wizarding world. If he hadn't played a double agent so well I do not believe things would have ended well.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The way I look at it Snape paid for his mistake every day for the rest of his life. If that isn't enough penitence IDK what is. In a way a Snape saved the wizarding world. If he hadn't played a double agent so well I do not believe things would have ended well.

For being a murderer? I don't think there is such thing as enough penitence for that.

It reminds me of a certain scene in Preacher.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Intentions being tainted my selfishness, makes them selfish imo. Afterall the Potters showed one can be purely selfless.

I disagree completley. By that logic, you're believing that someone's intentions can't change. That's like saying because I originally joined the superherohype because I was interested in Batman Begins, I'm still only interested in Batman even though my interest in other Superheroes grew out of it.

And I don't see how the Potters were exactly selfless. Is protecting your child a truly "selfless" act? Your child is still part of you, part of your "self" in a sense.

But that point aside, it doesn't matter if other people were completely selfless or not. I've never said Snape was completely selfless. I've fully acknowledged that his actions started out completely selfish. I believe he evolved into a more selfless person. Because I believe people's intentions can change.

 

[Fanticon]

Oh Snape does plenty to Harry in the 5th book. You don't remember occlumency lessons?

i do and i don't think it could be classified as torture. the occlumency lessons were for harry's benefit, so he could learn to shut out voldemort from his thoughts. Snape was only doing what he was told, and that particular magic is advanced and probably very uncomfortable for a reluctant 15year old. If it caused harry some pain both emotionally and as it appeared to be also physically exhausting for harry, remember, Snape always questioned Dumbledore before hand about his concerns. Harry didn't like being in the same room with Snape, no secret either that snape was not particularly fond of harry, despite the later revelations of DH. Peering into harry's thoughts during those lessons actually made snape sympathetic, as he was unaware mostly of the abuse harry suffered under the care of the dursleys. When harry peered into snapes memory, he did so out of frustration for how snape was acting towards him, being tough on him, it was also an eye opener for harry though, and Snape was understandably upset. so unless he physically laid his hands on harry or cast a spell to intentionally inflict pain upon harry, i don't think its torture. I think you just have it out for snape as an archetype you don't agree with, or like the fact that he is made out to be some kind of hero in the end. Snape was a good man. One of the most interesting characters in the books, and JK intended for everyone to see the truth we'd all hoped for, and that was that he truly did care for Harry. And the only thing that kept him from turning to the darkside was his love for Lilly, and the regret he will always have for not doing what could have been prevented had he set aside his hatred for james. The movie may not have conveyed this clearly enough for the payoff of A Prince's Tale to be truly as moving as it could have been but it was still well done and I thought the image of Snape holding lilly in his arms was beautiful and heartbreaking...furthermore I would have liked if he had also carried harry away from the rubble.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I disagree completley. By that logic, you're believing that someone's intentions can't change. That's like saying because I originally joined the superherohype because I was interested in Batman Begins, I'm still only interested in Batman even though my interest in other Superheroes grew out of it.

And I don't see how the Potters were exactly selfless. Is protecting your child a truly "selfless" act? Your child is still part of you, part of your "self" in a sense.

But that point aside, it doesn't matter if other people were completely selfless or not. I've never said Snape was completely selfless. I've fully acknowledged that his actions started out completely selfish. I believe he evolved into a more selfless person. Because I believe people's intentions can change.

Lily, James and Harry all died for others with no thought for their own well being.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

i do and i don't think it could be classified as torture. the occlumency lessons were for harry's benefit, so he could learn to shut out voldemort from his thoughts. Snape was only doing what he was told, and that particular magic is advanced and probably very uncomfortable for a reluctant 15year old. If it caused harry some pain both emotionally and as it appeared to be also physically exhausting for harry, remember, Snape always questioned Dumbledore before hand about his concerns. Harry didn't like being in the same room with Snape, no secret either that snape was not particularly fond of harry, despite the later revelations of DH. Peering into harry's thoughts during those lessons actually made snape sympathetic, as he was unaware mostly of the abuse harry suffered under the care of the dursleys. When harry peered into snapes memory, he did so out of frustration for how snape was acting towards him, being tough on him, it was also an eye opener for harry though, and Snape was understandably upset. so unless he physically laid his hands on harry or cast a spell to intentionally inflict pain upon harry, i don't think its torture. I think you just have it out for snape as an archetype you don't agree with, or like the fact that he is made out to be some kind of hero in the end. Snape was a good man. One of the most interesting characters in the books, and JK intended for everyone to see the truth we'd all hoped for, and that was that he truly did care for Harry. And the only thing that kept him from turning to the darkside was his love for Lilly, and the regret he will always have for not doing what could have been prevented had he set aside his hatred for james. The movie may not have conveyed this clearly enough for the payoff of A Prince's Tale to be truly as moving as it could have been but it was still well done and I thought the image of Snape holding lilly in his arms was beautiful and heartbreaking...furthermore I would have liked if he had also carried harry away from the rubble.

Lupin taught Harry some pretty advance magic. It was tough and it was painful. But in no way did he make worse it through his words and demeanor.

Also, Snape did turn to the darkside. Good men don't do what deatheaters did.

 

[Fanticon]

Lupin taught Harry some pretty advance magic. It was tough and it was painful. But in no way did he make worse it through his words and demeanor.

Also, Snape did turn to the darkside. Good men don't do what deatheaters did.

clearly i meant that Snape never returned to the darkside. the truth is that JK wanted to write about and create characters that were flawed, good people can sometimes end up doing bad things and be led down the wrong path. Snape was a complex character, but never truly evil.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Lily, James and Harry all died for others with no thought for their own well being.

Lily and James died for their son. I think what Harry did was more selfless then their final act. Not saying that dying for your child isn't noble, but I think it takes even more out of someone to lay down their lives for a person or persons who aren't your blood.

Also, Snape did turn to the darkside. Good men don't do what deatheaters did

By this logic people can never change. So, by this logic, Dumbledore was always a selfish person who craved power and wanted to rule over Muggles for their own good. Oh wait...he changed.

I believe Snape changed. I'm not saying he became a perfect and good man. But I believe he became a better man. He still had some very wretched qualities, but he also made some very selfless choices. This cannot be ignored. He committed great crimes and great good. He's complex that way.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

clearly i meant that Snape never returned to the darkside.

Which kind of hurts your, "Snape was a good man", point.

 

[Liam_H]

By this logic people can never change. So, by this logic, Dumbledore was always a selfish person who craved power and wanted to rule over Muggles for their own good. Oh wait...he changed.

Another point to reinforce this is that Draco changed, he was always raised to be like his father...but deep down he never believed in that path. He's still a prick that probably believes he's better than everyone else but he's not gonna mass murder as Voldemort would do. A dog that's all bark and no bite.

 

[Fanticon]

Which kind of hurts your, "Snape was a good man", point.

not really.

 

[OtherwiseKnownAs]

Is there any proof that Snape did anything other Death Eaters did? I don't think he ever tortured anybody, and there's sufficient proof that he's never killed, besides Dumbledore.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Is there any proof that Snape did anything other Death Eaters did? I don't think he ever tortured anybody, and there's sufficient proof that he's never killed, besides Dumbledore.

This is actually a good point. While I do think Snape probably did do bad things as a Death Eater, there is no proof that he actually killed or tortured anyone.

However, even if he did, my entire point that I'm trying to make is that people can change. Something Darthskywalker seems to disagree with.

 

[Homer J. Fong]

I just got back from my second viewing, and I was just as satisfied and thrilled as the first. I enjoyed the Aberforth scene more than I did the first time, too, possibly because I knew what it held. The problem, I think, with the lack of information or backstory on Dumbledore and his darkness, his own onetime obsession with The Deathly Hallows, being cut, is that we were teased with more in Part 1 that we get in Part 2. We were teased by Rita Skeeter's book, we were teased by Doge & Muriel's conversation, we were teased by Grindelwald showing up in Rita's book - and the payoff is not sufficient based on those little teases. It's not a big deal for me, though; I'm okay that Dumbledore remains even more of a mystery in the films than in the books.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Lily and James died for their son. I think what Harry did was more selfless then their final act. Not saying that dying for your child isn't noble, but I think it takes even more out of someone to lay down their lives for a person or persons who aren't your blood.

By this logic people can never change. So, by this logic, Dumbledore was always a selfish person who craved power and wanted to rule over Muggles for their own good. Oh wait...he changed.

I believe Snape changed. I'm not saying he became a perfect and good man. But I believe he became a better man. He still had some very wretched qualities, but he also made some very selfless choices. This cannot be ignored. He committed great crimes and great good. He's complex that way.

Jesse Custer, Gunther, Salvation.

I know these are character, and romanticizing them is probably much, if not the entire point. But people don't just change. What one has done, they have always done. What they are capable of, they are always capable of. That we see different aspect of character, doesn't mean they changed, just that there is more then one aspect to them.

Even if we go by your line of thinking, Snape grows to care for Harry. If that is so, he is showing nothing new then what we already knew about him. That he is capable of acts to protect those he cares for. That doesn't change his intentions or the man he is. He also the same man who committed horrific acts and will always be.

It is not unlike why Vader, after showing the qualities of a good man, had to die in the end.