I have a question.
Why there are so many arguments around snApe that don't go in deeper context? Like for example people believe Snape is obsessed, he is evil for being a death eater, he can't love, he has no morals and all of these things are disapproved by the text. There is an argument that decreases snape complexity and defuses James behaviour because he protected his wife yet James disgraced someone else he took his dignity and honour. He made him a laughing stock though Snape wasn't always innocent either but he can't be considered transgressor for the bad behaviour James and his friends showed considering Snape was powerless no matter how talented he was.
Nazi situation can not be considered in a fictional context considering the ideas and perspectives differ.
Snape morals are demonstrated in detail even through his school days.
The half blood prince is his best example.
They make the argument James is likeable because people liked him but they forget dumbledore mention of James potter wrong doing In Deathly hallows.
Wizarding world is not a meritocracy but it's all about social power. Snape was envious of James popularity but it's unlikely he ever wanted to be James afterall Snape was proud of the person he was.
Snape was respectful of lily choices, he didn't lie to her and never forced her to love him romantically and all of that is looked over because James saved lily even though he wasn't honest, he didn't approve of Snape in lily life. Jk Rowling comment about James does imply arrogance and extremely egoistic outlook.
They say Snape should have let go of his company if he loved lily but they forget even the most clever people get blinded.
Even dumbledore got blinded and there was not many men clever then him.
For even love he had to have to capacity to pick lily. His connections with dumbledore and Lucius demonstrates his capacity for concern and care.
One possible explanation for shallow arguments is the existence of All The Young Dudes, a Marauder-era Sirius Black/Remus Lupin fic that became extremely popular. It depicts Snape as a rich, pure-blooded bully. Essentially, fans of that work don't care about what the characters were actually like, or they've deluded themselves into thinking it's canon.
If the Death Eaters are the equivalent of Nazis, Snape is the Oskar Schindler of the wizarding world, sacrificing his quality of life to make sure the Death Eaters don't succeed while pretending to be on their side. The main differences are that Schindler had money and resources on his side, he was a contractor and therefore not one of Hitler's highest-ranking lieutenants, and his overall victory came when he outlasted the regime.
Student Snape's policy was always retaliatory; in every instance where he acts out, it's in response to someone who acts against him, or what he perceives as an attack.
James's popularity doesn't bode well for how people perceive character; it's like they assume that, because lots of people loved him, he was a good person, and I find that belief disgusting.
The wizarding world has never been painted as a meritocracy; it's all about nepotism and social connections, with classism elements.
"sNaPe WaS oBsEsSeD!!!" Yes, Severus Snape was so obsessed with Lily that he respects her wishes and never contacts her again after he tries apologizing for something he knows was wrong. He's so obsessed with Lily that he chose the Death Eaters over her and didn't turn away until he realized he'd placed her life at risk.
- As a note to add: they use this argument to compare Snape to James, who was so absolutely not obsessed with Lily that, during his DADA OWL, he drew a Snitch with Lily's initials on it, proceeded to play with the Snitch he'd stolen by rapidly catching it out of the air, attacked Snape and made sure to check Lily out while doing so (probably to get her attention), threatened to hex Lily for interfering, said he would only stop bullied Snape if Lily dated him (James), took his anger out on Snape for being rejected, and then spent the next two years lying to Lily about changing while secretly bullying Snape behind her back.
Quote from The Gestalt Prince on May 12, 2024, 6:16 pmOne possible explanation for shallow arguments is the existence of All The Young Dudes, a Marauder-era Sirius Black/Remus Lupin fic that became extremely popular. It depicts Snape as a rich, pure-blooded bully. Essentially, fans of that work don't care about what the characters were actually like, or they've deluded themselves into thinking it's canon.
If the Death Eaters are the equivalent of Nazis, Snape is the Oskar Schindler of the wizarding world, sacrificing his quality of life to make sure the Death Eaters don't succeed while pretending to be on their side. The main differences are that Schindler had money and resources on his side, he was a contractor and therefore not one of Hitler's highest-ranking lieutenants, and his overall victory came when he outlasted the regime.
Student Snape's policy was always retaliatory; in every instance where he acts out, it's in response to someone who acts against him, or what he perceives as an attack.
James's popularity doesn't bode well for how people perceive character; it's like they assume that, because lots of people loved him, he was a good person, and I find that belief disgusting.
The wizarding world has never been painted as a meritocracy; it's all about nepotism and social connections, with classism elements.
"sNaPe WaS oBsEsSeD!!!" Yes, Severus Snape was so obsessed with Lily that he respects her wishes and never contacts her again after he tries apologizing for something he knows was wrong. He's so obsessed with Lily that he chose the Death Eaters over her and didn't turn away until he realized he'd placed her life at risk.
- As a note to add: they use this argument to compare Snape to James, who was so absolutely not obsessed with Lily that, during his DADA OWL, he drew a Snitch with Lily's initials on it, proceeded to play with the Snitch he'd stolen by rapidly catching it out of the air, attacked Snape and made sure to check Lily out while doing so (probably to get her attention), threatened to hex Lily for interfering, said he would only stop bullied Snape if Lily dated him (James), took his anger out on Snape for being rejected, and then spent the next two years lying to Lily about changing while secretly bullying Snape behind her back.
O dear, I have heard about that Marauder fanfic, but I did not know Severus was portrayed in such an OOC (Out-Of-Character) way! I mean, to each writer their own, but it is saddening to hear that this fic could possibly have changed so many views on our dear Sev, he doesn't deserve that. (Poor dear already gets screwed over by canon, peeps. Let the man have some peace aaaahhhh :p ) Also, now that my memory about James' behavior during the "tree incident" has been refreshed, it surely comes across as him being way more obsessed with Lily than Sev ever was (considering obsessed usually means/includes not respecting peoples' wishes in any capacity). People are weird, man...
There are many possible explanations for these double standards, though in the end, they all amount the same thing:
People dislike Snape because they want to dislike him.
We all have heroes and villains, both in fiction and in real life. That's human nature, as is the fact that we tend to be far more forgiving toward those we love than those we hate. This is what helps us Snape fans see so much depth and nuance in his character. We know he has flaws and makes mistakes, but we also recognize his vulnerability and humanity. We focus on his bravery, his selflessness, his ability to love unconditionally, giving him the benefit of the doubt while painting his actions in the best possible light.
We do this because we love him, because that's the version of Severus we prefer. For us, he's a hero (or close to it)… we have no reason to turn him into a villain.
What's true for us is also true for Marauders fans, albeit in the other direction. They choose to see characters like James in a positive light, just as we do with Severus. Sure, you can argue all day about the shitty things James did, but it really doesn't matter. It's all a matter of perspective, and in the end, we all have our preferences.
Do I enjoy seeing them turn Severus into a villain? No, but I understand why they do it. I get it because I do the same thing with James. To me, he's an antagonist, someone I see as arrogant, selfish, immature, and manipulative. I don't like him because (echoing my earlier point) I don't want to like him. Right or wrong, that just doesn't fit my narrative.
Quote from Heatherlly on May 12, 2024, 10:49 pmThere are many possible explanations for these double standards, though in the end, they all amount the same thing:
People dislike Snape because they want to dislike him.
We all have heroes and villains, both in fiction and in real life. That's human nature, as is the fact that we tend to be far more forgiving toward those we love than those we hate. This is what helps us Snape fans see so much depth and nuance in his character. We know he has flaws and makes mistakes, but we also recognize his vulnerability and humanity. We focus on his bravery, his selflessness, his ability to love unconditionally, giving him the benefit of the doubt while painting his actions in the best possible light.
We do this because we love him, because that's the version of Severus we prefer. For us, he's a hero (or close to it)… we have no reason to turn him into a villain.
What's true for us is also true for Marauders fans, albeit in the other direction. They choose to see characters like James in a positive light, just as we do with Severus. Sure, you can argue all day about the shitty things James did, but it really doesn't matter. It's all a matter of perspective, and in the end, we all have our preferences.
Do I enjoy seeing them turn Severus into a villain? No, but I understand why they do it. I get it because I do the same thing with James. To me, he's an antagonist, someone I see as arrogant, selfish, immature, and manipulative. I don't like him because (echoing my earlier point) I don't want to like him. Right or wrong, that just doesn't fit my narrative.
They can like anyone they want, but my issue with them is often that, they try to force their viewes on others like deliberately finding Snape spaces and fics and commenting negatively, making "X reason why Snape is bad" posts daily, cyberbullying Snape fans and so on. Snape fans don't do it as much as marauderfen do it. The cult of ATYD even bully the old school marauder fans.
Yeah, I don't like that stuff either, but we can still choose not to react and/or avoid it. There are plenty of Snape friendly spaces where it doesn't happen (including this site), and speaking as a writer, reviews from those types are relatively rare.
Yes. The thing is I saw this notification on quora and again quora is not a practical side on understanding Snape complexity. I met this Jame's person who wrote he read the books and even said he liked Snape but refuses to acknowledge Snape complicated outlook in hogwarts. He said James loved lily because scarifices his life for her but Snape was possessive and I mean where it that's even stated? Don't people understand how patronuses are created or they assume anyone powerful can do that?
A solid patronus creation requirement requires strong long lasting emotional strength and determination afterall patronus is a reflective spell.
Recollection is important in it.
He said Snape didn't love lily because he didn't give up his company for her but they refuse to understand that his company is actually vague. It's not even describable. We don't even know who he used to hang around with. Considering he spent his all time creating spells which does highlight he didn't have a specific group of friends.
He also said Snape had no reservations for being a death eater but we don't even know his philosophy in his teenage years.
I try to give the analysis on Snape for that person to say I should understand my argument but the truth he didn't even understood his.
It was such a vague answer.
He said that Snape could have done something but like what? He did!
There were no internships? He wasn't popular. He was a laughing stock. What could he have done?
I have a question again why are James and Snape arguments so similar. Why do readers whitewash or blackwash Snape or James. Like for example if you think James is a good guy you give the arguments. The famous ones:
He was liked by people.
People had only good to say about him.
He was best friends with Sirius
He became an animagus for Remus.
He stood up for his wife.
People are fond of him.
All of these arguments can be contracted as much as the Snape arguments can be contracted as well.
They shouldn't be but you know we cannot measure people in absolute good and bad.
People on quora say: I just read an answer to a question and I wish I can stop messages from quora appearing in my email. There is a difference between an essay that is thoughtfully organised and a hasty work that vaguely defines both Snape good and bad or James good and bad. These are vague terms.
Why do even fandoms exist? I think fandoms have done a lot of harm to the characters and even jk Rowling. Her point was to teach us something and our point is to argue I think.
Why can't people be more I don't know objective? Criticise Snape where he has to be why downwash the good he did?
I hate these sort of arguments the most. Criticise Snape for being cruel to Hermione but don't criticise him for trying to protect harry and Draco.
Criticise him for being harsh on harry but what about his kindness to Scorpious?
Why are people for degrading eachother fandoms? Why not the truth? There is a truth.
The arguments seem to go like this:
It's like James a good person so I have to like him.
Snape is a good person and I have to like him. They were both people with their flaws and wrongdoing to respective patients( thematic term)
It's more about people superficial defense of morality rather then the characters themselves.
Snape was wrong or james was wrong . Lily was wrong or snape was wrong,But why both people can't be wrong?
James at least was snape bully but Snape himself could be a bully too.
They were both men that bullied the vulnerable in different ways.
One physical and the other verbal.
People reduce everything in book about Snape according to their mindset which means reducing fictional characters morality so one group can be happy.
I think gestation was the first fanfiction I read that created a really realistic scenario for both characters without whitewashing them.
So thankyou to the author for deeply going through Rowling work.
The thing is these arguments create disturbances in the actual understanding of her work at greater pace.
The famous arguments(the circulation)
Snape joined the death eaters.
Snape called lily a mudblood.
Snape practiced dark magic.
Snape was a cruel teacher.
Snape was nevelli boggart.
Snape patronus was same as lily so he was obsessed(the most disliked argument by me)
He threw a branch at peutina when they were nine.
Snape was called awful names by others.
Snape wasn't popular.
Snape only changed sides for lily.(Again my second most disliked argument)
Look first of all of these arguments are truth to some extend. It's true that Snape was bitter, he called lily a mudblood. He used dark magic but what about the context?
Context, events, experiences all of these things shape snape and literally all of us.
What's the context of these Statements?
How these actions happened?
What's the long setting psychology behind them?
What's the influence?
What factors are included in it?
Why did character perceived Snape in a bad light?
Was he even perceived so? Was harry wrong? Was harry judgement accurate or not?
Can bring a death eater or an order of the phoenix member explain morality? Would any of the characters, had they been in Snape position same? Would they have been put there?
The answers are circulations.
I don't want to rehash my previous post too much, but again, people see what they want to see. As for James fans hating Snape or vice versa, that has everything to do with their dynamic. If you really want to like James and believe he's a good person, you naturally look for reasons to justify his behavior toward Snape. If you can convince yourself that Snape was a villain and/or ignore his better qualities, it's much easier to do that.
Similarly, it's easier to ignore all the red flags in James and Lily's relationship if you frame Snape's feelings for her in a negative light. He was creepy. He was obsessive. He never really loved her, so on and so forth. None of that is true (obviously), but it certainly makes it easier to view James as the better choice.
Fiction isn't about being objective. It's about interpreting characters the way we choose to, much of which is based on our own feelings, experiences, and preferences. I know it can be frustrating when you feel that people are being unfair to a character you love, but you can't force them to see things the same way you do. You can't, and honestly, why would you want to?
Personally, I love fandom. I even enjoy debating about Snape on occasion, but it's important to keep things in perspective. If you find yourself taking it too seriously/getting upset when people disagree with you, it's probably best to avoid those conversations.
On that note, you should be able to get rid of the Quora emails . Just unsubscribe or if they don't provide a link for that, set up a filter in your inbox.
Well there is an objective interpretation it's different that most fans don't want to interpret the characters objectively. The objective interpretation would be how the book context is arranged. Things aren't hardly that subjective. The truth is because we are limited by number of experiences we assume that.
Thankyou for the quora answer.
