Comments | hp_essays: The Ragnarok Motif and the M.A.D. Deaths of Snape and Pettigrew in Book 7

sinick in hp_essays

The Ragnarok Motif and the M.A.D. Deaths of Snape and Pettigrew in Book 7

Feb 08, 2006 09:13

Back on Jan 24, amanuensis1 made an interesting post where she speculated on the odds of various HP characters dying in Book 7.

This essay covers slightly different ground. Like her, I believe that both Snape and Pettigrew are goners, but instead of the chances of their deaths in book 7, I'm going to describe the manner in which I believe Snape and Pettigrew ( Read more... )

other topics:mythology, characters:severus snape, other topics:theories, characters:remus lupin, characters:peter pettigrew, characters:fenrir greyback

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

tunxeh February 8 2006, 18:34:26 UTC

The Pettigrew/Greyback thing makes a lot of sense. But Snape comes across as incredibly embittered. Where is he going to find the happy memory to cast a really powerful Patronus?

I'll second that. stinksap February 8 2006, 19:05:12 UTC

My thought exactly.
Tonk's patronus changed in response to a strong *positive*
emotion; love. (The strongest emotion/force against dark magic if you accept at face value /Rowling and Dumbledores assertion that Harrys capacity for love is what will make all the difference in his battle against Voldemort.)

I can't fathom how killing Dumbledore (his own mentor?) could be construed as a positive experience unless Snape truly is one of the bad guys. (Which I am loathe to buy into.)

Perhaps Snapes patronus has been a Phoenix all along; this would explain why Rowling has shied away from showing it to us, and why Dumbledore trusted him completely.

If anything, I believe Snape will have a harder time than ever summoning a strong patronus.

Re: I'll second that. vvvexation February 8 2006, 22:53:37 UTC

It might not be necessary, though, for it to be a positive emotion; we've never heard that it is, and it seems pretty certain that Snape had some kind of very strong emotional response to killing Dumbledore.

Re: I'll second that. sinick February 9 2006, 03:03:42 UTC

True. And I'm not convinced that Tonks' emotion at the time we saw her changed Patronus was all that _positive_: yes, she loved Lupin, but it was _unrequited_ love, which is an intensely painful thing. Certainly the sorrow had begun to sap her Metamorphmagus abilities.

Re: I'll second that. vvvexation February 9 2006, 18:53:04 UTC

That too. I did get the impression her Patronus was more like an expression of longing than anything else--which makes it oddly similar to Harry's, in a way.

Re: I'll second that. cmwinters February 9 2006, 06:33:21 UTC

Snape's Patronus, *IF* it is a phoenix now (which I personally do believe), was NOT a phoenix all along. Jo's mentioned that a Patronus is unique to the individual, making it immediately identifiable as to who sent it. I.e. - ANYONE getting a Stag Patronus would KNOW it was from Harry, anyone getting an Otter would KNOW it was from Hermione, because *nobody* else has a stag or an otter.

I am completley of the opinion that Snape's Order Patronus *was* a King Cobra.

Re: I'll second that. tunxeh February 9 2006, 07:40:04 UTC

Some previous speculation about the shape of Snape's Patronus. I still like the idea that it might be a raven.

Re: I'll second that. sinick February 9 2006, 17:42:53 UTC

Agreed. I argued in the original post that Snape's Patronus _changed_ from whatever it had been when he was still in the Order, to Dumbledore's phoenix (the change being brought on by the strain of killing Dumbledore).

Re: I'll second that. cmwinters February 10 2006, 10:09:01 UTC

Agreed...stinksap speculated that Snape's Patronus was a Phoenix all along, which isn't possible. I was clarifying. :)

sinick February 9 2006, 03:02:07 UTC

Where is he going to find the happy memory to cast a really powerful Patronus?

One word: Forgiveness.

I think that when Snape revealed his Death Eater status to Dumbledore, he was trying to commit suicide-by-cop, to evade his guilt at having been (however indirectly) responsible for Lily's death. But instead of calling the Aurors (or the dementors), Dumbledore did the one thing Snape never expected.

He forgave him - and what was perhaps more comprehensible to someone as cynical as Snape - he gave him a mission that would allow him to work toward at least partial atonement for his crime.

(The comment has been removed)

sinick February 9 2006, 17:48:22 UTC

Heh, you caught me out. OK, to go into more detail, I think Snape outing himself to Dumbledore was done out of a tangle of motivations (nothing's ever simple with Snape).

I think it was partially suicide-by-cop, partially a guilty need to punish himself (in case he wasn't executed/Kissed), and partially retribution upon Dumbledore, for what Snape _must_ have seen as his outrageous bias in favour of the Marauders, after Dumbledore's insistence on dismissing Sirius' attempt to have him eaten alive by a werewolf, as a mere schoolboy prank.

I can imagine him shoving his Mark in Dumbledore's face, very much in a spirit of "SEE what YOU drove me to?"

cmwinters February 9 2006, 06:31:33 UTC

We *know* Snape can cast a Patronus, because he did so to Dumbledore when Harry pleaded with Snape in OotP that "He's got Snuffles in the place where it's kept". Plus, Jo's confirmed he *can* cast one. So that argument is moot; he *can* cast one.

tunxeh February 9 2006, 06:40:10 UTC

Sure, Snape can cast one. But the theory was not that he'd cast any old Patronus, but that he'd cast a super one, beyond even Harry's super Patronus by the lake in PoA. And more than that, that he's such an expert on Patroni that he'd be able to change its form from whatever his usual one is to something the Order would be more likely to trust. We saw from Harry's Patronus lessons that weaker memories lead to weaker Patroni. I just wonder why Snape of all people should be thought likely to be Mr. Super Patronus. It doesn't match my impression of his style.

cmwinters February 9 2006, 07:00:01 UTC

Hm.

Point made, but the issue with the Patronus, as near as I can tell, is that it had to be a "really powerful wizard" to have cast a *corporeal* Patronus, which is what Harry did, many years ahead of his time. It even got him extra credit in his OWLs.

I don't know that anyone will argue that Snape is not a powerful wizard. I will agree that he is, normally, *QUITE* subtle, however.

sinick February 9 2006, 17:36:33 UTC

I don't think that the change in shape of a Patronus is intentional, deliberate, or in any way under the voluntary control of the caster. I doubt very much that Tonks _intended_ to have her Patronus become such a huge tip-off to her _unrequited_ pining after Lupin: certainly she was discomfited by the fact that Snape was tipped off by it.

I think it's an _involuntary_ reaction to emotional stress: just like the waning of powers which we've definitely seen in Tonks (and which may also be responsible for both Merope Gaunt's poor performance in everything but love potions, and Eileen Prince's inability to defend herself or her son from her abusive Muggle husband).

Back to all threads