Oh no - another Snape essay! (cross-posted; also at my livejournal)
title Severus vs Sirius: a short meditation on the nature of love
author mary-j-59
genre Essay, gen, about 4,800 words.
rating G. No warnings.
summary and credits What is the real difference between Severus Snape and Sirius Black? Is it simply that one is good, and the other evil? Or is it more subtle than that? Thanks to all whom I credited. The essay follows the cut:
Sirius vs Severus
It finally occurred to me that Sirius Black's animagus form is significant. That he can turn into a dog tells us a great deal about him; his animagus form illuminates the strengths of his character - and also his weaknesses.
Why a dog, and why does that animal form seem to suit Sirius Black so well? Of course, the first thing some readers may have noticed is the wordplay: Sirius is the dog star, and Sirius Black turns into a big black dog. A large dog can also be quite scary if it is unknown - is the animal hostile or not? This is exactly Harry's reaction in POA; when he first encounters Sirius, the boy is very alarmed by him. It is not till the end of the book, when he really gets to know Sirius, that he is assured of the man's friendliness. Dogs are also guardians of thresholds (in particular, they can symbolize the threshold between life and death), and that suits Sirius as well. He is one of the main links between Harry and his dead parents, and, as Harry's godfather, he is also his legal guardian. But, even more than all these symbolic meanings, that Sirius can transform into a dog tells us exactly what sort of man he is.
Just like human beings, dogs are social creatures. You never really find a dog in isolation, do you? If they have the chance, they will become part of a pack - even though this pack might consist of a few humans, the family cat, and perhaps some other critters. Their place in the pack matters greatly to our dogs; they are conservative creatures, and like to know exactly what their position is and what the rules are. A well-socialized dog is known for his (or her) friendliness, obedience, stability and loyalty. But, of course, temperament among dogs varies a good deal, just as it does with people. An alpha dog will be harder to train than others and more inclined to tussle for command of the pack. Also, some dogs are more open and friendly than others; our dogs tended to accept as family everyone their people invited into the house, but I've met dogs who had an extremely limited picture of their 'family' and were hostile to everyone else.
So what sort of dog is Sirius Black? He strikes me as somewhat dominant, in that he is the one who will decide if another person is in his pack or not. After all, he utterly rejected his first pack - his birth family - and found another to take its place. With those people he accepts, Sirius has many of a good dog's fine qualities: he is loyal, brave, generous, affectionate, and playful. But what about outsiders?
If Sirius does not consider you a pack mate, he shows one of two reactions. As we see with young Severus Snape, Sirius may find outsiders either enemies or prey. In either case, they will come in for harsh treatment, and he will never acknowledge their common humanity, nor think he has done any wrong in mistreating them. His second reaction is almost more disturbing. Sirius is capable of being incredibly callous toward people who are merely in the way. I am thinking here of the way he seizes young Ron and breaks his ankle in his attempt to get at the boy's pet rat. Sirius bears Ron no ill will at all, but he is so fixated on getting his hands (or paws) on Pettigrew the rat that the boy does not matter. We see the same type of behavior in his slashing the fat lady's portrait with a knife and in his search - again, with a knife - of Ron's bedding. He just doesn't seem to care what damage he causes provided he can catch his prey.
And then, of course, there is the loathsome house elf, Kreacher. Dumbledore warns Sirius repeatedly that he should be kind to Kreacher, but Sirius cannot manage to obey. He speaks of Kreacher with exactly the same disdain and contempt the elf uses when speaking of him, and generally prefers to ignore Kreacher's very existence. Although it seems harsh to Harry (and to some readers), Dumbledore is right when he tells Harry Sirius's indifference is more harmful than active hate. Indifference is an indication that another person's being - their very existence - does not register with you. And Sirius is very good at tuning people out in this way. It isn't just Kreacher, either: if Harry hadn't seen the family tapestry at Grimmauld place, he might never have known his godfather had a younger brother. Sirius seems to speak of Regulus - who, as we later find out, died at 18 trying to strike a blow against Voldemort - with contempt. Yes, they were blood brothers, but Regulus made the wrong choice and stayed with his birth pack. Sirius left. And, once he is no longer part of your pack - or, once you are no longer part of his pack - you might as well not exist.
This brings me to the most egregious desertion of all: the betrayal by Peter Pettigrew. Peter leaves Sirius's pack with a vengeance, causing the deaths of two members and many other innocent people, and it's hardly surprising that Sirius in turn wants revenge on him. What is surprising, at least to me, is how obsessed he is with, as he puts it, committing the murder he was imprisoned for. He becomes determined to escape, after 12 years in prison, when he sees Pettigrew (in rat form) on Ron's shoulder in a newspaper photo. Once he manages the difficult escape, he does of course want to see his godson, Harry (which he does in dog form), but his main goal throughout POA remains killing Pettigrew. Think about this: if Sirius can prove that Pettigrew, whom he supposedly murdered, is still alive, he will be cleared of all the crimes he was convicted of - crimes Peter actually committed. But, right up until the conversation in the Shrieking Shack at the end of the book, it apparently never occurs to him to simply capture Pettigrew, go to Dumbledore, and ask for justice. It's Harry who has to talk him into that sane course of action. Sirius simply wants to kill Pettigrew, and it's quite difficult to dissuade him.
This vengeful and emotional temperament is shared by another man Sirius hates, Severus Snape. In fact, the two, who are superficially opposites (Sirius handsome, popular, wealthy, and from an ancient pureblood family; Severus homely, geeky, apparently poor and a half-blood) seem so similar in core ways, they might almost be brothers. Both are strong-willed, sharp-tongued, intelligent, and inventive, and both are frighteningly good at holding grudges. These similarities struck my sister and me so strongly that, when we were trying to guess what Severus Snape's Patronus might be, both of us guessed independently it might be something in the dog family.* But Severus Snape, unlike Sirius Black, is not a pack animal. Though he does seem capable of great loyalty, he also seems a loner.
A fan called Torrill, in a conversation on "Eeyore's reflections", claims that choice is what distinguishes Severus Snape and Sirius Black. Sirius, whose whole family had been sorted into Slytherin house, chose instead to be in Gryffindor. There, he chose to make good friends with proper values, unlike the evil Slytherins like Snape. And he was loyal to his friends and eventually died while fighting Death Eaters in an attempt to rescue Harry, his godson. Severus Snape, on the other hand, chose to go into Slytherin house, where he befriended a gang of future Death Eaters and eventually became a Death Eater himself. All this is true, as far as it goes, but I think we must look a little deeper to distinguish the true difference between these two young men.
As I said before, Sirius is highly social; a pack animal. And he is, most likely, an alpha. Therefore, he judges others instantly by a couple of criteria: are they members of his pack, or another group he respects and finds friendly? And do they keep to their place? (Part of the problem between him and Severus in OOTP is literally that Severus challenges him for dominance in his own territory.) To the people he finds worthy, Sirius is a completely admirable friend and colleague. But how does he treat those he deems unworthy? I have already mentioned Sirius's treatment of Severus Snape when they were schoolboys. Severus was hardly an innocent victim - at the very least, he did not take the bullying by Sirius and his friend James lying down - but, from what little we have heard of it, one of the pranks Sirius intended for Snape was appalling. This, of course, is what Jodel calls the werewolf caper.* It would almost certainly have resulted in Severus's death, had James Potter not intervened. If this were not so - if there were no real, mortal peril for young Severus - then he could not have incurred a life debt to James Potter, as everyone insists he did. Jodel points out further that, quite aside from the real peril to Severus, Sirius never gave a thought to the peril to Remus Lupin, the young werewolf he used as a tool. Here are the possibilities she outlines: Remus kills Severus. Remus bites Severus, who survives and becomes a werewolf himself. Severus kills or severely injures Remus in self-defense, perhaps getting bitten at the same time. To the day he dies, Sirius never expresses the slightest remorse for this cruel trick, merely remarking sullenly, "He deserved it." It's hard to imagine any 16-year-old boy who would deserve being killed by a werewolf or made into one. Like Jodel, I find this a simply appalling comment. But what disturbs me much more is Sirius's lack of thought for Remus, who was supposedly one of his best friends. Did Remus deserve to be killed? To be outed as a werewolf, expelled, and sent to prison for the rest of his life? For one of those things would surely have happened to him, had the prank succeeded. And yet these logical consequences never enter Sirius's head. He may be an intelligent young man, but his desire for vengeance (whatever the reason - we don't know it yet) drives out all logical thought. It is hardly any wonder that, just a few years later, Albus Dumbledore himself believes Sirius capable of treachery and murder. He has betrayed a friend, and attempted a murder, while still at school.
But Severus Snape, as a fan commented, joined the racist, murdering Death Eaters. Doesn't that automatically make Sirius a better person than Severus? It certainly means Severus made a grave mistake which Sirius avoided, and that is to Sirius's credit. However, since we do not yet know the full story of why Severus joined the Death Eaters, nor why he left them, we cannot say more. He may have fully agreed with their philosophy; he may have been ambitious and seen them as a way to get ahead; he may have joined - and left - for much more personal reasons. We don't yet know. We also don't know what crimes he may have committed (whether willingly or unwillingly) as a Death Eater. What we do know for certain is that, up until he (apparently) murders Dumbledore on the lightning-struck tower, we never see Snape do anything as evil as the werewolf caper. In six books so far, we have never heard him so much as make a racist remark as an adult, nor have we seen him use another person as a tool, as Sirius uses Remus.
This is not to say that Severus Snape is a nice person, nor wholly good. He's obviously not. Though he may have avoided those particular evils, he is harsh and unfair to Harry, Neville, and Hermione, frequently seeming to look for excuses to put them down. Ron, too, comes in for the rough edge of his tongue, especially when he speaks up for Harry. This is no way to treat his students, and I know I would have found it hard to learn from a teacher like him. However, to do him justice, he does seem to draw a sharp line between physical and verbal abuse. This is suggestive. As Helen Ketcham says in her essay "Good Snape is not a Squared Circle", young Severus seems to have been abused as a child, perhaps by his father. We also know, after HBP, that he comes from a time, place and culture where children were usually disciplined physically. Being raised this way would have taught young Severus two things. First, he would have learned that violence - whether verbal or physical - is a proper method to use when solving problems. Second, he might well have taken to heart the old saw that "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me." After all, which is more frightening and damaging to a child - being belted, or getting a tongue lashing? We now know that being continually belittled can cause enormous harm, but it's all too easy to imagine Severus saying to himself, "Abuse? I don't abuse the little buggers; I never even touch them!" Finally, as Helen Ketcham points out, if Severus actually was abused, and if his teachers typically belittled him, he simply may not know any other method of dealing with children. His knowledge of his subjects, and passion for them, is remarkable, and that is surely one of the reasons Dumbledore hired him, but it's clear that, in Hogwarts, teachers are selected for their knowledge, or because the ministry wants them there, or because they are Dumbledore's personal protégés, not because they actually know anything about teaching methods.
There is another thing to note in Severus Snape's dealings with children. Many fans seem to have missed this, but Sionna Raven on the whysnape board and Claire M.Jordan (whitehound) both noticed it independently, and I did too. Far from harming, or threatening to harm, children physically, Severus is extremely protective. One of his deepest and most powerful instincts seems to be to rescue children who are in danger. His efforts to save Harry's life in PS/SS are explained away as an attempt to repay the life debt he owes to James, Harry's father, but we see the same impulse in COS. Severus shows visible distress when the teachers are told a child has been taken into the Chamber of Secrets and is likely to die. I would guess his distress is the more acute because he is helpless - he doesn't know where the Chamber is, cannot open it, and can do nothing for the kidnapped child. In every one of the later books, we see another instance of Severus's strong drive to protect and defend children. In her essay, "Reserved Snape - canon or fanon", Claire M. Jordan lists just a few of these instances:
We see him go alone into the place where he was almost killed as a child, to confront the two people who almost killed him, one of them (as he thinks) a mass murderer and the other a werewolf he knows hasn't taken his Wolfsbane on a night of full moon, to save three children he doesn’t even like. And that must have been the reason, because if he'd just been trying to catch Sirius he would have waited the few minutes it took to call a Dementor to assist him. The only aspect of the situation which was so time-critical that a few minutes mattered that much was the danger to the children.
Again, we see him sprint through the school in his nightshirt, ignoring a break-in to his own office on the way, because he thought somebody had been hurt. That must have been the reason, because what attracted him was the noise from the open Triwizard egg, which we are told sounds like somebody screaming in pain. And we know he came in haste because he hadn't even stopped to sling a robe over his nightshirt and we know his quarters are down in the dungeons (or he wouldn't have passed his office en route) and yet he arrived on the scene, at least two floors above his quarters and an unknown distance horizontally, only about two minutes after the egg opened. When Harry accidentally cuts Draco, Snape burst through the door, grey-faced, without stopping to find out who has been attacked or by what or what might be waiting to attack him, knowing nothing except that he heard a girl scream "Murder!" (http://cj_whitehound.madasafish.com/Fanfic/reserved_Snape.htm)
Some fans might take issue with that last instance, pointing out that Snape may have known Draco was in the bathroom, and that Snape's rescue of the boy is not all that altruistic - after all, if Draco dies, he dies as well. But it is true Snape knows nothing of the danger that might be lurking there, and he doesn't hesitate for an instant.
He doesn't hesitate, either, when Narcissa Malfoy begs him, with tears in her eyes, to help and protect her son. And when Bellatrix brings up the Unbreakable Vow, he willingly puts his head in that noose. As I've said elsewhere, Severus seems fond of both Draco and Narcissa, and in any case has to maintain his cover in front of Bellatrix, so this is a special case. But, all the same, it does fit the pattern, in that the man is willing to risk his life in order to rescue an adolescent. There are at least two other instances of his desire and willingness to rescue children in the series so far. They both occur in OOTP. The first is rather minor - Snape drops everything and walks out of his office, leaving Harry alone there, in order to help his student, Montague, who is stuck in a toilet. But in the second example, he goes into the Forbidden Forest to search for Harry, Hermione and their friends who have apparently vanished there.
As Claire has pointed out, he actually risks his life trying to save the three children in POA. The same is true in OOTP: the centaurs in the forest are in rebellion, and have threatened to kill any adult wizards who encroach on their territory, and there is also a maddened giant on the loose - not to speak of giant spiders, blast- ended screwts, and who knows what other monsters. But Snape seems absolutely fearless in situations like these. When a child is in danger, the man's impulse is to respond immediately. Not only does he not hesitate, he scarcely seems to think.
This, by the way, shows clearly that one stereotype some fans hold about Severus Snape is false. Some readers are inclined to believe Snape's own press, and the descriptions emphasizing cold and darkness Rowling constantly gives him. They think Snape is cold and calculating, in marked contrast to the warmhearted and impulsive Sirius Black. Nothing could be further from the truth. In situations like these, when a child or group of children is threatened, Snape is impulsive, sometimes to the point of recklessness. He talks about emotion as if it were a weakness; he seems to have a fine analytical mind, but he does not scheme or think out all his actions beforehand. On the contrary, he leads with the heart, and unhesitatingly obeys his deepest impulses - and those impulses are to protect and defend. In this, he resembles no one so much as Harry. And there is one other person who may share those drives. It is not Sirius Black.
I believe it is Swythyv who points out that, in each generation, Hogwarts itself has had a guardian. When Tom Riddle was a student, that guardian was Dumbledore; now it would seem to be Snape. It seems almost as if Snape is Dumbledore's successor in this position. If this is so, as I think it might be, it also explains the man's animosity to Harry, even while he guards the boy. Some readers insist Severus cannot be a defender, nor on the side of right, because he is always trying to get Harry expelled. It is worthwhile to look closely at the second part of Helen Ketcham's essay, "Good Snape is not a Squared Circle" for an explanation of his behavior toward the boy. I agree strongly with Helen when she says Severus sees Harry as a budding Dark Wizard. Even more than this, it is possible he senses Voldemort in the boy and considers him a danger for that reason alone. Readers may not want to accept that Severus has a point here, but he does. Consider: So far as we know, Voldemort has not been seen or heard of in the Wizarding World for ten years. But, once Harry enters Hogwarts, Voldemort is present there, too, either in person , or by proxy in the form of one of his servants. It seems as if Harry (like Frodo in the movie of "Fellowship") brings great evil with him. No wonder Snape wants him gone. But things change after the end of GOF, when Voldemort has been reborn. At that point, Severus does not ask for Harry's expulsion even when he has a clear chance of success. The worst has happened; Voldemort has already used the boy, and Dumbledore insists only Harry can defeat the Dark Lord. So he must be kept safe at Hogwarts - but also watched constantly and carefully for signs of evil. And this is exactly how Snape behaves.
But, fans may say, if Severus is protective, so is Sirius. If he is a guardian, so is Sirius. Sirius, after all, dies trying to save Harry from the Death Eaters. And most of us are more favorably impressed by the man who rushes to his godson's rescue because he loves him than by the grim teacher who rescues because it is his duty. But should we be?
This brings me to the real difference I see between Severus Snape and Sirius Black. It strikes me that how you perceive these young men may well depend on what you think love is. Harry loves Sirius almost at once because he was his father's friend, and the young boy is desperate for a father. Sirius comes to love Harry because he is his best friend's son, and reminds him strongly of James. This is good and natural, and it's easy to admire Sirius for rushing to Harry's rescue. Because of the affectionate bond they share, it would seem inhuman if Sirius didn't feel compelled to help Harry. But, after all, Harry is now part of his pack. And it is a great deal easier to take a risk for someone you love, and who loves you, than it is to take that same risk for a stranger - or an enemy.
Harry considers Severus Snape his enemy, and the man knows this. He knows, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the boy hates him. Yet he is willing to risk his life for Harry, all the same. Why would he take such risks for someone he dislikes, and who detests him in turn?
In her novel, "A Swiftly Tilting Planet", Madeleine L'Engle explores this question. The young girl, Meg, has earlier been able to rescue her younger brother from evil by her love for him. Now she is faced with the task of loving her dry, unimaginative, unlovable principal, Mr. Jenkins. She is arguing about the task with her companion, the cherub Proginoskes. If she fails the task, Mr. Jenkins will be taken over by evil powers, and her own little brother will be one step closer to death.
"Progo! Help me! how can I feel love for Mr. Jenkins?
Immediately he opened a large number of eyes very wide. "What a strange idea. Love isn't
feeling. If it were, I wouldn't be able to love. Cherubim don't have feelings.
"But-"
"Idiot," Proginoskes said, anxiously rather than crossly. Love isn't how you feel. It's
what you do." (A Wind in the Door, pp 117, 118)
If love is not a feeling, what is it? As Proginoskes says, it is action - action and knowledge. Another definition I have heard which makes sense to me is that love means you desire the good of the other. You do for others what will do them good; you heal them if they are injured or sick, protect them if they are in danger, whether they consider you their friend or not. Here is a quotation: "You have heard how it was said, 'You will love your neighbor and hate your enemy'. But I say this to you, love your enemies . . . so that you may be children of your Father in heaven. . . . For if you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Do not even the tax collectors do as much?" (New Jerusalem Bible, Matthew 5:43-47)
So, when Severus Snape rushes into the Shrieking Shack to save three children he doesn't even like, or goes into the Forbidden Forest to search for them, or even tries to keep Harry from evil by disciplining him, these are acts of love. What is more, he is capable of loving his enemies, quite selflessly and even instinctively, and in this he is almost unique. Only two other people in the Wizarding World have shown this sort of love. The first and most obvious is Dumbledore, as he speaks to Draco, his would-be murderer, on the top of the astromomy tower. The second is Hermione, who takes to heart Dumbledore's instruction to be kind to the vicious house-elf, Kreacher. She does not stop reaching out to Kreacher even though he responds only with the worst kind of insults. I believe Rowling has said that she allows Dumbledore and Hermione to speak for her at times, particularly on matters of morality. So it is very significant that we see these two characters showing love for an enemy. But, in his care for Harry's physcal and moral wellbeing, no one has shown this particular type of love more frequently, and more consistently, than Severus Snape.
I know it's hard for some fans to believe Snape is capable of love at all. Certainly, he is not perfectly loving; he can be cruel and malicious and seems to take pleasure in the childrens' dismay at the tongue lashings and punishments he metes out. A fan called Sylvanawood on livejournal points out that his vengefulness and cruelty are quite genuine - an intrinsic part of his nature. I've also seen it suggested he is sadistic, but is struggling against this vice and now will not harm a child - or anyone - physically, if he can help it. I'm not sure I agree that Snape is sadistic, but Sylvanawood is certainly correct about his nastiness. Even if he is sadistic, though, this in no way negates Snape's real capacity for love, nor his real heroism. On the contrary, what Rowling is showing us is a young man struggling heroically against his own worst impulses to obey his best, and to help and protect everyone who needs his aid, no matter who they are or what they think of him. This is true valor. And it is valor of a sort that is very, very rare. I cannot think of another character in these books who demonstrates the same kind of courage and faithfulness, though Harry himself certainly has the potential.
And that is the real difference, in my mind, between Sirius Black and Severus Snape. Sirius, the dog animagus, faithfully loves and helps all the members of his pack - all those people who love him. He has never been shown to love an enemy. Severus, who has no pack, willingly risks his life even for a boy he knows hates him. In doing so, he consistently does what is right rather than what is easy. It's my hope that, by the end of Deathly Hallows, Harry will at last realize all that Severus has done for him, and recognize the true nobility of his character.
Mary Johnson, April 13 2007
Informal list of sources:
L'Engle, Madeleine, A Wind in the Door, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1973
New Jerusalem Bible
Websites: Helen Ketcham's excellent two part essay is up at Professor Granger's site (www.hogwartsprofessor.com) and also logospilgrim's (www.logospilgrim.com) Travis at Sword of Gryffindor has linked to it as well.
Jodel's essays, "The Werewolf Caper" and "Man's Best Friend", can be found at her website: http://www.redhen-publications.com/Potterverse.html
Claire M. Jordan's essay is here: (http://cj_whitehound.madasafish.com/Fanfic/reserved_Snape.htm)
Sionna Raven's thoughts can be found in this discussion: http://www.hostingphpbb.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=179&mforum=snape
Swythyv's wonderfully inventive and thought-provoking essays can be found on her website, http://swythyv.livejournal.com.
Sylvanawood's discussion of Snape, his motivations and actions is at this link:http://sylvanawood.livejournal.com/806.html#cutid1
Eeyore's reflections, and her conversation about Snape (in the comments) is here:
http://eeyoresreflections.blogspot.com/
author mary-j-59
genre Essay, gen, about 4,800 words.
rating G. No warnings.
summary and credits What is the real difference between Severus Snape and Sirius Black? Is it simply that one is good, and the other evil? Or is it more subtle than that? Thanks to all whom I credited. The essay follows the cut:
Sirius vs Severus
It finally occurred to me that Sirius Black's animagus form is significant. That he can turn into a dog tells us a great deal about him; his animagus form illuminates the strengths of his character - and also his weaknesses.
Why a dog, and why does that animal form seem to suit Sirius Black so well? Of course, the first thing some readers may have noticed is the wordplay: Sirius is the dog star, and Sirius Black turns into a big black dog. A large dog can also be quite scary if it is unknown - is the animal hostile or not? This is exactly Harry's reaction in POA; when he first encounters Sirius, the boy is very alarmed by him. It is not till the end of the book, when he really gets to know Sirius, that he is assured of the man's friendliness. Dogs are also guardians of thresholds (in particular, they can symbolize the threshold between life and death), and that suits Sirius as well. He is one of the main links between Harry and his dead parents, and, as Harry's godfather, he is also his legal guardian. But, even more than all these symbolic meanings, that Sirius can transform into a dog tells us exactly what sort of man he is.
Just like human beings, dogs are social creatures. You never really find a dog in isolation, do you? If they have the chance, they will become part of a pack - even though this pack might consist of a few humans, the family cat, and perhaps some other critters. Their place in the pack matters greatly to our dogs; they are conservative creatures, and like to know exactly what their position is and what the rules are. A well-socialized dog is known for his (or her) friendliness, obedience, stability and loyalty. But, of course, temperament among dogs varies a good deal, just as it does with people. An alpha dog will be harder to train than others and more inclined to tussle for command of the pack. Also, some dogs are more open and friendly than others; our dogs tended to accept as family everyone their people invited into the house, but I've met dogs who had an extremely limited picture of their 'family' and were hostile to everyone else.
So what sort of dog is Sirius Black? He strikes me as somewhat dominant, in that he is the one who will decide if another person is in his pack or not. After all, he utterly rejected his first pack - his birth family - and found another to take its place. With those people he accepts, Sirius has many of a good dog's fine qualities: he is loyal, brave, generous, affectionate, and playful. But what about outsiders?
If Sirius does not consider you a pack mate, he shows one of two reactions. As we see with young Severus Snape, Sirius may find outsiders either enemies or prey. In either case, they will come in for harsh treatment, and he will never acknowledge their common humanity, nor think he has done any wrong in mistreating them. His second reaction is almost more disturbing. Sirius is capable of being incredibly callous toward people who are merely in the way. I am thinking here of the way he seizes young Ron and breaks his ankle in his attempt to get at the boy's pet rat. Sirius bears Ron no ill will at all, but he is so fixated on getting his hands (or paws) on Pettigrew the rat that the boy does not matter. We see the same type of behavior in his slashing the fat lady's portrait with a knife and in his search - again, with a knife - of Ron's bedding. He just doesn't seem to care what damage he causes provided he can catch his prey.
And then, of course, there is the loathsome house elf, Kreacher. Dumbledore warns Sirius repeatedly that he should be kind to Kreacher, but Sirius cannot manage to obey. He speaks of Kreacher with exactly the same disdain and contempt the elf uses when speaking of him, and generally prefers to ignore Kreacher's very existence. Although it seems harsh to Harry (and to some readers), Dumbledore is right when he tells Harry Sirius's indifference is more harmful than active hate. Indifference is an indication that another person's being - their very existence - does not register with you. And Sirius is very good at tuning people out in this way. It isn't just Kreacher, either: if Harry hadn't seen the family tapestry at Grimmauld place, he might never have known his godfather had a younger brother. Sirius seems to speak of Regulus - who, as we later find out, died at 18 trying to strike a blow against Voldemort - with contempt. Yes, they were blood brothers, but Regulus made the wrong choice and stayed with his birth pack. Sirius left. And, once he is no longer part of your pack - or, once you are no longer part of his pack - you might as well not exist.
This brings me to the most egregious desertion of all: the betrayal by Peter Pettigrew. Peter leaves Sirius's pack with a vengeance, causing the deaths of two members and many other innocent people, and it's hardly surprising that Sirius in turn wants revenge on him. What is surprising, at least to me, is how obsessed he is with, as he puts it, committing the murder he was imprisoned for. He becomes determined to escape, after 12 years in prison, when he sees Pettigrew (in rat form) on Ron's shoulder in a newspaper photo. Once he manages the difficult escape, he does of course want to see his godson, Harry (which he does in dog form), but his main goal throughout POA remains killing Pettigrew. Think about this: if Sirius can prove that Pettigrew, whom he supposedly murdered, is still alive, he will be cleared of all the crimes he was convicted of - crimes Peter actually committed. But, right up until the conversation in the Shrieking Shack at the end of the book, it apparently never occurs to him to simply capture Pettigrew, go to Dumbledore, and ask for justice. It's Harry who has to talk him into that sane course of action. Sirius simply wants to kill Pettigrew, and it's quite difficult to dissuade him.
This vengeful and emotional temperament is shared by another man Sirius hates, Severus Snape. In fact, the two, who are superficially opposites (Sirius handsome, popular, wealthy, and from an ancient pureblood family; Severus homely, geeky, apparently poor and a half-blood) seem so similar in core ways, they might almost be brothers. Both are strong-willed, sharp-tongued, intelligent, and inventive, and both are frighteningly good at holding grudges. These similarities struck my sister and me so strongly that, when we were trying to guess what Severus Snape's Patronus might be, both of us guessed independently it might be something in the dog family.* But Severus Snape, unlike Sirius Black, is not a pack animal. Though he does seem capable of great loyalty, he also seems a loner.
A fan called Torrill, in a conversation on "Eeyore's reflections", claims that choice is what distinguishes Severus Snape and Sirius Black. Sirius, whose whole family had been sorted into Slytherin house, chose instead to be in Gryffindor. There, he chose to make good friends with proper values, unlike the evil Slytherins like Snape. And he was loyal to his friends and eventually died while fighting Death Eaters in an attempt to rescue Harry, his godson. Severus Snape, on the other hand, chose to go into Slytherin house, where he befriended a gang of future Death Eaters and eventually became a Death Eater himself. All this is true, as far as it goes, but I think we must look a little deeper to distinguish the true difference between these two young men.
As I said before, Sirius is highly social; a pack animal. And he is, most likely, an alpha. Therefore, he judges others instantly by a couple of criteria: are they members of his pack, or another group he respects and finds friendly? And do they keep to their place? (Part of the problem between him and Severus in OOTP is literally that Severus challenges him for dominance in his own territory.) To the people he finds worthy, Sirius is a completely admirable friend and colleague. But how does he treat those he deems unworthy? I have already mentioned Sirius's treatment of Severus Snape when they were schoolboys. Severus was hardly an innocent victim - at the very least, he did not take the bullying by Sirius and his friend James lying down - but, from what little we have heard of it, one of the pranks Sirius intended for Snape was appalling. This, of course, is what Jodel calls the werewolf caper.* It would almost certainly have resulted in Severus's death, had James Potter not intervened. If this were not so - if there were no real, mortal peril for young Severus - then he could not have incurred a life debt to James Potter, as everyone insists he did. Jodel points out further that, quite aside from the real peril to Severus, Sirius never gave a thought to the peril to Remus Lupin, the young werewolf he used as a tool. Here are the possibilities she outlines: Remus kills Severus. Remus bites Severus, who survives and becomes a werewolf himself. Severus kills or severely injures Remus in self-defense, perhaps getting bitten at the same time. To the day he dies, Sirius never expresses the slightest remorse for this cruel trick, merely remarking sullenly, "He deserved it." It's hard to imagine any 16-year-old boy who would deserve being killed by a werewolf or made into one. Like Jodel, I find this a simply appalling comment. But what disturbs me much more is Sirius's lack of thought for Remus, who was supposedly one of his best friends. Did Remus deserve to be killed? To be outed as a werewolf, expelled, and sent to prison for the rest of his life? For one of those things would surely have happened to him, had the prank succeeded. And yet these logical consequences never enter Sirius's head. He may be an intelligent young man, but his desire for vengeance (whatever the reason - we don't know it yet) drives out all logical thought. It is hardly any wonder that, just a few years later, Albus Dumbledore himself believes Sirius capable of treachery and murder. He has betrayed a friend, and attempted a murder, while still at school.
But Severus Snape, as a fan commented, joined the racist, murdering Death Eaters. Doesn't that automatically make Sirius a better person than Severus? It certainly means Severus made a grave mistake which Sirius avoided, and that is to Sirius's credit. However, since we do not yet know the full story of why Severus joined the Death Eaters, nor why he left them, we cannot say more. He may have fully agreed with their philosophy; he may have been ambitious and seen them as a way to get ahead; he may have joined - and left - for much more personal reasons. We don't yet know. We also don't know what crimes he may have committed (whether willingly or unwillingly) as a Death Eater. What we do know for certain is that, up until he (apparently) murders Dumbledore on the lightning-struck tower, we never see Snape do anything as evil as the werewolf caper. In six books so far, we have never heard him so much as make a racist remark as an adult, nor have we seen him use another person as a tool, as Sirius uses Remus.
This is not to say that Severus Snape is a nice person, nor wholly good. He's obviously not. Though he may have avoided those particular evils, he is harsh and unfair to Harry, Neville, and Hermione, frequently seeming to look for excuses to put them down. Ron, too, comes in for the rough edge of his tongue, especially when he speaks up for Harry. This is no way to treat his students, and I know I would have found it hard to learn from a teacher like him. However, to do him justice, he does seem to draw a sharp line between physical and verbal abuse. This is suggestive. As Helen Ketcham says in her essay "Good Snape is not a Squared Circle", young Severus seems to have been abused as a child, perhaps by his father. We also know, after HBP, that he comes from a time, place and culture where children were usually disciplined physically. Being raised this way would have taught young Severus two things. First, he would have learned that violence - whether verbal or physical - is a proper method to use when solving problems. Second, he might well have taken to heart the old saw that "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me." After all, which is more frightening and damaging to a child - being belted, or getting a tongue lashing? We now know that being continually belittled can cause enormous harm, but it's all too easy to imagine Severus saying to himself, "Abuse? I don't abuse the little buggers; I never even touch them!" Finally, as Helen Ketcham points out, if Severus actually was abused, and if his teachers typically belittled him, he simply may not know any other method of dealing with children. His knowledge of his subjects, and passion for them, is remarkable, and that is surely one of the reasons Dumbledore hired him, but it's clear that, in Hogwarts, teachers are selected for their knowledge, or because the ministry wants them there, or because they are Dumbledore's personal protégés, not because they actually know anything about teaching methods.
There is another thing to note in Severus Snape's dealings with children. Many fans seem to have missed this, but Sionna Raven on the whysnape board and Claire M.Jordan (whitehound) both noticed it independently, and I did too. Far from harming, or threatening to harm, children physically, Severus is extremely protective. One of his deepest and most powerful instincts seems to be to rescue children who are in danger. His efforts to save Harry's life in PS/SS are explained away as an attempt to repay the life debt he owes to James, Harry's father, but we see the same impulse in COS. Severus shows visible distress when the teachers are told a child has been taken into the Chamber of Secrets and is likely to die. I would guess his distress is the more acute because he is helpless - he doesn't know where the Chamber is, cannot open it, and can do nothing for the kidnapped child. In every one of the later books, we see another instance of Severus's strong drive to protect and defend children. In her essay, "Reserved Snape - canon or fanon", Claire M. Jordan lists just a few of these instances:
We see him go alone into the place where he was almost killed as a child, to confront the two people who almost killed him, one of them (as he thinks) a mass murderer and the other a werewolf he knows hasn't taken his Wolfsbane on a night of full moon, to save three children he doesn’t even like. And that must have been the reason, because if he'd just been trying to catch Sirius he would have waited the few minutes it took to call a Dementor to assist him. The only aspect of the situation which was so time-critical that a few minutes mattered that much was the danger to the children.
Again, we see him sprint through the school in his nightshirt, ignoring a break-in to his own office on the way, because he thought somebody had been hurt. That must have been the reason, because what attracted him was the noise from the open Triwizard egg, which we are told sounds like somebody screaming in pain. And we know he came in haste because he hadn't even stopped to sling a robe over his nightshirt and we know his quarters are down in the dungeons (or he wouldn't have passed his office en route) and yet he arrived on the scene, at least two floors above his quarters and an unknown distance horizontally, only about two minutes after the egg opened. When Harry accidentally cuts Draco, Snape burst through the door, grey-faced, without stopping to find out who has been attacked or by what or what might be waiting to attack him, knowing nothing except that he heard a girl scream "Murder!" (http://cj_whitehound.madasafish.com/Fanfic/reserved_Snape.htm)
Some fans might take issue with that last instance, pointing out that Snape may have known Draco was in the bathroom, and that Snape's rescue of the boy is not all that altruistic - after all, if Draco dies, he dies as well. But it is true Snape knows nothing of the danger that might be lurking there, and he doesn't hesitate for an instant.
He doesn't hesitate, either, when Narcissa Malfoy begs him, with tears in her eyes, to help and protect her son. And when Bellatrix brings up the Unbreakable Vow, he willingly puts his head in that noose. As I've said elsewhere, Severus seems fond of both Draco and Narcissa, and in any case has to maintain his cover in front of Bellatrix, so this is a special case. But, all the same, it does fit the pattern, in that the man is willing to risk his life in order to rescue an adolescent. There are at least two other instances of his desire and willingness to rescue children in the series so far. They both occur in OOTP. The first is rather minor - Snape drops everything and walks out of his office, leaving Harry alone there, in order to help his student, Montague, who is stuck in a toilet. But in the second example, he goes into the Forbidden Forest to search for Harry, Hermione and their friends who have apparently vanished there.
As Claire has pointed out, he actually risks his life trying to save the three children in POA. The same is true in OOTP: the centaurs in the forest are in rebellion, and have threatened to kill any adult wizards who encroach on their territory, and there is also a maddened giant on the loose - not to speak of giant spiders, blast- ended screwts, and who knows what other monsters. But Snape seems absolutely fearless in situations like these. When a child is in danger, the man's impulse is to respond immediately. Not only does he not hesitate, he scarcely seems to think.
This, by the way, shows clearly that one stereotype some fans hold about Severus Snape is false. Some readers are inclined to believe Snape's own press, and the descriptions emphasizing cold and darkness Rowling constantly gives him. They think Snape is cold and calculating, in marked contrast to the warmhearted and impulsive Sirius Black. Nothing could be further from the truth. In situations like these, when a child or group of children is threatened, Snape is impulsive, sometimes to the point of recklessness. He talks about emotion as if it were a weakness; he seems to have a fine analytical mind, but he does not scheme or think out all his actions beforehand. On the contrary, he leads with the heart, and unhesitatingly obeys his deepest impulses - and those impulses are to protect and defend. In this, he resembles no one so much as Harry. And there is one other person who may share those drives. It is not Sirius Black.
I believe it is Swythyv who points out that, in each generation, Hogwarts itself has had a guardian. When Tom Riddle was a student, that guardian was Dumbledore; now it would seem to be Snape. It seems almost as if Snape is Dumbledore's successor in this position. If this is so, as I think it might be, it also explains the man's animosity to Harry, even while he guards the boy. Some readers insist Severus cannot be a defender, nor on the side of right, because he is always trying to get Harry expelled. It is worthwhile to look closely at the second part of Helen Ketcham's essay, "Good Snape is not a Squared Circle" for an explanation of his behavior toward the boy. I agree strongly with Helen when she says Severus sees Harry as a budding Dark Wizard. Even more than this, it is possible he senses Voldemort in the boy and considers him a danger for that reason alone. Readers may not want to accept that Severus has a point here, but he does. Consider: So far as we know, Voldemort has not been seen or heard of in the Wizarding World for ten years. But, once Harry enters Hogwarts, Voldemort is present there, too, either in person , or by proxy in the form of one of his servants. It seems as if Harry (like Frodo in the movie of "Fellowship") brings great evil with him. No wonder Snape wants him gone. But things change after the end of GOF, when Voldemort has been reborn. At that point, Severus does not ask for Harry's expulsion even when he has a clear chance of success. The worst has happened; Voldemort has already used the boy, and Dumbledore insists only Harry can defeat the Dark Lord. So he must be kept safe at Hogwarts - but also watched constantly and carefully for signs of evil. And this is exactly how Snape behaves.
But, fans may say, if Severus is protective, so is Sirius. If he is a guardian, so is Sirius. Sirius, after all, dies trying to save Harry from the Death Eaters. And most of us are more favorably impressed by the man who rushes to his godson's rescue because he loves him than by the grim teacher who rescues because it is his duty. But should we be?
This brings me to the real difference I see between Severus Snape and Sirius Black. It strikes me that how you perceive these young men may well depend on what you think love is. Harry loves Sirius almost at once because he was his father's friend, and the young boy is desperate for a father. Sirius comes to love Harry because he is his best friend's son, and reminds him strongly of James. This is good and natural, and it's easy to admire Sirius for rushing to Harry's rescue. Because of the affectionate bond they share, it would seem inhuman if Sirius didn't feel compelled to help Harry. But, after all, Harry is now part of his pack. And it is a great deal easier to take a risk for someone you love, and who loves you, than it is to take that same risk for a stranger - or an enemy.
Harry considers Severus Snape his enemy, and the man knows this. He knows, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the boy hates him. Yet he is willing to risk his life for Harry, all the same. Why would he take such risks for someone he dislikes, and who detests him in turn?
In her novel, "A Swiftly Tilting Planet", Madeleine L'Engle explores this question. The young girl, Meg, has earlier been able to rescue her younger brother from evil by her love for him. Now she is faced with the task of loving her dry, unimaginative, unlovable principal, Mr. Jenkins. She is arguing about the task with her companion, the cherub Proginoskes. If she fails the task, Mr. Jenkins will be taken over by evil powers, and her own little brother will be one step closer to death.
"Progo! Help me! how can I feel love for Mr. Jenkins?
Immediately he opened a large number of eyes very wide. "What a strange idea. Love isn't
feeling. If it were, I wouldn't be able to love. Cherubim don't have feelings.
"But-"
"Idiot," Proginoskes said, anxiously rather than crossly. Love isn't how you feel. It's
what you do." (A Wind in the Door, pp 117, 118)
If love is not a feeling, what is it? As Proginoskes says, it is action - action and knowledge. Another definition I have heard which makes sense to me is that love means you desire the good of the other. You do for others what will do them good; you heal them if they are injured or sick, protect them if they are in danger, whether they consider you their friend or not. Here is a quotation: "You have heard how it was said, 'You will love your neighbor and hate your enemy'. But I say this to you, love your enemies . . . so that you may be children of your Father in heaven. . . . For if you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Do not even the tax collectors do as much?" (New Jerusalem Bible, Matthew 5:43-47)
So, when Severus Snape rushes into the Shrieking Shack to save three children he doesn't even like, or goes into the Forbidden Forest to search for them, or even tries to keep Harry from evil by disciplining him, these are acts of love. What is more, he is capable of loving his enemies, quite selflessly and even instinctively, and in this he is almost unique. Only two other people in the Wizarding World have shown this sort of love. The first and most obvious is Dumbledore, as he speaks to Draco, his would-be murderer, on the top of the astromomy tower. The second is Hermione, who takes to heart Dumbledore's instruction to be kind to the vicious house-elf, Kreacher. She does not stop reaching out to Kreacher even though he responds only with the worst kind of insults. I believe Rowling has said that she allows Dumbledore and Hermione to speak for her at times, particularly on matters of morality. So it is very significant that we see these two characters showing love for an enemy. But, in his care for Harry's physcal and moral wellbeing, no one has shown this particular type of love more frequently, and more consistently, than Severus Snape.
I know it's hard for some fans to believe Snape is capable of love at all. Certainly, he is not perfectly loving; he can be cruel and malicious and seems to take pleasure in the childrens' dismay at the tongue lashings and punishments he metes out. A fan called Sylvanawood on livejournal points out that his vengefulness and cruelty are quite genuine - an intrinsic part of his nature. I've also seen it suggested he is sadistic, but is struggling against this vice and now will not harm a child - or anyone - physically, if he can help it. I'm not sure I agree that Snape is sadistic, but Sylvanawood is certainly correct about his nastiness. Even if he is sadistic, though, this in no way negates Snape's real capacity for love, nor his real heroism. On the contrary, what Rowling is showing us is a young man struggling heroically against his own worst impulses to obey his best, and to help and protect everyone who needs his aid, no matter who they are or what they think of him. This is true valor. And it is valor of a sort that is very, very rare. I cannot think of another character in these books who demonstrates the same kind of courage and faithfulness, though Harry himself certainly has the potential.
And that is the real difference, in my mind, between Sirius Black and Severus Snape. Sirius, the dog animagus, faithfully loves and helps all the members of his pack - all those people who love him. He has never been shown to love an enemy. Severus, who has no pack, willingly risks his life even for a boy he knows hates him. In doing so, he consistently does what is right rather than what is easy. It's my hope that, by the end of Deathly Hallows, Harry will at last realize all that Severus has done for him, and recognize the true nobility of his character.
Mary Johnson, April 13 2007
Informal list of sources:
L'Engle, Madeleine, A Wind in the Door, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1973
New Jerusalem Bible
Websites: Helen Ketcham's excellent two part essay is up at Professor Granger's site (www.hogwartsprofessor.com) and also logospilgrim's (www.logospilgrim.com) Travis at Sword of Gryffindor has linked to it as well.
Jodel's essays, "The Werewolf Caper" and "Man's Best Friend", can be found at her website: http://www.redhen-publications.com/Potterverse.html
Claire M. Jordan's essay is here: (http://cj_whitehound.madasafish.com/Fanfic/reserved_Snape.htm)
Sionna Raven's thoughts can be found in this discussion: http://www.hostingphpbb.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=179&mforum=snape
Swythyv's wonderfully inventive and thought-provoking essays can be found on her website, http://swythyv.livejournal.com.
Sylvanawood's discussion of Snape, his motivations and actions is at this link:http://sylvanawood.livejournal.com/806.html#cutid1
Eeyore's reflections, and her conversation about Snape (in the comments) is here:
http://eeyoresreflections.blogspot.com/