Snape By The Book
An analysis of the purposes of Severus Snape's character in the Harry Potter series.
Note: This is heavy into literary analysis. Please use the "Literary Dictionary" if unsure about any points. This is also a work-in-progress. I am in school now, busy with analysing Yeats poetry, differentiating functions, and memorizing all of Wilson's 14 Points. Any opinions are welcomed and encouraged. This is also different than my Snape Critical Scene Analysis in that this is an overall view of his character. Sort of why he exists and what he does for the books.
It is hard at times to remember the presence of Severus Snape, Potions Professor in the Harry Potter series. Harry's story is quite a detailed and exciting one, full of plot twists and humor, with a captivating series of motifs which are universal. It is hard, at times, to remember the importance (or even the existance) of the Potions Professor. At times, when Harry and the other characters are in the midst of a mystery, Rowling often chooses to bring up Snape, commonly in topic of convesation, sometimes even have him enter the scene. The question is why.
Bookmarks to:
Snape in General * Sorceror's Stone * Chamber of Secrets * Prizoner of Azkaban * Goblet of Fire* Order of the Phoenix
Snape in General:
Snape at times is treated like a minor character, disappearing from the plot completely, or even disappearing from view for a hundered pages or so. Often times, the only participation is a snide remark, or a class scene where he insults Harry with unwarrented malice. The irony of that is that Snape, who is a teacher, and adult, behaves oftentimes very unlike a teacher- yelling, screaming, insulting their competence instead of trying to help them, even going as far as to hurt Harry physically. It is in this irony where Snape's true purpose comes out-- for he is a teacher to Harry, but not about Potions, about human behavior.
Snape in The Sorceror's Stone:
From our very first introduction to the professor, we are presented with a very unfavorable picture of Snape. His physical features seem to indicate a very unpleasant man; hooked nose, greasy hair, sallow skin and unfathomable cold eyes. This image is reinforced by the cold dungeon which is his classroom, complete with "the pickled animals floating in glass jars all around the walls" (bk 1, pg 136). His first speech, indeed, continues this image of an uncaring, cold-hearted man who has no regards in sheltering the tender first years to his sharp, biting, insults. Indeed, he makes no effort to remedy or alter this image. It is this image which the characters fight, this image which creates the assumptions made by the characters, thus creating suspense, especially in the first book.
The first speech also is a microcosm of how Snape operates. The speech itself is full of double meanings, from "subtle science and exact art of potion making," to " the delicate power of liquids that creep through human veins, bewitching the mind, ensnaring the senses..." (1, 136-7). His language is full of mystery and intrigue- the sophisticated syntax, double role of adjetives and nouns, and the parallel construction allow for double meanings to exist. We are given this hint by Ron and Harry's behavior after the speech: "Harry and Ron exchanged looks with raised eyebrows" (137). One does not know what to think after such a speech.
This quality is one of the more dominate of Snape's, and one that differentiates him from many characters. He presents an image -- in this case cold, impersonal, and highly unattractive -- but where other characters might fail in their deceptions, Snape is successful. If one juxtaposes Snape to others- Lockhart most noticiably - we see he makes no visable effort to make his deception known. Lockhart overcompensates, and in an effort to make sure he succeeds, he acts excessively, telling the characters (and eventually the reader) that the man is lying.
Rowling, too, makes no effort to modify or change our idea of Snape, rather, she encourages the "misconception" with most notiably, the first Quidditch match. Rowling does not lie about events- Snape's mutters under his breath while Harry tries to hold on to his broom is merely misinterpreted as an "evil act." Suddenly everything makes apparent sense- the cold, dark room, biting personality, and harshness in class is connected to another events, and Snape is deemed as the "evil one." The fact that Ron, Hermione, and Harry take this incident as truth, and work from this so-called "truth" to more conclusions indicates a powerful theme, one that might seem a little cliche; that you can't judge a book by the proverbial cover.
It is interesting to note that Harry does not find out they were wrong from Snape; it is from the real antagonist in the novel, Professor Quirrel. It's odd too, the straightfoward way that Quirrel revels the information -- we might expect that such a convincing truth would be denied by the one it involves. Instead, Rowling chooses to have someone else delve the information -- which tells us that Snape would never willingly admitted such an act as trying to save Harry. We, in using the real antagonist to question the truth (and later confirming it with another character) gain insight into Snape's character; he operates on duty: in this case, that of the life-debt held by James' act of saving his life. To actively seek Harry and say that he was trying to save his life would indicate that Snape needed the confirmation, and perhaps even the gratitude of Harry; but because he does not, it indicates that Snape is driven by duty, and needs no outer praise.
I find that Dumbledore explains it best: "...I do believe he worked so hard to protect you this year because he felt that would make him and your father even. Then he could go back to hating your father's memory in peace..."(1, 300).
Snape also represents another force in the novel- the power of logic. His first speech, again, first admonishes the concept of "foolish wand-waving."(1,137). Then he explains "many of you willl hardly believe this is magic." If one thinks about the nature of Potions, it does not require a natural-born talent, or a preconcieved supply of power within the individual, as what might be the case with another branches of magic, such as Charms or Divination. Potions merely requires attentiveness, skill, a thinking mind- aspects of a person which can be worked on, which are totally dependent upon the person to improve them. This in and of itself tells what Snape admires- the individual who is willing to work on improving their mind.
What narrows the concept to logic is how Hermione is treated in the same lesson. Hermione, who comes to the series having learned all the book facts, is intelligent. She knows the answers to Snape's questions. Notice Snape's behavior though- he ignores Hermione and focuses on Harry. This is our clue that he is not intent on pure book facts- because anyone can memorize facts- it is the practical application of facts to produce a result that the true purpose of the mind is revealed.
Logic itself is inserted into the concept at the very end; Harry and Hermione are trying to get to the Sorceror's stone, and they have to get through Snape's guard- which is a riddle. " 'Brillant," said Hermione. 'This isn't magic -- it's logic -- a puzzle. A lot of the greatest wizards haven't got an ounce of logic, they'd be stuck in here forever' "(1, 285). Here the image is complete; magic, which implies a mystical and therefore non-logical base, is juxtaposed to Potions, which is not magic, which represents logic and the force of the mind. So it is entirely fitting that Snape, who's entire character is based on the concept of logic, is the Potions master, the embodiment of logic and the power of the mind.
Snape in the Chamber of Secrets:
Snape takes on a rather minor role in the plot of Chamber of Secrets, but (does something about the parallel of Lockhart). The addition of Lockhart introduces a dramatic foil to Snape. Snape, being the embodiment of effective deception as established in SS (or PS), now must be compared to Lockhart, who overcompensates his actions, appears much the doofus. This is taken to its extreme in the Dueling Club incident, when Snape proves himself superior to Lockhart (and the students.)
The Dueling Club incident also proves that Snape is not merely acedemic, or merely a thinker- he can take action, and is quite competent in "foolish wand-waving."
We do see that he still hates Harry, though- even after saving him in the first year.
Snape also in a manner, represents the search for truth. Consider his monologue after Mrs. Norris is Petrified:
" 'Potter and his friends may have simply been in the wrong place at the wrong time,' he said, a slight sneer curling his mouth as though he doubted it. 'But we do have a set of suspicious circumstances here. Why was he in the upstairs corridor at all? Why wasn't he at the Halloween feast?' " (2, 143).
This is in another direction- but the right one. Even though within the plot it seems like Snape is asking about something irrelevant, the line of questioning points toward what we should as readers pay attention to- Harry hearing voices in the hall. Snape is right- and it only perfectly fits with his hating Potter mentality. Really, this early into the series we are confirming the image that Snape is a god-like character, who knows all, sees all, and is completely unfeeling. (He also has the god-like wrath). His presence in the second book merely reinforces the Logician Snape that we know so well. It is this image that is contested in....
Snape in the Prizoner of Azkaban:
Snape becomes a much fuller character- we learn he is not perfect, that he is not completely unemotional, and that he has been wounded phychologically. But one has to wonder: what is his purpose in the book? His story seems merely tacked on- the plot would have been exciting enough without the addition of Snape. (Sorry, but it had to be said). So why here? Why now? Why does Rowling spend a whole chapter and a half (and a bit more) having him explain the past?
He is a link to the past that we need to explain Harry's behavior. Rowling from the first book has established a motif of family values and the roles they play in our lives. We see this from the concept of Houses at Hogwarts, in that the behavior of its Housemates follow an unwritten code of conduct according to their House. This image system of Houses fits with the importance family plays in the plot; Harry is saved from Voldemort's curse due to his mother's sacrifice, and he is constantly compared to his father- talented at Quidditch, a bit of a troublemaker, but basically good at heart.
And this is where Snape comes in. Snape also compares Harry to his father, but as the arrogant, "swollen headed" boy of 15 who walked around like he owned the school.
If one thinks about it, there are only a few people (who are significant characters enough) to provide Harry with a link from the past. The first was Dumbledore, who, from the first book, gave Harry his first ideas about his father. And as much as we hate to admit it, Dumbledore is not impartial- he merely tells Harry what he asked. But we can trust what he says.
The second person is Lupin; from him we learn of the Marauders and of James' 'adventerous spirit.' Harry (and our) opinions of James rise: he sounds like the lovable jock. But because Lupin was a friend of James and a Marauder, he is a bit biased- he will not come out and totally insult James, as Snape does.
The third is Sirius, who also being a Marauder is biased. But his role helps solidify Harry's impression of James. His values are arranged such as to say that such adverterous behavior and rulebreaking are good, even going on as far as to encourage Harry to do so, because his father would be proud: " 'D'you think your father and I would've lain down and taken orders from an old hag like Umbridge?' "(5, 371).
The opposite force in this is Snape, of course. In the third book, we are first introduced to an unfavorable image of James, mainly through the telling monologue of Snape when Harry is caught sneaking to Hogsmeade. There is an important change in tone when this occurs. Rowling spends the first two books constructing Snape's outward character as cold, biting, and full of double meanings. It is a change, then, when during the third book his tone changes- it becomes direct and telling. He is cold with presicion and truth. Perhaps the most telling monologue is when he offers new information: " 'I would hate for you to run away with a false idea of your father, Potter,' he said, a terrible grin twisting his face. 'Have you been imagining some act of glorious heroism? Then let me correct you...' "(3, 285). He represents another viewpoint of Harry's father that Harry must sort through. The struggle over the right viewpoint of Harry's father reflects the outward conflict- that of Harry and Voldemort, or when taken to its abstractions, good versus evil. This also demonstrates a characteristic of Snape which defines him a bit; despite his image of deception, he is concerned about the truth. But his is an almost obsessive desire to prove the truth.
Compared with other characters, such as Harry himself, Snape also represents the individual that believes in their own personal truth enough to let emotions emerge. The instance where this is most apparent is in the third book, when Snape comes into the Shrieking shack to take Black to the dementors. We have just learned of Sirius's background and the fact that Peter Pettigrew (another friend of the Marauders) was alive, even though he faked his death.
In this part of the story, the logician Snape, who beforehand represented the search for truth, is now wildly incorrect; he is the first test of the new truth that we as readers have about a character. Snape enters suprisingly, and demands with force and mad fanatism. " 'Two more for Azkaban tonight,' said Snape, his eyes now gleaming fanatically' "(359). He is given the chance to prove himself right; and all the people in the shack
Considering the plot, Snape plays an even smaller part. He really doesn't do anything. Instead, his sparse appearances allow us to fill in some details about his life, provide major modivations, and elevate his character.
The first three books had ended on a sour note for Snape; despite the fact we know he saved Potter in the first book, he is seen as a throughly evil man. This is why Ron keeps insisting that Snape is 'evil.' It helps that impression when Sirius basically thinks along the same vein ("But as far as I know, Snape was never even accused of being a Death Eater - not that that means much. Plenty of them were never caught."). And coupled with Harry's loathing of Snape, and vise versa, we are operating on a very negative impression of Snape.
What is important in this book is that our sure image of Snape is rattled, much like it was at the end of book one. I direct one to the first of these incidences:
"There was a knock on the dungeon door. "Enter," said Snape in his usual voice. The class looked around as the door opened. Professor Karkaroff came in. Everyone watched him as he walked up toward Snape's desk. He was twisting his finger around his goatee and looking agitated.
"We need to talk," said Karkaroff abruptly when he had reached Snape. He seemed so determined that nobody should hear what he was saying that he was barely opening his lips; it was as though he were a rather poor ventriloquist. Harry kept his eyes on his ginger roots, listening hard.
"I'll talk to you after my lesson, Karkaroff," Snape muttered, but Karkaroff interrupted him.
"I want to talk now, while you can't slip off, Severus. You've been avoiding me."
"After the lesson," Snape snapped. Under the pretext of holding up a measuring cup to see if he'd poured out enough armadillo bile, Harry sneaked a sidelong glance at the pair of them. Karkaroff looked extremely worried, and Snape looked angry.
Karkaroff hovered behind Snape's desk for the rest of the double period. He seemed intent on preventing Snape from slipping away at the end of class. Keen to hear what Karkaroff wanted to say, Harry deliberately knocked over his bottle of armadillo bile with two minutes to go to the bell, which gave him an excuse to duck down behind his cauldron and mop up while the rest of the class moved noisily toward the door.
"What's so urgent?" he heard Snape hiss at Karkaroff.
"This," said Karkaroff, and Harry, peering around the edge of his cauldron, saw Karkaroff pull up the left-hand sleeve of his robe and show Snape something on his inner forearm. "Well?" said Karkaroff, still making every effort not to move his lips. "Do you see? It's never been this clear, never since - "
"Put it away!" snarled Snape, his black eyes sweeping the classroom.
"But you must have noticed -" Karkaroff began in an agitated voice.
"We can talk later, Karkaroff!" spat Snape. "Potter! What are you doing?" "(bk 4, pg 518 - 519).
Within the context of the main plot, this is nothing. Snape's actions here are much more reserved -- we find out he's been 'avoiding' Karkaroff. Given our impressions of Snape form the previous books, this is rather unlike him. We thought he was rather confrontational -- instead this seemingly dominate figure is avoiding an issue.
When Karkaroff shows what we know is the Dark mark to Snape, his reaction is very important. He turns away in digust, even avoidance. Even his protest ''"Put it away!" is pleading, in avoidance of the mark.
The multitudes of statements this one action says about his character! This turning away from his past is avoidance, embarassment. He is weakened -- no longer the powerful god, he has fears, regrets. It has also been suggested [by someone else in an email] that Snape might merely be looking to see if anyone is in the room, since what they are discussing is very sensitive.
At this moment, the scene means little -- we do not know what the mark is, or of Snape's involvement. But coupled with this scene --
"Snape strode forward, past Dumbledore, pulling up the left sleeve of his robes as he went. He stuck out his forearm and showed it to Fudge, who recoiled.
"There," said Snape harshly. "There. The Dark Mark. It is not as clear as it was an hour or so ago, when it burned black, but you can still see it. Every Death Eater had the sign burned into him by the Dark Lord. It was a means of distinguishing one another, and his means of summoning us to him. When he touched the Mark of any Death Eater, we were to Disapparate, and Apparate, instantly, at his side. This Mark has been growing clearer all year. Karkaroff s too. Why do you think Karkaroff fled tonight? We both felt the Mark burn. We both knew he had returned. Karkaroff fears the Dark Lord's vengeance. He betrayed too many of his fellow Death Eaters to be sure of a welcome back into the fold." "(709-710).
Within the plot, we learn vital information about the Dark Mark. Snape serves as a reliable means of instructing the use and appearance of the Dark Mark. But combined with the previous scene, it is very potent. We see his action is not planned; and the forced energy with which he speaks (the 'harshly') coupled with an almost steeling himself up to admit his past (the repeated "there") and we see some uniquely human traits. We now know from his actions he avoids his past; so this striding to admit to so many people (there's about eight people in the room) that he was involved in such an evil organization involves a strong outside modivation. Seeing as before the Minister of Magic was denying the Voldemort had come back, one can see that a possible cause for this rash action is Snape's dedication to the truth and the cause.
All this Snape analysis leads to one important theme that is reiterated again and again -- seeing versus being. As he denys his past, he is forced to confront it. The past comes back to haunt us, and Snape is a potent example of this.
Especially now, we are introduced to an issue of trust. The alliegence of Snape is in question, and this warrents discussion of motivation by specifically the trio:
" "I don't care what Moody says," Hermione went on. "Dumbledore's not stupid. He was right to trust Hagrid and Professor Lupin, even though loads of people wouldn't have given them jobs, so why shouldn't he be right about Snape, even if Snape is a bit -"
"- evil," said Ron promptly. "Come on, Hermione, why are all these Dark wizard catchers searching his office, then?"
"Why has Mr. Crouch been pretending to be ill?" said Hermione, ignoring Ron. "Its a bit funny, isn't it, that he cant manage to come to the Yule Ball, but he can get up here in the middle of the night when he wants to?"
"You just don't like Crouch because of that elf, Winky," said Ron, sending a cushion soaring into the window.
"You just want to think Snape's up to something," said Hermione, sending her cushion zooming neatly into the box. "(481).
His question of allegence allows discussion to take place -- but because of who he is, and the fact we do not have the entire series, we do not have affirmation as to what outcomes the suspisions have. We have several strong statements of his loyalty and trust ("He is now no more a Death Eater than I am", and in the 5th "I trust Severus Snape"). Whether the truth behind these statements is to be seen -- now we can determine that Snape's ehavior is meant for discussion -- if only to get the reader thinking about the nature of trust.
Snape in the Order of the Phoenix:
Snape takes on the teaching role again, except it is to give Harry lessons in Occlumency, " 'the magical defense of the mind against external penetration' "(5, 519). These lessons should be paralleled to Lupin's dementor lessons which occur in the 3rd book. These lessons, interestingly, provide information necessary for Harry to fufill the plot. Actually, the irony is that in the supposed lessons to close Harry's mind to external penetration result in an opening of the mind -- in the form of Harry learning both the location of the Department of Mysteries, and how to get to the room wth the prophecy. The irony must not be missed that in an effort to preserve a mind, it is actually opened to more possibilities. Such as--when Harry realizes that the door he has been seeing in his dreams is the Department of Mysteries. Notice that it is Snape's penetration that brings revelation--could this be saying that Snape's method of pure truth and direct probing is better than protection?
Also the concept of Occlumency as taught by Snape can be paralleled to the Divination lessons of another teacher, Sybil Trelawny. Much of the concepts that Trelawny talks about have a basis in "reading the mind." Rowling encourages this connection by having the students study dream interpretation. Really, Snape's role in this helps develop the importance of dreams and the corresponding ideas that the image system represents.
We also learn some very personal information about Snape. Details about his teenage years, including his ungainly walk, behavior, and general dislike of the Marauders is expressively shown through his memory. The point? Sirius (after the memory) says:
"'A lot of people are idiots at the age of fifteen. He grew out of it'"(5, 671).
We are given details about Snape's childhood to show that there is a change between childhood and adulthood, and that this fundamental change occurs to everyone-- from the smartest person in the class, to the more 'undesirable' student. He serves as another example for Harry to learn from.
And the line:
"'Yeah, okay,' said Harry heavily.'I just never thought I'd feel sorry for Snape'"(671).We should be happy that Harry is developing: and as much as he still hates Snape by the end of the book, he feels pity. Hopefully this will allow for the two of them to understand each other more, furthering the theme of awareness to others who share our plight-- that of human existance.
Again--any opinions, questions, email me.