Severus Tobias Snape, Choir Boy, St Ignatius Parish, Cokeworth, 1968

severus tobias snape, choir boy, st ignatius parish, cokeworth, 1968

—

for @byronicbat who asked for it in between our ramblings XD he’s effie cute, i can hardly believe it

Here is a list of things that Snape canonly, definitely, absolutely, no-need-to-look-for-proof did (I saw it on tumblr so it must be true)

- Stalked Lily. He had a pair of binoculars in his office, and also a newspaper with two eye hole cut into it. Snape used to sit in the tree outside Lily’s bedroom window, or the bench in her favourite park, and hiss menacingly at children and the elderly as they walked by

- Couldn’t take no for an answer. When Lily told him to fuck off, Snape immediately summoned his fedora and a guitar, and sang a sad song called nice guys finish last. He followed Lily round like a puppy, crawling and begging, until she finally kicked him which prompted Snape to kick any puppies he saw for the rest of his life

- Terrified children. Snape used to hide round corners dressed in a variety of costumes, such as killer clowns, vampires, monsters, and the taxman. He would jump out at children, shout ooga booga! and hiss menacingly (which also came in handy during the stalking)

- Stole from James. As most people do with their favourite bully, Snape idolised James and thought he was wonderful. Thus Snape would eavesdrop during class to find out what tips James had so he could write them down. Pride? What pride? Nobody needs pride when James Potter is around, that swell dude, so awesome, so rad. Even his bullying victims love him. Snape even stole James’s so he could run his fingers lovingly across the pages

- Made Sirius go to prison. Just like with James, Snape adored his other bully to Sirius to such a degree that he strived to know everything about him, including whether he was a Death Eater or not (Snape and Voldie are BFFs and Voldie tells Snape everything). When Sirius was arrested, Snape could have told the truth that he definitely knew every single Death Eater in the world and that Sirius wasn’t one of them, but some children were looking so he had to be scary instead by not telling the truth that he was 100% definitely absolutely sure of

- Was an adult at the same time he was a child and student. Yes, Snape was neglected and abused, lived in poverty, had one (1) friend, and was severely bullied at school which led to him falling in with a group of young Death Eaters who preyed upon the vulnerable but– BUT—Snape also abused his students as a teacher, which means that all that other stuff is okay because teenage Snape should have thought twice before adult Snape was mean to kids. I mean, James and Sirius absolutely knew that Snape was a dick teacher so their bullying towards him was a-ok. God Snape, why weren’t you more aware of your future self like your bullies were?

- Never did anything good. Ever. Spying on the Dark Lord to the Dark Lord’s face? Using Occlumency against the greatest Legilimens in the world? Saving the life (multiple times) of the kid of the one woman you ever loved and the man who bullied you for years? Giving your life to save said kid and the wizarding world? Nah man, none of that matters if you were a mean teacher too. Don’t you know that being mean cancels out everything good you’ve ever done and makes it void? God, Snape, why didn’t you know that?

"gave Snape a stable job....despite being abusive to children (though he probably didn't perceive himself as such)"

I am a tad confused about this. How could Severus not possibly understand that he was being abusive to the kids under his care- especially Harry? Did he feel threatened by the children under his care to the point of viewing them as equals and thus justifying his behaviour to himself (why didn't the other teachers call him out on his shit)

Anonymous: am curious. You mentioned Snape likely doesn't realise that he is abusing the children under his care and mimicking his father. Does he actually feel powerless enough to justify his behaviours to himself? When he sees James in Harry and blames Neville does he see the boys as his equals/ someone above him in power that needs to be put down- thus allowing himself to continue acting the way he does? It's ironic all things considered. For all that Harry looks like James, he takes more after Lily.

Okay, so, I just wrote a post about Snape, but I'll cover here what I'm thinking about this specifically in more detail.

I'm not sure where the quote you mentioned is from, but I can say what I think about the way Snape treats Harry and his students and how he sees it.

So, Severus was abused by his father. From his behavior, what I guess is that a lot of his treatment of his students is him mimicking what he saw from his father.

Like, Severus became a professor at 21. It means his older students knew him as a student. Not to mention he was a terrorist, known Death Eater, who was saved by Dumbledore from being sent to Azkaban. And his students knew this.

So Severus felt like he needed a way to make sure his students would take him seriously. The main example he decided to draw from — his father, Tobias.

We don't know what exactly Tobias Snape did, he was a poor, working-class man who abused his wife and son. And I think when Tobias wanted to be taken seriously, he used fear, insults, and force. So this is what Severus knows.

Severus sees what he does as the only way students would treat him seriously, he doesn't really see it as abuse, as I believe he doesn't really see his father's mistreatment of him as abuse.

Severus always struck me as a character who doesn't want to get better.

I think Severus is one of the abused kids who rationalized his own abuse as something he deserved. He clearly wants to beat himself up about his mistakes. He wants to feel the guilt over pushing Lily away and then over killing her (in his mind). So, to him, in his mind, it's not abuse, it's what they deserve.

Is it good that's what he thinks? No, not at all, it actually sucks. Snape needed therapy.

Now, with Harry specifically, his treatment is different. With Harry, he really does see him as an equal and he needs Harry to treat him seriously. Like, Snape projects James on Harry way more than Sirius does. And Snape can't show anything resembling weakness to Mini-James Potter, so he goes back to his father's methods to be taken seriously. It's about Harry not seeing him as weak like James did.

And revenge, a little bit. Snape is very petty.

He still doesn't see his vengeance as abuse, because, as much as Severus wants to believe he's the one in power, he's scared of Harry more than he's willing to confess. He doesn't see a power imbalance between him and Harry, he doesn't actually see himself in a position of power, because he sees James in Harry. Harry doesn't treat Severus with the respect usually given to professors, which strengthens the way Severus doesn't really see him as a student.

Like, the fact Severus felt the need to remove memories he didn't want Harry to see when teaching him Occlumancy shows how much he fears Harry. Fears the possibility of Harry getting this information and using it against him.

Harry sat there staring at Snape as the lesson began, picturing horrific things happening to him. . . . If only he knew how to do the Cruciatus Curse . . . he’d have Snape flat on his back like that spider, jerking and twitching. . . . “Antidotes!” said Snape, looking around at them all, his cold black eyes glittering unpleasantly. “You should all have prepared your recipes now. I want you to brew them carefully, and then, we will be selecting someone on whom to test one. . . .” Snape’s eyes met Harry’s, and Harry knew what was coming. Snape was going to poison him. Harry imagined picking up his cauldron, and sprinting to the front of the class, and bringing it down on Snape’s greasy head —

(GoF, 300-301)

In the above quote, Harry has these thoughts while Snape is reading his mind — there's eye contact. So Severus sees these thoughts from Harry and doesn't separate this from James, he sees it and thinks that Harry very much might actually spill his entire cauldron on him — like James might've done. So, Severus is taking every instance like this to justify his fear of Harry and his need to keep him down.

With Neville it's different. He doesn't fear Neville the way he fears Harry, I think he does see Neville as someone weaker. In the case of Neville, Severus is, I think, doing what a lot of bullies do, picking on a weaker link to feel better about himself. More in control, more capable. Neville being next to Harry is kinda part of it, I don't think Snape would've been as harsh with Neville if he wasn't near Harry, who makes Snape kinda lose it and feel unbalanced and insecure in his position because he sees him as James more than as Harry.

And I agree with you second Anon, personality-wise, I think Harry isn't very similar to James at all. And he definitely has some of Lily's traits in him, but he's not her either, he's his own person. Something Snape willfully chooses not to see. It's easier for him not to see it, so he chooses not to, so he can keep up with his petty vengeance towards a dead man.

As for why other teachers didn't call him out, well, I think the Wizarding World has a very different approach to child care than the modern western world does.

We know Corporal punishment was allowed at Hogwarts and the Wizarding World at large. One of the good things Dumbledore did as a headmaster was stop the use of it at the castle, but it was socially acceptable in the WW even in the 1990s. Actually, even in the muggle UK in the 1990s caning was still allowed in private schools, and Harry is clearly aware of this fact:

“Excuse me, Professor Flitwick, could I borrow Wood for a moment?” Wood? thought Harry, bewildered; was Wood a cane she was going to use on him? But Wood turned out to be a person, a burly fifth-year boy who came out of Flitwick’s class looking confused.

(PS, 109)

Because this is something that was still practiced in the UK. Harry actually had to lie to Aunt Marge that he was getting canned at St. Brutus school since that's something that happened there.

And it also happened in the Wizarding World until very recently, Molly says Arthur still has marks from what was most likely a caning when he was at Hogwarts:

Mrs. Weasley grinned, her eyes twinkling. “Your father and I had been for a nighttime stroll,” she said. “He got caught by Apollyon Pringle — he was the caretaker in those days — your father’s still got the marks.”

(GoF, 616)

Umbridge (and the Carrows) later returns corporeal punishment to Hogwarts, and it's quite clear there is no law against it in the WW:

“Approval for Whipping . . . Approval for Whipping . . . I can do it at last. . . . They’ve had it coming to them for years. . . .” He [Filch] pulled out a piece of parchment, kissed it, then shuffled rapidly back out of the door, clutching it to his chest.

(OotP, 673)

Molly actually beat Fred with a broom (or at least attempted to) and it's considered fine and legal and not abuse:

“Seen the Fizzing Whizbees, Harry?” said Ron, grabbing him and leading him over to their barrel. “And the Jelly Slugs? And the Acid Pops? Fred gave me one of those when I was seven — it burnt a hole right through my tongue. I remember Mum walloping him with her broomstick.” Ron stared broodingly into the Acid Pop box.

(PoA, 200)

Because the Wizarding World (and the UK) in the 1990s had a very different view on abuse and domestic violence. So, yeah, I don't think Severus considered what he did abuse, he considered it harsh discipline, like he himself received as a child. The way everyone ignores Harry's (and Snape's as a child) very clear signs of being abused is also telling. A rough hand and insults with disobedient children is just considered what you do, and not horrifyingly gross behavior like we see it today.

And the other teachers don't step in, because they consider it just as legal and acceptable as Snape. Because it is in the Wizarding World.

People will hate on Snape for being mean and sarcastic with children but he was mean and sarcastic with everyone. He was just treating his students with the same respect he gave everyone else, if you think about it.

Ooh more about the subtext around James/Sirius? I’ve always read the text this way too!

thank you for the ask anon!

this question could have been prompted by any number of posts i’ve made, because i am a great proponent of the idea that unrequited prongsfoot is canon. 

why?

i’m so glad you asked…

let’s begin with a small caveat which - regrettably - involves some engagement with discourse.

the things created within fan-fiction aren’t real - an individual fic can’t cause actual, material harm to a reader, even if it contains tropes that would be harmful or distressing if they happened in that reader’s real life; an author’s use of certain tropes or interest in certain characters is not indicative of their actual morals and values in real life; thought crimes are not real crimes - but fan-fiction is produced by human beings who are themselves products of the societies and communities in which we all live, and these societies and communities all have flaws and failings.

which is to say, those of us who prefer to read male friendships like james and sirius’ as romantic do need to be aware that, no matter how enlightened on gender and its foibles we think ourselves to be, we are nonetheless influenced as modern humans by a modern tendency to discourage platonic physical and emotional closeness between men, especially straight men, on the grounds that two men having this sort of relationship is inherently queer and, in being queer, implicitly sexual - another powerful societal influence on our thought, even if we know we don’t agree with it. we should also be aware that reading a friendship as defining and life-altering as james and sirius’ as romantic gives weight to a modern tendency to prioritise romantic love - and one of its expected outcomes, the love of parents for their biological children -  over platonic love, and to regard people for whom romantic love is not a priority as not properly having achieved the milestones of adulthood, nor as properly fulfilled, adored, or satisfied.

everything which follows here, then, can be taken to refer just as validly to a purely platonic relationship between james and sirius if the reader prefers. and, indeed, my view is that this is how the canon narrative wants the reader to understand james saw the relationship. 

but i also think that the canonical text wants us to infer that, for sirius, his relationship with james was one of unrequited romantic love.

it must be said, however, that the narrative doesn’t show this explicitly. of course, it emphasises sirius and james’ compatibility, their similar personalities, their shared affection for each other, and a certain element of codependency (the thought of these two boys unable to be apart even for a detention without talking through their mirrors! my heart breaks!), but it also sets up these shared elements as - in some senses - fraternal: sirius is quasi-adopted by the potters; harry thinks of him and james as like fred and george, at least until he sees snape’s memories in order of the phoenix. when sirius speaks to harry about james, the profundity of his love for him is obvious, and on the two occasions when we see them physically together (snape’s worst memory and the prince’s tale) it’s clear that each is the primary driving force behind the other’s decisions. but we have nothing which indicates unambiguously that sirius’ feelings for james were romantic.

until we dive into a bit of narratology. because the text does do something to suggest that its intention is for sirius’ relationship with james to be read as non-platonic, and that something is its use of narrative mirrors. the harry potter series loves assigning its characters to narrative pairs - harry and voldemort are the obvious one; ron and draco malfoy are the one which deserves more attention - and it assigns to sirius a narrative mirror whose own story is one of unrequited romantic love.

severus snape.

sirius and snape are incredibly similar, personality-wise. they also serve identical narrative roles, in that they function as the guides who lead harry through an emotional arc which begins in earnest in prisoner of azkaban and concludes in deathly hallows, in which he sheds his childish, black-and-white view of his parents and comes to regard them as real, flawed, and complex people. harry does this with james in order of the phoenix - after the realisation that he was a bully stops the hero-worshipping which has defined his earlier attitude towards his father - with sirius as his guide (sirius is then killed off the second this narrative sub-arc is complete). he then does it with lily - who spends the earlier books as secondary in importance to james in her son’s mind - in half-blood prince and deathly hallows, in which snape (via the proxies of slughorn, the discipline of potions, his textbook, his patronus, and his memories) serves as his guide, until the fact that lily is the key to the whole mystery is revealed just before harry sacrifices himself to save the world.

in the course of this, it comes to be revealed that each of them considers their life to be defined by their relationship with and love for one half of the pair of james and lily (although the series hides this in snape’s case - making it look as though he is also motivated purely by his antagonistic relationship with james - right up until the last moment). their mirrored relationships with harry - while the idea that sirius is incapable of distinguishing him from his father is an invention of the films - is also driven fundamentally by their relationship with one of the two halves of his parents.

sirius and snape’s mirrored motivation-by-love is shown most clearly in their identical approach to guilt and grief, the two things which overarchingly drive their individual character arcs across the seven-book canon (or three, if you’re sirius - rip king).

both sirius and snape indirectly trigger the death of the person they love - and, let’s be frank, if we’re going to excoriate snape for reporting the prophecy to voldemort, exactly the same level of ire needs to be reserved for sirius and his plan to switch secret keepers (what we could do instead, of course, is recognise the life-altering tragedy of making this kind of mistake, which we all have to hope we never experience ourselves, and treat the lads with compassion) - but it’s clear in canon that neither accepts the idea that their involvement was, in fact, indirect. sirius openly tells harry that he considers himself to have ‘as good as’ cast the killing curse on james and lily; snape rejects dumbledore’s (back-handed) comfort that james and lily’s deaths were caused by ‘putting their trust in the wrong person’ by wishing to die himself.

wracked by guilt and hollowed out by grief, both of them then decide to punish themselves in an effort - one which, i think, they both consider futile, since they clearly regard their sins as too great to be redeemed - to atone for causing james and lily’s deaths. both of them do this by subjecting themselves to the pain and humiliation of imprisonment.

in sirius’ case, obviously, this is literal. we know from canon that he refuses to profess his innocence at any point during his show trial - and why would he, when he considers himself to be guilty? - and that he remains in azkaban for twelve years, despite possessing the means to escape before then. he leaves the prison only to attempt the one action which he thinks will redeem him in james’ eyes: murdering peter pettigrew.

in snape’s case, the prison is a metaphor (foucault just sat up). snape entombs himself both at hogwarts - not a place he seems to have been particularly happy - and in spinner’s end, allows dumbledore to repeatedly humiliate him, and risks his life as a spy as a means of self-flagellation. like sirius, he fails to profess his innocence - through ordering dumbledore to tell nobody of his true allegiance - because he considers himself to be guilty. he leaves the self-constructed cell in which he is skulking only when dead - when harry, who has taken on the burden of fulfilling snape’s atonement himself by preparing to kill voldemort, starts screaming his true motivations in the dark lord’s face - although there is some implication in canon that dumbledore’s intention was for snape to end the series by attempting himself the one action which he thinks will redeem him in lily’s eyes: murdering voldemort.

[after all, why does dumbledore say to harry at king’s cross that his intention was for snape to control the elder wand if he wasn’t hoping he’d use it to give the dark lord his death blow?]

snape and sirius mirror each other exactly in their response to the death of the person they love. we can justifiably assume, then, that we are intended by the text to read that love as identical in type. 

jkr has been very clear that snape’s relationship with lily is one of unrequited romantic love. we obviously don’t have to accept this in our own readings or in the way we write the characters in our own work - i love a queer snape sacrificing everything for his platonic best friend as much as the next girl - but we do have to acknowledge it as the doylist text’s stated intention. it stands to reason, then, that the text’s intention is for us to regard the mirror-image of snape’s love for lily - sirius’ love for james - as romantic as well.

or, unrequited prongsfoot is canon.

Anyone ever pissed at Snape because he literally had the students buy shitty potions textbooks?

Like literally the same book he used when he was at hogwarts

The same book he spent time correcting so that it actually worked

That’s the book he had his students buy, and then he didn’t give them the corrections.

That alone makes him an unforgivable character because he liked to watch children fail.