snape & peter
Aug. 16th, 2003 10:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pauraque_bkCross-posted to ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
snapesupport. A section of my as-yet unfinished exploration of Peter's motivations and relationships. It refers back to other parts of the article, but it should be comprehensible enough on its own.
Many writers have postulated that Peter and Snape worked together as Death Eaters, or even that it was Snape who recruited Peter in the first place. The idea is appealing, but I don't think it's possible.
If Snape knew that Peter was a DE, it means that he a) knew Sirius was not guilty of the crimes he was convicted of, and b) knew who the leak in the Order was, and didn't tell Dumbledore.
At first glance, a) seems reasonable -- surely Snape wouldn't have cared that Sirius had been falsely accused. But if he had known Sirius was innocent, why would he have pretended otherwise in the Shrieking Shack in PoA?
Point b) is impossible unless Snape is either a triple agent, or very stupid.
Whatever their relationship, Snape and Peter mirror each other in many ways. They're the same age. They were both figures of fun at school. Sirius was contemptuous of both of them (and they may both have hated him [this theory is discussed earlier]). They joined Voldemort's party at about the same time (age 20 or so). They are both traitors -- Peter to James, Snape to Voldemort. They were both Death Eaters and Order members, and they were both spies. If you consider that Snape was probably *expected* to become a Death Eater just as much as Peter was expected to join the Order, then you'll notice that they have each "switched sides" exactly once (in opposite directions), and neither shows much sign of doing so again.
Some readers also see in Snape a streak of muffled servility -- a disinclination to follow his own path, and a need to serve a strong leader (Voldemort or Dumbledore). Such traits are quite evident in Peter.
Perhaps most notably, Snape and Peter share an unhealthy fixation on James Potter. Snape is said to have been jealous of James, and many fans have speculated that this jealousy was fueled by an unrequited love for Lily Evans. If true, it can be another mirroring: Peter was in love with James and jealous of Lily [another theory discussed earlier] -- Snape was in love with Lily and jealous of James.
Like Snape (and like another emotionally warped character, Sirius Black), Peter may even confuse Harry with James, as when he insists that Harry spare his life because it's what James would have done.
The last thing Snape and Peter share is a debt to Harry Potter. James saved Snape's life, and after James died, the life debt was inherited by Harry (at least in Snape's opinion). Harry saved Peter's life in PoA, and Dumbledore tells us that this incurred a life debt as well. Snape may or may not feel that he's repaid his debt, but Peter certainly has not.
So, what can we say about Peter's future? We may reasonably try to predict it based on Snape's actions. Snape has risked his life to save Harry -- Peter may do so too. At first it may seem that Peter cannot return to Dumbledore; it would upset the parallel between the characters. But on the other hand, if it happened, it could show us that Dumbledore exercises a pull over wizardkind that exceeds that of Voldemort.
I'm very open to criticism/debate. Let me know what you think.
snapesupport. A section of my as-yet unfinished exploration of Peter's motivations and relationships. It refers back to other parts of the article, but it should be comprehensible enough on its own.Many writers have postulated that Peter and Snape worked together as Death Eaters, or even that it was Snape who recruited Peter in the first place. The idea is appealing, but I don't think it's possible.
If Snape knew that Peter was a DE, it means that he a) knew Sirius was not guilty of the crimes he was convicted of, and b) knew who the leak in the Order was, and didn't tell Dumbledore.
At first glance, a) seems reasonable -- surely Snape wouldn't have cared that Sirius had been falsely accused. But if he had known Sirius was innocent, why would he have pretended otherwise in the Shrieking Shack in PoA?
Point b) is impossible unless Snape is either a triple agent, or very stupid.
Whatever their relationship, Snape and Peter mirror each other in many ways. They're the same age. They were both figures of fun at school. Sirius was contemptuous of both of them (and they may both have hated him [this theory is discussed earlier]). They joined Voldemort's party at about the same time (age 20 or so). They are both traitors -- Peter to James, Snape to Voldemort. They were both Death Eaters and Order members, and they were both spies. If you consider that Snape was probably *expected* to become a Death Eater just as much as Peter was expected to join the Order, then you'll notice that they have each "switched sides" exactly once (in opposite directions), and neither shows much sign of doing so again.
Some readers also see in Snape a streak of muffled servility -- a disinclination to follow his own path, and a need to serve a strong leader (Voldemort or Dumbledore). Such traits are quite evident in Peter.
Perhaps most notably, Snape and Peter share an unhealthy fixation on James Potter. Snape is said to have been jealous of James, and many fans have speculated that this jealousy was fueled by an unrequited love for Lily Evans. If true, it can be another mirroring: Peter was in love with James and jealous of Lily [another theory discussed earlier] -- Snape was in love with Lily and jealous of James.
Like Snape (and like another emotionally warped character, Sirius Black), Peter may even confuse Harry with James, as when he insists that Harry spare his life because it's what James would have done.
The last thing Snape and Peter share is a debt to Harry Potter. James saved Snape's life, and after James died, the life debt was inherited by Harry (at least in Snape's opinion). Harry saved Peter's life in PoA, and Dumbledore tells us that this incurred a life debt as well. Snape may or may not feel that he's repaid his debt, but Peter certainly has not.
So, what can we say about Peter's future? We may reasonably try to predict it based on Snape's actions. Snape has risked his life to save Harry -- Peter may do so too. At first it may seem that Peter cannot return to Dumbledore; it would upset the parallel between the characters. But on the other hand, if it happened, it could show us that Dumbledore exercises a pull over wizardkind that exceeds that of Voldemort.
I'm very open to criticism/debate. Let me know what you think.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-08-17 10:14 am (UTC)I have tended to discount Snape's life debt to Harry in light of later developments. I feel like that explanation of Snape's animus reflected a narcissistic, "he's just jealous" view (on the partof Harry/the narrator) that was first shaken by the revelation of the prank (the circumstances in which James saved his life were obviously not going to endear him to SS) and decisively knocked out of the water by Snape's Worst Memory. Snape had good reason to hate James. We no longer need (though we may still want) either envy or sexual jealousy as a motive. I think.
Which doesn't mean Snape doesn't still owe Harry a life debt. However, wouldn't they be even after the Quidditch episode in Book 1? I don't remember how we get the information that Snape thinks he owes Harry a life debt. DD? Maybe the idea of a life debt is a metonym for not owning your own life, lacking autonomy, and thus relates to the "servility" issue you raised. Defining oneself in terms of others? And can this be avoided? (Harry--James, Sirius; Hermione, Ron--Harry).
Thanks for writing and posting this!
no subject
Date: 2003-08-18 07:35 pm (UTC)Yes, I think so. We're left very vague on what a "life debt" is exactly, and I think the vagueness is part of its nature. I suspect that paying back the debt is something that happens when *you* feel you've made adequate restitution, and are then freed from defining yourself in terms of your debtor.
And can this be avoided? (Harry--James, Sirius; Hermione, Ron--Harry).
Well, that's the million-Galleon question, isn't it? We're basically presented with a twofold concept of virtue and enlightenment in the WW: 1) Make your own choices. 2) Choose love.
It seems contradictory at first, like being offered a choice that isn't really a choice, but it has a certain appeal. It's a microcosm (or macrocosm?) of the process of growing up. First you're dependent on your parents. Then you learn to make your own path and define yourself as a unique individual. But after that, to be truly happy, you have to come back around and allow yourself to be close to other people again, finding a balance.
And *that's* what I mean when I say Snape is immature (which I think some people misconstrued when I said it over in
no subject
Date: 2003-08-18 09:31 pm (UTC)I certainly agree that Snape is immature, and also that he doesn't allow himself to be close to others, but I can't help thinking he could still be a loner and not be quite so bloody childish.
I think you are maybe saying something similar to what I was stabbing at the other week with the thing about narcissism (childhood stage) vs. caritas. But with the addition the question of autonomy (which I also framed in Christian terms; freedom as prerequisite of moral meaning ...)
no subject
Date: 2003-08-19 04:59 pm (UTC)Yes, I think so. And the idea that right and wrong have no real meaning unless we choose them freely certainly aligns with what we're told in the books about the nature of virtue.