Is Snape Really Evil?

[Tanuki]

So:
Why on earth has Snape been such a [insert words here] to Harry. Shouldn't he be trying to make him a great wizard? So he can defeat Voldemort?

Snape hates Harry. That can never be denied. His attitude has the advantage of three things

1) He gets to be as nasty to James's son as he wants. Snape is not a mature man, this might be enough for him under certain circumstances.

2) Snape is that kind of teacher. He favors Slytherin. Any change will be noticed. On top of all that, he seems to be the type of teacher who has his students learn out of intimidation or an innate hatred of him and a desire to show him up. Harry is a better potions maker when Snape isn't around

3) He has a cover to maintain. He is playing both sides, so he needs to keep Draco loving him.

[Asphodel]

"Hate" is a strong word. I don't think Snape "hates" Harry, merely has a major dislike for him. It's just because James was mean to him, so on a sub-conscience level, he's being mean to Harry. But Snape is continually saving Harry, and J.K.R has enforced in the books that Snape is never the culprit.

[Phoenix in the Ashes]

Ah.

That, I'm sorry to say I agree with Tanuki on.

Snape more than just hates Harry. He passed that barrier when he first laid eyes on him, seeing his resemblance with James. In fact, probably earlier when he heard the prophecy.

[Tanuki]

sub-conscience level, he's being mean to Harry

The was more than subconcious. This was deliberate and fowl. Snape more than disliked Harry, he hated him. He wants Harry to suffer and the more Harry succeeds, the more he wants to punish Harry for being happy when James should be suffering in hell. Snape is the exact opposite of Sirius (think about the many comparrisons between them and the scene in OotP. As as good as Sirius was, that is how evil Snape is.[/quote]

[Asphodel]

But then why would J.K.R constantly enforce that Snape is good? He's always saving Harry, and whenever they suspect him, it turns out to be wrong.

[Nightcrawler]

I think what JKR is putting forward with Snape, is that people's morality doesn't always reflect how likable they are.

Suppose that Snape is good (and killing Dumbledore was something he had to do), that doesn't negate the fact that he's still a jerk to Harry. So I think in a way, you're both right.

[SunsetG|rl]

I agree with Nightcrawler. Being mean to Harry has really not much relevance in the fact that he is good or evil. I understand somehow Snape in being so mean to Harry. He really hated James, and James never wanted to change that. He really acted as a jerk and even Harry saw and admited that. I actually felt Harry was dissapointed somehow after seeing what his father did in his school years.

[Phoenix in the Ashes]

What hurt Harry so much, more than anything I think, was the fact that he saw his father being just what Harry had being defending Snape from accusing him as.
He had come to idolise him, and to see him...

To see Snape be correct.
To see his father in the wrong.

That must have hurt.

[Tanuki]

1) Harry's dad was a teenager. he did what all teenagers did. Snape was still just as bad

2) Did you feel betrayed and confused when Snape, who we were constantly forced to accept as good, just stood there and accepted a contract from Draco's mother, and later killed Dumbledore? Because that is what J.K.R. was going for. We made ourselves believe Snape had to have some redeeming qualities for so long that when we see that he doesn't, it hurts more than when a character it's easy to like betrays you

[Asphodel]

There must be a loophole in that vow. You saw how he was nervous. And I think it would be kind of... odd, to say the least, because Snape is a jerk, not an evil person. Name one time where J.K.R depicted Snape as an evil person.

[Phoenix in the Ashes]

There is one thing I can reply to. There's one thing that I can say without hesitation.

There is no loophole.

Oh, and the one issue I have with your case Tanuki, is that if Snape really is evil (in it for himself or not), then don't you think JKR brought it out pretty early.

If I was her, I would have left it right up until the climax of book 7 to declare Snape truly evil, wouldn't you?
It just doesn't make sense.

(And I still think Dumbledore could have gotten out of the situation leading up to his death when he was cornered, wand or not... but I'll leave that topic to rest... for now .)

[Asphodel]

On the loophole issue, I think there was. The vow said he must protect Draco, and I think protecting him would mean taking him away from LV.

[SunsetG|rl]

yeah that is a very interesting point of view. About how the vow could have worked against LV. And I think just the same. That he thought somehow it won't get this far. That he won't have to do anything dangerous for anybody.

[Asphodel]

He probably thought Draco would fail, and all he had to do was smooth-talk LV out of killing Draco. Or at least try his best.

[Phoenix in the Ashes]

Hold on, I have to read the last few lines again.
Did you just write that he thought he could talk Voldemort out of killing someone.
Nobody is that stupid. Must have mis-read it.

The Vow said he must protect Draco, and attempt to fulfill his duty should it look like Draco was doomed to fail.

Fulfill his duty. How can you get around that, because Snape knew what Voldemort wanted of Draco. He knew when he agreed to that Vow that he was agreeing to kill Dumbledore if Draco was failing. He knew it all along. And he still agreed.
He couldn't have just taken Draco away to protect him, because he then would have had to fulfill the task himself (which we ended up doing anyway), without giving Draco a chance. Draco was determined to suceed, if you remember.

It either makes him a murderer, or a mercy-killer, depending on whether Dumbledore knew about this, which I'm betting he darn well did.
Either way, Dumbledore is very, very dead.