Potter VS Snape

[Miss Wings]

What are your opinions? I found it on Facebook...


If you click the picture it will be made bigger in another screen.

[Kitty279]

Do I need to say anything? You know already that I can't stand the dungeon bat and think that JKR gave him too much credit, not to mention the fangirls. So: Yes, I agree on all points. Never understood why so many fans blame James for being a bully, but excuse Snape's behaviour because he was oh-so-bullied - and then complain about Harry being sooo nasty to his friends for snapping at them when under extreme stress. Obviously, Snape can be excused on everything, but no one else. Sorry, but I have to disagree. The 6:0 for James is what I feel, too.

[ayrine]

I would say 6:2.
Each character had it's flaws and qualities. Plus, Snape, in the end, was acting to protect Hogwarts students, not just Lily's son and Dumbledore was long dead then.
Snape's problem was that he gave more importance to the Dark Art than to Lily, he was thinking like "if I have power, I can have everything else, including Lily", but when she died by his fault, he realized that all his power wouldn't make her come back.
unluckily for him, Snape started to change well after he lost the one he loved while James changed just in time to win her. That what make people pity him more. But well, I can't deny it. I just love James.

[melodypottersnape]

SNAPE

I like his character in a sense. I like his snarky wit and elegant speech. I like the idea of him but not how he was written if that makes sense.

I don't like the fact that he gets away with acting immature and bullying towards Harry, but Harry can't even just call him Snape without someone reprimanding him about respect. I hate how he rants and raves about the bullying James did but does ten times worse by bullying kids who can't in anyway fight back.

I like him being bashed or being a true good guy when fanfic writers portray him.

------------
JAMES

I don't like how he was a bully. He did start it as shown in the HP&TDH. I hate when people say that Snape was deep in Dark Arts and deserved it. I don't believe that cause Snape was raised in a muggle household and his mother was obviously abused. I don't think she would have taught him spells. I also dislike it when people say 'well he grew out of it and so it doesn't matter that he bullied Snape. Snape should just get over it.' Him stopping his bullying doesn't excuse his behavior.

Now that doesn't mean I hate James. I quite like his character in fanfics. I like that he went so far for Remus. I like that he didn't let Sirius's heritage prejudice him. I like that he eventually did grow up and stop bullying even if it was wrong for him to do so in the first place. I like that he never gave up o Lily. I like that he didn't just leave his kid to die and tried to stall Voldemort to buy his family time. I even like that he was a prankster when it wasn't in a humiliating way.

[Kitty279]

Well summed up, Melody. While I don't like Snape, otherwise I agree. Though I still think he gave as good as he got, so I see the relationship with the Marauders with some scepticism.

James overdid the bullying, yes, but overall, his good side outweighed the bad for me.

What annoys me is the way that JKR showed the worst side of Snape throughout the series, and then we are suddenly supposed to think he's a good guy, as are the Malfoys, while she makes the Marauders look bad, but never tries to redeem them in the same way. It didn't feel right to me.

[ayrine]

Oct 15, 2013 0:20:16 GMT -5 Kitty279 said:

Well summed up, Melody. While I don't like Snape, otherwise I agree. Though I still think he gave as good as he got, so I see the relationship with the Marauders with some scepticism.

James overdid the bullying, yes, but overall, his good side outweighed the bad for me.

What annoys me is the way that JKR showed the worst side of Snape throughout the series, and then we are suddenly supposed to think he's a good guy, as are the Malfoys, while she makes the Marauders look bad, but never tries to redeem them in the same way. It didn't feel right to me.

I feel some frustration they say History is as objective as are the historians.
I also believe that JKR said in an interview that her favorite male character in HP was Snape. It could explain some of it.

I dislike Snape bullying, I understand that you are frustrated, I have friends who say that Snape bullying is justified and that Harry deserve it for being an idiot. Thankfully (relatively), I had the "luck" to have a teacher like Snape. So I know how it feels to be the target of a sarcastic adult who enjoy criticizing you publicly. Most Snape fans don't and while I can appreciate dark and sarcastic humor, using it against kids who can't defend themselves is a no, it's cowardice.
I like Snape or rather I respect him. He choose a really bad way at first, then when he had the choice between continuing his bad ways, killing himself or fighting Voldemort's for whatever reason, he choose the later. I respect his courage for lying to Voldemort to his face. Even if you don't believe that Voldemort is that much powerful, Voldemort had an unimaginable emprize on them through the fear he inspire them. Their fear is their worst enemy and Voldemort was taking advantage of it.
Then his love for Lily was the last nail in the coffin, everybody stated pitying him for not having Lily and started saying crazy things like he deserved her more than James. Never mind that he was a DE and was the reason she died, never mind that his obsession creep me out so much. I would have preferred that he had fought Voldemort for something else. Plus necro-romance isn't my thing. "Please Severus, just move on!"

I like the Marauders too, they were bullies and had sometimes a disputable sense of humor, but I understand that it steams from their immaturity and also the context they were living in. It was war outside and people were afraid for their family, then to see those people strutting around like Draco do and calling other "mudblood" or "go die" or "you will be next" or laughing at them, you would hate them too. Even if they are immature too and don't really know what they are saying, it's like having your own fear thrown to your face, so you can't be objective.

I don't excuse bullying, but I can understand that you can do mistakes and there is no one who is nonredeemable, of course unless he doesn't want to.

[Kitty279]

Well, I am known to be stubborn, so don't be surprised

Ugh, if she actually said that, that would certainly explain a lot. Though not exactly in a good way for me.

Did really anyone say that Snape deserved Lily more than James? OUtside of the Snape fangirl, I mean?

[ayrine]

Well I am too. That why I can't stop.
Well I think they were all fan-girls because if you heard them he was "a misunderstood angel who would never hurt a fly".
Well I understand that one can be a little partial to a favorite character, but not that much. The worst is they unknowingly paint him as a brainless wimp who was manipulated by everyone and it is rather insulting for the guy. I am sure if Snape heard them, he would have cursed them, and some need that wake up call.

[Kitty279]

Yep, that's what they say and I strongly disagree with
*grin* You know, that's a good point, and I'd like to give Snape some Expendable Ears just so he can listen to them

Years ago, I've been lurking on another HP discussion forum, and there they had some really bad Snape fans. The way they denied everything bad he did, or blamed everything on the Marauders, which in their eyes obviously weren't any better than Voldemort, made me nauseous. When they compared the whole enmity to the Nazis with Snape being the poor Jew sent to concentration camp and the Marauders being the Nazis doing that, I stopped reading there, that was way beyond the pale for me. It's astounding how some people refuse to see any fault in him and insist that everything he did was right, justified and well-meant. One can just wonder if they did ever read the same books I did.

[ayrine]

Oct 19, 2013 0:57:23 GMT -5 Kitty279 said:

It's astounding how some people refuse to see any fault in him and insist that everything he did was right, justified and well-meant. One can just wonder if they did ever read the same books I did.

I think it starts as a pity for the character and an admiration for his obsession (I don't dare call it love at this point ). "Always". How many time did I read this word and winced . Then if you read a lot of fanfictions you forget the book itself.
But when you take away his faults, you also take away his qualities. It's because it was Snape decision to do wrong, that it's more meaningful when he chose to change camp. If it was the Marauders, Lily, Dumbledore, Voldemore, the rest of the world who were in fault and not him; then who was he? was he just a shell? no conscience? no determination? no existence? no soul?
They hurt his character more than they realize.

[Kitty279]

That's a way of seeing this whole mess they certainly wouldn't agree with, lol. Their adoration and everything has to make him a saint, not diminish his character, you know

[ayrine]

It's OK if they won't agree, and I will still continue to wince and cringe at such a silliness

[shadowslucidity]

Oh gosh, I can't count how many times I yelled profanities at the dungeons bat while watching the movies and reading the books. It's one of those things where he was more of a child then Dudley and Draco. I mean come on! You're a freaking spy and you can't get over a childhood grudge? Not to mention when Harry and him where having Occlumency lessons he saw some of Harry's memories from his childhood. You would think that it would make him less of a jerk. But I guess it just goes to show you that delusion can be dangerous. lol

[Kitty279]

Welcome to the boards! You brought up something I always wondered about, too - Snape saw how Harry was treated, and he still couldn't let go of his grudge. It's funny how people complain about Sirius being immature, but refuse to see how immature Snape is acting ...

[shadowslucidity]

Thanks. It's like what did baby Harry throw up on him or something? Most people just take what they like from a character and leave the rest. I guess from that they come up with half-baked ideas.

[Kitty279]

Partly, possibly. Though in the case of Snape I believe the main problem are the Alan Rickman fangirls. They crush on him, so his film character can do no wrong *rolls eyes*

[RandomPasserby]

A random note - because I re-read Snape's worst memory and thought this was kind of adorable.

Snape calls Lily a 'filthy little mudblood' (ironically, the exact same wording as Draco Malfoy will use some seventeen years later towards Hermione).

The funny thing is that Ron, while explaining it, uses it again anyway. James Potter meanwhile, literally refers to the word mudblood as '*hesitation* you-know-what'. He's 16. He's not bothered by Snape swearing at him but using the word mudblood is literally inconceivable to him even in describing what was said by someone else.

I just find that utterly adorable.

[Kitty279]

It *is* adorable. He really wasn't as bad as some people like to paint him, was he?

[RandomPasserby]

This cracked me up
frogsgointhemicrowave.tumblr.com/post/111639374147/hello-im-auditioning-for-the-role-of-severus

[PoisonLily]

James Potter: Did everything for his best friends.

Pro:He was a good friend to Sirius (taking him even in when he ran away from his family) and learning to become Animagus for Remus was a great thing to do (The question is if he did it more for Remus or for himself, since it would have tickled his sense for adventure).

Contra: He treated Pettigrew very condescendingly and more like a groupie than a true friend. He didn't help Remus get a job or made sure he was covered financially. Normally, I wouldn't expect friends to go this far, but Remus is a werewolf who are discriminated against I expected his friends to look out for him, for example in their will . Later he suspected Remus to be the traitor in the Order because of his werewolf nature and didn't tell him about Pettigrew being the Secret Keeper which shows he wasn't such a great friend after all and prejudiced against werewolves to boot. 

Severus Snape: Called his best. friend (Lily) a mudblood.

Pro: Yes, he did. It shows that he has some prejudice in him and that there is some stowed up aggression in him he feels against Lily to lash out like that at her, even if he was angry. It also shows that he can be vicious when driven to the edge.

Contra: He apologized profusely, tried to mend things with her and regretted this mistake for the rest of his life. Also he called his friend a bad word, not to sound blasé or anything since it is a racial slur (?), but so did Lily. She called him Snivellus (which is just as horrible for him since the Marauders call him that) and abandoned him to the tender mercies of the Marauders. He had almost died the night before, was being embarrassed publicly in front of the whole school and Lily had nothing better to do than flirt with James while Snape was being humiliated. Yes, she told James to cut it out and made fun of him, but that is all. Instead of getting her wand out and helping out Snape who was literally dangling in the air showing his underwear to the whole school she was busy playing hard to get with James. Harry would have hexed Malfoy, if it was Ron dangling in the air. She even laughed at Snape! It was a suppressed smile, but it still counts! Now I think Snape was blinded by love when it came to Lily, but he must have realized that Lily didn't hate James as much as she pretended to. His insecurity fuelled by her always defending James proves this. I think this was the reason he lashed out at her.

Or maybe his manly pride couldn't bear the thought of being helped by a mudblood? Snape haters certainly think so, but I don't think this is the first time that a similar situation happened (James bullying Snape and Lily intervening), and it was the first time he ever called her mudblood or anyone else for all we know. There is no proof in the books that Snape used the word mudblood other than this.

[LovePoison]

James: 

Tried seven years to get a date with Lily. He never gave up on her.

Pro: He was very persistent when it came to courting Lily. He would be called an obsessive stalker if it wasn't for the fact that Lily did not hate his advances as much as she pretended to and I think James knew that, too. Sirius says so later on when Harry asks him and I have to agree with him.

Contra: It is never said how long James had been after Lily, we only know that he had wanted to date her since fifth year (in Snape's Worst Memories they had just taken their OWLs). I really doubt that an eleven year old boy would be interested in romance. In fact I'm more inclined to believe that he was a late bloomer just like Harry. He certainly wasn't very mature and seems a lot like the twins, more interested in pranks than girls. Also, it would make sense that it had been a recent development (I would say fourth year at the earliest), since Snape seemed so very insecure when it came to Lily possibly liking James' advances. If it had been going for longer and Lily had been ignoring James this whole time he would have had no reason to feel so insecure.  

Snape:

Calling her a Mudblood, gave up and became a Death Eater. 

Pro: Yes, he called her a Mudblood and became a Death Eater. The Mudblood part I already talked about before and  becoming a Death Eater certainly would not have been good for their non-existing relationship. Also becoming a Death Eater he stood on the opposite side of the war which meant he might have to fight against her one day and Voldemort winning would have been bad for Lily's future.

Contra: He never gave up on her evidenced by him dying for the sake of her son later on and he never stood against her in the war switching sides immediately to rescue her life when it was endangered. She was the one to break all ties with him and refuse his attempt to reconcile. Being a Death Eater was a mistake, but he had just lost his best friend and love interest and I think it is around that time that he also lost his mother. Now, I'm making no excuses for his decision, since I think he made a mistake, but this was a political decision. Snape dislikes Muggles (because of his father) and likes the Dark Arts. This firmly puts him on the Dark Side's camp. Problem only, he never seemed to dislike Muggleborns (see: Lily) and seems to be proud of his Half Blood Status (which I don't really get, maybe he choose to be proud, because despite lacking the pedigree of a pure blood he was better than most??). Maybe he didn't realize how horrible life would be for Muggleborns under Voldemort's regime? The Jew's  and most Germans (not the Nazis) never saw it coming either. In either case I agree that he made a grave mistake, but the Dark Side must have had made some valid arguments (in Snape's eyes) for him to consider joining them. Or maybe his Death Eater friends at Hogwarts brainwashed/peer pressured him into it. In either case I  argue that Snape really doesn't belong with the Death Eaters and that he proved this later on.

[PoisonLily]

Potter:

Saved Snape after Sirius told him to go to the Whomping Willow. 

Pro: Snape owes James a live debt for saving his live.

Contra: Sirius never told James to rescue Snape. Years later Sirius still thinks that he deserved it. Sirius bragged about what he had done and James went after Snape and rescued him. James didn't do it for Snape though, he did it for selfish reasons. If he hadn't stopped Snape, at worst Remus would have been an unwitting murderer and at best would have turned a fellow student into a werewolf. In both cases Remus would have been thrown out of Hogwarts, his wand would have been snapped and he might have even been thrown into Azkaban. The same would have happened to Sirius. There would have been a trial and they might even use Verita Serum, which means them being illegal Animagi and endangering the student population by playing around with a werewolf would have come out. In that case even James would face expulsion, the snapping of his wand and at worst Azkaban (Though I don't think minors are normally thrown into Azkaban, Hagrid wasn't). In either case James was covering his own ass and at best was rescuing Remus from becoming a murderer. It is very obvious he doesn't do it for Snape since it is very obvious that he has no regard for Snape whatsoever as the next day is the day of Snape's worst memory where he is being humiliated in front of the whole school by the Marauders. 

Snape:

Didn't even care if James or Harry were to be murdered at Voldemort's attack. 

Pro: He only asks Voldemort to spare Lily's life and Dumbledore only to protect Lily at the beginning. This shows his selfishness and disregard for others not called Lily. I'd go even further and say that he might have hoped to have Lily all to himself after James' and Harry's death.

Contra: He couldn't possibly ask for Harry to be spared because of the prophecy and he is no position to ask even for the favour of Lily's life being spared, since she was an enemy of Voldemort, a member of the Order and had defied Voldemort thrice already. He still asked for her to be spared and risked his life doing so. If it wasn't for him being such a capable Death Eater and potioneer I think Voldemort might have just killed him for being a traitor and Mudblood lover to boot. There is no reason whatsoever Snape should ask for James to be spared. Despite what the author implies, Snape doesn't owe him anything and has every reason to hate him. Also while it is true that he went to Dumbledore to ask for Lily's protection which disgusted Dumbledore immensely (and I have to agree with him in this) aften Dumbledore made his disgust obvious and scolded him, Snape basically said that it didn't matter he should protect Harry and even James, if only Lily was protected, too. Yes, I realize that basically means he didn't care for James and Harry at all and while I don't blame him about the first, baby Harry is innocent and doesn't deserve his disregard (even if I can understand Snape's feelings, who would care about the fruit of the union between the love of his live and his greatest enemy? I bet Snape hated the very thought of Harry alone). But. BUT! In that moment he told Dumbledore that he didn't care if it meant protecting James and Harry as long as Lily was alive, I was really proud of him, because he had made the decision to rather be unhappy the rest of his most likely short live (no chance getting Lily if James and Harry were there, and likely killed someday for becoming a spy) than to see the person he loved so much die. In that moment he proved that his love was real, because he had put aside his selfishness for her well being. And he stood by his decision for the rest of his live. While he never had a good relationship with Harry and never overcame his hatred for James, he came to care about Harry later on in his own way. Snape was utterly disgusted and appalled at Dumbledore for raising Harry like a pig for the slaughter, the boy he (Snape) had been protecting all this time. And I concur, Dumbledore was worse than Snape at his lowest. 

[Kitty279]

Contra: He treated Pettigrew very condescendingly and more like a groupie than a true friend. He didn't help Remus get a job or made sure he was covered financially. Normally, I wouldn't expect friends to go this far, but Remus is a werewolf who are discriminated against I expected his friends to look out for him, for example in their will . Later he suspected Remus to be the traitor in the Order because of his werewolf nature and didn't tell him about Pettigrew being the Secret Keeper which shows he wasn't such a great friend after all and prejudiced against werewolves to boot.

Well, Pettigrew really acted like a groupie in my eyes, he seems to have been drawn to the others for their names and money, at least to me. Seeing that there were probably no others in their dormitory, I suspect they might just have allowed him to tag along, because it was easier than hiding everything from him. And as Sirius said, he was drawn to the powerful ones.
How do you know James didn't leave anything to Remus? Frankly, seeing how Dumbledore handled Sirius' will - Harry being the sole heir, but not learning of the will reading or being present - I wouldn't be too surprised if Dumbledore hid or sealed the will of the Potters (that fanfiction idea does make a lot of sense to me), just so he could force Harry into imprisonment in Durskaban. And I don't believe one second that his parents didn't leave a will; they lived in a war, for heaven's sake! And I don't believe that this will only listed Sirius as guardian or that they wanted Harry to be with Petunia. So, what if Dumbledore hid the will so he could control Harry, and because it was not executed, any bequeaths were never done? And as for not telling Remus ... canon sounds to me as if the Potters at first just went into hiding and the Fidelius was added very late on, so it could be that Remus was simply not available when they did it because Dumbedore sent him on some mission.

Lily didn't break with Snape just because he called her Mudblood. She had already criticised his hanging out with Death Eaters in the making, and it was mentioned that he thought it a laugh that they attacked her friend. So, Snape gave her more reason than just one word to ditch him when she saw that he was already on his way down that road.

Where did you get the idea that the werewolf incident was the day before the OWLs? According to the HPL timeline, it happened in SIXTH year - and by then they had their OWLs already. Oh, and btw, the books said that Snape kept following them around, trying to get them expelled, and no doubt to find out where they went. My impression was that he already suspected what Remus was. So, it was a great bright idea to go to the Shrieking Shack. Wouldn't be too surprised if Snape thought he could just kill the werewolf with a dark curse because he overestimated himself, just to hurt the Marauders and make himself look good. He would have gotten away with it, too. Besides, I find it very strange that he followed instructions of people he hated and distrusted. The whole story doesn't make that much sense to me. Mind you, I don't condone what Sirius did, but I still think there was more to it than we know.

As for bullying Snape, considering his petty nature, I firmly believe that he gave the Marauders ample reason to humilate him. And remember, they only humilated him, he retaliated with a dark spell that, if it had hit elsewhere, could have killed James in seconds. Don't forget, we nearly only know about their relationship from Snape's memories - and he was highly biased and always saw himself as the victim, never as the villain, no matter what he did.

And just for the record, I don't believe he loved Lily that much. If she were still alive, she'd have skinned him alive for the way he treated her son. One act of help (and the bit when he was dying strained my ability to dispense disbelief beyond the limit) doesn't make up for being a petty, vindictive bully for years.

By the way, why on earth would Snape borrow the pensieve from Dumbledore to put his memories in during the occlumency lessons? If that wasn't an open invitation to Harry, I don't know what it was. It would have been so much safer to put the memories in a vial and hide them *before Harry came*, so Harry didn't even know they existed. Instead he removed them in front of Harry and then put them on display. Idiotic.

[RandomPasserby]

 He treated Pettigrew very condescendingly and more like a groupie than a true friend.

When? We have one actual scene with the teenage Marauders, James asks Peter how thick he is which is admittedly somewhat condescending, but not as bad as what Sirius says. We have what McGonagall says which is that Peter hero worshipped James, nothing about how James treated Peter.

He didn't help Remus get a job or made sure he was covered financially... for example in their will . Later he suspected Remus to be the traitor in the Order because of his werewolf nature and didn't tell him about Pettigrew being the Secret Keeper which shows he wasn't such a great friend after all and prejudiced against werewolves to boot.

James did support Remus financially. Remus was a member of the Order and James supported the Order financially according to the Carnegie Hall interview where Dumbledore was outed as gay. We don't know anything about their will, let alone if they had one or if it was read.

No they didn't tell Remus who the Secret Keeper was. Know why? Because the Fidelius doesn't protect the identity of the Secret Keeper so it makes sense to keep the Secret Keeper secret (which was the whole point of the switch from Sirius to Peter). Sirius thought Remus was the spy, we don't know what James and Lily thought.

He apologized profusely, tried to mend things with her and regretted this mistake for the rest of his life. Also he called his friend a bad word, not to sound blasé or anything since it is a racial slur (?), but so did Lily. She called him Snivellus (which is just as horrible for him since the Marauders call him that) and abandoned him to the tender mercies of the Marauders. He had almost died the night before, was being embarrassed publicly in front of the whole school and Lily had nothing better to do than flirt with James while Snape was being humiliated. Yes, she told James to cut it out and made fun of him, but that is all. Instead of getting her wand out and helping out Snape who was literally dangling in the air showing his underwear to the whole school she was busy playing hard to get with James. Harry would have hexed Malfoy, if it was Ron dangling in the air. She even laughed at Snape! It was a suppressed smile, but it still counts! Now I think Snape was blinded by love when it came to Lily, but he must have realized that Lily didn't hate James as much as she pretended to. His insecurity fuelled by her always defending James proves this. I think this was the reason he lashed out at her.

And Lily isn't obligated to forgive someone who called her a slur.

Lily didn't call him a bad word, she called him a derogatory nickname certainly but Snivellus is not an all-purpose insult the way mudblood is, Snivellus doesn't have the cultural history behind it that mudblood does and people called Snivellus were not being murdered the way people called mudblood were.

While we don't actually know which month/year Snape tried to get into the Shrieking Shack, it happens while Snape and Lily are talking and they're not talking about OWLs. Plus Sirius says 'wish it was a full moon' which indicates that the OWLs are between two full moons since he wouldn't have said that if a. Remus had nearly killed Snape the night before and b. if he and Remus were barely speaking because of that which means that James could well have saved Snape months ago.

Oh for crying out loud, re-read the fucking chapter. In fact, here's a summary of what happens.

Everyone is doing their OWLS
The OWL finishes and everyone heads outside
The Marauders talk and then get up to harass Snape verbally
Snape goes for his wand, James disarms him
James casts Impedimenta and James and Sirius mock Snape verbally
Snape swears at James and Sirius. James casts Scourgify
Lily shows up, James and Lily argue culminating in Lily refusing to go out with him
Snape gets his wand and casts some sort of cutting curse at James' head, missing and cutting his cheek open
James casts Levicorpus, Lily's 'furious expression twitched for an instant as though she was going to smile'
Lily tells James to let Snape down. He does.
Sirius casts Petrificus Totalus on Snape
Lily gets her wand out, tells James to take the curse off Snape
James takes the curse off Snape ('You're lucky Evans was here Snivellus')
Snape calls Lily a Mudblood ('I don't need help from filthy littly Mudbloods like her')
Lily goes to leave ('I won't bother in future. And I'd wash your pants if I were you Snivellus')
James tries to make Snape apologise, Lily isn't having it
Lily actually leaves
James casts Levicorpus a second time and threatens to take off Snape's underwear

So large parts of what you're asserting didn't happen the way you say they did. Bearing in mind that Levicorpus itself 'had a great vogue during my time at Hogwarts. There were a few months in my fifth year when you couldn't move for being hoisted into the air by your ankle' so it's not like Snape was the only person it happened too. And that, if Snape invented Levicorpus then that means he used it on other people before they found out the incantation and it was used on him.

Now, I'm making no excuses for his decision, since I think he made a mistake, but this was a political decision. Snape dislikes Muggles (because of his father) and likes the Dark Arts. This firmly puts him on the Dark Side's camp. Problem only, he never seemed to dislike Muggleborns (see: Lily) and seems to be proud of his Half Blood Status (which I don't really get, maybe he choose to be proud, because despite lacking the pedigree of a pure blood he was better than most??). Maybe he didn't realize how horrible life would be for Muggleborns under Voldemort's regime? The Jew's and most Germans (not the Nazis) never saw it coming either. In either case I agree that he made a grave mistake, but the Dark Side must have had made some valid arguments (in Snape's eyes) for him to consider joining them. Or maybe his Death Eater friends at Hogwarts brainwashed/peer pressured him into it. In either case I argue that Snape really doesn't belong with the Death Eaters and that he proved this later on.

According to JKR Snape joined the DE's because 'like many insecure, vulnerable people (like Wormtail) he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive.'

He does dislike Muggleborns, Lily was the exception not the rule. She says 'you call everyone of my birth mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?'. She admits to having made excuses for him to her friends for years and he doesn't deny that he plans to join the Death Eaters.

James didn't do it for Snape though, he did it for selfish reasons. If he hadn't stopped Snape, at worst Remus would have been an unwitting murderer and at best would have turned a fellow student into a werewolf. In both cases Remus would have been thrown out of Hogwarts, his wand would have been snapped and he might have even been thrown into Azkaban. The same would have happened to Sirius. There would have been a trial and they might even use Verita Serum, which means them being illegal Animagi and endangering the student population by playing around with a werewolf would have come out. In that case even James would face expulsion, the snapping of his wand and at worst Azkaban (Though I don't think minors are normally thrown into Azkaban, Hagrid wasn't). In either case James was covering his own ass and at best was rescuing Remus from becoming a murderer. It is very obvious he doesn't do it for Snape since it is very obvious that he has no regard for Snape whatsoever

Let me get this straight. James saving Remus from Remus' worst nightmare (killing/injuring someone during a full moon) is selfish. Saving two lives (Snape's and Remus') is selfish because his intent was only to save Remus' and saving Snape was a byproduct? We don't actually know what was going through James' head when he found out but the fact of the matter is that he saved Snape's life.

He couldn't possibly ask for Harry to be spared because of the prophecy and he is no position to ask even for the favour of Lily's life being spared, since she was an enemy of Voldemort, a member of the Order and had defied Voldemort thrice already. He still asked for her to be spared and risked his life doing so. If it wasn't for him being such a capable Death Eater and potioneer I think Voldemort might have just killed him for being a traitor and Mudblood lover to boot. There is no reason whatsoever Snape should ask for James to be spared. Despite what the author implies, Snape doesn't owe him anything and has every reason to hate him. Also while it is true that he went to Dumbledore to ask for Lily's protection which disgusted Dumbledore immensely (and I have to agree with him in this) aften Dumbledore made his disgust obvious and scolded him, Snape basically said that it didn't matter he should protect Harry and even James, if only Lily was protected, too. Yes, I realize that basically means he didn't care for James and Harry at all and while I don't blame him about the first, baby Harry is innocent and doesn't deserve his disregard (even if I can understand Snape's feelings, who would care about the fruit of the union between the love of his live and his greatest enemy? I bet Snape hated the very thought of Harry alone). But. BUT! In that moment he told Dumbledore that he didn't care if it meant protecting James and Harry as long as Lily was alive, I was really proud of him, because he had made the decision to rather be unhappy the rest of his most likely short live (no chance getting Lily if James and Harry were there, and likely killed someday for becoming a spy) than to see the person he loved so much die. In that moment he proved that his love was real, because he had put aside his selfishness for her well being. And he stood by his decision for the rest of his live. While he never had a good relationship with Harry and never overcame his hatred for James, he came to care about Harry later on in his own way. Snape was utterly disgusted and appalled at Dumbledore for raising Harry like a pig for the slaughter, the boy he (Snape) had been protecting all this time. And I concur, Dumbledore was worse than Snape at his lowest.

It says something about the guy that if Harry had been born 24 hours later, if it had been Neville who was the only option, Snape wouldn't have given a shit that a baby was going to be murdered and would have happily gone on being a Death Eater.

Snape's actions are pretty much just covering his ass. He wants to be powerful. Solution: Join the Death Eaters. There is a child who might defeat Voldemort leading to Snape going to prison. Solution: Become a double agent for Dumbledore. He wants Lily to be alive (and preferrably with him). Solution: Ask Voldemort for Lily's life as his reward for telling Voldemort the prophecy and simultaneously go to Dumbledore and ask him to protect her from Voldemort.

Now either way he thinks he's going to get what he wants. If Voldemort attacks the Potters, kills James and Harry, spares Lily and wins the war Snape is a highly ranked Death Eater and has Lily. If Voldemort is defeated, Snape stays free and can potentially get back into Lily's good books having saved the life he put in danger in the first place.

He didn't exactly have a huge choice in standing by the decision. He can't revert back to being on one side without the other side trying to kill him extra hard and Lily is dead either way.

[ChickenOrder]

Well, Pettigrew really acted like a groupie in my eyes, he seems to have been drawn to the others for their names and money, at least to me. Seeing that there were probably no others in their dormitory, I suspect they might just have allowed him to tag along, because it was easier than hiding everything from him. And as Sirius said, he was drawn to the powerful ones.

I wouldn't call becoming Animagus together and and forming their little boy band as letting him tag along. Pettigrew cannot be called a simple tag along after all the things they went through together.

Harry and Ron managed pretty well to hide their shenanigans from their dorm mates. And I never saw Harry treat Neville this callously, despite him being more of a tag along than a friend at the beginning.

Even if Pettigrew had been only a simple groupie, it still reflects badly on James' character to treat him such. Harry was way nicer to Ron who was utterly insufferable about his Boy Who Lived status.

How do you know James didn't leave anything to Remus? Frankly, seeing how Dumbledore handled Sirius' will - Harry being the sole heir, but not learning of the will reading or being present - I wouldn't be too surprised if Dumbledore hid or sealed the will of the Potters (that fanfiction idea does make a lot of sense to me), just so he could force Harry into imprisonment in Durskaban. And I don't believe one second that his parents didn't leave a will; they lived in a war, for heaven's sake! And I don't believe that this will only listed Sirius as guardian or that they wanted Harry to be with Petunia. So, what if Dumbledore hid the will so he could control Harry, and because it was not executed, any bequeaths were never done? And as for not telling Remus ... canon sounds to me as if the Potters at first just went into hiding and the Fidelius was added very late on, so it could be that Remus was simply not available when they did it because Dumbedore sent him on some mission.

James might have left something to Remus in his will, but frankly I'd be very surprised since James suspected him to be a traitor by that point. Sirius says so in PoA. They believed he was the traitor because DD had sent him on an undercover mission with werewolves and they thought he might have taken the side of his brethren over his friends. (How very convenient for DD's plans for the Chosen One, especially since he was the one to send Remus on this mission in the first place). It is also the reason they didn't tell him about Peter being the Secret Keeper.

Also Lily and James were woefully unprepared in this war. Harry doesn't have a Godmother in canon(I always thought that it would have made sense for Alice Longbottom to be his Godmother), they had no contingency plan if Voldemort were to overcome the Fidelius Charm (which is always a possibility), got a baby during the war, James gave away his Invisibility Cloak when it could have saved their lives, they didn't have their wands on hand when Voldemort attacked, no escape routes, etc. James didn't have any foresight, so I doubt he did anything further than appointing Sirius as his Godfather in his will.

I agree about Dumbledore interfering with the will. He must have for him to have placed Harry with the Dursleys before Sirius was even in Azkaban.

Lily didn't break with Snape just because he called her Mudblood. She had already criticised his hanging out with Death Eaters in the making, and it was mentioned that he thought it a laugh that they attacked her friend. So, Snape gave her more reason than just one word to ditch him when she saw that he was already on his way down that road.

Severus was not friends with Death Eaters. It had always been the Marauders against Snape, he certainly had no Death Eater friends to help him out. He associated (hung out) with them insofar that they were in the same House and Snape didn't completely commit social suicide by not only being best friends with a Muggleborn, but ignoring his fellow Sytherins as well. He never laughed about them attacking the girl, he might have downplayed it, but Lily is guilty of the same sin as she had no problem defending Snape's bullies to Snape's face (who was her "best friend" at that time), which is a worse offence in my books. It is never said that the girl was Lily's friend. Lily was only offended because wannabe Death Eaters tried to cast evil Dark Magic on a Muggleborn. Which is bullshit. They would have been thrown out of school if it had been true.

Where did you get the idea that the werewolf incident was the day before the OWLs? According to the HPL timeline, it happened in SIXTH year - and by then they had their OWLs already.

I'd have to reread the chapter, but the HPL timeline makes no sense.
“…thought we were supposed to be friends?” Snape was saying. “Best friends?”

“We are, Sev, but I don’t like some of the people you’re hanging round with! I’m sorry, but I detest Avery and Mulciber! Mulciber! What do you see in him, Sev, he’s creepy! D’you know what he tried to do to Mary Macdonald the other day?”

Lily had reached a pillar and leaned against it, looking up into the thin, sallow face.

“That was nothing,” said Snape. “It was a laugh, that’s all ---“

"It was Dark Magic, and if you think that’s funny ---"

“What about the stuff Potter and his mates get up to?” demanded Snape. His color rose again as he said it, unable, it seemed, to hold in his resentment.

“What’s Potter got to do with anything?” said Lily.

“They sneak out at night. There’s something weird about that Lupin. Where does he keep going?”

"He’s ill,” said Lily. “They say he’s ill ---"

“Every month at the full moon?” said Snape.

“I know your theory,” said Lily, and she sounded cold. “Why are you so obsessed with them anyway? Why do you care what they’re doing at night?”

“I’m just trying to show you they’re not as wonderful as everyone seems to think they are.”

The intensity of his gaze made her blush.

“They don’t use Dark Magic, though.” She dropped her voice. “And you’re being really ungrateful. I heard what happened the other night. You went sneaking down that tunnel by the Whomping Willow, and James Potter saved you from whatever’s done there ---”

At this point they are still on speaking terms (at least Lily agrees that they are best friends at that point), so Snape hasn't called Lily Mudblood yet since we know she doesn't talk to him afterwards, but HPL tells us that the Werewolf incident occurred in his sixth year, despite him calling her Mudblood in his fifth year? Makes no sense to me.

I argue that Lily didn't need a reason to dump Snape, she had never been his friend in the first place. For that reason I dislike Lily more than James, because while I dislike James for being a bully he was at least a good friend to Sirius, Lily has no such redeeming qualities. Here two links:
thehpn.net/theforum/showthread.php?tid=18
redpassion.deviantart.com/journal/Explanation-of-hating-Lily-Evans-224472833

Oh, and btw, the books said that Snape kept following them around, trying to get them expelled, and no doubt to find out where they went. My impression was that he already suspected what Remus was. So, it was a great bright idea to go to the Shrieking Shack. Wouldn't be too surprised if Snape thought he could just kill the werewolf with a dark curse because he overestimated himself, just to hurt the Marauders and make himself look good. He would have gotten away with it, too. Besides, I find it very strange that he followed instructions of people he hated and distrusted. The whole story doesn't make that much sense to me. Mind you, I don't condone what Sirius did, but I still think there was more to it than we know.

Likely there was more to it. Snape planning to kill Remus is an interesting theory, but I doubt it. Even though Remus was a Werewolf I'm sure he would not have gotten away with it, especially not under DD's nose. Also Dark Magic is forbidden and would have landed him in Azkaban. And trying to get someone into trouble and cold murder--that's a really big jump. Plus the other Marauders would have killed him. And if getting away with murder was so easy, Sirius is the more likely candidate to attempt murder (kill off Severus in "self-defence" and argue he was using Dark Magic against him). (On the other hand Sirius got away with attempted murder, but you know he is a Gryffindor and there are different rules for heroes or DD might have just been covering his own ass again). I doubt Sirius instructed Snape in as much as that he let himself be "overheard" or "seen" while entering the Whomping Willow. It is more likely that Snape only wanted to gather undeniable proof of Remus' lycantrophy and the Marauders' misadventures to get them all kicked out. Dumbledore allowing Remus to attend Hogwarts is illegal and would have meant the end for his career as Headmaster if it had gotten out. Snape needed proof if he wanted to have a chance against Dumbledore. 

As for bullying Snape, considering his petty nature, I firmly believe that he gave the Marauders ample reason to humilate him. And remember, they only humilated him, he retaliated with a dark spell that, if it had hit elsewhere, could have killed James in seconds. Don't forget, we nearly only know about their relationship from Snape's memories - and he was highly biased and always saw himself as the victim, never as the villain, no matter what he did.

I disagree. Sirius said himself that James hated Severus on sight and that his sole existence was reason enough to hate him. Mind you, Sirius says this to Harry, after Harry confronted him about his disappointment in him and his father. Not very smart of Sirius, that. Sirius said that Severus gave as good as he got, but this is clearly a lie. Snape stood alone against the Marauders, there is no possible way for him to give as good as he gets when he stands alone against a group. It is impossible. Sirius was trying to placate Harry and was downplaying their bullying by explaining how Severus was a Slytherin and used Dark Magic. I call bullshit again. If Severus had used Dark Magic against the Marauders he would have been thrown out.

And just for the record, I don't believe he loved Lily that much. If she were still alive, she'd have skinned him alive for the way he treated her son. One act of help (and the bit when he was dying strained my ability to dispense disbelief beyond the limit) doesn't make up for being a petty, vindictive bully for years.

I disagree. You realize that your argument is true for James, too, right? James loved Lily and was a bully (to her friend Snape. Even before she broke her friendship with him). Those are undeniable facts. Snape loved Lily and was a bully to her child.
I agree that she would have skinned him alive. But just because she doesn't care for Snape, doesn't mean you can blind yourself to his devotion towards her which lasted until his last breath. I agree that he is petty and that by bullying Harry he is no better than James. But it's not like I think Snape is perfect or that I agree with everything he does, I just couldn't stand to see so much Snape bashing, while James gets so much leeway.

By the way, why on earth would Snape borrow the pensieve from Dumbledore to put his memories in during the occlumency lessons? If that wasn't an open invitation to Harry, I don't know what it was. It would have been so much safer to put the memories in a vial and hide them *before Harry came*, so Harry didn't even know they existed. Instead he removed them in front of Harry and then put them on display. Idiotic.

I really doubt he wanted Harry to see his panties. Snape is way too proud to humiliate himself in front of Harry in such a way just to gain sympathy. With how petty and irrational he was towards Harry I doubt he would have been happy with Harry's sympathy. Snape wants Harry to be like James so he can hate him, but at the same time he is protecting him to atone for the part he played in Lily's death. Quite the conundrum. James would have never shown any sympathy towards Snape (much like Sirius, and also Lily in my eyes), so if anything Snape wanted more reasons to hate Harry.

I agree that it was plenty stupid. But that's the books for you, most characters barely have two braincells to rub together. Even supposed geniuses behave more often utterly stupid than not.

[ChickenOrder]

When? We have one actual scene with the teenage Marauders, James asks Peter how thick he is which is admittedly somewhat condescending, but not as bad as what Sirius says. We have what McGonagall says which is that Peter hero worshipped James, nothing about how James treated Peter.

That scene, his nick name Wormtail which is an insult just as Muggle, Peter being made Secret Keeper because he's so pathetic nobody would even think it possible they could trust him with the Secret on the basis that he couldn't possibly be the traitor because he's too pathetic.

James did support Remus financially. Remus was a member of the Order and James supported the Order financially according to the Carnegie Hall interview where Dumbledore was outed as gay. We don't know anything about their will, let alone if they had one or if it was read.

That is not canon. Also we see from the state of Remus' robes that he is not well off. So much for that. James may have supported the Order while he was alive. Afterwards it would have been the Order stealing Harry's money. "We'll take care of it for you" my ass. Now what Hagrid said to Harry makes so much more sense. Or that the Weasleys could just access Harry's vault for him. And I always thought the stealing Harry's money conspiracy was only fanwank. It certainly is a possibility. But supporting the Order and supporting Remus are two different things.

No they didn't tell Remus who the Secret Keeper was. Know why? Because the Fidelius doesn't protect the identity of the Secret Keeper so it makes sense to keep the Secret Keeper secret (which was the whole point of the switch from Sirius to Peter). Sirius thought Remus was the spy, we don't know what James and Lily thought.

Sirius said that they believed Remus to be the spy. That includes Lily and James. And your argument that they didn't tell him for security reasons doesn't hold, since they could have obliviated Sirius and planted a wrong memory about him truly being the Secret Keeper if they were so concerned about their safety.

Lily didn't call him a bad word, she called him a derogatory nickname certainly but Snivellus is not an all-purpose insult the way mudblood is, Snivellus doesn't have the cultural history behind it that mudblood does and people called Snivellus were not being murdered the way people called mudblood were.

Mudblood is a horrible word, I agree. But to Severus being called Snivellus by his best friend in front of his tormentors is just as horrible and much more personal. Both are grievous insults and calling Snivellus a nickname doesn't do it justice.

[ChickenOrder]

While we don't actually know which month/year Snape tried to get into the Shrieking Shack, it happens while Snape and Lily are talking and they're not talking about OWLs. Plus Sirius says 'wish it was a full moon' which indicates that the OWLs are between two full moons since he wouldn't have said that if a. Remus had nearly killed Snape the night before and b. if he and Remus were barely speaking because of that which means that James could well have saved Snape months ago.

You are right about that. It must have happened before their OWLs.

So large parts of what you're asserting didn't happen the way you say they did.

I do have to reread it, but many of my points still stand. And while the list is helpful, thank you very much, reading between the lines and the overall tone is even more important. The nuances are completely lost that way.

Bearing in mind that Levicorpus itself 'had a great vogue during my time at Hogwarts. There were a few months in my fifth year when you couldn't move for being hoisted into the air by your ankle' so it's not like Snape was the only person it happened too. And that, if Snape invented Levicorpus then that means he used it on other people before they found out the incantation and it was used on him.

Which makes it worse. They hold themselves as morally superior because they don't use "Dark Magic" as Snape does, but this is clearly a lie. All this bullshit about bullying Snape for being Dark is a lie, since seemingly using Dark Magic is okay for Gryffindors, but not for Slytherins.

According to JKR Snape joined the DE's because 'like many insecure, vulnerable people (like Wormtail) he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive.'

So basically being bullied by the Marauders and dumped by Lily caused him to become a Death Eater. You are only giving me more ammunition. Also I would never compare Pettigrew and Snape. Sacrilege XD
Of course him hating Muggles because of his father could not have attributed, or that he loves the "Dark Arts". Rolls eyes.

He does dislike Muggleborns, Lily was the exception not the rule. She says 'you call everyone of my birth mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?'.

I don't remember Snape ever calling someone Mudblood in the entire books outside of Lily once. Also Lily equals Snape associating with wannabe Death Eaters with him wanting to become a Death Eater and the sins of his fellow Slytherins as his sins. It is not a stretch to think she is faulting him for the wrongdoings of his Slytherin friends again.

She admits to having made excuses for him to her friends for years and he doesn't deny that he plans to join the Death Eaters.

This is in their fifth year. How long do you think have those fifteen year-olds aspired to become Death Eaters what do you think? And how many years has she been making excuses for him? Being a Slytherin is a terrible sin in the eyes of self-righteous Gryffindors. She just told him that they are not friends:
“Slipped out?” There was no pity in Lily’s voice. “It’s too late. I’ve made excuses for you for years. None of my friends can understand why I even talk to you. You and your precious little Death Eater friends --- you see, you don’t even deny it! You don’t even deny that’s what you’re all aiming to be! You can’t wait to join You-Know-Who, can you!”
None of my friends that tells him exactly where he stands. And that she would feel the need to make excuses, for what? Snape has done nothing that would deserve such disgust outside of slipping once and calling her Mudblood. And seemingly she has been making excuses for associating with him for years. Meanwhile Snape has befriended a Muggleborn and didn't feel the need to make any excuses for that. I'm very sure those Death Eater friends of him gave him more stunk than Lily got from her friends. And then she proceeds to make wild accusations and basically tells him that she thinks for him their friendship is worthless (because wanting to join the Death Eaters would be a betrayal of their friendship. Now keep in mind Snape is in fact not a Death Eater at that point and it might have turned out either way. Lily was not right in her accusations. If he had wanted to be a Death Eater he would have dumped her Mudblood ass long time ago. Half-blood and Mudblood lover too boot? They would have never accepted him. I'm very sure that it was Lily breaking their friendship which sent him to the arms of his 'Death Eater friends'. He didn't deny it is not a confession of his guilt. If my best friend had accused me such I wouldn't have been able too defend myself, too. The shock, betrayal and pain would have rendered me speechless.

Let me get this straight. James saving Remus from Remus' worst nightmare (killing/injuring someone during a full moon) is selfish. Saving two lives (Snape's and Remus') is selfish because his intent was only to save Remus' and saving Snape was a byproduct? We don't actually know what was going through James' head when he found out but the fact of the matter is that he saved Snape's life.

He did it for himself and his friends, not Snape. Whatever went through his head that night, it certainly didn't stop him from bullying Snape in later years. He might have gotten cold feet or thought that killing Snape was too much, who knows.

Doing a good deed can be considered selfish if it is done for the sense of self-gratification, self-worth and gratitude that can be obtained through it. Saving a friend even more so, because if that friend was harmed so would you be harmed in return and by protecting your friend you protect yourself. That is simple philosophy/psychology.

It has nothing to do with what I said though, James was saving his own ass and by association Sirius, Remus and Peters. I'm glad he saved Snape,as it makes him less of an awful person, but for the author to imply that Snape owes James for covering his own ass is just wrong.

It says something about the guy that if Harry had been born 24 hours later, if it had been Neville who was the only option, Snape wouldn't have given a shit that a baby was going to be murdered and would have happily gone on being a Death Eater.

I disagree. When Snape was Headmaster he was protecting the students from the other Death Eaters as best as he could. I think sooner or later he would have turned traitor. Again and again Snape is seen protecting students and not just Harry.
If he didn't care he wouldn't have protected them as it didn't further him at all.

Snape's actions are pretty much just covering his ass. He wants to be powerful. Solution: Join the Death Eaters. There is a child who might defeat Voldemort leading to Snape going to prison. Solution: Become a double agent for Dumbledore. He wants Lily to be alive (and preferrably with him). Solution: Ask Voldemort for Lily's life as his reward for telling Voldemort the prophecy and simultaneously go to Dumbledore and ask him to protect her from Voldemort.

Where did you get the idea that he was a double agent for DD because he was afraid of a prophecy? Does Snape seem like he cares two Knuts about anything Sybill has to say? And it is DD who coerces him into becoming a spy for him in exchange for Lily's protection, which he failed to uphold.

Now either way he thinks he's going to get what he wants. If Voldemort attacks the Potters, kills James and Harry, spares Lily and wins the war Snape is a highly ranked Death Eater and has Lily. If Voldemort is defeated, Snape stays free and can potentially get back into Lily's good books having saved the life he put in danger in the first place.

I agree that this might have been his motivation at first (or at least partly), but the second is hardly ever going to happen. I can't see Lily ever forgiving Snape, especially if she found out about his involvement. Protecting Harry later on doesn't work with this picture you are trying to paint either. I really believe that he genuinely wanted to atone for his mistakes and that the thought of Lily's death was more unbearable to him than death (or her staying with Potter).

He didn't exactly have a huge choice in standing by the decision. He can't revert back to being on one side without the other side trying to kill him extra hard and Lily is dead either way.

Fake his own death and hide. If Pettigrew can do it, Snape won't have any difficulties. Snape had various chances to save his own arse. Especially after this meddling coot was dead. There was nobody forcing him to help Harry after DD was dead, and the Dark Side had practically won. If he really only cared about himself he could have just forgotten about DD's instructions and done whatever. (Which is maybe the reason DD planned his murder).

[Kitty279]

Even if Pettigrew had been only a simple groupie, it still reflects badly on James' character to treat him such. Harry was way nicer to Ron who was utterly insufferable about his Boy Who Lived status.

The difference is, James had grown up normally and had friends; Harry had grown up as a freak, used to take everything in stride for his own safety, and Ron was his only male friend. Sometimes I wonder how much Ron's constant foot-in-mouth-disease and Hermione's bossiness kept others away from Harry. Of course Harry would react totally different.

Also Lily and James were woefully unprepared in this war. Harry doesn't have a Godmother in canon(I always thought that it would have made sense for Alice Longbottom to be his Godmother), they had no contingency plan if Voldemort were to overcome the Fidelius Charm (which is always a possibility), got a baby during the war, James gave away his Invisibility Cloak when it could have saved their lives, they didn't have their wands on hand when Voldemort attacked, no escape routes, etc. James didn't have any foresight, so I doubt he did anything further than appointing Sirius as his Godfather in his will.

Who knows if there isn't a godmother who was killed in the last year of the war. Besides, we all know Dumbledore (and JKR) didn't want any adult there for Harry to rely on who wasn't going to lead him to be slaughtered. As for the cloak - care to explain why Dumbledore insisted on borrowing it at this crucial time? I seriously doubt it was James' idea. One could think Dumbledore did want them to have no escape ... (yeah, not a Dumbledore-fan here!) And I never heard of godparents appointed in the will when the baby is 15 months old already; you'd think even if wizards don't christen their children, there might be some naming ceremony or something like that. Besides, if there was no will or it was hidden, how did so many know who was Harry's godfather?

Lily was only offended because wannabe Death Eaters tried to cast evil Dark Magic on a Muggleborn. Which is bullshit. They would have been thrown out of school if it had been true.

Sorry, now I am the one to call it bullshit. We all know that Dumbledore protected Death Eaters over good guys. See Malfoys constant attempts to kill him, which was allowed to go on even after two others were very nearly killed. Consequences for Draco? Zero. Draco trying to use an Unforgivable on Harry (which is an one-way ticket to Azkaban) and Harry retaliating with a spell he didn't know what it was? Harry was punished, Draco got off scot-free. And I doubt it was different in the 70's. After all, Dumbledore needed to redeem all the bad guys so they could repent and go on killing innocents.

Likely there was more to it. Snape planning to kill Remus is an interesting theory, but I doubt it. Even though Remus was a Werewolf I'm sure he would not have gotten away with it, especially not under DD's nose. Also Dark Magic is forbidden and would have landed him in Azkaban. And trying to get someone into trouble and cold murder--that's a really big jump. Plus the other Marauders would have killed him. And if getting away with murder was so easy, Sirius is the more likely candidate to attempt murder (kill off Severus in "self-defence" and argue he was using Dark Magic against him). (On the other hand Sirius got away with attempted murder, but you know he is a Gryffindor and there are different rules for heroes or DD might have just been covering his own ass again). I doubt Sirius instructed Snape in as much as that he let himself be "overheard" or "seen" while entering the Whomping Willow. It is more likely that Snape only wanted to gather undeniable proof of Remus' lycantrophy and the Marauders' misadventures to get them all kicked out. Dumbledore allowing Remus to attend Hogwarts is illegal and would have meant the end for his career as Headmaster if it had gotten out. Snape needed proof if he wanted to have a chance against Dumbledore.

You forget that murder isn't a school misbehaviour, but a case for the DMLE. A student killing another - I doubt even the headmaster could have swept that under the carpet. So the DMLE would have been involved, with a fanatic at the wheel who would think that killing a dark creature (and in the eyes of these bigots, that's all Remus is) would be perfectly acceptable. Snape would rather have gotten a reward than a prison sentence.
Oh, and if Snape only overheard it, who knows if Sirius realised in time he was there? Snape was stalking them, after all.

I disagree. Sirius said himself that James hated Severus on sight and that his sole existence was reason enough to hate him. Mind you, Sirius says this to Harry, after Harry confronted him about his disappointment in him and his father. Not very smart of Sirius, that. Sirius said that Severus gave as good as he got, but this is clearly a lie. Snape stood alone against the Marauders, there is no possible way for him to give as good as he gets when he stands alone against a group. It is impossible. Sirius was trying to placate Harry and was downplaying their bullying by explaining how Severus was a Slytherin and used Dark Magic. I call bullshit again. If Severus had used Dark Magic against the Marauders he would have been thrown out.

That made me laugh. You seriously think Snape never got any help from the Slytherins? Even if he had no close friends, they would have happily jumped at any chance to get one up on the hated Gryffindors. And frankly, the way Snape was depicted, I see him as the type who cursed others in the back instead of confronting them honestly. Besides, we only know of the Levicorpus spell, as far as I remember, used on Snape (after he must have used it on others frequently - but again, in your eyes him inventing it and using it is okay, others turning the tables on him is evil). If *that* is dark magic, then I am sorry, but they can rename Hogwarts as Hogwarts school of dark arts, because half the curriculum would be dark. And I already mentioned Dumbledore let everyone get away with dark magic, Slytherins included. We never hear that any Slytherin was reined in, either. On the contrary, Snape as a teacher was a willing accomplice.

I disagree. You realize that your argument is true for James, too, right? James loved Lily and was a bully (to her friend Snape. Even before she broke her friendship with him). Those are undeniable facts. Snape loved Lily and was a bully to her child.
I agree that she would have skinned him alive. But just because she doesn't care for Snape, doesn't mean you can blind yourself to his devotion towards her which lasted until his last breath. I agree that he is petty and that by bullying Harry he is no better than James. But it's not like I think Snape is perfect or that I agree with everything he does, I just couldn't stand to see so much Snape bashing, while James gets so much leeway.

LOL. So James and his friends bullying *one peer* is sooo much worse than Snape abusing his authority as a teacher to bully *three quarters of the school*. And because he loved Lily so much, he bullied her son from day one without giving him a chance to show if he was more like James or more like Lily. Great way to honour Lily. Yeah, right, that's completely understandable and makes complete sense to me *snort* Sorry, but that's rubbish. And I won't even go into his so-called devotion to her; to me the whole thing was rather creepy.

He did it for himself and his friends, not Snape. Whatever went through his head that night, it certainly didn't stop him from bullying Snape in later years. He might have gotten cold feet or thought that killing Snape was too much, who knows.

Doing a good deed can be considered selfish if it is done for the sense of self-gratification, self-worth and gratitude that can be obtained through it. Saving a friend even more so, because if that friend was harmed so would you be harmed in return and by protecting your friend you protect yourself. That is simple philosophy/psychology.

By that logic, Snape was equally selfish when he wanted to save Lily - but was only too happy to have her husband and son killed. Getting Lily for himself and getting rid of his rival in one big swoop. Great. Besides, the Marauders at least grew up; Snape, however never did, he actually got worse.

Oh well, I don't know why I even bother, it's clear you are one of these who think Snape was an innocent lamb and in no way responsible for his own actions, but blame the Marauders for everything that was wrong with that man.

[ChickenOrder]

The difference is, James had grown up normally and had friends; Harry had grown up as a freak, used to take everything in stride for his own safety, and Ron was his only male friend. Sometimes I wonder how much Ron's constant foot-in-mouth-disease and Hermione's bossiness kept others away from Harry. Of course Harry would react totally different.

Harry growing up differently is true, but it still was not an okay thing for James to do. I'm pretty sure the Trio's closeness kept others at bay, no way there were no other kids outside of Ron and Ginny who wanted to be friends with the famous Boy Who Lived.

Who knows if there isn't a godmother who was killed in the last year of the war.

I really want to believe that Alice was his Godmother and DD let the attack on Neville's parents happen because he wanted to get rid of her.

Besides, we all know Dumbledore (and JKR) didn't want any adult there for Harry to rely on who wasn't going to lead him to be slaughtered.

Totally, he might even have made sure that Alice wouldn't recover from the torture. Discussing evil DD is so much fun

As for the cloak - care to explain why Dumbledore insisted on borrowing it at this crucial time? I seriously doubt it was James' idea.

That's a fact. DD asked to borrow the Cloak to inspect it at such a crucial time. DD said so himself. JK stating later in a interview that it would not have saved the Potters doesn't convince me. It might have bought them enough time for DD to stop pretending he was sleeping on the job and move his arse to Godric's Hollow.He certainly reacted very fast once they were dead. Thats why DD "borrowed" the cloak. The gall of giving the cloak to Harry as a Christmas present always set my teeth on the edge. While I think that DD set it up, James and Lily had the responsibility to protect themselves and Harry. James should have used his brains and kept the cloak near him. Unfortunately Order members have yet to grow a brain that doesn't start with D  XD

One could think Dumbledore did want them to have no escape ... (yeah, not a Dumbledore-fan here!)

Me neither

And I never heard of godparents appointed in the will when the baby is 15 months old already; you'd think even if wizards don't christen their children, there might be some naming ceremony or something like that. Besides, if there was no will or it was hidden, how did so many know who was Harry's godfather?

I'm pretty sure Sirius was appointed Godfather before James got together with Lily

There must be something like a naming ceremony, a wizarding naming ceremony. (Drools).

At least the Order Members knew so maybe they spread the news??

Sorry, now I am the one to call it bullshit. We all know that Dumbledore protected Death Eaters over good guys. See Malfoys constant attempts to kill him, which was allowed to go on even after two others were very nearly killed. Consequences for Draco? Zero. Draco trying to use an Unforgivable on Harry (which is an one-way ticket to Azkaban) and Harry retaliating with a spell he didn't know what it was? Harry was punished, Draco got off scot-free. And I doubt it was different in the 70's. After all, Dumbledore needed to redeem all the bad guys so they could repent and go on killing innocents.

DD is incredibly prejudiced against anything considered Dark which includes the Slytherins. Sirius got away with attempted murder and escaped scat free. There are lots of examples, but I'm to lazy to list them. Him wanting to give Slytherins' second chances is the same as him wanting to protect Harry, utter bullshit. Draco got away with what he was doing because DD recognized the potential to turn him against Voldemort, which Draco eventually did by letting Harry escape. At worst Voldemort would have an incompetent follower which would only be a liability and a plus for the Order. Also while Draco was unsuccessfully attempting to kill DD, Voldemort might hold off from sending someone actually competent to do the job. That's all. And DD never had a problem endangering the student body before. For example: First year DD was the one to send an invite for Voldemort to come to Hogwarts. Who knows, maybe the old coot wanted to do some good for once in his life by saving Draco's life, seeing as he had basically already made sure that Snape would be killed off? (Elder wand*cough). Rescuing someone like Draco (Snape's godson) might have been DD redeeming himself in his own eyes. And I can imagine that Snape asked him for this favour, maybe in exchange for taking DD's life?

Every time DD tries to help "poor, unfortunate souls" and tries to give "second chances" there is some way he might profit from it later. Case in point: Snape, Hagrid, Remus, Draco, Harry, (and likely Mrs. Figg). See the pattern? The important part is that Draco was interrupted before he could cast Crucio and Harry told nobody. Just like with the Dursleys. If the victim doesn't come forward nothing will happen. And DD wouldn't bother, because again he would not benefit from it. Of course Draco got away scot free, Snape was the one on site, lol.

You forget that murder isn't a school misbehaviour, but a case for the DMLE. A student killing another - I doubt even the headmaster could have swept that under the carpet. So the DMLE would have been involved, with a fanatic at the wheel who would think that killing a dark creature (and in the eyes of these bigots, that's all Remus is) would be perfectly acceptable. Snape would rather have gotten a reward than a prison sentence.

Hagrid got away with unwittingly killing a student, petrifying several students and raising a very dangerous Magical Creature in Hogwarts with only a slap on the wrist because of DD's interference and was still allowed on school grounds after everything. Not that Aragog was responsible, but the Ministry thought it was him (no matter how stupid it was). DD has a lotof political power, so who knows how it would have turned out. Also the Blacks would have likely interfered if only to protect their own name and by association Sirius. Plus the Potters. Snape has nobody of power backing him up, so I doubt it would have gone this smoothly for him. I agree about the horrible treatment of werewolves in the Wizarding World, it's really awful and if not for DD, Sirius and James backing him up, Snape might have gotten away with killing him (if it was his intention).

In the end we don't know if Snape was as far gone as Sirius, but don't forget that later on Snape always flawlessly brewed the Wolfsbane Potion for Remus. It would have been so easy for him to "make a mistake". If he really was such an awful person as you seem to think, there would have been nothing holding him back. Not if he hated Remus enough to risk being thrown out of school and/or into Azkaban while he was still a student himself. Also if anything, I would expect Snape to go after James' life not Remus. You really think that someone as skilled as Snape would not have found a way if he truly wanted to kill any of the Marauders?

Oh, and if Snape only overheard it, who knows if Sirius realised in time he was there? Snape was stalking them, after all.

One word: the Marauder's Map. Also, Sirius admits as much to Harry.

That made me laugh. You seriously think Snape never got any help from the Slytherins? Even if he had no close friends, they would have happily jumped at any chance to get one up on the hated Gryffindors.

Snape was friends with a Mudblood, poor and a Half-blood, I'm surprised those "wannabe Death-Eaters" talked to him at all. Sirius says himself that it was always Snape against the Marauders. He never mentions anyone helping Snape. But I agree that there might have been some instances we don't know about. But Slytherins attacking the Gryffindors and Snape getting help are two entirely different pair of boots.

And frankly, the way Snape was depicted, I see him as the type who cursed others in the back instead of confronting them honestly.

Not really, he was always very upfront and confrontational when attacking Sirius in the books. Like when he revealed himself in the shack instead of just stunning them under the cover of the Invisibility Cloak. Which was so stupid. I swear Snape looses the majority of his braincells whenever confronted with the Marauders. 

Even if he did attack the Marauders from behind, how else would he have ever gotten one over the Marauders, who attacked him as a group? How is four against one honest or fair? Or do you really think that James' friends only stood idly by? Don't make me laugh.

Besides, we only know of the Levicorpus spell, as far as I remember, used on Snape (after he must have used it on others frequently - but again, in your eyes him inventing it and using it is okay, others turning the tables on him is evil).

Stop putting words in my mouth. I don't think the Levicorpus spell can be considered evil, nor do I think that using it against others in jest can be considered anything more than a prank.

On the other hand deliberately humiliating someone like the Marauders humiliated Snape is another thing altogether.

What I find unbearable is the Marauders' self-righteous attitude. They think Snape evil for practising and inventing spells such as Levicorpus, but then have no issue with using those spells themselves, as if they are somehow exempt from morals when it comes to evil Slytherins.

I don't see Sirius thinking he is evil for attempting to kill Snape or ever regretting it.

If *that* is dark magic, then I am sorry, but they can rename Hogwarts as Hogwarts school of dark arts, because half the curriculum would be dark.

Hogwarts, a Dark Arts School has a nice ring to it

I do think the Ministry classified Levicorpus as Dark later on, since so many Death Eaters used the spell. Sirius sounded like he was trying to justify himself for using this spell against Snape with the explanation of it not being stigmatized back then like it was in Harry's time. Also I'm very sure that the Blood Wards that protected Harry can be considered Dark Magic. Sacrifice and blood, is all I'm saying.

And I already mentioned Dumbledore let everyone get away with dark magic, Slytherins included. We never hear that any Slytherin was reined in, either. On the contrary, Snape as a teacher was a willing accomplice.

Outside of Draco I don't remember anyone. I disputed this above in another post.

LOL. So James and his friends bullying *one peer* is sooo much worse than Snape abusing his authority as a teacher to bully *three quarters of the school*.

Again, stop putting words into my mouth.

First you are incorrect in assuming that the Marauders only bullied Snape. Sirius said that when Lily and James got together he had stopped bullying others other than Snape. Which means there were others we don't know about. Admittedly, I doubt that he was quite as horrible to anyone else as he had been to Snape.

I don't think that Snape bullying all non-Slytherins is acceptable at all. He had his reasons just as James did for bullying him and others, but it doesn't justify both their wrongs.

I am merely defending/explaining Snape's actions and criticizing James because nobody else here bothered to. It is awfully boring and one-sided if everyone just bashes Snape and excuses James' actions by pointing out how much worse Snape was. If you have no trouble putting yourself in the shoes of James, how about you try the same with Snape? It is one thing disliking a character and defending a beloved character, but another thing altogether to refuse to see the faults and the good in characters you like and dislike.

I dislike James for being a bully. I dislike Snape for being a bully. Outside of that I have other reasons to like or dislike them. I like Snape better than James since I have zero tolerance for bullies and especially self-righteous wannabe heroes (which James is both) and feel sorry for Snape for having been the victim of bullying in his childhood and his less-than-ideal circumstances at home. Since Snape has some reasons for his atrocious behaviour I give him some leeway, but that doesn't mean that I find his behaviour any more acceptable that James'.

Bullying students as a teacher is unacceptable. I can understand Snape favouring his own House, especially with the treatment Slytherin gets from the other teachers, the Headmaster and even from "fair" teachers such as Minerva, but he really was just a bitter, petty man. On the other hand, while awfully unfair and horrible to the students he never quite humiliated a student as badly as he was humiliated by the Marauders (though he did come close with Harry) and he did protect the students several times. I don't think that Severus can be excused for bullying children, but I neither agree that he was as bad as you painted him.

James on the other hand is an overall more well-adjusted individual than Snape, but that is also the reason I give him less leeway, he had no good reason that would excuse his bullying other than being a spoilt, prejudiced brat with a big, swollen head.

Victims of bullying will sometimes turn into bullies themselves, which is no excuse but at least a reason. James really had no such reasons outside of enjoying bullying others. The Marauders seemed to think it was great "fun".

I am starting to like James better. I disliked him beforehand and liked Lily, but like my opinion on DD this has changed, too.

I think that the author gives James too much credit/leeway (when it comes to Snape), but at the same time not enough when it comes to other things. I really don't see how Lily was better than James. James sacrificed his life to save Lily and Harry, just as Lily sacrificed her life for Harry. It is awfully unfair that James' sacrifice is always being downplayed, while Lily is always being exalted for doing the same. As if Lily's sacrifice was somehow more worthy or better.
At least James tried to do something useful 'buying time for Lily to escape with Harry' while Lily was utterly useless. Frankly, they both sucked and this from Order Members that had "defied Voldemort thrice" already.
Another way that James was better than Lily is that he was the best friend Sirius could have ever wished for and a great friend to Remus, too, (until James thought Remus had turned traitor, but who knows maybe DD used a Confundus Charm on him or something).
Lily was an awful friend to Snape (I linked two links above).
And for all of Lily's brilliance, James was seemingly equally brilliant while putting much less effort into it. Seriously, Lily is totally overrated. Most paint her as a Saint. The only good thing I can say about her is that she protected Harry with her life, but contrary to what JK thinks, it is not really unusual for a mother to protect her child (It is commendable and heroic), and it does not automatically make her a good person.
I'm very sure Petunia would do the same for Dudders and Petunia is mostly a truly awful person.

Back to the bullying, I think it was really petty of Snape to let his anger get the better of him and let his frustrations out on school children.

And because he loved Lily so much, he bullied her son from day one without giving him a chance to show if he was more like James or more like Lily. Great way to honour Lily. Yeah, right, that's completely understandable and makes complete sense to me *snort* Sorry, but that's rubbish.

He protected Harry for Lily. Protecting his life and bullying him because he is a petty, bitter man blinded by his hatred for James are two different pair of shoes.

Protecting Harry was commendable and bullying him doesn't lessen this. Just as bullying Harry was pathetic and can't be excused by his hatred for James or lessened by protecting Harry's life from harm.

The world is not black and white. Horrible people can do good things and otherwise good people can do horrible things.

In my eyes both James and Snape belong to the later category. Good people who did bad things. I'd be glad if you at least saw Snape as the former. Can you really deny that he did good things in his life?

 I just dislike James more and like him less, and dislike Snape less and like him more. It's not all roses and rainbows with me and Snape

And I won't even go into his so-called devotion to her; to me the whole thing was rather creepy.

She was his best friend and he also loved her romantically. If he had not been devoted to her that would have been weird. Especially since she had been his only friend.

Lily is to Snape what James is to Sirius. I don't see you commenting that Sirius devotion was creepy. James also chased Lily for years, despite her acting like she hated him and you don't call him a creep either.

Just because it was one-sided doesn't make Snape a creep. It makes him pathetically sad and sadly pathetic for not realizing that Lily was not the person he thought she was. Especially later on. I can excuse such stupidity in his teenager self, but he should have realized the truth as an adult and finally gotten over her. This just shows how desperate he was, but it doesn't make him a creep per se.

It is of no fault of his own that he didn't realize what we could see, that Lily didn't really like him as much as he liked her, and that her "best friends" meant far less to her than it did to him.

By that logic, Snape was equally selfish when he wanted to save Lily -

Yes, he was selfish. Love is selfish and selfless in equal parts

but was only too happy to have her husband and son killed. Getting Lily for himself and getting rid of his rival in one big swoop. Great.

I argued otherwise already. It might have been part of his motivation at first, but he then decided that he'd rather protect James and Harry, too, and loose Lily to them forever than have her die. It was selfish in that he did this only to protect Lily, but selfless, too, because he willingly risked his life for Lily, James and Harry knowing that he would never gain anything from this other than see her alive for as long as he lived. Being willing to sacrifice his own happiness for her happiness was selfless.

Besides, the Marauders at least grew up; Snape, however never did, he actually got worse.

Yes, and no.

First the Marauders never grew up. Sirius later never regretted his bullying in his school days and even said that Snivellus deserved his murder attempt. Remus was constantly bullying Snape. In more subtle ways, so you might have missed it. Neville's Boggart for example and always condescendingly telling Snape to get over a little bit of school rivalry that almost resulted in his death, while never reprimanding Sirius for doing the same. Sirius and Remus only showed a little shame in themselves when confronted with Harry's disappointment. And James in fact never stopped bullying Snape even after he got the girl. So, great he stopped bullying everyone but Snape. How mature of him.
Snape did get worse by becoming a bully, I totally agree, and he is just as bad as Sirius in some ways. Those two have not matured since their teenage years at all. (I wonder though why Sirius is that angry, its not like he was terribly humiliated in his teenage years and almost killed by Snape and he also doesn't know about Snape telling Voldemort the Prophecy. If Sirius had known, we would know since it would have been impossible for Sirius to hold back his vitriol.)
But Snape also became a better person by repeatedly protecting those around him (Lily, James, Harry and other students).

Oh well, I don't know why I even bother, it's clear you are one of these who think Snape was an innocent lamb and in no way responsible for his own actions, but blame the Marauders for everything that was wrong with that man.

Because you dislike Snape and like the Marauders and feel defensive about them? Just as I feel defensive about Snape? Lol.

Snape is certainly not a little, innocent lamb. Hahahaha, the mental picture! Snort.

And I put the blame where it belongs. I blame the Marauders for being bullies and prejudiced little swots and I blame Snape for becoming a Death Eater and a bully of a teacher.

Obviously I see no need to criticize Snape any further as you and the others already got this covered. Instead poking some holes into your Saint Potter and your beloved Bully Quartet is much more fun

[physicssquid]

Now, while I can see both sides of this, I would just like to say, I don't see Neville's Boggart as Remus Bullying Snape, I see it as Remus trying to build up Neville's confidence using whatever tools are available. The point of that lesson was to make the kids face their worst fears in a semi-controlled environment, and try to make them funny in some way, which will hopefully give them the chance to prove to themselves that they can face & overcome their fears. Neville's Boggart being Snape, is the worst part of it to me. The simple fact that a teacher is so horrible to the kids, that he has become the worst fear of one of them, is horrific. And, there is no sign that the other teachers had any inclination to try and force Snape to stop.

It is quite obvious to me, that Snape, when he asked DD for help, only really cared about Lily's protection, but not James & Harry.

This quote is the most telling to me.

“You disgust me,” said Dumbledore, and Harry had never heard so much contempt in his voice. Snape seemed to shrink a little, “You do not care, then, about the deaths of her husband and child? They can die, as long as you have what you want?”

Snape said nothing, but merely looked up at Dumbledore.

“Hide them all, then,” he croaked. “Keep her – them – safe. Please.”

That says to me that Snape only asked DD to protect Harry & James as an afterthought, as if he didn't really care. When I first read those few sentences, I got the feeling that if Lily had survived the attack, Snape would have done practically anything to get her for himself, not even caring for her state of mind or emotional wellbeing after the loss of her husband & son.

Reading & re-reading the original books, as well as so many fanfictions that I've lost count, has helped me realise that while Snape did do some good things in his life, the bad things he did, still outweigh the good, purely because of the way he treated Harry, Neville & the other non-Slytherins while he was a teacher.