Snape Theories

The theories section on the main Snape page was getting pretty long, so I decided to put it on its own page. Here it is.

The Vampire Thing

UPDATE 3/4/04

Posted prior to 3/4/04:

    A lot of people don't seem to like this but I think it'd be cool if Snape turned out to have something to do with vampires. Here's my version of the evidence, mostly from the books but also from the movies and interviews with J.K. Rowling.

Evidence For:

• Several times, Snape is compared to a bat. Apart from the black robes, he really doesn't seem all that batlike; the way he's described, it seems like a cat or a raven would both be equally good comparisons but we never see that. It's always a bat. It's also possible that these are hints that Snape is an unregistered animagus, and can turn into a bat, but I think there are already more than enough unregistered animagi; if Snape were one, that would bring the total up to five and Hermione says there have only been a handful of registered animagi in the past century.
• Quirrell may have had all the garlic around to keep Snape away (it's also possible that his head smelled funky because of Voldemort and he used the garlic to mask the smell, but if that were the case then why garlic? One would think he could just as well have used something else).
• On a few occasions, Harry gets the feeling that Snape can read his mind (PS/SS ch.13). Though Snape can't actually read minds (if he could then he would, for example, have known about Crouch impersonating Moody) he does often seem to have a very good idea of what Harry's up to, with little more to go on than intuition. Vampires are supposed to have that sort of ability.
  Update: ok, so that's probably explained by Snape's ability to do Legilimency. BUT he's still very perceptive. We can assume that, unlike Voldemort, Snape can't just see what people are thinking all the time - Snape would have to use his wand but he can still tell when Harry's up to something without whipping out the wand.
• Snape can often be found roaming about the castle at night (though, in fairness, so would I).
• Lupin assigned his vampire essay after Snape had assigned the werewolf essay. If werewolves are too advanced for third-years then surely vampires are too. Based on what Neville asked Harry about, the assignment was similar to the werewolf one - it had to do with repelling vampires, if not killing them. This could either have been retaliation on Lupin's part or just a hint from the author. I suspect it is the latter, because if Lupin knew about him being a vampire, then Snape would've had to worry about his secret being exposed just like Lupin's.
• Speaking of Lupin, vampires and werewolves aren't supposed to like each other much (in White Wolf, anyway - I'm not a gamer but I'm familiar with LARP). Whereas Snape refused to believe in Sirius' innocence because of what happened when they were in school, his main objection to Lupin seemed to be simply that he was a werewolf, not something about his character or behavior.
• Snape appears to have very good hearing. In the first movie, he almost caught Harry in his invisibility cloak, just by hearing Harry breathing.
• A few things I noticed in the movies that weren't in the books:
  His suit has a high collar. Maybe he wants to keep his neck covered for some reason? (or maybe it just looks damn good on him. That is a possibility).
  In the scene in the first movie where the trio is on a covered walkway just outside the castle and Snape says someone might think they're up to something: it looks like Snape just appears out of nowhere. On closer inspection (playing the DVD frame by frame), I found that he's just facing away from the camera initially and, with the dark hair and robe, he 's barely visible against the dark doorway at the end of the hall. Still, why do it like that, instead of having him come through the doorway, or from across the courtyard, as it is in the book?
  The first time I saw the second movie, I was struck by the way he moves, especially in the scene in his office and in the dueling scene, when he glides up the stairs onto the stage. mmm... What was I saying?
  In the books too, his movements are often described as gliding or sweeping. It's very distinctive, the way one might expect a vampire to move.
• In the first book, JKR makes a point of comparing Snape's eyes to Hagrid's. I've been thinking they probably aren't really black, just very dark brown so it looks black, because humans don't usually have totally black eyes. But then I thought this could be another clue that Snape, like Hagrid, isn't 100% human.
• by Ozmavul: I had another wee look at your vampire theorys, and thought maybe I would share one of mine...
  ...Perhaps one of the reasons why Snape's hair is so greasy is because he just doesn't shower. Because I have read quite a few vampire books and just according to legends n stuff, that since a vampire is "immortal", one wouldn't really need to shower...because they know they cannot die from just being dirty. Like, people can get sick if they live in filth and don't clean themselves everyonce in a while. Plus, when you're immortal, would you really be thinking, "Oh no! I got poo all over my foot! I am going to die!"
  I know if I was, I wouldn't care about showering. I'd be prancing all about the lands.
  kinda like in Anne Rices vampire books, some of the vampires NEVER shower, for like...AGES.
  But with that new interesting concept of perhaps Snape being turned into a vampire between GoF & OoTP, then I just wouldn't know...since now he would be considered being a vampire.
  Or perhaps he isn't immortal or a vampire, and just doesn't like to shower =P
• He wasn't a vampire but he is one now OK, here's the deal with this one: I've been trying to re-read OotP to verify this but I never have time and it's just been dragging on and on. So I'm putting up this theory without double-checking the facts, relying on the assumption that my memory is good enough. So here's the theory. Please don't hesitate to point out any problems with it, those of you who have either more time to re-read or a better memory.
  Snape wasn't a vampire before but he became one between GoF and OotP. That's what Dumbledore was talking about when he asked Snape if he was ready at the end of GoF. Snape's family (not purebloods, see OotP page) has some connection with vampires, who, like the centaurs, goblins and giants, have their own complex society that is largely separate from both Muggles and Wizards. Both Dumbledore and Voldemort think the vampires are likely to take Voldemort's side if they become involved and Voldemort has already approached them. Snape, rather than going back to being an undercover Death Eater, which would surely have resulted in his, er, death, is spying on Voldemort by working with the vampires.
  Something I noticed the first time I read OotP was Snape's apparent absence at meals. He isn't mentioned in a lot of the scenes in the Great Hall, though we have to assume he's there or else Harry would've noticed and commented on it. So he's there but he's inconspicuous. And Ron specifically mentions that Snape never eats with the rest of the group at 12 Grimmauld Place.
  Here's the bit that I would've liked to check but, at this rate, I never would've gotten it done: Snape, as far as I can remember, does not go outside during the day, throughout the whole book. He must still be able to tolerate indirect sunlight, because he does move about the castle during the day, when there's light coming through the windows. I think this is mainly another clue, like how we don't see him eating.

Evidence Against:

• Traditionally, vampires can't be exposed to sunlight and Snape is clearly capable of going out in the sun and not getting burned to a crisp.
  BUT...
  Nokomis posted this in my LJ:
  I was looking at your site, having read the Mary Sue HP comic several times but not having explored elsewhere, and I wanted to contribute a little to your Theory of Snape's possible vampire. Something you offered as evidence against this possibility is his ability to be exposed to sunlight. Actually, though, if Rowling is reaching into the origins of the Dracula traditions, a vampire can appear in the sunlight; it's just that a vamp's power is severly diminish, and actually has its peak at sunrise and sunset.
  Also, reaching into the tradition of the original Dracula novel, I'm fairly certain that vamps actually can consume food; I'm not entirely certain of this point. Now I may go give the book a reread!
  But... yes. Sunlight + Vamp Snape doesn't necessarily = poofy smokeness. *nodnod*
  That's cool. Maybe I should get around to reading the book. Instead of just watching the movie. But then, if I remember correctly, Dracula went out during the day in the movie. Right? I'll have to watch it again. Mmmm, Gary Oldman.
• Also traditionally, vampires are incapable of consuming normal food. While we never specifically see him eating in the book, we do see him in the Great Hall at mealtimes and presumably the students would start to get suspicious if he never ate anything. Also, he was eating in the first movie (and talking to Quirrell with his mouth full. heh heh).
• Vampires are supposed to be able to heal better, or be less vulnerable to injury than normal people. When Fluffy bit him, Snape was wounded and limping for a few days afterward. BUT (you LJ people are so cool) Meepalicious pointed out that this could actually be evidence that Snape is a vampire, because Fluffy would've killed a normal human, whereas Snape was merely injured.

Is Snape Good or Evil?

    Of course, in PS/SS, Snape appeared to be the bad guy but this was just one of many red herrings J.K.R. employs to divert our attention from the real culprit. However, people have voiced the opinion that Snape could still secretly be on Voldemort's side, or at least not on Dumbledore's side. The evidence most often cited for this is the fact that he's head of Slytherin, the "bad" House, and the way he treats his students, especially Hermione. We haven't really seen any evidence that Snape is prejudiced against Muggle-borns like Voldemort and the Malfoys are. He's only mean to Hermione because she earns a lot of points for Gryffindor, and because she draws attention to herself. We never see Snape picking on Dean or Seamus, because they don't try to answer questions in class. As for Slytherins all being evil, that's just the narrow-minded view of a lot of the students and faculty. If everyone in Slytherin turned bad then they would've disbanded the House a long time ago. Hagrid says that no witch or wizard who went bad was in any House other than Slytherin but he didn't know about Peter Pettigrew at that point. Was Pettigrew in Slytherin? It seems unlikely that he'd have been friends with the Marauders if he were.

    I have a few reasons for believing that Snape really is one of the good guys:
    In spite of all the name-calling and threats of expulsion, Snape really is trying to protect Harry. I suspect that Dumbledore and his inner circle (including Snape) know something about Harry that tells them he has to be protected at all costs. It could be that Trelawney's first accurate prediction had to do with Voldemort's downfall, and that Harry would have to be alive to stop him After OotP, we know that Snape and the rest of the Order do indeed know that Harry has to survive long enough to challenge Voldemort. Maybe Snape wants to see him expelled because then he'd have to be with the Dursleys all the time, and would therefore have that protection year-round instead of being vulnerable every year when he's at school (not to mention that then he'd be out of Snape's hair). To Harry, of course, it just seems like Snape's being mean trying to stop him from sneaking around and poking his nose into things, but Snape has a good reason for doing it. Dumbledore encourages Harry to get into trouble, by giving him the invisibility cloak and by turning a blind eye to a lot of his mischief. He just has more confidence than Snape in Harry's ability to look after himself.

Goblet of Fire
    In the end of GoF, Snape appeared in Crouch's Foe-Glass along with Dumbledore and McGonagall. The mirror had belonged to Moody but since it was in Crouch's possession now, it showed his (and, by extension, Voldemort's) enemies. If it were showing Moody's enemies then Dumbledore and McGonagall would not have appeared in it. This depends to some extent on how the mirror works: did it know that Snape was against Voldemort, or did he just appear in it because at that moment he was a threat to its present owner? Or did it show Snape because Crouch perceived him as a threat, regardless of Snape's real intentions? It should also be noted that Snape's seen peering at his own image in the mirror. Perhaps this is an indication that he's surprised to see himself there. There are a few possible explanations for this:
    1. He expected it to show Moody's enemies and is therefore surprised to see all three of the people in the mirror, not just himself.
    2. He really is on Voldemort's side, therefore the mirror is faulty (I don't buy this one).
    3. He didn't expect the mirror to include him, though he is on Dumbledore's side, because most people act like he's untrustworthy and therefore he's used to being not counted among the good guys.
    People have argued that Snape being wary of Moody (or the person he thought was Moody) is evidence that he's on Voldemort's side but it really isn't. Moody - the real one - never trusted Snape and didn't think Dumbledore should. Though Snape has nothing to hide from Moody, he still has every reason to be worried becuase Moody's already demonstrated that he thinks Snape should be treated as if he's guilty no matter what - even if he's innocent. ...Alright, so technically he isn't innocent of being a Death Eater but it's pretty standard practice to go easy on people if they've already come around and helped stop the criminals they used to work with. Moody seems to think that no matter what Snape does, he can never make up for having been a Death Eater. The fact that Snape was afraid of being unfairly accused doesn't make him guilty.

    People have also argued that Voldemort is referring to someone other than Snape when he talks about the Death Eater who's "left [him] forever" and that this is evidence that Snape's still on the side of evil. I think he is talking about Snape. First of all, it appears that the Death Eaters were a relatively small and exclusive group. People who supported Voldemort were not automatically Death Eaters - this was the case with Sirius' parents, for example. It seems that Voldemort expected all the living Death Eaters to be present for his return, except the ones he mentions: the Lestranges, three unnamed dead and the three that've been the focus of all the speculation. I maintain that Snape has to be one of these three because he cannot have been present in the graveyard and therefore Voldemort must have mentioned him:
    Why couldn't he have been in the graveyard? No matter what his true intentions are - whether he would've liked to be in the graveyard or not - it's unlikely that Snape could have gotten away from Hogwarts then gotten back in time for Harry's return without Dumbledore, and probably other people, knowing about it. The same holds for Barty, except he would've had to get back almost immediately, because he was there seconds after Harry appeared, offering to take him to his office. It's possible that Snape and/or Barty were present and they were among the Death Eaters whom Voldemort passed without comment. I think it's unlikely, but possible. Let's assume for a moment that Snape was there. Either he was there to support Voldemort or to spy on him. Even if Snape's a double agent, ultimately he has to be on one side or the other. If it were a different character, I might buy him trying to win favor with both sides, so he'd come out on top no matter who wins. But this is Snape we're talking about and he strikes me as being too cautious to take a risk like that; the risk being that he'd be found out by either side and punished for being a traitor. So I think we have to assume Snape's chosen a side. Whichever it is, I have reasons for believing that he wasn't at the graveyard:
    If Snape's loyal to Voldemort: The Death Eaters fully believed that Voldemort would kill Harry that night. Those whose names Harry would obviously recognize, like Crabbe, Goyle and Malfoy, didn't care that their identities were revealed to Harry. So why should Snape care, if he were there? He wouldn't. Snape takes every opportunity to gloat at Harry and there's no reason why he would've missed this one. Hating Harry as much as he does, there's no way Snape would've let him die without knowing that he, Snape, was partly responsible for it. Yet Harry had no inkling that Snape might have been there.
    If Snape's loyal to Dumbledore: Snape's already demonstrated that he'll take risks to save Harry, like going after Harry to the Shrieking Shack knowing that Sirius and Remus were there and there was a full moon. I strongly suspect that Snape knows about the prophecy and that Harry must be protected at all costs. Therefore, when it looked like Voldemort was about to kill Harry, Snape could not have stood by and done nothing to intervene. Even though it would have meant certain death for Snape, if he were on the side of the Order then he would have done anything he could to keep Harry alive.
Therefore, Snape was not in the graveyard.
    Who were the three missing Death Eaters? Apart from the three dead ones and the Lestranges, there were no other missing Death Eaters besides the cowardly one, the faithful servant and the one who's left forever. Why would Voldemort mention a few absent ones but leave out others? There are, conveniently, three Death Eaters we know of who weren't present: Snape, Karkaroff and Barty. I think there's a reason for this: it isn't meant to be as complicated as we're all making it. Some clues turn out to refer to things in previous books, or books that have yet to be written (like the stuff about Mrs. Figg) but I don't think this is one of them. The three that Voldemort describes nicely match up with the three who aren't there. Karkaroff amply demonstrated that he's afraid of Voldemort's return (cowardly), Snape spied on Voldemort for Dumbledore (left Voldemort) and Barty, by his own admission under the influence of Veritaserum, single-handedly set up the whole thing to get Harry to the graveyard (faithful servant). If Snape's the faithful servant then who's Barty? If Barty managed to get to the graveyard and back, therefore he wasn't mentioned and Snape's the servant at Hogwarts then who's the one who's left forever? Some other character we haven't heard of yet? Someone whom we have no reason so far to suspect, like Fudge? You can't reliably apply Occam's Razor to all fictional literature but in this case, there's no reason not to: the simplest answer is probably the right one. No matter how much some of us would like to believe that Snape's a bad guy, in this case the interpretation pointing to him not being one makes by far the most sense.

Updated 7/16/05:
Order of the Phoenix
    I thought of something else, from OotP, not HBP. Snape's actions after Harry warned him about Sirius being captured are also evidence that he's working for the Order. If he'd been loyal to Voldemort, why would he have sent the other Order members to the Ministry? He had no way of knowing Sirius would die so that can't have been what motivated him. The presence of the Order members was the only thing that prevented the Death Eaters and Voldemort from succeeding. If Snape had wanted them to win, it would have been easy for him to claim that he didn't understand Harry's cryptic warning. So that rules out the "he had to do it in order to keep spying on Dumbledore" argument.

    I still think Snape's not evil, even in light of the, ahem, new info about him from HBP. If you've already read the book (or have been spoiled as I was, ha ha) see my new HBP page for details.

In conclusion
    Snape is one of the most complex characters in the series, unlike Lucius Malfoy, for example, who is clearly evil and, though entertaining, pretty one-dimensional, at least so far. Snape is just about the last person one would expect to do something as noble as risking his life by joining Dumbledore's side when it looked like Voldemort was going to win (remember: until he tried to kill Harry, Voldemort was at the height of his power). He's unfair to the Gryffindors (though not much more unfair than McGonagall and Dumbledore are to the Slytherins), and I admit that the way he treats Harry and Hermione is inexcusable. But Snape opposes Voldemort and works to stop him even at his own expense, like when he refereed the Quidditch match, making himself unpopular with the other teachers. He may dislike Harry intensely but he still does everything he can to protect him. Anyway, isn't it much more interesting to have a character be good and noble but still be unattractive and socially dysfunctional than to stick to the usual stereotypes?

Where did he go at the end of Goblet of Fire?

    Update 7/16/05: the answer appears in HBP pretty clearly. See my HBP page for that discussion.

    When I first wrote this section, it was before OotP came out and I assumed that we'd find out where he went when it did but we still don't know exactly what he's doing for the Order of the Phoenix. Harry said something about Snape spying on the Death Eaters, but the way Snape responded, it sounded to me like maybe Snape just wanted Harry to think that's what he was doing. I'm still not convinced that's what he's doing, or at least that that's all he's doing. There are a few reasons why I think this:
    Voldemort wants to kill him. We don't know exactly what Harry told Dumbledore after he returned from the graveyard but if he remembered what Voldemort said about the three missing Death Eaters then Dumbledore probably knows that Voldemort wants to kill Snape and therefore he would not send Snape back to spy on him. Even if Dumbledore doesn't know what Voldemort said, he, and Snape, do know that Voldemort knows that Snape tried to stop Quirrell. Snape can't go back to Voldemort and try to claim that there was some other reason why he did that. He could claim that he was also trying to steal the Stone for Voldemort but that doesn't explain why he saved Harry at the Quidditch match. Voldemort may have decided later on that he wanted Harry alive (to take his blood) but at the time, it was Voldemort himself who made Quirrell try to kill him. Therefore, there's no way Snape could have been trying to help Voldemort by protecting Harry, and Voldemort knows this.
    People know he was a spy before. Even if Snape somehow gets around Voldemort wanting to kill him, people like Lucius Malfoy are probably aware of what went on in the Death Eater trials and they know that Dumbledore testified that Snape had been a spy.
    My last reason has more to do with what I know of J.K.R.'s style than with the actual story. Harry actually speculated that Snape might have gone to spy on the Death Eaters again: "Snape had turned spy against Voldemort, 'at great personal risk.' Was that the job he had taken up again? Had he made contact with the Death Eaters, perhaps? Pretended that he had never really gone over to Dumbledore, that he had been, like Voldemort himself, biding his time?" This quote is, for me, the clearest indication that Snape went to do something other than rejoin the Death Eaters as a spy. J.K.R. never tells us so clearly what's going to happen.

    So where did Snape go? It's possible that he'll have something to do with spying without having to be undercover, maybe being in charge of the other spies. We have to remember, though, that he wasn't happy about what Dumbledore wanted him to do. When Dumbledore asked him, Snape "looked slightly paler than usual, and his cold, black eyes glittered strangely." Is it just me, or does that sound like he looked as if he might cry? Dumbledore also had "a trace of apprehension on his face." One could argue that Dumbledore's reaction has more to do with not fully trusting Snape than with concern for his safety, but Dumbledore has clearly demonstrated that he does trust Snape.
    (Again, leaving the vampire bit up despite it having been debunked, because I like it)
    If Snape does indeed have something to do with vampires, he could have gone to meet with them, as Hagrid went to meet the giants, to try to get them on Dumbledore's side. Apart from that, I don't really have any ideas. It could be something we can't predict because we haven't heard anything about it yet.
    It could have something to do with Snape's parents. Given that Snape already knew a lot of hexes at the age of 11, one or both of his parents most likely had that information available, whether they actively taught him or not. They could even have been anti-Dark Arts - and would have wanted their son to know about the hexes in order to defend against them - and young Snape ended up joining the Death Eaters out of rebellion. Clearly, his father wasn't a nice person but that doesn't mean he had to be on the Dark side; Bartemius Crouch Sr. was on the good side and we know what he was like. Maybe Snape's parent(s) know something or have something that could help the fight against Voldemort but for whatever reason, they aren't already involved in the Order. That would explain what Dumbledore and Snape said at the end of GoF without Snape having to go back to the Death Eaters.
    I've just been re-reading OotP and I thought I should point out: whatever he's doing, it's an ongoing thing, because he keeps giving reports at the Order meetings. So there has to be more to it than securing his parents' allegiance. I do maintain that he can't be an undercover Death Eater because Voldemort would just kill him. Re-reading it, though, I'm becoming more convinced that Snape's got something to do with spying on them, he's just not undercover.

The Anagram Thing

    Like many children's book authors, J.K.R. plays around with anagrams. She spelled it out for us in CoS, with "Tom Marvolo Riddle" = "I am Lord Voldemort." As soon as it was revealed that Lily's surname was Evans, people noticed that Snape's full name contains those letters. The remaining letters can spell...

• Perseus, the name of the Greek hero
• persues, which sounds like "pursues" but isn't actually a word
• peruses, meaning he... looks at her?
• 'e's super, which, of course, 'e is.

• If Snape were related to Lily then he'd also be related to Petunia and Harry. On page 13 of SS (American paperback), Dumbledore says to McGonagall "I've come to bring Harry to his aunt and uncle. They're the only family he has left now." The only family he has left. If Snape's an Evans then either Dumbledore doesn't know about it or he's lying to McGonagall. He has no reason to tell McGonagall a flat-out lie like that; if he had to conceal it from her then he'd have said something more like "They're the only people who can take care of him," or something, without actually lying. Therefore if Snape's an Evans then Dumbledore doesn't know about it.
• If Snape's an Evans and Dumbledore doesn't know about then how did the name change come about without him knowing? Snape's name had to have changed before he was 11 and started attending Hogwarts. Part of the Perseus Evans argument is that Snape may have been ashamed of being Muggle-born and changed his name to dissociate himself from his background. How could he have done this as a child? The only possibility I can think of is that he was raised separately from the rest of the family. We know from what Harry saw in Snape's memories that Snape lived with his father (and presumably the woman was his mother) at least when he was a small boy. It would just be silly to describe the man exactly as Snape's been described and then turn around and say "whoops, he wasn't Snape's father after all." J.K.R. may plant red herrings but I don't believe she'd jerk us around like that.
• If Snape was raised by someone else then why make his new name an anagram of his old one? If for whatever reason they wanted to conceal his connection to the Evans family then it would make no sense to make his new name a clue about it.
• Snape doesn't look anything like Lily or Petunia. Although, the way they've been described, Lily and Petunia don't look a lot like each other.
• Why would Muggles name their kid Perseus? If they weren't Muggles then why does Petunia think Lily's the only witch in the family? It could be that Lily and Petunia's parents were squibs and when they said "we have a witch in the family" they only meant in their immediate family. It could also be that Petunia acts like Lily's the only magical person in her whole family because she doesn't want Vernon to know. BUT Snape called Lily a Mudblood at school; when James tried to defend her he didn't say "she isn't one," and Lily herself didn't deny it. So if there are other magical people in the Evans family then no one knows about it.
• What possible reason could there be for Snape being raised separately from his family? Why would Snape's Muggle parents have allowed him to be taken away and raised among magical people, probably before he was old enough to have demonstrated magical abilities anyway? If he'd been old enough to do magic, as Harry did when he wound up on the school roof and when he shrank the sweater, then Lily, Petunia and he most likely would've known each other. He could be an Evans without being their brother, but if he's less closely related to them then what's the point of making him an Evans at all? Anyway, if Snape knew that he was related to Lily and he knew that it was important for Harry to be with relatives - as a lot of people in the Order of the Phoenix knew - then why would he have concealed that information from Dumbledore even then, when he'd already demonstrated that he was willing to sacrifice everything for the Order?
• Finally, the whole thing just rubs me the wrong way. It's too cliché, having it turn out that such enemies as Harry and Snape are secretly related. It's almost as bad as if Snape were Harry's father (which he's not or else why would everyone always go on about how Harry looks exactly like James?) Also, if Snape were Lily and Petunia's brother then he and Lily would have to be twins, bringing in a whole new dimension of potential cheesey significance. What it all comes down to is, when I say to myself "if I had to write this, and somehow Snape has to be an Evans, but it has to be consistent both with canon and with common sense," I just can't do it. Feel free to if you can come up with something without it being a huge, nonsensical conspiracy to conceal from everyone Snape's true origins. If so, you're more creative than I.

Is Snape a Pureblood?

    Yes, I finally got around to writing this one. So. Snape being a pureblood or not.
First, let's make sure we agree on what 'pureblood' means. My interpretation is that it's not simply a case of having both parents be able to do magic. If two Muggle-borns have a kid, people like Salazar Slytherin and the Malfoys probably would not call that kid a pureblood. I don't know how many generations back one has to have only magical people, and I expect the Malfoys couldn't give a firm answer either. But it seems it has to be several generations. It also seems that one has to be recognized as part of the pureblood community for it to count; there are references to the "old pureblood families." It all gives me the impression of the concept of 'pureblood' being as much cultural as it is biological. Harry, whose mother was Muggle-born (as far as we know), would not be a pureblood by these criteria.
    I could be completely wrong about this, of course. One possible counter-argument to what I said above is that Harry does count as a pureblood or else the hat wouldn't have wanted to put him in Slytherin. I think the hat sorts people based on its own estimation of how well they'll fit in in each house, not so much based on the original intentions of the founders. One interesting thing to note is that the hat belonged to Godric Gryffindor. Gryffindor is seen by most of the school as the "good" house. The star pupils that we know about have all been in Gryffindor (James, Sirius and Hermione.) Is it possible that the hat is a little biased and tends to put those likely to be the best students in Gryffindor? But that's going off on a bit of a tangent.
    On J.K.R.'s official site, it says Harry doesn't count as a pureblood. Therefore, if Harry could've been in Slytherin then being head of Slytherin doesn't mean Snape has to be a pureblood.
    Back to the issue of Snape's parentage. Until OotP, I think a lot of us assumed (I certainly did) that Snape's childhood was a lot like Draco's: wealthy, perhaps strict, parents who live in a mansion. From the Penseive and Snape's memories in OotP, we got a very different impression, though there were really few details. In fact, it's still entirely possible that Snape's parents were rich but my gut feeling says they weren't.
    There is the problem of the Death Eaters: it seems unlikely that they'd let a half-blood join. The only Death Eaters about whose background we know something - Lucius, Bellatrix and Barty Crouch - were all purebloods. This doesn't necessarily mean they wouldn't let a half-blood join, especially one as intelligent and probably zealous as Snape. It's also possible that they didn't ask to see people's family trees but Death Eaters who weren't purebloods had to be sort of in the closet about it. I get the impression Snape feels he's in debt to the Malfoys; perhaps Lucius knew about Snape's parents but kept it secret.
    It struck me on maybe the 10th or so viewing of CoS: in the dueling scene, Snape says that if they let Ron duel with Harry, they'll be sending Harry to the hospital wing in a matchbox. I checked the book and, though there he's talking about Neville not Ron, he still says matchbox. So what's the problem with that? Wizards don't use matches. In GoF, even Mr. Weasley, who actually works with Muggle stuff, is baffled by the matches. The problem with this is that Snape, being Head of Slytherin, would not likely throw around obviously Muggle terms so casually. Lucius might be able to excuse some Muggle blood in Snape's family but it would still be unseemly to draw attention to it. It's also possible that this is just a slipup by J.K.R.; that it's just a common word and she didn't know when she wrote CoS that she'd later be including a bit about matches in GoF. The fact that no one reacted to Snape saying "matchbox" supports this idea. But then maybe it's another hint (as I suspect is Lupin's vampire essay) that doesn't mean anything to the characters but is aimed at the readers, if that makes sense.
    Another reason I have for suspecting that Snape's not a pureblood is that there was no mention of Snape's name on Sirius' family tree. There's been nothing to suggest that the Snapes would've been removed from the tree; Severus was taught (or at least had access to information about) Dark Magic before he started at Hogwarts, so the Snapes, had they been purebloods, probably would've fit in with the Blacks and Malfoys just fine. UNLESS, as I mentioned above, Snape's parents were on the Light side. I just came up with this as I was typing this update, actually, but now that I think of it, it makes sense. Plus, it's cool having that complexity where they're on the side of good but they (or Snape's father, anyway) isn't/aren't really good people.

    Yes, in fact, I'm going to make this my new pet theory: Snape's parents were on the side of good but they weren't the greatest parents. We know from Snape's memories that his father was abusive and judging by Snape's personality, I'd say he didn't have a loving, supportive relationship with his mother. So he started studying the Dark Arts because it was forbidden to him. And then he found that he was good at it and because he was studying in secret, his parents couldn't judge him and tell him he wasn't doing well enough. Then when Snape was in his late teens or early twenties, after he'd joined the Death Eaters, he realized that he was on the wrong side and he decided to do what he thought was right, not just react to his parents. And now that Voldemort's back, the Order somehow needs Snape's parents' help. Maybe they've moved away or there was some falling-out between Snape's parents and the members of the Order. So now Snape's the only one who can go and ask them for help and THAT'S what Dumbledore sent him to do at the end of GoF.
    Then again, I got all excited about Mark Evans and it turns out he's not important at all (according to J.K.R. herself) so we'll see how this one pans out.
    Update 7/12/05: If that's true (the Snapes were on the Good side) then we don't know whether they're purebloods or not. They could be because being on the Good side would be grounds for removal from the Black family tree. But then there would've been a whole family of three (assuming Snape doesn't have any siblings) removed and that should've caught Harry's eye. It also would've been very odd for Sirius to know about the Snapes' having been on the tree and removed but not to tell Harry about it, given that he didn't hesitate to tell Harry how he was related to the Malfoys.
    Maybe this is all for naught anyway because James is supposed to be a pureblood and there's no mention of the Potters being on Sirius' tree either. Sirius might have neglected to mention Snape but there's no way he wouldn't tell Harry about his father, if he were on the tree. But are we sure James is supposed to be a pureblood (the way the Blacks would characterize a pureblood)? It's possible his family was wealthy but part-Muggle. Given how surnames are inherited, Magical society appears to be patrilineal, therefore if the magic is on James' mother's side then the Potters could have never been included in the Blacks' tree in the first place.
    We've been waiting all along to hear the big revelations about Snape's past in book 6 so watch this space for more discussion on about Monday...

Why is Snape mean to Hermione?

    This one's going to be a little short but I've seen it brought up in several places and I wanted to address it. Above, I touched on the fact that Snape doesn't pick on all the Muggleborn students or even all the Gryffindors personally. We've only seen him pick on Harry, Neville and Hermione. Neville appears to be the worst-performing student in his class, so that one's obvious. With Harry, it's mainly that he reminds Snape of James but also because Harry misbehaves a lot and he treats Snape with as little respect as he can get away with, so Harry's not entirely innocent.
    Hermione's a different matter. She excels at Potions and she's (generally) well-behaved. Even the one time she did misbehave around Snape, when she broke into his office on CoS, he assumed it had been Harry.
    I think a lot of Snape's dislike of Hermione is based on a misperception on Snape's part. I think he thinks she's like Sirius and James - doing well without having to try hard and being popular among both the students and teachers without deserving it. Obviously, she does work hard and she isn't popular but that might not be so obvious to Snape. A lot goes on outside the teachers' presence, so it's reasonable to think Snape mistakenly believes she's popular like Harry among the other students. And she does seem to be highly thought of by all the other teachers, except Trelawney. The scene from the Penseive of Snape and the Marauders taking their DADA O.W.L. implies that James and Sirius never had to put much effort into studying whereas Snape put a lot of effort into it; there's another reason for him to be jealous of them. Hermione's proximity to Harry probably makes Snape more likely to draw parallels between her and James and Sirius.
    Also, as I noted above, Hermione draws attention to herself more so than the other students. Not that there's anything wrong with her doing that but it does make Snape notice her more. He picks on her a lot more than he picks on Ron, for example, because he doesn't have as much of a reason to pick on Ron, apart from the fact that Ron is Harry's friend.

Werewolves

    Just a little for now but I'll probably add more to this section as I think of more. I've been thinking about what we can learn from the Penseive scene where Snape's taking his DADA O.W.L.. My first impression was that Snape is very studious and puts a lot of pressure on himself to do well but I've since been wondering if there's more to it than that. We know one of the questions was about werewolves. Does that mean anything? Was it just there so we could see the interaction between the Marauders (showing how they were a bit careless about protecting Remus' secret) or did it also have something to do with Snape's intense concentration during the test?
    The Prank took place during their sixth year so Snape taking the O.W.L.s doesn't yet know about Lupin. In PoA, he clearly feels strongly about werewolves (see the Vampire section). The question is: does he feel that way because of Lupin or did he have a problem with werewolves to begin with? From the pre-HBP evidence, either seems plausible.

Theories/Musings not directly related to Snape:

Is Pettigrew going to kill Lupin with his silver hand at some point? I hope not but it seems likely.

Who's going to die in book 5? Hagrid. Sirius! I meant Sirius. Just a little typo, there. Heh.

Is Dumbledore an Animagus? No.

Being a little less glib now, what's the deal with Fawkes? According to JKR, Dumbledore is about 150. Fawkes gave the feathers for Harry's and Voldemort's wands, meaning Fawkes is at least 50. That's fine with me; phoenixes are supposed to live a really long time. Here's my problem: When Fawkes dies and is resurrected from the ashes, and Harry witnesses it (in book 2) Dumbledore acts like this is a routine occurrence. Meaning he must've seen Fawkes do it at least a few times. Even given that he knew it was normal for phoenixes, he wouldn't have been so blasé about it if he'd never seen it before. So how come Dumbledore's had Fawkes long enough to have seen this a few times? I was under the impression that the phoenix's life cycle was a thousand years long. Obviously, it's possible that in the Harry Potter universe, phoenixes die and are reborn much more frequently (and if that can happen then maybe there can be sunlight-tolerant vampire Potions Masters too...).

Is Crookshanks really Lilly/Arabella Figg/Dumbledore/yer mama? No. First of all, Crookshanks is male and so far all the animagi we've seen have been the same sex in both human and animal form. Second of all, Lilly's dead; JKR specifically said that neither of Harry's parents would appear in the series alive or as ghosts. Third of all, there are too darn many animagi already, as I pointed out above (in the vampire section). Fourth, and probably most importantly, if Crookshanks were really a wizard, he'd have known who Sirius was (once he saw Sirius in his human form) and would've had no reason not to turn him in.
Fifth, and more importantly than all that; J.K.R. said he's not an animagus and he's part-Kneazle.

What's the deal with the cover of PoA? On the American cover illustration (by Mary GrandPré), there's Harry and Hermione riding Buckbeak on the front, with Sirius in the window, about to be rescued. On the inside front cover, we see Wormtail, sitting on a piece of masonry on the outside of the castle, for some reason. Then on the back, there's the Dementors, what appears to be Crookshanks under the Whomping Willow, Harry's Patronus on the far side of the lake... and some doglike creature running out towards the lake. Lupin, you may say? It can't be Lupin because directly above him is the moon, nowhere near full. Therefore Lupin would not be in his wolf form. Is this just artistic license, since the waning moon looks prettier? This seems likely, since we know this picture depicts the events on the night when Sirius got away, and the moon was full and Lupin was the wolf that night. Still, it seems weird that such an obvious detail would have been ignored.

Who's that on the cover of OotP? Again the American cover: Who's that in the doorway in the upper right corner of the back cover? It's not Sirius because he's standing behind that other door. The weird thing is that there's the shadow of a person but just a wisp of smoke or something in the doorway. Which makes me think it represents Sirius somehow. If the illustrations were done by JKR herself, I'd be more inclined to think this was a clue that Sirius' death may not have been as straightforward as it appeared but as it is, we can't read too much into it, since it's just the artist's interpretation and she doesn't know what's going to happen in the next two books.