Latest Posts by dreamsp023 - Page 3

Yearly reminder that J.K. Rowling’s awesome autistic feminist women’s and human’s rights activist chemistry teacher whom Snape was heavily inspired by (!) wrote a Harry Potter fanfiction which you can read by clicking the hyperlink. It’s very short (not even 400 words), so I definitely recommend taking a look. One can expect to finish it within two or three minutes depending on reading pace.

As a super awesome side note, here’s an essay in memorandum written by a close friend of his celebrating his life (and closely and often detailing the multitude of striking similarities between him and Snape and his relationship with the character). Here is the condensed version.

If you have the time, I recommend reading the original essay, though the writer is very good and provides a lot of insightful context in both. I think she (forgive me if the writer is a he; I haven’t read the essay since last year, I’m afraid, but I will after making this post) does a good job of giving two sides of the story and not being entirely biased toward her/his friend.

​I used bold and italic lettering in hope of providing an easier reading experience to this text post. I hope this was helpful. Have a great day.

you cant go back

Happy birthday to Severus Snape! the edition is done in Shuffles

It seems like you somehow manage to have one foot in the marauders fandom and one in the snape fandom and I’m so impressed. How do you do it?

Also, since you get to see both sides of things I’m wondering what you like the most about each fandom?

Ok this is an interesting question! Honestly I think I’m able to do this, and do this enjoyably, because I really try to make an effort to not moralize. This hasn’t always been how I interacted with fiction in the past, so it’s been a tricky process of learning how to do this with consistency. But it is something that I think is very important for me to do, not only because I have a better time in fandom when I'm not moralizing, but also because it inspires a sort of self reflection and allows me to practice empathy in a way that’s feels more analytical than emotional/inherent. And in the case of navigating two fandoms that have a built in tension between them, this becomes especially helpful.

The tension between the snape and marauders fandom almost always comes down to moralizing. The back and forth arguments between fans are usually rooted in the idea that the other character is not only morally flawed, but more morally flawed than theirs. If you look at any anti Snape or anti James post there’s an underlying agenda that’s trying to prove one is worse than the other. This is pretty irritating to me because I find it to be very boring, silly, and just missing the point of the characters and themes. But this is also irritating because I find that it's ineffective in producing any real meaningful analysis on these characters. Because the goal is not to understand that character, but to condemn them.

(This doesn’t mean that I think you shouldn’t examine the behavior of the characters, just that assigning a moral judgment to that behavior outside the world of that character leads to heavily biased analysis (meaning making it personal and about your standard of morality leads to a messy understanding of the character and story))

Going back to the tension between these fandoms, I think when you’re busy trying to prove how shitty a fictional character is you have a hard time separating them from their fans. Because it’s not really about the character anymore it’s about you and your personal feelings and beliefs.

I very frequently run into posts talking about “snape defenders” and “marauders defenders”, like this is some kind of battle where a side needs to be picked, and then picking a side is a reflection of your morality and politics (I’ve seen marauders fans imply that “snape defenders” are fascists or fascist sympathizers and I’ve seen snape fans call marauders fans “class traitors”, all in the last couple days mind you).

I’m going to be honest and say that whenever this pops up it’s gets pretty frustrating, frustrating because it feels like people are just using these characters as avatars for larger discussions they actually want to be having, but because these characters have specific stories, motivations, and complexities it makes this extremely messy (want to vent about the cult of conservatism that's growing all around us? Bring out the Snape Ken doll and talk about how he deserved his bullying (if he even was bullied)! Hate feeling the weight of capitalism on your chest while the class divide grows larger and larger? Call James “bourgeois scum”!)

(Or as @sideprince wisely said, it’s a way to be political without actually engaging in politics)

So yes I find this tiring, but I also really get it. I have done some form of this myself plenty of times. I am not immune to moralizing or having these same type of strong emotional reactions to a fictional character. In fact, I had this very recently when I watched “Girls” for the first time last month. Until maybe this week I felt a strong hatred for the character “Adam”. This hatred came from seeing him do something in a scene that I considered to be morally repugnant. The scene itself was incredibly graphic and triggering to the point where I had to stop watching the show for a couple days. The disgust response firing in my brain made it so I was incapable of viewing his character as anything but a POS, and all the complexities of him were lost because I refused to engage with them. So all his actions after that were viewed with a moral judgement from me. I mean even when he was being funny, sweet, or just interesting I felt incredibly annoyed because I desperately didn’t want to like him. However I was cognizant of the fact that I was having this sort of moral reaction to fiction because this is a show that is defined by its complex, complicated, and realistic characters, who have all done some very questionable things, and yet he was the only character getting this treatment in my head. So feeling frustrated with my own hypocrisy I decided that I needed to start approaching this differently.

So I made a choice to look at his action, the one that I found disgusting, and start breaking it down: Why did he do that? What was it saying about his relation to shame, power, control, violence, sex, gender, etc.? How else has he reacted to those issues in the show? I kept asking those types of questions, on and on, until suddenly I wasn’t just thinking about the disgusting act itself, but the character. The act stopped being about my own feelings and trauma and became about him.

That’s what I do with the marauders and snape, that’s what I strive to do with any fictional character, because to me that’s the most enjoyable way to engage with fiction. And I find that the fun I have in fandom is greatly limited when I’m pissed at a character, because it makes it difficult to interact with others who are their fans. If I see that someone is playing with that character, a little voice would go, “but what about my anger?” followed by a sharp sting. That type of anger, that moral anger, is personal, but this character is public, it lives beyond me and my feelings. My anger is mine, it never belonged to the public.

And I have at some point felt that same type of moral disgust/anger for both the marauders and snape. But I zeroed in on what specific action was making me feel that way, tried to understand why I had that reaction in the first place, and then went back to the action itself and tried to contextualize it within the character and story so it was removed from myself.

That’s how I’ve been helping myself with the moralizing issue. I’ll still have these reactions in the future, I might even have one on here, but I'll keep working on it. Because either way I love all of these characters and I want to continue to be able to exist in both fandoms without having to choose a side, or even lean a certain way. When you're not trying to win the war on which character was the Shittiest™ the pressure turns off and you can just enjoy these multifaceted characters with their many flaws and many strengths.

And as for what I like most about each fandom: I adore the snapedom because I've always felt that the best meta in the entire hp fandom came from there. Honestly the whole reason I love snape so much wasn't because I ever felt particularly identified with him, but because I read a billion incredible metas and analyses about him and truly came to appreciate his complexities.

For the marauders side I think I really enjoy the camaraderie, there are a lot of really sweet and cool people I’ve talked to on here and that's always been a blast!

I've been looking for a post like this since I learned more about autism! ∞🏳️‍🌈

Talking to your autistic friends about autistic snape like

what is "FD"?

FD is “Forever Dawn."  It was the original sequel to Twilight (Before New Moon and Eclipse were written) and was what Breaking Dawn is based on.   From Stephenie Meyer’s website:

The basic story is the same. Bella and Edward get married and go to Isle Esme for their honeymoon. Bella gets pregnant with Renesmee. The birth just about kills Bella, but Edward makes her a vampire in time. Jacob imprints on Renesmee. Alice has a vision of the Volturi coming to destroy the Cullens with the "immortal child” as their excuse. Alice bails. Bella’s shielding abilities turn the tide in the Cullen’s favor, along with Alice bringing home another half-vampire to prove that Nessie isn’t a danger.

The things that are different:

Jacob and Bella are not nearly so close. None of the events of New Moon or Eclipse exist; Edward never leaves, so Bella and Jacob never bond. Jacob’s feelings for Bella remain at crush level.

Due in part to Jacob being a smaller character, the werewolf pack is only sketchily developed. It exists as a whole, but there isn’t much information about the individuals. Most of the wolves do not have names.

The entire story is written in Bella’s perspective. Because of this, there is a lot more emphasis on the pregnancy phase.

Jacob isn’t there at the delivery, naturally, so he imprints on Renesmee a few weeks later when Bella is visiting Charlie.

With no New Moon or Eclipse, Victoria and Laurent are both still alive. Laurent stays happily with Irina and sides with the Cullens in the confrontation with the Volturi. It is Victoria rather than Irina who informs on the Cullens to the Volturi. She creates a new friend, Riley, to make the actual accusation. She doesn’t want Aro to know about her agenda—or the fact that the baby is only half-vampire, of which she is aware.

The wolves kill Victoria. She is the only casualty at the final confrontation.

The last chapter ends the same way, but there is an epilogue. It involves Max (J. Jenk’s assistant). Bella’s initial interaction with him is a little bit longer and, feeling she owes him a favor, she gives him her number and tells him she will help him out in return if he ever needs a favor of his own. Max gets himself into some trouble, and Bella gets to play Superman.

I once sat in an Catholic Studies lecture where a professor argued in all seriousness that Snape, by the end, was the most moral person in the entire series. He based his case on this passage:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%205:43-48&version=NIV

Snape’s the only character who comes close to ‘love thy enemy’, because he’s sacrificed his life and reputation in order to aid those who despise him or have failed him. Most of the other characters are fighting because the people they love are at risk. He shows genuine remorse, and genuinely seeks to do better. I don’t know that I wholly agreed with the professor, but it was a compelling case. If you’re a consequentialist, Snape did far far more good than evil. Saving lives > being a bitch to toads and their owners.

Having studied my entire basic education in a Catholic school, I can say that from a Christian-Catholic moral perspective—one based on repentance but especially on penance as key pillars for earning a place in Heaven and reaching God—Severus fits perfectly as the ultimate example of the stray sheep who returns to the flock. He is the prodigal son; he’s Saul of Tarsus, who persecuted and judged Christians but later became one of their most devoted followers.

From a purely Catholic viewpoint, Severus is the perfect acolyte because he embodies the teachings of Jesus, who always advocated for those who strayed from the path. In Catholic thought, there’s great reverence for those who make mistakes, choose the wrong path, but later find redemption. And it’s not just about changing one’s beliefs—it’s about taking a painful, thorn-filled path where suffering itself demonstrates one’s worthiness for the Kingdom of Heaven.

Severus doesn’t just repent; he imposes upon himself a life solely dedicated to atoning for his sins. He renounces any personal happiness or fulfillment in order to be considered worthy of returning to the “flock.” It’s a deeply Catholic figure, now that I think about it—something I hadn’t realized before, but it makes perfect sense. Maybe that’s why I find everything he does so justifiable? Probably because, even though I’m not a believer and never have been, I grew up in an environment where figures like Severus were held up as examples of unwavering willpower and strength of character.

Let’s not forget that Catholicism also praises humility and condemns arrogance. The humility of doing good deeds without seeking recognition is considered virtuous, while the arrogance of wanting to be seen as a hero is sinful. Jesus sacrifices himself on the cross under extreme torture—that’s the Catholic ideal of the martyr. Your sins are forgiven not only if you repent but also if you become penitent. Severus is the ultimate penitent figure, and I probably have a very biased view of this because of the environment in which I was raised.

I will always value the sheep that returns to the flock more than the one that never left, because the former is the one that needs help the most. That’s how I was taught—that Christ didn’t care for the rich or for those with intact morals; he sought out the poor, the accused, the sinners, because they were the ones who needed a guide.

The priests really brainwashed me, my God—but it definitely makes sense. You can take the girl out of the Catholic school, but you can’t take the Catholic school out of the girl.

severus snape and the ongoing theme of “insufficient masculinity” (aka homophobia/transphobia)

snape is introduced at a young age wearing a “women’s blouse”, which petunia uses to mock him

snape, when appearing to neville as a boggart, wears neville’s grandmother’s clothing when neville uses riddikilus on him

during “snape’s worst memory”, james turns snape (who he sees as a potential romantic rival) upside down and strips him/humiliates him in an attempt to impress lily, and after snape yells at lily and calls her a mudblood, lily covers up her (justifiably) hurt feelings by commenting on his dirty underwear

snape’s patronus, confirmed by jkr to be a symbol of “true love, love everlasting”, unlike james’ stag, mirrors lily’s patronus by being a doe (which much of the fandom considers to be a sign of obsession, despite never levelling the same accusations against tonks’ wolf patronus mirroring remus’)

most, if not all, of the significantly positive/grounding forces in severus’ life are women (eileen, lily, narcissa, mcgonagall) 

feel free to add more if u can think of any