![[personal profile]](http://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I watched this movie yesterday that got me thinking about Snape in a weird way. I should at least partially blame ![[livejournal.com profile]](http://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
sydpad's
I'm going to include spoilers for the movie and probably ultimately talk more about The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence than about HP, but it did eventually lead to Snape...
Like many John Ford movies and even more Westerns, this one seems very concerned with Being a Man, but the ending sort of left me thinking about what it was actually saying, if anything. The story is basically this:
Liberty Valence terrorizes a small Western town. The only man who can really stand up to him is Tom (John Wayne). Ransom (James Stewart) is an attorney and wants to bring the law to the town, so that Liberty goes to jail. Tom laughs at this--the only way to protect yourself against Liberty is with a gun. Tom is clearly sweet on Hallie (Vera Miles), who agrees with Ransom.
Ransom takes a job at the restaurant, which leads to some pointed lines about his masculinity, even from Hallie who clearly likes him. "Where's your reading and writing got you--in an apron!" When the owner asks Ransom to bring some food out Hallie gets angry--"Who ever heard of a man waiting tables?" Ransom has no problem with it--he's a new kind of man, not defining himself by superficial gender roles. Liberty mocks "the new waitress" and Tom steps in to protect him.
Ransom is angry at Tom for fighting his battles but does start learning how to shoot from him. He also starts a school teaching everyone (the class is multi-racial with both men and women) how to read and write and encouraging them to push for statehood so that they’re under government protection. Ransom nominates Tom to represent them at a convention. Tom turns it down and Ransom and another man are elected. Liberty attacks the other representative so that Ransom realizes he has to face him. Just as Liberty is going to kill him, Ransom shoots and kills Liberty. Tom arrives later and sees Hallie clearly in love with Ransom. He goes home and burns down the house he was building for her in a masculine rage.
So Ransom's won, but he doesn't feel comfortable that he's now known for being the man who shot Liberty. "It's bad enough to kill a man," he says, "but to build a life on it..." Tom reveals he didn't kill Liberty at all. Tom was across the street and saw him about to get killed, so he killed Liberty. Ransom says he saved his life, Tom says he now wishes he hadn't, since Hallie (who was never interested in him anyway) is his girl. This is all told by Ransom years later when he returns after a successful career for Tom's funeral. The press decides not to print the story, because Ransom's killing Liberty has become a legend by that point. Returning to Washington with Hallie, Ransom receives the first class treatment on the train because, he's told, "Nothing's too good for the Man who Shot Liberty Valence!"
Sorry for that long summary, but here's my point. Tom seems to be the man of the past and Ransom the man of the future. Even romantically, Ransom wins. In Tom's world the toughest men protect everyone. Ransom thinks society needs to protect everyone equally through the law. Even with Hallie Tom basically offers protection--she can rely on him as her husband. Ransom's lessons to Hallie may seem a bit condescending at times, but he actually is making her more equal by teaching her to read and write, a skill she'll have whether she's with him or not. (Also he's not teaching her in order to win her.)
But Tom is the tragic hero, really, because he sacrifices himself for Ransom's success. Here's where I'm eventually getting to Snape, I swear. First, Tom is almost like a father figure who's protecting Ransom so that he can do the things he's meant to do. It's Ransom who goes into the future both by having a career and getting married. Tom dies unknown and unmarried. Ransom insists he be buried with his boots and gun, and is told he hasn't carried a gun for years, further proof that his form of law and order has become obsolete.
But what's interesting is the problem of the title. Somebody *did* shoot Liberty Valence, because he needed killing. That person wasn't Ransom--though Ransom didn't intentionally take credit for it dishonestly. He thought he killed him. His learning that he didn't seems to make him happy, as if he felt tainted by killing, even in self-defense. Yet the fact remains that him being a killer, or at least people thinking he was, is a part of his success. It's like he needed this injection of old-fashioned manliness to make his real agenda of the law protecting everyone something people could get behind. When it came down to it, he proved could get rid of the bad guys. He had to essentially absorb Tom into himself and carry an essential part of him with him in order to succeed. It was Tom who gave him the boost to start his own career.
When Tom confesses that he killed Liberty he says it was "cold-blooded murder. I can live with that." That's where I'm getting to Snape. Because there's just something interesting the way that Ransom and Tom are almost like a hero divided, where Ransom is the "pure" hero. His purity is so important that he originally leaves the convention, not wanting the nomination because it’s based on his killing. When Tom tells him he didn't kill, he somehow feels able to re-enter the room and accept the nomination. Meanwhile Tom is not only a killer, but doesn't even qualify it as part of the previous code of the wild west. Liberty wasn't outgunned by Tom, as everyone thinks he was outgunned by Ransom, because Tom was hidden across the street. He just took him out--it was murder and he, unlike Ransom, can "live with that."
See where I'm getting at with Snape? HBP is a book that also puts importance on the damage of murder on a person's soul. Student characters have come close to murder, but Rowling has never had them cross the line even into manslaughter--even Ginny would have a hard time bouncing back from her role in CoS if anyone had actually died (even if she was possessed). In HBP you've got Draco almost killing Ron and Katie, and Harry almost killing Draco. Riddle murders several people and becomes less human-like. We learn that murder is central to his unnatural life and everything he's about. Draco's given the task of murder to be one of his followers and ultimately realizes he doesn't want to cross the line and "split his soul."
Which is all great, but it's not unusual when you have a story that puts out the idea that killing is wrong to wind up at the question: So how do we get rid of Liberty Valence? In movies they'll often have the hero offer the villain mercy, which is rejected, and then the villain dies trying to commit some other awful act. So he's dead, but the hero is still pure. That's the thing about keeping the soul pure--it's often a good thing, but sometimes it can get close to selfishness, if you feel like the hero is putting the state of his own soul before others. Ransom sort of gets to have it every way at once: he's brave for facing off with Liberty (once not doing that becomes connected to other people getting hurt), he doesn't kill, but he doesn't die either. He benefits from something he didn't do, but didn't intentionally lie about it.
We don't yet know how Voldemort's going to be destroyed in HP, and obviously Snape’s not going to be the one to do it, but I still feel like Snape's got some parallels with Tom here in that he's the older man who, if he's DDM, is taking on the dirty work of the good side. We don't know if Snape's ever killed anyone but Dumbledore, but either way Snape seems to be the one saying, "Cold-blooded murder. I can live with that." Even while he's helping Dumbledore steer the younger man away from that bad choice. (Harry may never have to actually kill.)
So I found myself making the connection in the way the "good side" is sort of split with this one figure taking the sins on himself and then going away with them. Tom doesn't literally die in TMWSLV (take hope, Snape fans!) until he's an old man, but he does die symbolically and willingly before that, acknowledging that it is Ransom and not him who will shape the future--a future he doesn't belong to. He seems to know this even as he rejects the nomination for the convention himself. He'll watch over Ransom's election and keep order, but he doesn't see himself in this new way of doing things. He can't really change or become this new man--he may be "good" while Liberty is "bad" but they are two of a kind where Ransom is not.
Similarly, Snape is not able to battle Voldemort the way Harry can (with his secret love power or whatever). He possibly doesn't personally understand Dumbledore's plans for him (and Draco) any more than Tom really understands where Ransom's coming from. But he is willing to be a sort of midwife to it all just the same, bringing about a new world he may not have a part in himself. Ironically, the very things that make him an ill fit are what possibly make him so needed by the good side. Ransom doesn't look down on Tom. He respects him both for what he did for him and for the sacrifices he made. Ransom can't ever be completely dismissive of the type of man Tom was given what he owes him. As I said, he has to carry part of Tom with him into the new world because of that, and that's the way Tom really doesn't just die forgotten.
I kind of hope Harry has to carry Snape with him the same way.:-) I hope Draco carries him with him that way too, but Draco's more of a given in that sense.
Btw, this wound up much longer than I anticipated, and in the middle of it I got my eyes checked. They’re still dilated so I apologize for any mistakes there might be. The whole thing might be written in wingdings for all I know right now.
sydpad's I'm going to include spoilers for the movie and probably ultimately talk more about The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence than about HP, but it did eventually lead to Snape...
Like many John Ford movies and even more Westerns, this one seems very concerned with Being a Man, but the ending sort of left me thinking about what it was actually saying, if anything. The story is basically this:
Liberty Valence terrorizes a small Western town. The only man who can really stand up to him is Tom (John Wayne). Ransom (James Stewart) is an attorney and wants to bring the law to the town, so that Liberty goes to jail. Tom laughs at this--the only way to protect yourself against Liberty is with a gun. Tom is clearly sweet on Hallie (Vera Miles), who agrees with Ransom.
Ransom takes a job at the restaurant, which leads to some pointed lines about his masculinity, even from Hallie who clearly likes him. "Where's your reading and writing got you--in an apron!" When the owner asks Ransom to bring some food out Hallie gets angry--"Who ever heard of a man waiting tables?" Ransom has no problem with it--he's a new kind of man, not defining himself by superficial gender roles. Liberty mocks "the new waitress" and Tom steps in to protect him.
Ransom is angry at Tom for fighting his battles but does start learning how to shoot from him. He also starts a school teaching everyone (the class is multi-racial with both men and women) how to read and write and encouraging them to push for statehood so that they’re under government protection. Ransom nominates Tom to represent them at a convention. Tom turns it down and Ransom and another man are elected. Liberty attacks the other representative so that Ransom realizes he has to face him. Just as Liberty is going to kill him, Ransom shoots and kills Liberty. Tom arrives later and sees Hallie clearly in love with Ransom. He goes home and burns down the house he was building for her in a masculine rage.
So Ransom's won, but he doesn't feel comfortable that he's now known for being the man who shot Liberty. "It's bad enough to kill a man," he says, "but to build a life on it..." Tom reveals he didn't kill Liberty at all. Tom was across the street and saw him about to get killed, so he killed Liberty. Ransom says he saved his life, Tom says he now wishes he hadn't, since Hallie (who was never interested in him anyway) is his girl. This is all told by Ransom years later when he returns after a successful career for Tom's funeral. The press decides not to print the story, because Ransom's killing Liberty has become a legend by that point. Returning to Washington with Hallie, Ransom receives the first class treatment on the train because, he's told, "Nothing's too good for the Man who Shot Liberty Valence!"
Sorry for that long summary, but here's my point. Tom seems to be the man of the past and Ransom the man of the future. Even romantically, Ransom wins. In Tom's world the toughest men protect everyone. Ransom thinks society needs to protect everyone equally through the law. Even with Hallie Tom basically offers protection--she can rely on him as her husband. Ransom's lessons to Hallie may seem a bit condescending at times, but he actually is making her more equal by teaching her to read and write, a skill she'll have whether she's with him or not. (Also he's not teaching her in order to win her.)
But Tom is the tragic hero, really, because he sacrifices himself for Ransom's success. Here's where I'm eventually getting to Snape, I swear. First, Tom is almost like a father figure who's protecting Ransom so that he can do the things he's meant to do. It's Ransom who goes into the future both by having a career and getting married. Tom dies unknown and unmarried. Ransom insists he be buried with his boots and gun, and is told he hasn't carried a gun for years, further proof that his form of law and order has become obsolete.
But what's interesting is the problem of the title. Somebody *did* shoot Liberty Valence, because he needed killing. That person wasn't Ransom--though Ransom didn't intentionally take credit for it dishonestly. He thought he killed him. His learning that he didn't seems to make him happy, as if he felt tainted by killing, even in self-defense. Yet the fact remains that him being a killer, or at least people thinking he was, is a part of his success. It's like he needed this injection of old-fashioned manliness to make his real agenda of the law protecting everyone something people could get behind. When it came down to it, he proved could get rid of the bad guys. He had to essentially absorb Tom into himself and carry an essential part of him with him in order to succeed. It was Tom who gave him the boost to start his own career.
When Tom confesses that he killed Liberty he says it was "cold-blooded murder. I can live with that." That's where I'm getting to Snape. Because there's just something interesting the way that Ransom and Tom are almost like a hero divided, where Ransom is the "pure" hero. His purity is so important that he originally leaves the convention, not wanting the nomination because it’s based on his killing. When Tom tells him he didn't kill, he somehow feels able to re-enter the room and accept the nomination. Meanwhile Tom is not only a killer, but doesn't even qualify it as part of the previous code of the wild west. Liberty wasn't outgunned by Tom, as everyone thinks he was outgunned by Ransom, because Tom was hidden across the street. He just took him out--it was murder and he, unlike Ransom, can "live with that."
See where I'm getting at with Snape? HBP is a book that also puts importance on the damage of murder on a person's soul. Student characters have come close to murder, but Rowling has never had them cross the line even into manslaughter--even Ginny would have a hard time bouncing back from her role in CoS if anyone had actually died (even if she was possessed). In HBP you've got Draco almost killing Ron and Katie, and Harry almost killing Draco. Riddle murders several people and becomes less human-like. We learn that murder is central to his unnatural life and everything he's about. Draco's given the task of murder to be one of his followers and ultimately realizes he doesn't want to cross the line and "split his soul."
Which is all great, but it's not unusual when you have a story that puts out the idea that killing is wrong to wind up at the question: So how do we get rid of Liberty Valence? In movies they'll often have the hero offer the villain mercy, which is rejected, and then the villain dies trying to commit some other awful act. So he's dead, but the hero is still pure. That's the thing about keeping the soul pure--it's often a good thing, but sometimes it can get close to selfishness, if you feel like the hero is putting the state of his own soul before others. Ransom sort of gets to have it every way at once: he's brave for facing off with Liberty (once not doing that becomes connected to other people getting hurt), he doesn't kill, but he doesn't die either. He benefits from something he didn't do, but didn't intentionally lie about it.
We don't yet know how Voldemort's going to be destroyed in HP, and obviously Snape’s not going to be the one to do it, but I still feel like Snape's got some parallels with Tom here in that he's the older man who, if he's DDM, is taking on the dirty work of the good side. We don't know if Snape's ever killed anyone but Dumbledore, but either way Snape seems to be the one saying, "Cold-blooded murder. I can live with that." Even while he's helping Dumbledore steer the younger man away from that bad choice. (Harry may never have to actually kill.)
So I found myself making the connection in the way the "good side" is sort of split with this one figure taking the sins on himself and then going away with them. Tom doesn't literally die in TMWSLV (take hope, Snape fans!) until he's an old man, but he does die symbolically and willingly before that, acknowledging that it is Ransom and not him who will shape the future--a future he doesn't belong to. He seems to know this even as he rejects the nomination for the convention himself. He'll watch over Ransom's election and keep order, but he doesn't see himself in this new way of doing things. He can't really change or become this new man--he may be "good" while Liberty is "bad" but they are two of a kind where Ransom is not.
Similarly, Snape is not able to battle Voldemort the way Harry can (with his secret love power or whatever). He possibly doesn't personally understand Dumbledore's plans for him (and Draco) any more than Tom really understands where Ransom's coming from. But he is willing to be a sort of midwife to it all just the same, bringing about a new world he may not have a part in himself. Ironically, the very things that make him an ill fit are what possibly make him so needed by the good side. Ransom doesn't look down on Tom. He respects him both for what he did for him and for the sacrifices he made. Ransom can't ever be completely dismissive of the type of man Tom was given what he owes him. As I said, he has to carry part of Tom with him into the new world because of that, and that's the way Tom really doesn't just die forgotten.
I kind of hope Harry has to carry Snape with him the same way.:-) I hope Draco carries him with him that way too, but Draco's more of a given in that sense.
Btw, this wound up much longer than I anticipated, and in the middle of it I got my eyes checked. They’re still dilated so I apologize for any mistakes there might be. The whole thing might be written in wingdings for all I know right now.
![[identity profile]](http://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
Although, the film is never entirely clear who shot Liberty Valance. The two bullets are never seen, so it's possible- faintly, miraculously possible that Ransom was the man, and Tom lied because it was the only thing that would get Ransom back in to the fight for statehood. I prefer your ideas, though.
(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
It occurs to me that Harry already is carrying a little bit of Snape – his memories from the Pensieve. Knowing someone at their worst moment would create that kind of bond even when you don’t want it, I would think.
(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
Ransom can't ever be completely dismissive of the type of man Tom was given what he owes him. As I said, he has to carry part of Tom with him into the new world because of that, and that's the way Tom really doesn't just die forgotten.
That's one of the reasons why I have never liked fandom theories that Peter will kill Voldemort, thus making D's prediction "one day you will be glad you saved his life" come true. I feel that such sacrifice should bring redemption and forgiveness,and I can't grant Peter that. He killed Harry's parents, betrayed his own friends [while loyalty and bravery are the 2 central values in the series] and is as despicable as one can get. I believe some things can not be forgiven by people, f.e. Hitler's crimes, and can't imagine Harry forgiving Peter, unlike Snape, let alone carrying any bit of Pettegrew with him anywhere. If Snape doesn't turn out to be The Evil and sacrifices himself, the idea of Harry carrying the man with him will partly reconcile me to his death. It will mean both growth for Harry, becoming more like Dumbledore, and giving Snape at least posthumous recognition. As for Peter, I have no idea what JKR will do with him and will prefer just killing him off screen like Amelia Bones or sending to Azkaban to the sacrifice for the mentioned above reasons.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
Snape seems to be the one saying, "Cold-blooded murder. I can live with that."
This is really interesting; it makes me think about the role Snape has in the Order and the amount of respect he gets from the other members and DD. Possibly I should re-read OotP and HBP, because my memory is really hazy on this point, but do we ever get any indication that Snape is respected by the Order? Or that he isn't respected?
The most noticable thing about Snape is, IMO, his extreme bitterness, and I wonder whether it might not be exacerbated by his not receiving the respect for his job as a spy that he thinks he deserves?
Several fanfics I've read have described Snape as a person who does what have to be done ("cold-blooded murder") and receives no thanks. Rather, he's mistrusted and reviled as a Death Eater by several of his fellow Order members. Often even DD cheerfully takes the fruits of Snape's spying work, but offers no real respect for that. I've got to admit that I like that kind of fics, partly because my opinion of DD isn't very high, but also because they explore that tension between "keeping your soul pure" and "doing what has to be done", and how the focus on purity may become selfish, like you said, and lead to reviling the people who must do the dirty work because no one else will do it.
I kind of like the theory that Snape is so bitter because he is doing the dirty work and no one, not even DD, respects that.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
Just kidding.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
There's waaay too many thoughts swirling around my head to respond coherently... so I'll be incoherent!
Ransom can't ever be completely dismissive of the type of man Tom was given what he owes him. As I said, he has to carry part of Tom with him into the new world because of that, and that's the way Tom really doesn't just die forgotten. I kind of hope Harry has to carry Snape with him the same way.:-) Yeah, kind of like how Dumbledore has a left-hand man in Snape, as it were. I can see Harry developing a similar sort of relationship with Snape, if for some crazy reason he survives-- he has to be 'pure' so he can't have that rage and violence as actually part of his personality, but he can respect it and keep it in a 'safe' form beside him, and make a demonstration of accepting it. I'm fascinated by the sin-eating/scapegoat function of Snape. There's a way in which everything in him goes back to guilt and shame and these primal ideas of wrong-doing. The victorian-villain get-up, and the obsession with rules and rulebreaking, the threat of 'expulsion' (from the garden?), the repression and the occlumency and the mind-reading and concealment. And JKR goes right to the Freud, with having his pants being pulled down as a central memory! Talk about shame! Of course the big difference between Snape and John Wayne (there's a sentence I thought I'd never type!) is that Tom seems less like he thinks there's something wrong in himself, than that really he was just born in the wrong time. He can feel the world changing and that he doesn't fit in it, but he doesn't seem to be hit with the guilt at the soul-level that Snape does. Of course maybe it's just been too long since I've seen the movie, because maybe that level is all being carried by the Girl, in the sense of getting the girl as signifying spiritual completeness. Of course Not Getting the Girl is something else Snape has going on, if you buy into Snape/Lily! Anyhow Tom is comfortable with being the Shadow in a way that Snape isn't-- he can live with cold-blooded murder-- but Snape really seems to be going off the deep end with the guilt sometimes. Can he live with cold-blooded murder?
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
...Ransom and Tom are almost like a hero divided, where Ransom is the "pure" hero. His purity is so important that he originally leaves the convention...
Student characters have come close to murder, but Rowling has never had them cross the line even into manslaughter...
Which is all great, but it's not unusual when you have a story that puts out the idea that killing is wrong to wind up at the question: So how do we get rid of Liberty Valence?
So he's dead, but the hero is still pure. That's the thing about keeping the soul pure--it's often a good thing, but sometimes it can get close to selfishness...
...I still feel like Snape's got some parallels with Tom here in that he's the older man who, if he's DDM, is taking on the dirty work of the good side. We don't know if Snape's ever killed anyone but Dumbledore, but either way Snape seems to be the one saying, "Cold-blooded murder. I can live with that."
Tom doesn't literally die in TMWSLV (snip) until he's an old man, but he does die symbolically and willingly before that, acknowledging that it is Ransom and not him who will shape the future--a future he doesn't belong to.
Ironically, the very things that make him an ill fit are what possibly make him so needed by the good side.
It's the same kind of splitting, in a way, where the good side needs somebody like Snape, but they still revile him for being that thing that they need.
From midwives to spies and encompassing old-fashioned manliness, the whole thing is about the transition generation, which is really a role every generation takes at some point. Ransom and, we presume, Harry, move on, leaving Tom and Snape in the past. Yet Tom and Snape were both in the forward-looking generation at one point, too. Tom was the hero who protected the west, Snape is the man who made mistakes and is eternally atoning. They had their time, now it's someone else's time.
And, maybe that's where Snape and Tom are different. Snape made obviously bad choices while Tom can look back with no regrets. They still take the same role, that of midwife to the birthing of the new adult generation. They both give up their central places, in society, in the Order, and additionally in Snape's case, at Dumbledore's side.
Both characters take somewhat of a clandestine role, too. Snape's is, obviously, spying. Tom hides his feelings for the Girl, promotes Ransom, and sneakily but with complete moral authority, shoots Liberty Valance. In fact, it could have been either, if conditions were just right and Mars was not adversely aspected by Ceres. ;) The question seems answered, but there's always a hint of doubt. Ransom's happy, but you wonder if he ever questions it in the dead of night.
Spies are shunned by society, sure. So are executioners. Both provide valuable services (you may not agree with execution, but in societies where execution takes place, the executioner is valuable to that society), but both carry a certain sinister mystique. In Liberty Valance, Tom takes the role of the executioner, Death in his stealthiest guise, creeping up unexpectedly and taking a soul.
Tom's and Snape's generations do die symbolically. Tom dies symbolically impotent, since he didn't get the Girl. Snape's generation is literally dying off: James, Sirius and Lily are all dead, killed by the generation that went before. But the living examples of this generation are nearly as impotent as Tom symbolically is. Snape, Lupin and Sirius have no children and possibly no prospects for having them (Sirius for sure, but it's up in the air now for Lupin), and who on earth would marry and reproduce with Peter? Lucius and Narcissa have reproduced, but only once. Aside from the Weasleys, who seem to be repopulating the WW single-handedly, too many WW families have only one child, or a set of twins. Whether it's a problem of potency, or of libido, or of difficulty resulting from a magical pregnancy, there aren't a lot of multiple child families.
There is so much to think about in this! I've avoided answering since I had a test tonight, but I don't think that even with a lot more time on my hands, I can mention even half the things I started thinking about here.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: