The man who didn't come to dinner

[sistermagpie]

I had a stray thought today while reading the various theories of Sirius being poisoned, mostly about why I like

Personally, in case anyone's interested, I don't think Sirius was poisoned, nor do I think he was acting reckless when he died. I tend to think that line about the potion is there so that *Harry* can start suspecting Snape of doing some reckless poisoning later, if it's there for any reason at all. Or perhaps the potion will come up later. Heh. It's like fanfic. Everybody knows when Snape introduces a potion in class *somebody* will be accidentally ingesting it by the end of the fic, and it will probably lead to sex somehow.

Anyway, one thing that's been brought up with regards to Snape poisoning someone is his not eating any food at Grimmauld Place--something one might avoid if one knew the food was poisoned. I think again, that would be a little too obvious, like in We Have Always Lived In The Castle when a character is widely considered a murderer because her family was poisoned through the sugar bowl and everyone knows Constance never takes sugar. Regardless, what's interesting is how the topic of Snape's not eating has become an issue.

Technically, I don't think we know he doesn't eat anything at Grimmauld Place, though I suspect he doesn't. I think we're just told he "never stays for dinner." People have said, reasonably, that he doesn't stay for dinner because he doesn't want to socialize with these people any more than he has to. For all we know he's also got a truckload of other responsibilities somewhere. Maybe he's moonlighting at a fast food place in Hogsmeade. We don't know.

But I realized another reason I like the idea of Snape not eating at the place. I'm pretty sure there's a passage in The Count of Monte Cristo, that deals with the hero not eating. Now, I read CoMC (hmm. same initials as Care of Magical Creatures...) in French so for all I know I made up the entire scene through my bad translation and Edmund really refused to remove his galoshes indoors, but I seem to remember that what happened was the Count went to a party at the home of his former fiancé and her husband, one of the conspirators who got him sent to prison for 19 years. Mercedes, his former love, recognizes him as Edmund. She keeps the secret but gets very upset when he refuses an hors d'oeuvre. I mean, seriously upset. She's just frantic that he try her canapé--wtf?

Later it's revealed this is because refusing to eat is a point of honor--you do not accept food in your enemy's house. It appears to be something one could start a duel with if one wanted. Now, it's kind of funny to draw a parallel between Snape and Edmund, since in this story the character most like Edmund would be the guy who spent 13 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit and then broke out. Snape isn't responsible for putting Sirius in prison, though, and Sirius doesn't seem much for archaic traditions. Snape, otoh, I can definitely see holding a Monte Cristo-type grudge and privately vowing never to eat food served in the house of his enemy. Not that anyone would notice--well, other Slytherins might, but they’re not going to be invited to dinner by Molly either.

Snape is, after all, the character in canon who feels bound by a life debt because James Potter was moved to stop a prank by his best friend that never should have happened to begin with--I suspect if there were a fair court of law about such things Snape would be cleared of any life debtedness. Harry, by contrast, appears to feel under no such obligation to Snape for his protection. So if somebody were going to do something like this it would be Snape, imo. I doubt this was the author's intention, but it just seems very Snape to me.

Comments

[trobadora]

That parallel is awesome, and it makes a great deal of sense to me - as you say, a very Snape thing to do.

The life debt thing has bugged me as well - what's up with that? The way Snape is "saved" by James, or Pettigrew by Harry, are supposed to be deeply significant and lead to some kind of magical indebtedness, but Snape saving Harry doesn't? It just makes no sense to me, unless the rule is "it only matters if you're saved by a Gryffindor"...

Incidentally, I don't think Sirius was poisoned either, but did you notice all of the truly reckless/idiotic things he does (like accompanying Harry to the station, or suggesting Harry meet him in Hogsmeade) seem to happen before Christmas? After that (though he doesn't appear much) he seems much closer to his GoF personality to me. (And of all the things one might hold against him, rushing in to help Harry at the Ministry really isn't one!)

[the-gentleman.livejournal.com]

Hmm. I'm not entirely sure that Snape saving Harry's life is cause for a life debt. I think that in the two examples we have, James saving Snape and Harry saving Peter, we have two people who are under no obligation whatsoever to save the other person's life. Snape saving Harry, however, is part of Snape's job as a Hogwarts teacher- they're obliged to act as guardians for the students in their care. Sure, Snape is rather blase when it comes to dangerous potions, but I don't think that he sees saving Harry's life as anything more than another annoying part of his distasteful job.

[trobadora]

two people who are under no obligation whatsoever to save the other person's life

It's also two people who stop themselves from being an accessory to murder, and not allowing murder to go on in front of your very eyes if you can stop it seems like the basic obligation of any human being to me. So James stops Remus from killing Snape, Harry prevents Peter being killed in the Shack, and Snape prevents Harry from falling to his death when Quirrelmort hexes his broom. All three seem to me simply what any decent person would do, and if a debt is owed for one surely it should also be owed for the other.

[dphearson.livejournal.com]

Snape saving Harry, however, is part of Snape's job as a Hogwarts teacher- they're obliged to act as guardians for the students in their care.

Thank you, thank you, thank you for this. It really does seem to be something that many a fan has forgotten- as mean and cruel as Snape can be, his responsibility is for the over all safety of the students.

[trobadora]

Who was Peter being "saved" from but Harry himself? Who was Snape being "saved" from but James' best friend and partner in pranks Sirius.

Yes, in both cases the supposed "saviour" is more like an accessory to murder who gets cold feet at the last moment. You're completely right that it's not really about saving someone from danger, but *sparing* them - which is even worse in its condescension towards both Peter and Snape. Again with the double standards that seem so pervasive in these books at every level.

Also about saving lives and owing debts - the *worst* allegation in that context comes from Dumbledore in PS/SS when he basically tells Harry that Snape only saved his life because of the debt owed to James - meaning that otherwise Snape would cheerfully have let Harry die. (I wonder if that's what the narrative voice is truly trying to convey, and that's why Harry doesn't owe Snape anything?!) This undermines everything Snape stands for in my view - doing what needs doing even when you don't like it, not letting someone die simply because you *can* stop it, helping all those people he loathes...

And you're right about Sirius seeming more reckless pre-Christmas. I feel like characterwise one might say that this is because after Xmas he falls into despair.

We see relatively little of him after Christmas, so it's difficult to judge, but in a more charitable (or less depressing) interpretation, perhaps the attack on Arthur could have been a sort of wake-up call for Sirius? He seems so much more reasonable talking to the twins after that than he did the entire time before. (Perhaps I simply don't want Hermione-the-Queen-of-Exposition to be right all the time...)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Re-posting to make thoughts more coherent:

unless the rule is "it only matters if you're saved by a Gryffindor"...

Seems that way, dunnit? But I think there's also other things the two life debt cases have in common. Who was Peter being "saved" from but Harry himself, in a way, since Harry had reason to *want* Peter dead and also had the power to stop it? Who was Snape being "saved" from but James' best friend and partner in pranks Sirius-same idea. Peter and Snape weren't saved, they were *spared.* It seems to me like a different code of honor that very much assumes that Harry and James were being particularly gracious because Peter and Snape deserved to be killed, Peter for betraying Harry's parents and Snape for poking his nose where it didn't belong and trying to get MWPP in trouble.

That's a pretty old-school moral system there, I think. Snape, by contrast, is actively working to protect Harry from threat. However, if Snape had towered angrily over Harry after the Pensieve scene and then shown mercy as Harry and James did, I can't imagine that being seen in the same light and Harry given a life debt because of it. It really feel like there does have to be some feeling that the victim has earned their death in order to be spared, and perhaps it's the narrative voice that makes that choice. I might not say that in another series, but it could be true here. It's a little barbaric, imo, and not completely out of place. It seems like there's a hint that James and Harry would have been justified in not acting.

And you're right about Sirius seeming more reckless pre-Christmas. I feel like characterwise one might say that this is because after Xmas he falls into despair. In the beginning he's still lively so wanting to try to join in with things maybe, so he takes a risk at the station, envies Harry his fight with Dementors, begs Harry to go to Hogsmeade. Hermione-the-Queen-of-Exposition suggests that Sirius was hoping Harry would be expelled so he'd get to stay with him. I wonder if Sirius came to the conclusion on his own that Harry would never be any way close to him like James was, that he really had no one, and so after Christmas just accepted his fate.

[dphearson.livejournal.com]

Please remember though- that it is Remus saying that to Harry, anbout how Harry's dad saved Severus, and the tone of the voice that is used. It is clear from word choices and tone that Sirius and Remus would not have felt a bit of guilt about Severus dying as much as they would felt about being expelled from school.

On the other hand, looks how the events of how Voldemort was cominbg after the Potters played out. Dumbledore did not trust Sirius to be an effective secret keeper- and with good reason. I don't think that Dumbledore trusted Sirius that much, and i bet that whole incident taught Dumbledore a bit about Sirius recklessness and foolishness.

[dphearson.livejournal.com]

I might not say that in another series, but it could be true here. It's a little barbaric, imo, and not completely out of place. It seems like there's a hint that James and Harry would have been justified in not acting.

I just had to reiterate, again, that it is Remus and Sirius saying this to Harry. Harry is inherently warm and gentle-souled; he would have wanted Peter to see true justice, and not vengence, which is what Remus and Sirius were about to do.

And again, Severus did not earn Remus' respect that year, and he never has it from Sirius. These are people who werre golden boys, and their lives has takebn a terrible turn. There is real disrespect and resentment on the fact that the greasy little boy that they used to make fun of now has a better life, and proven to be useful.

[tasogare-n-hime.livejournal.com]

You make an excellent point. First of all I think there are several reasons for Snape not to stay for dinner and poisoning some one has nothing to do with any of them. For one not only is Sirius there but the place full of people who while they respect his position as a teacher and an order member, just don't LIKE him. Also the children are there and I think he would rather spend as little time with them as he could. There are more i think but none of them come to mind at the moment.

On the poisoning its self though I don't know. Putting that potion in the book and then finding out latter it was used on some one seems to me like a very JK thing to do. I do agree with you on the death thing though, Sirius wasn't being reckless he just made a mistake anyone could have made. (in any case I really should stop reading these post because they are inspiring a plot bunny where Snape is drugging Sirius for sex, and Sirius' behavior is an after affect of the drug....)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Okay, now I'm totally running that fanfic possibility through my head. Thanks!

I definitely agree mentioning the potion and later finding out it was used is very JKR--when I read the book I completely thought that's where it was going and that Kreacher was going to turn out to have poisoned Sirius, but I prefer the idea that whatever Sirius was going through was just what he was going through. I agree with someone somewhere else who pointed out that far from being befuddled Sirius was all-too-aware of exactly where he was and what his prospects were.

With regards to Snape--exactly. Can you imagine him having to sit at dinner with kids who treat him with disrespect as well as adults? If I were him I can imagine just taking the position of, "You're only asking me to dinner for politeness sake, so I will politely refuse."

[trobadora]

(in any case I really should stop reading these post because they are inspiring a plot bunny where Snape is drugging Sirius for sex, and Sirius' behavior is an after affect of the drug....)

Yes, you should stop reading and start writing this bunny!

--A Snape/Black OTPer

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

Snape, otoh, I can definitely see holding a Monte Cristo-type grudge and privately vowing never to eat food served in the house of his enemy.

Yeah, it's not like he's been holding a grudge for 20 years or anything...

I suspect if there were a fair court of law about such things Snape would be cleared of any life debtedness.

I think any sane court would say that *Lupin* owed a life debt, but not Snape. Dumbledore's reasoning on that score seems shaky at best.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yeah, my conversation with trobadora above has made me even more suspicious of the whole "life debt" idea and who owes one to whom. Funny to mention Lupin owing life debts, after all, given his seemingly tense relationship with Snape as wolfsbane-potions-maker.

Yeah, it's not like he's been holding a grudge for 20 years or anything...

The man can do grudges, you have to admit!

[ishtar79.livejournal.com]

--you do not accept food in your enemy's house.

Yes, thank you. I will not rant get into all the ways the 'Snape poisonning Black' theory annoys me. I was actually more leaning towards the 'Snape doesn't eat there because the idea of sharing at table with his two oldest ennemies, Harry Potter, and a bunch of loud Weasleys is his idea of hell' explanation, but yours makes a frightening amount of sense.

It's just so consistent with what we know about Snape, and the way he behaves around his enemies.

About the 'life debt'...you know, I've just about given up trying to figure it out. I don't see how much it's a life debt for James to simply put a stop to the Prank that he participated in.

Also, by that logic, Ginny owes a life debt to Harry, and it's a much-more clear cut 'rescue' scenario. The Trio are bound by mutual and confusing life debts. Umbridge owes a life debt to Dumbledore for saving her from the gang raping murderous Centaurs. Buckbeak owes a life debt to Harry and Hermione. And so on...

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it's pretty damned hard to sort out all the life-debting going on in this world, particularly in Gryffindor where if you haven't racked up a few life debts by fifth year you're probably considered a duffer.

I'm uncomfortably leaning towards the idea that trobadora and I are talking about above, that it's not about saving a life so much as sparing a life that has earned death, like a gladiator choosing not to finish off his opponent or something. There seems to be a feeling like Snape brought the prank on himself and Peter earned death by betraying the Potters so Harry and James would have been justified in letting them die...thus their sparing of them is particularly noble. Only that's just incredibly scary in itself.

At the same time, I think it is something Snape himself might understand the same way he'd understand not eating at the house...

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

The life debts are easy to work out:

If a Gryffindor saves you, you owe them. This does not apply vice-versa.
A Gryffindor owing another Gryffindor cancels the debt, sometimes causing memory problems. (Harry's 'Oh, gosh, there was someone else in the chamber of secrets?' and 'God damn stupid Ron and Hermione, they never risk anything like Wonderful Me!')
A Slytherin possibly could owe another Slytherin. Who cares? The sooner they all die, the better.
A Hufflepuff/Ravenclaw being rescued by a Gryffindor is obliged to swoon over saviour, especially if female.
A Slytherin being rescued by a Gryffindor is an enormous sacrifice on the Gryffindor's part, and must be recognised. Unlike said Gryffs involvement in said Slytherin being put in a painful/humiliating and/or life-risking situation.

[jollityfarm.livejournal.com]

I simply thought he wouldn't want to be forced to be sociable not only with people who upset him by their very existence and nature, but with people who do their level best to upset him until he explodes. If it were me in such a situation, I'd be running out of that door, let me tell you. He can get food all over the damn place.

Plus, you know he'd be next to Mundungus Fletcher and Tonks, the former of whom probably dribbles and talks with his mouth full, and the latter of whom does that really weird nose thing during dinner, which wouldn't half put me off my potatoes. And she'd do his nose as well. Pointedly. And Ginny would giggle, and then there'd be Incident. Not to mention Words. Loud ones.

I can't help thinking that Severus, verbally unpleasant though he may be, hasn't really got the heart to do anything physical towards even his deadliest foes for no justifiable reason any more. Plus, you know Albus Dumbledore would have a really bewildering way of finding out about that sort of shit faster than you can say "and where were you with your mighty powers of observation when...?"

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

LOL! Oh my god, now I'm imagining all those things at the meal and...yes. There would be Incident. And Words. I mean, really, I don't feel we even need to hear Snape doesn't stay for dinner because it's Snape staying to dinner that would be hard to explain. Just picturing him sitting down between two other people makes one realize it would never work. It's like every movie scene involving a Strange Person at Dinner or Dinner With Strange People. I imagine he could hardly get anything down.

Plus, you know Albus Dumbledore would have a really bewildering way of finding out about that sort of shit faster than you can say "and where were you with your mighty powers of observation when...?"

Funny how that power of observation comes and goes, isn't it?

[trobadora]

I can't help thinking that Severus, verbally unpleasant though he may be, hasn't really got the heart to do anything physical towards even his deadliest foes for no justifiable reason any more.

I think this is one of the reasons why Snape honestly believes he's a better person than Sirius - at least he never tried to kill anyone for no better reason than that they were annoying!

[millefiori.livejournal.com]

I can't help thinking that Severus, verbally unpleasant though he may be, hasn't really got the heart to do anything physical towards even his deadliest foes for no justifiable reason any more.

Hmmm. I agree with you, but I wonder if it's not so much that he doesn't have the heart, as he knows how badly any sort of phsyical display would be interpreted/received by Dumbledore and/or anyone else aware of his past history. I've always thought it rather significant that, for all his verbal/emotional abuse of Neville and Harry, and his hatred of Remus and Sirius, the only time he ever does anything physical to any of them in present-day canon* is the incident with Harry and the pensieve, when he was in an extreme rage.

I mean, I can *so* see Snape gleefully using Umbridge's pen with both Harry and Neville if he thought he could get away with it, you know? Or Filch's 'Old Punishments.'

*Excepting the Shrieking Shack scene, of course, but Snape thought Sirius was an escaped murderer and Remus his accomplice at the time...

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

Anyway, one thing that's been brought up with regards to Snape poisoning someone is his not eating any food at Grimmauld Place--something one might avoid if one knew the food was poisoned.

Surely if he was poisoning it himself, he'd eat lots and lots of 'safe' food, to double bluff everyone. Like, real cunning there, Snape - avoid all food whatsoever. No-one would ever suspect that!

Harry, by contrast, appears to feel under no such obligation to Snape for his protection.

Well, to be fair, Harry's doesn't feel under obligations to anyone. Ron, Hermione, Neville, Sirius - of course they've risked their lives for him. That's what people do! He's TBWL!
Whereas, of course, him saving theirs is a much weightier burden. Can they ever repay it? Probably not!

[iczer6.livejournal.com]

For all we know he's also got a truckload of other responsibilities somewhere. Maybe he's moonlighting at a fast food place in Hogsmeade. We don't know.

Well Snape is the only teacher for a rather complex class. I can honestly see him as having better things to do, like setting up lesson plans, then hang a bunch of people he doesn't like all that much.

Or maybe he just hates Molly and Sirius's cooking, if anything I'd think he'd avoid eating there because the Weasley twins stay there and they have a habit of altering food for pranks.


Icz

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

On god,I hadn't even thought of the twins and their pranks. The list of reasons for Snape not staying just grows and grows.

[dphearson.livejournal.com]

You have not read my Snape/Molly. You need to read my Snape/Molly!