#i was going to add to this but i really dont need to tbh
There’s something I don’t understand in the HP books and more particularly, how we are supposed to judge Snape as a teacher.
Beyond all the hate-then-defense arguments—and believe me I’m the first one to defend him—the problem is that if Snape’s teaching was so bad, then how is it:
1 - every (or almost every) student succeeds their OWLs
2 - his lessons are “fairly advanced”
3 - there are relatively few students who fail in his class (2 or 3), and one of them succeeds his OWLs with an E and previously had bad marks only because he wouldn’t concentrate, while the others are ok in the end?
Asking this because right now, I AM having a bad teacher who puts pressure on me and more or less insults me. The result is that I am afraid (for my life) everytime I start learning how to drive (almost shaking in my seat) and last time I cried in the car. Feeling like I had quite the Neville Syndrome.
But the problem is: with a bad teacher, your class is NOT “fairly advanced” because students learn badly and thus more slowly; you do NOT succeed in your exams, only with lower probabilities; and if this bad teacher’s behavior is for everyone, then LOTS more people would fail.
So theoretically, Snape’s classes, if he were such a bad teacher (and some of his behavior is indeed callous), would be a ruin.
And this is so weird, because the books are supposed to present us a Professor Snape who’s such a meanie and a bad teacher—the author herself dislikes him and wanted to write him as a bad teacher—and yet it almost seems like the books and the author are showing that in the end, Snape’s (“mean”) teaching style is actually a good thing, because it brings (arguably) good results.
Even when it comes to students who do not pay attention to his classes and don’t study a lot.
I’m sure this wasn’t the author’s intention, but then you wonder if… she would actually approve of this character’s pedagogic methods if only it weren’t Snape. Because in the end, she shows that his “callous, mean” teaching methods bring good results. Had she truly acknowledged them bad, then I think she wouldn’t have shown those positive consequences (since there wouldn’t be any).
Looking at other, “nicer” teachers’ horrible behaviours, it indeed looks like neither the author, nor Harry/the books, nor even the Wizarding World’s logic, has understood that this is a problem.
I generally feel that there are two answers to this.
The first is that we only really see Snape teaching Harry’s class. It’s a mixed class of Gryffindors and Slytherins; two houses which have great animosity. It contains the children of Death Eaters, who Snape rightly needs to be wary of as he knows that at some point, he will need to return to the Dark Lord. It also contains Harry Potter - not only the boy he has pledged to save in Lily’s honour, but the boy who looks exactly like his father - the boy who bullied Snape for seven years.
I think there are lots of credible arguments as to why Snape might fear the Death Eater children reporting back to their parents when it comes to his behaviour towards Harry. I also think Snape has unresolved trauma when it comes to both Lily’s death and the part he played in it (and the fact that he was unable to save her despite his best efforts) and James’ unrelenting bullying of him - and these three elements all play a part as to how Snape interacts in his classroom.
We know that his classes are canonically successful - as you’ve laid out in your post; not only does he expect that his class will receive high OWL results without exception (including in a class with Neville, Crabbe, Goyle), but his expectations are such that he’s been allowed to set his NEWT level admissions at the highest possible level. We can infer from the fact that Slughorn immediately drops the requirement that Slughorn likely didn’t have that requirement during his teaching years.
So as you say, that presents a really important piece of information - it isn’t that Snape’s a jerk; his students’ results are presumably so high, he can afford to choose the best-of-the-best. He doesn’t need to make the numbers up; he can expect that he will gain the right number of NEWT students without needing to admit anyone with a lower grade.
Incidentally, that’s how Sixth Forms around my area operated in the 80s/90s - there was a set number of students permitted for a subject; A* and A students would almost certainly get in, B students were likely to get in, and C students were ‘possibles’ if there were any spaces left.
Also, as you rightly identify; the students are successful at his subject, which means that for the rest of the students who have passed through his classroom, they haven’t frozen in fear in the way that Neville does. Neville, in particular, seems to be the outlier (and Harry, who is unfortunate enough to earn a special ire due to the factors listed above).
…so my conclusion here would be that Snape’s behaviour in Harry’s class is not necessarily demonstrative of how he behaves in other classes. I think he’s strict, I think he’s sarcastic, I think he’s tough - but is that all he is? In my experience, I had a bunch of strict and snarky teachers, and as you got older, they relaxed slightly - because the expectations and tone of the classroom had been set in the lower years. By Sixth Form, those same strict teachers were a bit of a laugh - because you knew the boundaries and you met them half way, usually with some degree of enthusiasm and competency for their subject.
I don’t think Snape would have much patience with Neville in any class (for reasons we have long discussed) - but him being a Gryffindor and him being in the Gryffindor/Slytherin class which also contains Harry Potter and Draco Malfoy? I think Snape’s behaviour is probably worse than it might’ve been had Neville been in Hufflepuff and it was the Hufflepuff/Ravenclaw class. But that’s a personal feeling.
The second factor, I think, is generational. It’s absolutely brilliant that the teaching landscape has changed, but when I read HP, I recognised Snape as being very similar to some of the teachers I’d experienced. As listed above, I saw him as tough and unrelenting, with high expectations and a nasty vindictive streak; you’d do your best to keep on the right side of him - but he’s also presented as someone skilled and talented and competent. Keep your head down and your mouth shut and do your work…and you’ll likely learn a lot. (Indeed, we see that Harry does learn his most used spell from Snape; Expelliarmus).
And that was the accepted truth in those days. Sadly, softer teachers were often destroyed by poor classroom behaviour - sometimes you were grateful for the teachers who were more strict or demanding, because they’d get the class clown to shut up and concentrate. In classes where that didn’t happen (particularly non-streamed classes), the room would fall into bedlam and you’d learn little.
So I think my main conclusion is that the author is someone who experienced classroom life in the 70s and brought that presentation to a series set in the 90s, where it was still recognised as being pertinent and relevant. Those scenes are now being read by people in the 20s who feel that it’s unrecognisable - and our collective insistence that this is 'modern’ means that it’s difficult to see that society has changed.
For comparison purposes, Enid Blyton wrote the last Famous Five novel in 1963. I read it approximately 28 years later (91, I think). Famous Five, to me, was 'historical’ - set in a world that was very different to mine. Harry Potter should be the same - it’s coming up to 25 years since the first book was published; society, attitudes, and life move on - but I don’t think we’re truly recognising this in fandom.
But yes, I also wholeheartedly agree with your point about the wizarding world not recognising this either. We can easily explain Dumbledore not pulling Snape up for his behaviour, as we know that Dumbledore hired him due to how useful he could be for the war - but none of the staff pull him up on his behaviour, including McGonagall, who has no idea of Dumbledore’s intentions for Snape during the war. McGonagall believes him to be a genuine teacher and she is shown to trust Snape’s judgement as a professor and Head of House.
I think that Snape’s behaviour isn’t rebuked within the text because at the time it was written, it was unremarkable. I feel that if it was written now, Snape would be a little softer in his classroom approach.
You are quite right when you say that shaking before lessons etc is not conducive to a productive learning environment - so the fact that Snape’s students generally succeed suggests that Neville’s reaction is an outlier.
Therefore, the conclusion that he’s a 'bad’ teacher isn’t, I feel, what we’re meant to take away from the text - and I think that’s why that conclusion is at odds with what we see eventuate.
