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.
theres something so beautiful about things becoming dirty from their job. like a painter’s desk being covered in paint stains, or a gardeners pants having mud stains that wont wash out, or a cutting board being stained from all the foods that have been cut on it. just a clear, distinct telling of “this was used as intended and it shows” an object clearly showing it’s been used and loved
i think people need to get more okay with physically hurting people who are participating, nominally peacefully, in a political act that advocates for right wing violence
if it becomes par for the course that you will get the shit beaten out of you for showing up with a group of chuds outside a gay bar and chanting “groomers”, then less people will do that.
the par for the course if you do nothing or try to out-chant them, or play funny music, by the way, is that they get more and more emboldened because they see that there’s no real consequences, and they run their ideology to their end point, and someone gets killed.
one thing i absolutely love about this show is the way there’s almost zero communication gap between the leads. you’d think that having a complicated past that you’re hiding from your detective wife would get in the way but no! these two find a way to be honest with each other any and every chance they get. hyunsoo’s always trying to understand jiwon, what’s going on in her head and why she thinks that way, says he wants to be a decent enough person for her, whereas jiwon’s always there for hyunsoo, trying to understand him through his body language for the things he cannot verbally express, telling him that she’ll wait for him to explain himself whenever he wants to, in the way he wants to. and when everything’s finally out in the open he lays down his entire life in front of her which she patiently listens to, and then helps him verbalise the feelings and emotions he was never allowed to feel, let alone be taught how to put into words. honest, in depth conversations with your partner can help a long way in a relationship no matter what you’re dealing with, and this show proves it.
There are warning signs. Blinking lights slipping past your vision, hovering at the edges like the stars on the back of your eyelids. That look in your eyes when I’m going a little too far. The threat of the point of no return, the way it looms on the horizon. You know. I know. I smirk at the perimeter.
It’s because you get off on fear, you know. Comfortable is the antithesis of that hard knot in your belly, it softens you up, makes you slip away into happy dream land when I want you here in cold stiff reality. I don’t want you to be comfortable. I want tension. I want drama. I want a conflict between the you that wants this, and the you that knew this was always a bad idea.
And I want to see one of those win. I want to see the defeat in your eyes, the acceptance, and the beauty, and then I want to set you down, safe and sound, and watch the relief flood over you like a fugue, some heady miasma that leaves you panting and breathless. I want to smell the catharsis come off you in waves.
just saw a post where someone put “detrans dni” and like… hey we should be supporting detransitioned people bc if we don’t terfs will
sometimes you’re wrong about your identity and that’s ok like i used to think i was bi but it turns out i was wrong and i know ppl who thought they were trans but it turns out they were wrong and it should be ok and accepted that sometimes people don’t get it right on the first try
This touches on something I have felt for a long time, which is that one of the reasons rigid queer labels and gatekeeping is so dangerous is because if you want to encourage people to explore their gender/sexuality, there has to be a safe “Actually I was wrong” option.
I went through so very much anxiety coming out, and when I really think about it it was squarely from the fear of being wrong about it all. That I was, at heart, a cishet woman, and therefore I was appropriating a label that didn’t ‘belong’ to me, and I would (somehow) be harming other people by doing so. There’s so much more unnecessary pressure if the sword hanging over your head is “But you do have to be right about this, you can’t back out once you’ve even asked the question.”
I think that is Bad. I think it makes fewer people ask the question. I think that includes those who need to ask, and would be much happier for it.
to summarize: one of the things the Q stands for is QUESTIONING
and that is as it should be
I’d like to also submit the possibility that some people may be more prone to shifts in their gender identity than others, and that it’s not necessarily even a case of being “wrong,” so much as it’s a case of just changing over time. I know the predominant narrative we see in discourse is that a person who transitions was never their agab—and I’m sure that’s true for a lot of people! But… it’s not true everyone? I remember reading an interview with Danny Lavery after he came out, and he said something along the lines of “One day, I went to bed a woman and woke up not a woman anymore.” So if a person can change once, who’s to say that can’t change again? For example, I know Eddie Izzard (whose labels have shifted a lot over the decades, as terminology and options for gender identities identity have changed many times over since the 1980s) has said she goes through long block periods of being a particular gender, so right now she’s “based in girl mode,” (her words) but she’s previously had blocks of time being based in “boy mode,” too. So like, whose to say other people don’t have block periods like that? Maybe somebody really was non-binary for ten years and now they’re not anymore, y’know? Not feeling something about yourself forever doesn’t have to mean you were wrong the whole time. Of course, being wrong is okay too! But I’d make room for both.
i LOVE this addition, especially because it helps us move away from the “ive always known” narrative that dominates so much trans space. sometimes your gender literally changes, and it’s not helpful or healthy of us to act like that means everything that came before was false or mistaken.
I think one of the most important parts about film and tv analysis is never forgetting that no matter the genre or setting, the story is probably being filtered through the perspective of a person who lives in California
Like if you’re watching a tv show and you’re starting to feel alienated by some of the motivations and worldviews the characters all seem to share, consider that you aren’t the weirdo, they are, because they’re being written by people who are at any given moment no more than five minutes removed from a kale smoothie
if you mean rich white people you can just say that…………
The irony of terms like afab/amab is that they’re intended to point out why being coercively assigned these labels and how the prejudices/preconceived notions that come with them are harmful, but most people (even trans people) use them to create Gender 2.0 and reinforce these preconceived notions.
aaron taylor johnsonandcharlie heaton were both groomed by older, more powerful women when they were new to the industry. terry crews spoke of being sexually harassed by an executive. brendan fraser was sexually assaulted and the experience was so horrible for him that it spiraled him into a depression, affecting his career. his assaulter never faced charges. the kevin spacey trial is coming up where he is being charged for sexual assault.
if you GENUINELY care for male victims, at least famous ones, you’d make some noise about these cases. however, these past few months, i have hardly seen a bolstering of these cases. instead i see a campaign of inappropriate memes and edits being made. is that your way to show you “care about male victims” lmao?? by making a mockery of a case discussing dv topics?? i think people like to hide behind the guise of caring about male victims when it’s really just an excuse to engage in inappropriate, obscene behaviors.
One of the things that I find so alluring about Eve and Villanelle’s relationship is that their connection is so intricately interwoven within each others very being that it almost enters into the realm of magic realism.
Throughout the seasons there have been scenes in which we’ve seen the paralleling of Eve and Villanelle. Where what one is experiencing the other is going through the same thing, or (in some cases) the exact opposite. There has always been a theme of reflection and them mirroring one another. But sometimes it also feels as if those mirrors are windows, where instead of being each others reflection they instead are almost peering in to the others reality. It just brushes the shoulder of it almost feeling mystical. Take for example the scene of Eve kissing Helene.
What I loved about this scene is how even though Eve was kissing Helene, the force that was truly controlling that entire moment was that of Eve and her connection to Villanelle. In the beginning it starts off with Eve and Helene playing their chess game of power, where when one makes a move the other is quick to respond. The constant shifting of control is very fun to watch as both are worthy adversaries to the other. However, what was a private moment between these two then shifts when Helene mentions Villanelle.
It’s here where we then see Eve become once again effected by the thought of her. The look of being stunned, her shaky breath… It was a move Eve was not expecting and Helene revels in the power she has taken. But it isn’t long before Eve rises to the challenge and initiates a kiss. However, what was once an interaction between Eve and Helene has now been invaded by Eve’s connection with Villanelle.
It’s here where we then get a split in the scene of Eve kissing Helene and shots of Villanelle, thus connecting these two in this moment and changing the entire focus of what this scene meant. Now, there are many ways to interpret this scene. I do think that the most obvious is that it’s clearly showcasing how Eve is thinking of Villanelle in this moment. However, I want to take this a step deeper and play with the actual mysticism of their connection.
As Eve is kissing Helene we get a shot of Villanelle alone, seeming quite somber. It’s evident that she is deep in thought about her feelings of Eve. But what I found interesting is that if you take it a step deeper, due to their connection, it’s almost as if Villanelle can sense what is going on, like she can see what Eve see’s. Again, going back to the idea of them almost having a “window” into each other’s lives at times which usually happens when they both are having strong feelings, either about the other or something effecting them personally. It’s as if their connection is so deeply bonded with the other that when they both succumb to that place of intense emotion, it opens themselves up completely to allow the other in.
The same thing happens with Eve when it quickly cuts back to her having pulled away from the kiss and looks at Helene. But it’s not the eyes of Helene in which she is seeing, but instead, that of Villanelle’s.
Now, I’m not actually saying that Eve and Villanelle are magical. But what I am saying is that their connection is on such a different plane of existence that sometimes it definitely feels as if they are tapping into something at such a molecular level that it transcends what we view as being capable of being able to do with another human being. It’s almost on the same wavelength as when someone can sense when a loved one has passed and sometimes can even physically feel sad or angry without even knowing why. That’s what I feel Eve and Villanelle have tapped into, only their senses are more deeply heightened and tuned due to them having explored the most darkest and deepest forms of ones own psyche and nature with each other that their wavelengths are able to go to more extremes.
That is what I feel was happening in this scene. Where they weren’t together physically, and yet they still were together in that moment - seeing and feeling the other. Villanelle may not have known what Eve was doing, but something unconsciously deep within her core felt it, knew it, as if she was right there witnessing it. Eve may not have physically been with Villanelle but in that moment she could see her plain as day right in front of her, feel her warmth, almost like it was her that she was holding the face of.
It’s not something to define, or even to have addressed. It’s simply something that is. I think even Eve and Villanelle don’t know how to explain it and may not even be aware of it in the active parts of their brain. But in the stillness of their minds when all goes quiet and the entirety of their being is left open for the other to connect with, it just…happens.
