#Snape's Worst Memory

[sevsbestfriend]

As Severus saw the world around him while he hung upside down, a horrible terrible realization dawned on him.

It came as he saw the sadistic smirk on potters face.

It came as he saw Lily blush as she argued with his tormentor.

It hammered into his heart at the sight of lily trying to hide her smile.

In the quest to shed his muggle half, in an effort to not become like his father he...

He had become just like his mother.

[soraya-snape]

My Roman Empire:

What happened during SWM after Sev pulled Harry out of the pensive. Did James actually take off Sev's pant's or was he stopped?

If he was stopped, what made him stop? Was it another person or something else? Was it a teacher or another student?...

If he wasn't stopped, how far did he take it? For how long did he let him hang up there? Did he do anything else even more heinous and humiliating (I don't really want to think about this part)? How did it eventually end?...

There are so many more questions, some also concerning the following days/weeks. Like, did Lily ever apologize for making fun of Sev too (probably not)? Did Sev talk to anyone about it (probably also not) or what did he do to cope? When was the next time the marauders bullied Sev, and how far did they take it this time? Did the marauders ever take it this far or even further again?...

And most importantly: Why can't I just give Sev a big hug and make him feel OK again?

[expectopatronum18]

When you talk about SWM, ppl just focus on defending their favs, but imo the thing thts majorly overlooked is how it creates a major plot hole in the pensive system. Technically, Harry dives into Snape's memories, and even then we can see every second of what the marauders are doing, even though Snape isn't looking at them and is said to be immersed in his own paper, both during and after the exam. Even worse, how tf cud he have heard exactly what the marauders were saying even tho they weren't sitting remotely close to each other? Adding on, Snape only tries to get his wand out when james calls out loudly to him, otherwise he would hv known tht james and sirius were coming for him if he could hear them all along. The whole goddamn chapter is named 'Snape's Worst Memory' and yet we witness stuff even Snape couldn't see/hear when he was actually going through it. As much as I love the fact that we get a glimpse into what the marauders were like at Hogwarts, I do wish it was shown in a way tht actually makes sense (as I do with 123693674 different stuff in this series......)

[thistuesdaynight]

y'all, I'm struggling rn

I just read Snape's Worst Memory from canon for the very first time.

I-

[stabbyapologist]

Snape's rage after Harry seeing his memories in the pensieve is ominous in the movie but

Book!Snape had me scared af

[severus-snaps]

'Mudblood' and Muggle-borns

back again with some late-to-the-party observations that I want to talk about (ah, the perils of becoming obsessed with snape in 2024)

So, I think by now that most people are aware of this tweet and/or the idea that it wasn't just Muggle-borns, but half-bloods as well, who were called 'Mudbloods' by blood supremacists:

And I don't know about anyone else, but I took this with a grain of salt because JKR is known to... make statements sometimes, some more realistic within her own canon than others.

I know that some people (on Quora especially, but probably elsewhere) outright claim that JKR said this to make Snape's use of 'Mudblood' in SWM 'more acceptable' or less bad or something because the term applied to him, too, and not just Muggle-borns - and literally until today, I thought the same. Now don't get me wrong, I love Snape and will usually jump at any chance to make his backstory and characterisation more complicated and sympathetic. I felt almost that JK was sort of... backtracking, because in the series we only see people use 'Mudblood' against Muggle-borns, with Hermione and Draco the most frequently seen Muggle-born and blood supremacist (respectively) in the series.

So I've rounded up a few examples where Mudblood is arguably used against people who are not Muggle-born.

We're first introduced to the term "Mudblood" in CoS:

The smug look on Malfoy’s face flickered. “No one asked your opinion, you filthy little Mudblood,” he spat.

Ron describes the term shortly afterwards as follows:

"Mudblood's a really foul name for someone who is Muggle-born — you know, non-magic parents"

And that is how we see Draco use it most often, to refer to Muggle-borns (most notably Hermione). But it has been used on others who are probably not Muggleborn.

Exhibit A: Bob Ogden

Over to Potter-Search I go, searching 'Mudblood' - only to find someone called Bob Ogden. Now, having not read the later books in quite some time I had no idea initially who Bob Ogden was, so I head over to the wiki page. For those of you like me who haven't read the later books in a while, Ogden appeared in one of Dumbledore and Harry's trips into the Pensieve:

Bob Ogden (fl. 1925) was a British wizard who worked in the Department of Magical Law Enforcement, a department of the Ministry of Magic, and led the Magical Law Enforcement Squad in the 1920s. As part of his duties, he once visited the Gaunt Shack, as the Department believed that Morfin Gaunt had not only performed magic in front of a Muggle but also accosted that Muggle, Tom Riddle Snr, and performed a dark charm on him.

Marvolo Gaunt, Morfin's father, asks him this:

“Are you pure-blood?” [Gaunt] asked, suddenly aggressive. “That’s neither here nor there,” said Ogden coldly, and Harry felt his respect for Ogden rise. Apparently Gaunt felt rather differently. He squinted into Ogden’s face and muttered, in what was clearly supposed to be an offensive tone, “Now I come to think about it, I’ve seen noses like yours down in the village.” “I don’t doubt it, if your son’s been let loose on them,” said Ogden.

Harry I think interprets this interaction as a Pureblood/Half-Blood Ogden rejecting Pureblood/blood supremacist ideology. Personally, I'm more inclined to think he's being cagey because he has definite Muggle ancestry, but we just don't know. I suppose it doesn't really matter. And then:

“So!” said Gaunt triumphantly, as though he had just proved a complicated point beyond all possible dispute. “Don’t you go talking to us as if we’re dirt on your shoes! Generations of purebloods, wizards all — more than you can say, I don’t doubt!” ... “Mr. Gaunt,” said Ogden doggedly, “I am afraid that neither your ancestors nor mine have anything to do with the matter in hand. I am here because of Morfin, Morfin and the Muggle he accosted late last night.

And finally:

“And you think we’re scum, do you?” screamed Gaunt, advancing on Ogden now, with a dirty yellow-nailed finger pointing at his chest. “Scum who’ll come running when the Ministry tells ’em to? Do you know who you’re talking to, you filthy little Mudblood, do you?” “I was under the impression that I was speaking to Mr. Gaunt,” said Ogden, looking wary, but standing his ground.

On the Wiki page, under Ogden's blood status, I find this interesting note:

In Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 10 (The House of Gaunt) Ogden is shown wearing "the strange assortment of clothes so often chosen by inexperienced wizards trying to look like Muggles," which indicates that he was not Muggle-born, as a Muggle-born would have at least some experience with putting together a Muggle outfit.

The outfit in question was described as a "frock coat and spats over a striped one-piece bathing costume". I know shit all about clothes, so I had to google a frock coat, and here's some examples (conveniently also featuring spats on the feet in the first image); and also a one-piece bathing suit (vintage, since it was the 1920s and I'm assuming a men's):

[Images from Lily Absinthe, State Library of Victoria and vintag.es]

What a look. Deliberate in its farcicality. So... no, even the most out-of-touch Muggleborn in the 1920s probably wouldn't put that together in combination, because even assuming he was like 100 or something (seeing as he died at some stage before the events of HBP), I don't think a Muggleborn with two Muggle parents could've been that out of the loop on Muggle clothing to confuse swimwear for casual daywear.

Ogden is, obviously then, of magical enough heritage not to have any idea how to dress like a Muggle. And yet here he was, in my 'Mudblood' search. Admittedly, that might only be a generation or so removed; Tonks is also clearly clueless:

“Very clean, aren’t they, these Muggles?” said the witch called Tonks, who was looking around the kitchen with great interest. “My dad’s Muggle-born and he’s a right old slob. I suppose it varies, just like with wizards?”

Marvolo's comment about Ogden's nose also can be taken several ways; a jab/joke about the pus nose curse that Ogden's just had put on him by Morfin, or a real, thinly veiled accusation of Ogden having Muggle heritage (possibly the same as those in the surrounding villages). For his own safety, if Ogden was indeed Pureblood, he probably should've said so (for all the good it might have done him).

At any rate, Ogden obviously, whatever his family history, is 'wizard' enough to not know how to blend with Muggles - he's definitely not Muggleborn himself. If he did have Muggle heritage, which makes him a dubiously-named half-blood (dubious in that "half-blood" more or less refers to anyone who isn't 'Pureblood' or 'Muggleborn' rather than indicating a half-and-half split), it's likely to have been a grandparent or something, if not further removed (do we see Tonks struggle to wear Muggle clothes? I can't remember. I vaguely remember McGonagall wearing a Muggle dress, and she's supposed to be half-blood - but she's not described as looking odd for what she's wearing but I got more of the impression that Harry found it odd to see her out of the ususal robes she wears at Hogwarts).

Anyway, the real point of it is that it doesn't matter how magical Ogden is, because he is marked out as not Muggle-born by his clothes, and yet he still gets called a Mudblood. Gaunt wasn't necessarily suggesting Ogden's parents hadn't been a witch and a wizard, but that overall he had a bit more Muggle in him than a wizard should have (which, according to Gaunt, is none).

It's worth noting that the Gaunts were a family "noted for a vein of instability", possibly as a result of consistently marrying their cousins, so perhaps only their view on 'Mudblood' is anyone who isn't a Pureblood. And, of course, they are the proud, cousin-marrying descendents of Salazar Slytherin, who "started all this pure-blood stuff", and so were likely especially zealous about who 'counted' as Pure:

"They [Hogwarts founders] built this castle together, far from prying Muggle eyes, for it was an age when magic was feared by common people, and witches and wizards suffered much persecution." (Binns, CoS) "Slytherin wished to be more selective about the students admitted to Hogwarts. He believed that magical learning should be kept within all-magic families. He disliked taking students of Muggle parentage, believing them to be untrustworthy." (Binns, CoS)

Said Slytherin, "We'll teach just those Whose ancestry is purest." (Sorting Hat, OotP)

In any case, this is the strongest example of a dedicated blood supremacist calling someone with any suspected (real or otherwise) Muggle heritage a Mudblood.

Exhibit B: Walburga Black

Walburga Black was Sirius Black's mother, a proud pureblood supremacist, and she thought that Voldemort had the 'right idea' about things. Her portrait at Grimmauld Place calls the inhabitants of her house "filth" "creatures of dirt*", "scum", "stains of dishonour", and "mudbloods".

"MUDBLOODS! SCUM! CREATURES OF DIRT*!" “Filth! Scum! By-products of dirt and vileness! Half-breeds, mutants, freaks, begone from this place! How dare you befoul the house of my fathers — ” "Mudbloods, filth, stains of dishonor, taint of shame on the house of my fathers!"

* Creatures of dirt is apparently another word/turn of phrase for Mudblood, according to the wiki.

Obviously the portrait is screaming and overexcited, and not especially prone to nuance, but it does seem to be calling multiple people in the house Mudbloods - when, in theory, only Hermione would fit that description. Walburga is also capable of distinguishing between different people and offering specific insults, such as to Sirius:

“Yoooou!” she howled, her eyes popping at the sight of the man. “Blood traitor, abomination, shame of my flesh!”

Andromeda Tonks (nee Black) was blasted off of the Black family tapestry by Walburga for marrying a Muggleborn:

[Sirius] pointed to another small round burn mark between two names, Bellatrix and Narcissa. “Andromeda’s sisters are still here because they made lovely, respectable pure-blood marriages, but Andromeda married a Muggle-born, Ted Tonks, so — ” Sirius mimed blasting the tapestry with a wand and laughed sourly.

I expect having an actual Muggle in the family (aka an actual half-and-half Half-Blood) would've been seen as just as bad, if not worse, than marrying a Muggleborn to dedicated blood purists.

But in any case, with an Order primarily made up of Pureblood blood traitors (e.g. Weasleys, Sirius, Moody) and Half-Bloods (generally consisting of at least two magical parents like Harry, Tonks, and Dumbledore), and one Muggleborn (Hermione), Walburga just calls them all Mudbloods.

I'm also curious, as Hagrid wasn't there at 12 Grimmauld Place and a werewolf isn't technically a half-breed (but is sometimes conceptualised as such e.g. by Umbridge and her ilk), whether Walburga calls half-bloods "half-breeds", or whether she was yelling more generally at Lupin. Perhaps Muggles are "a different creature" in her eyes. We know that this line of thinking isn't uncommon:

"We’ve all got to listen to [whichever DE was in charge of Muggle Studies in DH] explain how Muggles are like animals, stupid and dirty..." (Neville, DH)

Exhibit C: Penelope Clearwater

Examples start to get a bit more sparse and interpretive from here on out.

In Chamber of Secrets, Voldemort describes the people petrified as Mudbloods:

“Haven’t you guessed yet, Harry Potter?” said Riddle softly. “Ginny Weasley opened the Chamber of Secrets. She strangled the school roosters and daubed threatening messages on the walls. She set the Serpent of Slytherin on four Mudbloods, and the Squib’s cat.”

The "four Mudbloods" in question were:

Colin Creevy

Justin Finch-Fletchley (with Nearly-Headless Nick as collatoral damage)

Hermione Granger, and

Penelope Clearwater

But we're not certain that they're all Muggleborn. In CoS, Justin is confirmed; he was headed to Eton and was waiting for Harry (the supposed Heir of Slytherin) to attack him in CoS for being Muggleborn. Colin is confirmed; "I never knew all the odd stuff I could do was magic till I got the letter from Hogwarts. My dad’s a milkman...", and Hermione is obvious.

And then there's Penelope. Unlike the other confirmed Muggle-borns, we don't hear much about her, apart from the fact that she's Percy's girlfriend and probably likes Quidditch; but Hermione uses her as her 'cover' when the Trio gets caught by Snatchers in Deathly Hallows:

“Penelope Clearwater,” said Hermione. She sounded terrified, but convincing. “What’s your blood status?” “Half-blood,” said Hermione.

And the note about it on the Wiki says:

However, it is possible that the fourth Muggle-born in addition to Colin, Hermione, and Justin (who are all definitively identified as Muggle-borns at some point) was Nearly-Headless Nick, and that Penelope was simply petrified because she was with Hermione when she encountered the Basilisk. In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 23 (Malfoy Manor), Hermione posed as Penelope when under interrogation by Snatchers, and claimed to be half-blood. Although, Hermione may have only lied about Penelope's blood status because mentioning she's Muggle-born would have possibly made things worse.

To me it seems unlikely that Voldemort would set the Basilisk on a ghost. It also seems unlikely that, after Harry has offered up "Vernon Dudley" as his name (more on that in a moment), and Ron has called himself first Stan Shunpike and then Barney Weasley, that Hermione would choose someone who she knew wasn't going to be a safe bet. Snatchers are "gangs trying to earn gold by rounding up Muggle-borns and blood traitors", so why offer a name that's likely to be on their list of Muggle-borns? It's also possible that it was just the first name she thought of, then lied about the blood status; but given that Hermione and Penelope would have woken up in the hospital wing together at the end of the events of CoS, it may well have come up in discussion.

And then there's this:

“You checked their names on the list yet, Scabior?” he roared. “Yeah. There’s no Vernon Dudley on ’ere, Greyback.”

So, the list is being checked by the Snatchers to see if the 'disguised' Trio are "wanted" - aka if they are Muggleborns/blood traitors/truants. I doubt they even checked Ron's name since the Weasleys are well-known blood traitors, but they picked up on Vernon Dudley not being a real name, and their list certainly seems to include Muggleborns, since they say they've captured a "Mudblood (presumably Dean Thomas), a runaway goblin, and three truants (the Trio)". Yet they don't mention Penelope.

So, Penelope was not on their list, and if it hadn't been for the Snatchers recognising Hermione in the paper, they might have gotten away with it. Maybe Penelope was Muggleborn and "presented herself for interrogation", which is something that Ron mentions Hermione hasn't done earlier in the book, and therefore that's why Penelope wasn't on the list - or that Penelope is not Muggleborn, but Half-Blood, and she got called a Mudblood in CoS anyway.

(Yes, JK probably forgot - but I'm sticking in-universe).

Exhibit D: The Muggle-Born Registration Commission

“Will the old hag [Umbridge] be interrogating Mudbloods all day, does anyone know?”

Shortly followed by:

“No, no, I’m half-blood, I’m half-blood, I tell you! My father was a wizard, he was, look him up, Arkie Alderton, he’s a well-known broomstick designer, look him up, I tell you — get your hands off me, get your hands off—” “This is your final warning,” said Umbridge’s soft voice, magically magnified so that it sounded clearly over the man’s desperate screams. “If you struggle, you will be subjected to the Dementor’s Kiss.” The man’s screams subsided, but dry sobs echoed through the corridor. “Take him away,” said Umbridge. Two dementors appeared in the doorway of the courtroom, their rotting, scabbed hands clutching the upper arms of a wizard who appeared to be fainting. They glided away down the corridor with him, and the darkness they trailed behind them swallowed him from sight.

So, the Muggle-Born Registration Commission was supposed to be rounding up, interrogating and imprisoning Muggle-borns, but arguably was also rounding up (and referring to) possible half-bloods, too. The same possibly happened to Dean Thomas, a half-blood (according to his official page) mistaken for a Muggle-born, as he had no record of his wizard father.

“Muggle-born, eh?” asked the first man. “Not sure,” said Dean. “My dad left my mum when I was a kid. I’ve got no proof he was a wizard, though.”

Summary of Exhibits

So, we've seen half-blood-or-more Bob Ogden and potentially half-blood Penelope Clearwater be referred to as Mudbloods by Gaunts/Voldemort. We've seen an entire house of people of different magical heritage between them, all collectively called Mudbloods by Walburga Black. And we've seen some random Ministry witch call a whole collection of (assumed but not confirmed) Muggle-born wizards and witches Mudbloods.

I think what we can gather from this is that the distinction between half-blood and Muggle-born hardly matters to some blood supremacists. If you're a Pureblood supremacist, anyone who isn't Pure is, obviously, impure. Arguably, "Mudblood" wasn't always strictly about being Muggleborn; it's about 'impure' heritage. The stronger examples (Bob Ogden, Walburga Black) are older examples; Voldemort and Walburga's generation (born ~1920s) and even before (Marvolo's generation had an even more ambiguous use). I think it's safe to say that the meaning of the word may have evolved or tightened by the time Harry is in school to primarily refer to Muggleborns, but obviously that's a matter of opinion;

Silent Half-Bloods in the Hierarchy of Pureblood Supremacy

Wizarding society is sort of divided into Pureblood, Half-blood, Muggle-borns, Muggles, and... Squibs, somewhere.

Obviously, in an ideal pureblood society, Purebloods are at the top:

[Sirius' parents] "thought Voldemort had the right idea, they were all for the purification of the Wizarding race, getting rid of Muggle-borns and having purebloods in charge." (Sirius, OotP) "For years [Regulus] talked of the Dark Lord, who was going to bring the wizards out of hiding to rule the Muggles and the Muggle-borns..." (Kreacher, DH)

Setting aside the knowledge for a moment that Voldemort was half-blood, and instead perceiving him as the Pureblood he pretended to be, this is what he touted, and this is what his Pureblood followers from the "ancient and noble" families like the Malfoys and the Blacks aspired to.

So indisputably, here excluding for brevity's sake the complexities of intelligent nonhumans/magical beings and 'half-breeds' (being its own meta that's probably been written somewhere), Muggles are at the bottom of a blood supremacist's list. Muggles and Muggle-borns are seen as a threat to Wizarding society, and as (potentially dangerous) outsiders. We can see it in the explanation given (quoted somewhere way, way above) about Salazar Slytherin's reasonings; it started with mistrust, as Muggles in the early days were persecuting wizards.

This mistrust (and disgust) obviously was kept alive and well in Tom/Voldemort/blood supremacists: "I, keep the name of a foul, common Muggle, who abandoned me even before I was born, just because he found out his wife was a witch?" (Voldemort, CoS).

But it's also an element of exclusionary attitude; Muggle-borns have grown up outside of magical culture, which we can see reflected in the first interaction between Draco and Harry in PS:

“But they were our kind, weren’t they?” “They were a witch and wizard, if that’s what you mean.” “I really don’t think they should let the other sort in, do you? They’re just not the same, they’ve never been brought up to know our ways. Some of them have never even heard of Hogwarts until they get the letter, imagine. I think they should keep it in the old wizarding families. What’s your surname, anyway?”

It'll come as a surprise to literally nobody that the problem as blood supremacists see it is that Muggles, and by extension Muggle-borns, as well as being outsiders, are viewed as dirty/disgusting, and common. In CoS, post slug-heaving, Ron describes "Mudblood" as meaning:

"Dirty blood, see. Common blood".

We see these descriptors a lot in the series. Gaunt describes Merope as a "dirty Squib", "disgusting little Squib" and a "filthy little blood traitor" (and she's a Pureblood witch, albeit struggling with her powers); and in CoS of course Voldemort calls his father "a foul, common Muggle". We also see throughout the books "Mudblood filth", and "filthy little Mudblood" in particular reference to Muggle-borns such as Hermione and Lily (and to Bob Ogden).

[Side note: I have seen some arguments that say 'filthy' is sometimes used in the series instead of the word 'fucking', e.g. "that fucking Mudblood" - but obviously it's a kid's series, so the word was replaced. I think it could work in terms of this replacement in some contexts, but I'm not sure that was the purpose. Filthy just means disgustingly dirty, and has an interesting extra context from the etymology I just found out:

filthy (adj.) late 12c., fulthe, "corrupt, sinful," from filth + -y (2). Meaning "physically unclean, dirty, noisome" is from late 14c. Meaning "morally dirty, obscene" is from 1530s.

You can get a sense of a more 'moral' objection in the later books, e.g. Neville discussing their Muggle Studies during the events of DH:

We’ve all got to listen to her explain how Muggles are like animals, stupid and dirty, and how they drove wizards into hiding by being vicious toward them, and how the natural order is being reestablished.

And especially this, from Voldemort:

"Not content with corrupting and polluting the minds of Wizarding children, last week Professor Burbage wrote an impassioned defense of Mudbloods in the Daily Prophet. Wizards, she says, must accept these thieves of their knowledge and magic. The dwindling of the purebloods is, says Professor Burbage, a most desirable circumstance. … She would have us all mate with Muggles …"

I feel like there's a few points to be made about this quote.

First, obviously Voldemort has the DEs convinced that he's also Pureblood; he's the Heir of Slytherin after all, the Dark Lord, greatest wizard of all time, etc. Even Harry telling Bellatrix that Voldemort was half-blood at the end of OotP hasn't made a difference. (And why would it? Question or defy him and he'll kill your whole family and make you watch, probably).

Second, we can see also in the Muggle-Born Registration Commission chapter, where Umbridge asks Mary Cattermole where she stole her wand from, that Muggle-borns are accused of somehow... stealing magic?

"Nevertheless, unless you can prove that you have at least one close Wizarding relative, you are now deemed to have obtained your magical power illegally and must suffer the punishment."

Anyway, I think there's another point here, one I can't quite reach with my brain. The quote starts with viewing ostensibly only Muggleborns as the issue; as the thieves of knowledge. But Voldemort's point ends up with the disparaging of half-bloods (as they're the wizarding 'type' to arise from Muggle-Magical Mating™️). That's nothing to do with Muggle-borns at all.

But we hear next to nothing about half-bloods, despite their having Muggle and/or Muggle-born heritage; the same heritage described so often as dirty, disgusting, and filthy. We hear more outrage about blood traitors, Pureblood families who sympathise with Muggles or Muggle-borns: "blood traitors are as bad as the Mudbloods", "Blood traitor is next to Mudblood in my book", and wizards/witches who are tolerant of Muggles are called "Muggle-lovers". (I hesitate even to say that 'Muggle-tolerant wizards' like, support, or even accept Muggles - because even Muggle 'tolerant' wizards (e.g. like Hagrid and the Weasleys), the Order and the like, the allies to the "champion of commoners, of Mudbloods and Muggles, Albus Dumbledore", also look down on Muggles to an extent, but I digress again).

The only disparaging references I could find to half-bloods were Bellatrix to Harry:

"You dare speak his name with your unworthy lips, you dare besmirch it with your half-blood’s tongue, you dare -" " — He stands there — filthy half-blood —"

And one about Mundungus:

“That mangy old half-blood has been stealing Black heirlooms?” said Phineas Nigellus, incensed.

In the few examples we see, they're subject to the same dehumanising, dirty/disgusting and animal comparisons as "Mudbloods" and Squibs.

But there are few examples. The lack of attention paid to half-bloods is probably, in part because of the dwindling population of Purebloods:

"Most wizards these days are half-blood anyway. If we hadn’t married Muggles we’d’ve died out." (Ron, CoS) “If you’re only going to let your sons and daughters marry purebloods your choice is very limited, there are hardly any of us left.” (Sirius, OotP)

Half-bloods are accepted purely by necessity, because unlike Muggle-borns they do have magical lineage to draw on, and because there aren't enough Purebloods left. It's for the same reason that blood traitors are allowed to keep on being traitors but aren't punished to the same degree as Muggle-borns, per this note from the wiki:

"They don’t want to spill too much pure blood, so they’ll torture us a bit if we’re mouthy but they won’t actually kill us.” Given this statement, as well as the fact that the Weasleys were only in direct danger after Ron Weasley's help of Harry Potter was revealed to the Death Eaters, it seems that they were hesitant to kill blood traitors unless they were very rebellious.

Half-bloods sort of escape the Pureblood rhetoric entirely, between these reasons and being the most common type of witch or wizard. The term “half-blood” is ambiguous, and practically meaningless, after all; it refers to anyone with one Muggle parent (like Seamus Finnegan; Severus Snape), or anyone with one Muggle-born parent (like Harry, Tonks), and (I'm not sure if we learn this in the books, but) it also applies if you have a Muggle or Muggle-born grandparent, and presumably any recent traceable Muggle or Muggle-born lineage.

While half-bloods do have 'impure' Muggle ancestry, they are often viewed through the lens of their magical parentage, which can sometimes afford them a degree of acceptance or a different (almost nonexistant) level of scrutiny. In the hierarchy of blood purity, they are less offensive to purists compared to Muggle-borns, but not as esteemed as pure-bloods.

Sort of absent but for different reasons are Squibs. In broad terms, Squibs are generally more likely to be straight up ignored or disregarded, in contrast to the outright hatred and contempt directed toward Muggleborns and Muggles - the issue is a relation to non-magical Muggles, rather than magical skill itself. Because Squibs have magical ancestry, perhaps they fare slightly 'better' within this belief system. Of course, I expect it's all interrelated and decidedly more nuanced (as are all systems of prejudice/oppression), but as I say - in broad terms. Filch liked to help Umbridge, after all - like so many others in wizarding society (and wider, real-life society), his acceptance was conditional, and arguably based on either pity or what he could bring to the table.

In a similar way, being half-blood is only 'advantageous' when magical heritage can be proven and played upon - like Voldemort; like Umbridge:

“That’s — that’s pretty, Dolores,” she said, pointing at the pendant gleaming in the ruffled folds of Umbridge’s blouse. “What?” snapped Umbridge, glancing down. “Oh yes — an old family heirloom,” she said, patting the locket lying on her large bosom. “The S stands for Selwyn. … I am related to the Selwyns. … Indeed, there are few pure-blood families to whom I am not related...”

"It was Umbridge's lie that brought the blood surging into Harry's brain and obliterated his sense of caution; that [Slytherin's/Voldemort's] locket she had taken as a bribe from a petty criminal [Mundungus] was being used to bolster her own pure-blood credentials."

... and even like some Death Eaters probably do:

"The Death Eaters can’t all be pure-blood, there aren’t enough pure-blood wizards left," said Hermione stubbornly. "I expect most of them are half-bloods pretending to be pure." "I got this one," [Neville] indicated another slash to his face, "for asking [Carrow] how much Muggle blood she and her brother have got."

... and unlike the son of Arkie Alderton, the well-known broomstick designer, who got carted away by Dementors. Purebloods could and would just as easily turn on half-bloods.

"First they came for the Socialists…" as the poem goes. Muggles and Muggle-borns will be the first witches and wizards targeted, face the worst discrimination, but half-bloods too are only safe so long as they can prove themselves as 'magical enough', dedicated enough, or useful enough; and they'll never be magical enough for the likes of true believers.

Severus Snape: Mudblood?

I don't think it's a stretch, then, to say that some Purebloods did use the term "Mudblood" for people other than Muggle-borns. Unlike most of the half-bloods we see in the series, with two magical parents, Snape was actually the son of Tobias Snape, a Muggle, with a clearly Muggle name that sets him apart from the well-known and interconnected Pureblood families. As a student, and sometimes as an adult, Snape to some extent 'fit' the stereotypes of Muggles in that he would be perceived as common, dirty, and disgusting; throughout the series he's described as "greasy", with "yellow, uneven teeth"; he hails from Cokeworth, likely from a two-up-two-down house, described as though set in a Northern industrial area; he is scrawny, skinny, as a child wears mismatched clothes, and is likely neglected and grew up in poverty. (Contrast with Purebloods Sirius, who is regularly described as handsome, James, who had the "indefinable air of having been well cared for and even adored that Snape so conspicuously lacked", and the Malfoy family, who are also regularly described as being attractive).

If we use Draco as a benchmark for Slytherin Pureblood behaviour, then imagine how much worse Snape would be received; he's poorer than a Weasley, more Muggle than Harry Potter (and absolutely not the chosen one), and at least half as Muggle as Hermione. It's questionable whether Eileen Prince/Snape was herself even a Pureblood; whilst I was traversing for all the quotes here, Hermione talks about reading through Nature’s Nobility: A Wizarding Genealogy, that "lists the pure-blood families that are now extinct in the male line" - which, if Prince was a Pureblood name, might have crept up in passing conversation since Hermione seemed to struggle to find anything out about the HBP in the previous book.

During a war in which Voldemort rose to power, with an identifiably Muggle name and not one of the vastly interconnected and still-powerful Pureblood families, Snape would be noticed for being different. He was about a year apart from Regulus after all, who had a whole collage on his wall of Voldemort's press cuttings, favoured son of enthusiastic blood supremacist Walburga Black - so I find it hard to believe that Slytherins were... fully accepting.

In CoS, when a basilisk was going around attempting to kill Muggle-borns on behalf of the Heir of Slytherin, the Slytherin common room password was pureblood. I feel like there's a whole point there, but it's nearly 4am here, so I can't brain it right now. (But like... did Snape set the passwords? Did the entrance do it magically?? Did a Head Boy/Prefect do it?? Either way, there's a strong sense of pureblood supremacy communicated in that password that's only strengthened by the timing, echoing the Heir's agenda). In any case, it speaks to the entrenched nature of pure-blood ideology of Slytherin as a house.

"my parents, with their pure-blood mania, convinced that to be a Black made you practically royal . . . my idiot brother, soft enough to believe them" (Sirius, OotP) "as far as [Marvolo] was concerned, having pure blood made you practically royal" (Harry, DH)

The Purebloods of Slytherin house in any generation - who considered themselves "practically royal" in their superiority - would surely ridicule a self-styled, half-blood Prince.

[tanginawrites]

The Marauders didn't stop bullying Snape after the prank. It actually got worse.

A lot of people are surprised to realize that the scene in Snape's Worst Memory happens after the werewolf prank. When first reading OOTP, people generally assumed that SWM showed escalating tension between the Marauders and Snape that up led to the prank. But in DH, we see Snape and Lily talking about the prank before SWM. This means that the Marauders are still singling Snape out and targeting him after prank. Why?

My theory is that the bullying actually got worse after the prank. Because the only way to hold their friend group together was for the Marauders to double down and rally around blaming Snape for what happened.

Think about it: How did that incident not tear them apart? Sirius not only exposed Lupin's secret – he also attempted to use Lupin as a weapon against Snape, and he could have gotten James killed in the process. That's a huge betrayal.

But Sirius isn't mature enough to take responsibility for it. Lupin isn't self-confident enough to confront Sirius about it. "James would-consider-it-the-height-of-dishonor-to-mistrust-his-friends Potter" isn't going to be the one to lay blame on Sirius or break up the group. But it's too big an issue to ignore. The only way they can get over this is to put it all on Snape. It was just a joke, and Snape is an idiot, and James is a hero.

If you compare the two incidents that the books show us of the Marauders bullying Snape, you can see that totally different dynamics are driving the bullying. This shows how and why the bullying got worse after the prank.

The first bullying incident we see is on the Hogwarts Express, when James and Sirius engage in verbal bullying of Snape, with one small attempt at tripping him up as he leaves. This bullying is a form of bonding for James and Sirius and forms the basis of their friend group. This is an example of bullying driven by Peer Group factors (source), and this sort of bullying is generally done to:

to attain or maintain social power or to elevate their status in their peer group.

to show their allegiance to and fit in with their peer group.

to exclude others from their peer group, to show who is and is not part of the group.

What we're seeing here is that the soon-to-be Marauders are in new environment and they're defining their peer group and establishing social hierarchy, trying to establish their status. The Marauders continue in this pattern of Peer Group bullying throughout their school career, as evidenced by the detention records Snape has Harry transcribe in HBP. The Marauders seem to have thrown out hexes in a scattershot way to establish superiority over other students and look cool. This casual, incidental sort of bullying is likely what Snape experienced for the first several years of school.

But what we see in SWM isn't bullying to maintain Peer Group dynamics. This bullying isn't just flinging a single insult or a clever hex. James and Sirius hunt Snape, they deprive him of his wand and ability to escape the situation, and they repeatedly hex him until Lily (temporarily) stops them. This incident is extremely personal. This is an example of bullying driven by Emotional factors, and this type of bullying is done when the bullies:

have feelings of insecurity and low self-esteem, so they bully to make themselves feel more powerful.

don’t know how to control their emotions, so they take out their feelings on other people.

may not have skills for handling social situations in healthy, positive ways.

What we're seeing here is all the fraying edges of the Marauders' friendship. Sirius has just damaged their group, but he can't apologize or address it without accepting blame, so he has to take his emotions out on Snape. Punishing Snape is a way to exorcise his guilt. And it's actually imperative that he bully Snape into silence, because he is the one who has revealed Lupin's secret to Snape and put them all in jeopardy. Lupin can't confront Sirius about the betrayal of trust, and likewise he can't confront his friends here. Not only does Lupin not have the emotional security for handling this situation, he also can't risk putting himself in front of Snape in this moment, lest Snape scream "Werewolf" instead of "Mudblood." James is here trying to work through his own insecurities – in bullying Snape he is defending his friends, but James is also trying to get Lily's attention. James offers to change his ways if she'll give him a chance, because James needs to reassure himself that he is chivalrous, that he is a hero.

Looking at the way the bullying dynamics change and escalate in those two scenes, I think it’s clear that Lupin’s line, “Snape was a special case. I mean, he never lost an opportunity to curse James so you couldn't really expect James to take that lying down,” is an understatement.

Snape was a special case because he knew Lupin’s secret, which would always make him a potential threat. The Marauders would always take any opportunity they could to reinforce that Snape was powerless to do anything to them. And they’d continue to take out all their emotions about the prank on Snape rather than confronting each other.

[ottogatto]

There's something very moving about Snape making Harry watch his most vulnerable moments. His most shameful and painful memories. Including his Worst one. That's the same man who went hysterical when Harry invaded his privacy in OotP... and at the end of DH, either those memories slip by mistake, or he trusts Harry, or he really wants to confide to him about what happened, or he decides that's the price to pay for his absolution and/or his final mission. Regardless, here you have the man who holds so dear to his privacy -- a spy -- and he is giving his dearest secrets to the boy he hated yet had to protect. So, was it an accident? Was it an utilitarian strategy born at the last moment? Or did something change in Snape in his last year, when Harry was away?

[bookwormangie]

Lily is absolutely flirting in Snape’s Worst Memory - but I think this is one scene that has dated the series and is easily overlooked if the reader is not a Brit of a certain age. Lily and James are bantering in that scene in the way that Beatrice and Benedick do in Much Ado About Nothing or the way that Elizabeth and Darcy have crazy sexual tension while she’s telling him that she hates him and that he’s the last person on earth she’d ever marry.

People don’t see it now because James’ approach has so many red flags that are widely acknowledged as red flags in 2024 that they see Lily’s responses as genuine disgust and dislike, instead of her getting drawn into his game because she’s interested. But it was obvious in 2003 what JKR was going for here. The implication is that Snape lashes out at her *because* he sees her half smile and her flirtatiousness in this moment, and properly realises for the first time that his ‘best friend’ is totally into the guy tormenting him in front of half the school.

None of this is to say that Lily wasn’t a) completely right to terminate the friendship and b) wasn’t overall a very decent person. But she’s supposed to be a pretty shit friend here - put any one of the trio in Lily’s shoes and imagine their response to the same situation and it becomes clear that her half assed, rather impersonal defence was indeed intended to be half assed. Now of course this is directed by JKR needing to keep the connection between Snape and Lily secret until the very end, but she makes this work retrospectively from a characterisation perspective in the Prince’s Tale by depicting a Snape who is difficult to be friends with and who doesn’t recognise what true friendship *should* be because he’s never had it, and a humanised (not a saint) Lily who’s been quietly realigning herself away from her difficult friend for a very long time without making it crystal clear to him what she’s doing. It doesn’t make her bad, it makes her a very normal 15 year old pretty, popular girl with all the positive traits that entails (confidence, vivaciousness, fearlessness) as well as the negative (thoughtlessness, a lack of empathy towards those less socially adept).

Thank you for your message, anon. 

I understand where you’re coming from, and while some people interpret the scene as flirting or as "laying the groundwork for their eventual romance," especially when viewed through the lens of classical literature and 'enemies to lovers' tropes, I see it differently. For me, attraction doesn’t automatically equal flirting. I do recognize subtle cues in Lily’s behavior that suggest she might be physically attracted to James, and yes, there’s some tension, but I wouldn’t categorize that as flirting. To me, flirting is intentional—a deliberate way to say, "Hey, I’m interested in you; let’s date.” That’s not what’s happening here. While Lily may have had some attraction to James, her intention certainly wasn’t to express that to him, particularly because his bullying and arrogance were significant turn-offs. This is consistent with the fact that she only began dating James in their seventh year when he supposedly "deflated" his ego and stopped bullying others. She valued the growth she saw in him, which made him someone she could consider dating at that point. (Whether he genuinely matured is another discussion, but I won’t delve into that here.)

I don’t deny that Lily’s conflicting feelings toward James might have influenced her defense of Snape to some extent, but to call her defense completely “half-assed" because she was supposedly “flirting” with James seems like a stretch. (Honestly, I’m considering posting the whole scene because it feels like people may have forgotten what actually happened or have only skimmed it.)

From an external perspective, Lily’s defense might appear somewhat weak or insufficient, especially given the severity of the situation. However, it's crucial to understand that this perception does not fully capture the complexity of Lily’s internal experience. Lily’s primary goal was to stop the bullying by publicly insulting and embarrassing James. She’s clearly trying to de-escalate the situation by first shouting at them, and when that doesn’t work, she takes out her wand, ready to escalate things if necessary. While it may not have been the most forceful defense, it was still a defense, and it clearly demonstrated her disapproval of their behavior. Initially, it even seemed effective, as James did perform the countercurse to the full body-bind curse. However, after Snape called Lily a Mudblood, she left, and James and Sirius resumed bullying him.

From an internal perspective, in my view, the primary factor influencing Lily’s defense was the state of her deteriorating friendship with Snape. As I’ve mentioned in previous posts and reblogs, their friendship was strained, and she likely had conflicting feelings about him. As you pointed out, she was gradually distancing herself from him due to his behavior. After years of standing by Snape, excusing his actions, and pretending everything was fine, Lily likely felt frustrated and betrayed. She was torn between her past loyalty to him and her current disapproval, making it challenging for her to respond more forcefully. While I do wish she’d done more (and she certainly could have), her feelings are understandable given everything that had transpired between them.

Regarding the notion that Snape noticed any "flirting," I respectfully disagree. Snape didn’t lash out at Lily because he saw her "flirting" with James or noticed any subtle expression. His focus was on defending himself from Sirius and James. Additionally, he wouldn’t have seen her expression since his robes were hanging over his head while he was suspended upside down:

"James whirled about; a second flash of light later, Snape was hanging upside down in the air, his robes falling over his head to reveal skinny, pallid legs and a pair of graying underpants."

The more likely reason for his outburst was that he felt humiliated and emasculated by James, especially when James said, "Lucky Evans was here Snivellus —,” as he let Snape down. That likely exacerbated Snape’s embarrassment, leading him to lash out with, "I don’t need help from a filthy little Mudblood like her." It seems like he was trying to regain some dignity, and the slur slipped out in a moment of anger and shame.

All in all, you’re right—Lily isn’t a saint; no one is. And while I’m not eager to compliment JKR the TERF, I do think she did a good job of humanizing her characters. Lily isn’t as fleshed out compared to other minor characters like James, and I do wish we’d seen more of her flaws. That said, her response to the situation, while somewhat imperfect, reflects the complexities of her character, which makes her more relatable and human.

While we may not completely agree, I appreciate your interpretation and opinion, anon. Thank you for sharing your perspective. 💫

*As a side note, I want to clarify that I’m not trying to excuse Lily for not defending Snape more effectively; I’m simply trying to view the situation from her perspective, as I do with other characters when analyzing them. Additionally, I want to emphasize that I’m not hating on Snape. Some people have taken my posts and reblogs about Lily as an excuse to criticize Snape, but that’s not my intention at all. I clearly identify as a "Snape defender" in my bio. Just because I’m exploring Lily’s perspective in SWM doesn’t mean I don’t also understand Snape’s situation. I have other posts dedicated to him on my blog.

[casasupernovas]

thinking about how in 'snape's worst memory' when james potter tells sirius black he knows how to rid him of his current boredom, indicating severus snape, the book literally describes sirius going very still, like a dog who had just spotted a rabbit.

you lot are convinced that it was just a 'rivalry' right, but if this were to be a rivarly, snape would just be another dog. dogs fighting. not the literal PREY. a dog and a rabbit? like a HUNT?! are you KIDDING ME?!

[annabtg]

Attention

a no-prompt @jilymicrofics

After the Defence Against The Dark Arts OWL exam, the Marauders relax out in the grounds, but James Potter's attention is not really on his friends.

In honour of my beloved boy's birthday, here you have him, being a complete and utter idiot ❤️❤️

Read on AO3! Completed, 300 words.

[ravenclawloverofseverussnape]

I think Severus's worst memory is if they took off his pants.

If it happened that Severus in his worst memory did have his underwear removed, it is implicit since he was upset when Harry tried to do the levicorpus and was exposed since Lily abandoned him in that scene, whoever says that it didn't happen is a fatal mistake .

[celestemagnoliathewriter]

What do you think was the immediate aftermath to the “Prank”? I actually do think Sirius was remorseful for what he did at the time(I think his attitude in PoA could be explained by how he was in Azkaban all those years, had to survive on very little, and was just not in a good place to process his past properly at the time. And he does acknowledge that he acted poorly during SWM, so I feel like with time he would realize that he could’ve handled those situations better- even if Snape could be a dick lol. At a certain point someone has to take the high road XD), but I think it still would have taken a while for Remus to forgive him or for the group to go back to the way it was. But if I’m being honest, I feel like the group never really went back to the way it was when we consider how both Remus and Sirius thought the other was a spy :/. I also think that James would have been put in a hard spot, because he’s incredibly loyal to his friends, and Sirius is(let’s face it lol) his favorite, but this “prank” could have gone very wrong in so many different ways and I feel that James may have been able to recognize more than Sirius at first.

(I also don’t understand why JKR would place SWM after “The Prank” because why on earth would James and Sirius continue to antagonize Snape to that extent when he now knows one of their best friend’s deepest and darkest secret(and there couldn’t have been anything magical keeping Snape from saying anything, seeing as he gives away the secret in Book 3)? But I digress lol(although I will say that one minor change I make for myself is imagining the Prank as happening after SWM since that makes more sense to me)

I have so many thoughts on “The Prank” mainly because while I love Sirius(and I do think his good qualities outweigh his bad ones), this situation showcases one of his biggest flaws(he can be reckless to the point where other people can/are at the risk of getting seriously hurt or worse) and I just find it really interesting to explore that and how it would have affected the Marauders and their dynamic at the time

Oooh boy do I have THOUGHTS about the Prank and SWM. I'm actually very okay with SWM happening after the Prank. It shows that James and Sirius took a LONG time to grow and were still dicks late into their fifth year. But let's get to the fun!

Immediate aftermath of the Prank:

I wholeheartedly agree that the group was never the same after the Prank. I think the Marauders were always on thin ice or precarious ground, and it was only because of James that they were all together. Sirius and James were like magnets for each other. James picked up the underdog, Remus, and Remus brought in the super underdog, Peter. That's not to say that Sirius didn't care for Remus and Peter, but everything in canon suggests that Sirius was a Prongs fangirl, not a Moony or Wormtail fangirl.

But let's get to the Prank. Snape thought something was up with Lupin. I believe Sirius thought one of two things: 1) fuck around and find out, and 2) he's not actually stupid enough to go whomping willow/werewolf hunting. There is definitely some blame on Severus for following through, but it's more on Sirius for underestimating Severus and potentially ruining Remus's life. Because it was James who pulled Severus back, Sirius probably felt more remorse than had it been someone else.

I believe that after the Prank, Remus's trust in Sirius was irrevocably changed. I think that Remus implicitly trusted Sirius before, but after the Prank, the nature of the friendship changed. I imagine that Remus didn't change much outwardly. He's a coward at heart and didn't want to rock the boat. But the thing is, Sirius isn't stupid. He almost certainly noticed a change in Remus's behavior. Remus probably went more passive-aggressive, and that laid the foundation for Sirius believing Remus to be the spy later, because of his behavior change. For Remus, it's the same thing, because of Sirius's capacity to use him for a cruel prank.

I do think that they were friends and remained friendly. James was the foundation for their friendship, and as long as James was alive and friendly with both, they would remain friends. However, with more people dying, Remus off with werewolves and Sirius doing who-knows-what, it would make sense for Sirius to think that Remus was a spy and vice versa. When Halloween '81 happened and the Potters were killed, Remus was probably shocked but not surprised. Sirius was capable of darkness.

And THIS is why I'm very okay with the Prank happening before SWM. Imagine Remus thinking the same thing during SWM - 'guys, please stop antagonizing him' - and James and Sirius continue antagonizing Severus for fun, because they're bored. This is abundant proof that Sirius still had a lot of growing up to do, as did James. Imagine Remus after the Potters die, thinking how Sirius could do this?, but then being reminded of SWM, where Sirius continued to play with his food, so to speak. Imagine Remus thinking it impossible for Sirius to turn his back on his friends, but after Peter is 'killed', and Remus was almost exposed in the Prank, that means the only person left for Sirius to betray was James. With that track record, Remus could've very well thought Sirius was the traitor.

I love Sirius as well. My man, like Remus, has layers. Their friendship in later years - post-Azkaban - was cobbled together by shared memories of James and years of trauma/betrayal by one another and Peter. At this point I imagine a friendship of convenience - they're friends because few people understand the trauma they went through, but they're never going to be BFFs the way that James and Sirius were. If Sirius is fire, James is the sunshine that fuels him, while Remus is a moldy wet log of a human being.

As always @puppyduckster you've given me tremendous food for thought and provided excellent insight on the characters we so love.

[expectopatronum18]

I absolutely hate the whole 'snape loved lily' plot twist. People often equate it to the way Sirius still loved and missed james years after his death and went to insane lengths to protect his son, but tht was so not the case with snily.

Coz snape and lily had such a toxic, imperfect relationship in canon, but instead of treating it tht way it was never addressed. It wud hv been so interesting to explore this, but the series just doesn't.

Both of them r awful friends to each other. Snape's faults r obviously pretty clear (aiming to join a terrorist group tht believes ppl lyk his friend shouldn't be alive...yea tht doesn't need to be mentioned twice lol). Don't get me wrong, lily was completely right to cut Snape off, but it wasn't lyk she was a good friend even before tht. Can u ever imagine Ron or Hermione almost smiling if Draco was exposing Harry's underpants to a crowd of jeering students? Nope. They wud throw hands, period. Can u imagine any of the marauders doing tht to each other? (their internal dynamics might not be the healthiest but they wudnt stand for it if an outsider bullied their friends). Absolutely not. Coz it's not about these characters, it's just... not how u react when ur 'friend' is getting tormented (or anyone else for tht matter, but friend in this context specifically). Also can u imagine Ron or Hermione relying on school rumours saying tht Draco saved Harry's life without asking Harry about his version of the event first? Nope. Can u see what I'm getting at here?

Lily wasn't even a good friend to Snape to begin with, but he loved her until the end (irrespective of whether u want to see it as romantic or platonic). Now, I cud buy the narrative tht lily was the only person who was ever kind to him and thts y he clung on to her, but thts not how canon sees it. The source material doesn't address the nuances of this relationship in any meaningful way other than 'snape loved lily and tht is y he switched sides'.

Which is y the reason he switches sides, and his continued love for lily until he dies at 38 seems sort of shallow to me. Coz it wud be different if he'd hurt someone who truly loved him, but thts clearly not the case (u cud say tht lily loved him and did wrong by him too but tht isn't canon, given tht canon doesn't think she ever wronged him to begin with). Just feels lyk he was gaslit by the author tbh

[sendandburn]

What was so funny about Mulciber attacking Mary Macdonald with Dark Magic that Snape described it as "just a laugh"?

"Let’s make something as clear as possible. We have no idea if Snape and Lily were even present when whatever happened to Mary Macdonald happened. That is how little information we have available. The only two people in the series that discuss it. And we don’t even know if they were there at the time. Let that sink in for a moment.

Snape says it was just a laugh. Lily says it was Dark Magic. And states thatJames and the Marauders do not use Dark Magic when Snape tries to compare what they do with what was done to Mary. She also considers Mulcibers sense of humour sick. There are a few ways to interpret this.

Snape was there and is lying/does consider it just a laugh when someone that isn’t him is being bullied. Lily was also there and finds what was done to Mary worse than what James does in SWM.

2. Snape wasn’t there and has heard secondhand that it was just a laugh or bit of fun that got out of hand. He appears to believe said account. Lily was there and knows it was worse than SWM.

3. Snape was there and considers it just a laugh. Lily wasn’t there and from what other people have told her about it considers it to be Dark Magic and worse than SWM.

4. Neither Snape not Lily we’re there. And both of their assessments come from secondhand information from people who either sided with Mary or Mulciber. People who could quite easily have lied to one or both of them.

One is the most unlikely possibility. Since Lily doesn’t argue that Snape let his friend Mulciber do xyz to Mary Three is likewise unlikely.

As Snape being there would have likely been mentioned to Lily if she heard the news secondhand and she’d make the same argument as above.

Snape being friends with someone doing evil stuff behind his back makes sense given the arguments she makes in canon. Not Snape already being aware of what his friend is doing and letting it happen.

That leaves two and four. And personally I tend towards four.

Given Lily does not say something like “I was there Severus it definitely wasn’t “just a laugh”” But as you’ll notice I’m talking probability not certainty when I say I find it most likely neither of them were present for what happened.

We have a fairly wide disparity of reactions but if we assume that what Mulciber did was Dark Magic and both Snape and Lily’s friends told the truth here’s what I think happened; Mulciber cast the Imperius Curse on Mary under his breath. And forced her to do relatively harmless but embarrassing and humiliating things for his and some mates amusement.

If we assume they’re prejudiced and cruel let’s say kissing the hem of their robes, calling herself a filthy Mudblood and things to that effect. If confronted by Mary’s friends or a teacher he lies and insists it was just a powerful Confundus. Or outright denies it was him.

As no one can prove it was Dark Magic/ that Mulciber did it he gets away with it. Facing light punishment at worst. Snape’s friends tell him of the stuff they forced Mary to do in a way that he finds amusing in the telling. He is convinced they were just having a laugh and it wasn’t as bad as what James has done to him. Lily’s friends tell her they’re sure Mulciber used the Imperius Curse. And she gets told how Mulciber wasn’t even punished properly for it. How upset Mary was etc. She believes it’s considerably worse than what she’s seen James do. Because she saw what it did to the person afterwards.

Now for a mature adult it’s pretty obvious this kind of mental violation is deadly serious even if no physical lasting harm was done. But a teenager hungry for acceptance could relatively easily not linger on that form of harm. And think “they weren’t actually hurt so where’s the harm?”.

If my scenario is accurate and Snape was told outright that it was Imperius not Confundus they used. He should not have found it funny. He ought to have considered it a significant violation of another person. But we can say exactly the same of everyone in the crowd during SWM. Remus and Lily are the only people outside that have any issue with what Snape was being subjected to. SWM was slightly less severe (provides my scenario is accurate and everything that Mulciber did was cruel but petty) but the people there actively witnessed someone being hurt and tormented. No secondhand accounts. No distance from someone else being upset and hurt. Yet they laughed and found it amusing.

Should we consider the people in the crowd psychopaths or as empathic as Death Eaters? Snape is a teenager. The people in the crowd are teenagers. Teenagers can be very s**tty under the right circumstances. (...) Snape is wrong to find it amusing yes. Just as the crowd is to find his humiliation amusing. But it doesn’t make him abnormal, sub-human, evil etc. He did choose a pretty dark path and took time to turn back from it as much as he did. But people like Remus who know it’s not cool to laugh at someone else’s suffering. But who don’t do anything to help/stop other people laughing are a bit depressingly rare at secondary school. People like Lily who for whatever reason can tell when things go too far and actively try to stop it even more so. " (Analysis by Alex Forbes)

[mrstellmeafuckingsecret]

guys why is swm about s/a ?? why do people say snape was s/aed?? i mean ok i know why but like .............. pantsing isnt ? sexual ? it doesnt have those intentions / undertones ? in the scene , too , theres nothing like that going on ? it was shitty and horrible and humiliating and probably made snape feel like shit which i will not now or never defend the mauraders for but ......... it's not s/a .............

ignore tags