The Breaking of the Hogwarts Fellowship

[Lalwendë]

I'd never have compared Snape to any character in LotR, but the one I would say he is most close to is Saruman, simply as Saruman is one of the few characters who has turned from the 'good' to the 'bad' and yet even here the comparison is flimsy as Snape has seemed evil, found not to be so, and then eventually been revealed as such; Saruman seems to simply turn from good to bad, yet he does retain that quality which manages to seduce people over to his view.

Perhaps rather than LotR being an 'influence' in terms of theme on Harry Potter, it is more that both series of books use themes which in the end are fairly universal and which also admittedly work well in generating an exciting plot!

[the phantom]

I'm surprised no one has said that Snape is Gollum, pointing out that they are both complicated and twisted, have flashes of what could be goodness, but generally are evil and are dominated by a greater evil power. And maybe Harry will show Snape mercy as Frodo showed Gollum mercy and things will work out for the best.

But that's not really what I think of Snape- I'm just saying that for the purpose of comparing him to Gollum. In reality, I think there are at least one or two important somethings that Rowling has not told us about Severus, and that if we knew them we would be fairly confident that Snape is not on the side of evil.

Yes, yes, you can mark that down and make fun of my prediction if Snape turns out to be bad. But I think I'm right. The next book will make Snape a hero of sorts.

Frodo saved the world, but it wasn't saved for him. He died a sort of death. I think it is likely that Harry will too.

The fate of the Death Eaters? I expect most of them will adhere to their beliefs and eat death. Thankfully, many good guys will pass up this dish and opt for the bread pudding.

Also, I think the next book will reveal that Ron and Hermione are the twin offspring of Darth Voldemort.

[Firefoot]

I'm agreeing with Lalwende on the Snape/Saruman idea. I had started to think about it last night, but I am hesitant to post any strong ideas because it's been six months since I read HBP and longer for the others. So if I mess some facts up... blame a faulty memory.

Snape definitely strikes me as being loyal only really to himself - he'll pay lip service to those higher up but only to keep himself in a good position to move up. He's really only looking out for himself, playing both Dumbledore and Voldemort to his advantage. Power for himself seems to be the theme here - similar to Saruman, helping out the good guys while pursuing his own ends, eventually hooking up with Sauron as well. But while Saruman's change is pretty steady in one direction (pretty steadily good to bad), Snape seems to flip-flop all over the place... you're not really ever sure where he's at - good (okay, he was never the most pleasant fellow but I wouldn't call him evil before he hooked up with Voldemort), bad, good?, bad, and in book 7... more bad? good?

As for the similar themes and parallels... both Rowling and Tolkien drew on mythology, Rowling primarily Greek and Tolkien more Norse, but Tolkien knew Latin and Greek so I highly doubt he would be unfamiliar with Greek mythology. From what I know of mythology, there are many similar themes and often similar stories running through those of different cultures. This could explain some of it.

Great Wizard lost! - Gandalf/Dumbledore. Will Dumbledore return? I don't think so.

I hightly doubt it as well, especially considering Rowling's theme of death and the acceptance of it. (Sorcerer's stone, "To the well organized mind, death is only the next great adventure," deaths of prominant characters such as Sirius, etc.). However, to take the loss of the Great Wizard parallel further, even though Gandalf came back, he didn't come back and help Frodo, the main hero, out. Frodo (with Sam) had to do it on his own without Gandalf's guidance, similar to how Harry (with Ron and Hermione) is going to have to complete his task without Dumbledore's guidance.

Breaking of the Fellowship - which I alluded to in the thread title. Hogwarts may be no more; it may survive, but apparently not for Harry, Ron, and Hermione. (Italics mine)

Even though this wasn't the point LMP was getting at, that part about Hogwarts not being there for Harry, Ron, and Hermione reminded me of how the Shire really wasn't meant for Frodo anymore after the quest. Now we'll see what happens to Harry in Book 7, but I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't some kind of the same kind of growing up and growing out. The fact that he is already leaving Hogwarts suggests that it may be so.

[littlemanpoet]

Ooh what a fun bucket of opinions and ideas!

I want to deal with Sources in a separate post.

Originally Posted by Estelyn

Gríma - even the names "Snape " and "Snake" sound similar.

Originally Posted by Cailin

And Snape? He’s definitely a good guy at heart.

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Snape makes me think about Boromir.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Saruman is one of the few characters who has turned from the 'good' to the 'bad' and yet even here the comparison is flimsy as Snape has seemed evil, found not to be so, and then eventually been revealed as such...

Originally Posted by the phantom

I'm surprised no one has said that Snape is Gollum, pointing out that they are both complicated and twisted, have flashes of what could be goodness, but generally are evil and are dominated by a greater evil power.

Originally Posted by Firefoot

Snape definitely strikes me as being loyal only really to himself - he'll pay lip service to those higher up but only to keep himself in a good position to move up. He's really only looking out for himself, playing both Dumbledore and Voldemort to his advantage. Power for himself seems to be the theme here - similar to Saruman...

My thought had been Boromir, but with qualifications.

For the record, I agree with those of you who think Snape will turn out for the good in the end. And I don't think he's in it for his advantage. Rather, he's trying to survive. Imagine being in his place. You're one of the more powerful wizards, a former Death Eater; being former, now that Voldemort is back, you are considered a traitor unless you can persuade and convince and demonstrate the opposite, just in order to save your skin. That means Snape is forced to play double agent. He knows that Dumbledore is going to give him the benefit of the doubt, yet is no fool; so he tried to do as much for Dumbledore as he can without appearing to do too much against Voldemort. A tricky proposition for anyone at all! Why he swore that oath, however, I'm still trying to figure out. At any rate, I think Snape is still merely trying to survive, especially having sworn the oath. Did he swear it in order to keep that aunt of Malfoy from getting the mind of Voldemort turned against him? That's the only thing I can think of.

[Glirdan]

I must disagree with those of you who believe that Snape will turn good. He's a complete and total git who completely betrayed the Order. Of course, we could all go on with proof that he will/will not return to the good side and argue, but that's not what this thread is about.

Now, seeing as I just disagreed with the crowd who believes that Snape will turn good, my obvious link to him from LotR will be Saruman and Gollum. Both of them were originally good. Then, they were corrupted by the evil in the Ring and the lust for it. Just like Snape. He was good (inside) in school, until his seventh year when he became a Death Eater. Seeing as he was already deeply immersed in the Dark Arts, it wasn't hard for Voldemort (oh my, I just uttered his name!! [ ]) to convince him to join the Dark side. He lusted for more power and he got it. What makes you think that he's willing to give it up? Was Gollum willing to give it up? True, he did for a short time. But then he lusted for it again and betrayed Frodo. And what about Saruman? He was given two chances to change his ways. Did he? Now I leave you to ponder on that.

[tar-ancalime]

On Snape:

I think Dumbledore knew he was going to have to die. This isn't going to be his fight, but he's got to clear the way for Harry and make one last sacrifice for the cause. I think Snape swore the oath with Dumbledore's blessing. But that's just me.

Now, this from Cailin:

I was a fan of the Harry Potter books long before I even read Lord of the Rings.

makes me feel really old. I was a fan of the Lord of the Rings long before there was a Harry Potter.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

For the record, I agree with those of you who think Snape will turn out for the good in the end. And I don't think he's in it for his advantage. Rather, he's trying to survive. Imagine being in his place. You're one of the more powerful wizards, a former Death Eater; being former, now that Voldemort is back, you are considered a traitor unless you can persuade and convince and demonstrate the opposite, just in order to save your skin. That means Snape is forced to play double agent. He knows that Dumbledore is going to give him the benefit of the doubt, yet is no fool; so he tried to do as much for Dumbledore as he can without appearing to do too much against Voldemort. A tricky proposition for anyone at all! Why he swore that oath, however, I'm still trying to figure out. At any rate, I think Snape is still merely trying to survive, especially having sworn the oath. Did he swear it in order to keep that aunt of Malfoy from getting the mind of Voldemort turned against him? That's the only thing I can think of.

I also think Snape may turn out to be 'good' in the end. There are a lot of clues in the text that he will do so, only apprent to the reader after some digging, which is appropriate as I also think that only Snape and Dumbledore knew that Snape was in fact on the 'good' side - it would be far too dangerous for anyone else to know this.

Why is Snape willing to take an oath swearing allegiance to Voldermort and to kill Dumbledore? I think he will be instrumental in leading Harry to Voldemort and to their 'final battle'; he has managed to foster an incredible hatred in Harry, who will now pursue him and thus get to the real enemy who is very elusive. It also, from a narrative point of view, makes for a better story as we see Harry being distracted from his real task in order to go after Snape for revenge.

I also believe that Harry will be back at Hogwarts. In much the same way that his Aunt's house provides him with protection, I think Hogwarts also does the same. More importantly, I think that there is at least one Horocrux hidden there, so a return will be necessary. And there was one at Grimmauld Place, the locket, which in fact could now be anywhere if Mundungus or Kreacher took it. There may also be a return to Godric's Hollow as I think Harry may believe a Horocrux is also hidden there.

I have to wonder if there was this level of speculation in between publication of Two Towers and Return of the King? One thing both Tolkien and Rowlings do have in common is their ability to leave us wanting more, from leaving us hanging by a thread. Rowlings has developed this in the later books of the series which have been much more accomplished and dark, whereas Tolkien seemed to have developed this ability from the start - was this a result of his having written all three books at once, in comparison to Rowlings' more gradual writing process?

[Cailín]

Now why do you feel so strongly that Snape is evil, Glirdan? Personally, I have never doubted him, but I may be blinded since he is my favourite character. It all comes down to trusting Dumbledore, as is said by Lupin in book six too - if Snape is evil, Dumbledore has failed in the end, and not only that, he has shown weakness by pleading for his life. I just cannot believe that. But that is not entirely relevant here, I suppose.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

One thing both Tolkien and Rowlings do have in common is their ability to leave us wanting more, from leaving us hanging by a thread. Rowlings has developed this in the later books of the series which have been much more accomplished and dark, whereas Tolkien seemed to have developed this ability from the start - was this a result of his having written all three books at once, in comparison to Rowlings' more gradual writing process?

It is evident from JK Rowling's writing that she, unlike Tolkien, did not know how exactly things were going to end from the start. She obviously had a general idea, but she has herself admitted that some things did not work out the way she wanted them to work and there are several continuity mistakes to be found in her novels. They are few, though. I'm not sure whether I agree Tolkien leaves you hanging by a thread as much as Rowling does - I actually find the cliffhangers and red herrings in the Potter series far more agonizing, but that may be because Lord of the Rings is such a familiar story. I do agree that JK Rowling has grown as an author since she started writing the first book, while Tolkien's style remained consistent throughout (arguably not in the first few chapters that seem to have some "Hobbit" influence).

What makes Tolkien, in my opinion, superior to most and possibly all fantasy authors is that he wrote his trilogy in one go. It happens so often that a series goes astray just because the author wishes to publish and thus sell more books or does not dare to abandon a familiar setting… Of course, Tolkien did the same thing but Lord of the Rings is still done and can easily be read and enjoyed as a complete work.

As for their return to Hogwarts... well, whether Harry returns or not, JK Rowling has to (and has already gradually been doing that) let go of the structure of the previous novels. It should be interesting.

Now, this from Cailin makes me feel really old. I was a fan of the Lord of the Rings long before there was a Harry Potter.

Tar, it has little to do with feeling or being old. I just read Tolkien rather… later than most people here. You can actually look up the exact date I started reading: it's the same day I made my 100th post on the Downs.

[littlemanpoet]

These are not meant to be one to one correlations, just a reminder on that.

It struck me that Harry Potter is not the only Rowling character who corresponds to Frodo. Who is it that is given the almost impossible task? Who faces death? Who is it who must struggle through until the bitter end? And who is it that is saved from doing the most horrible thing that could be done, by the supposed betrayal of another? Yes, Frodo in LotR; but who in HP? Draco Malfoy. And Snape saves him from murdering Dumbledore by doing so himself. Murdering Dumbledore I find to be akin to claiming the Ring. It would have been the point of no return for Malfoy, and he is saved from it. He isn't even completely willing to do it, as Dumbledore assures him that he is no killer; but would become one if he had followed through. So Snape is akin to Gollum, and Malfoy to Frodo. See it?

By contrast, what's HP's primary title (whether he likes it or not) through HBP? "The Chosen One". Who's the chosen one in LotR? Isn't that more of an Aragorn type role? It's interesting, however, that Malfoy's struggle is seen at third hand instead of at first hand. (um, so what would be second hand? heck I don't know )

[Eruanna]

An interesting connection between Frodo and Aragorn, that I had not considered before lmp.
Although this is not meant to be a one to one correlation I do have to say that when I read the first HP book and the description of Harry's scar (which still causes him pain, therefore is never really healed) I immediately thought that Harry was Frodo. There are also, of course, the other similarities already mentioned.
I also have to join with those who believe that Snape will prove to be one of the good guys, in the end.