I'm respecting the series as a whole more as a result of the reread.
Yes. The scene that just came into focus for me is the finale of Prizoner of Azkaban, where Sirius Black escapes and Snape goes completely spare. At the time, this seems to point to Snape's general instability and unpleasantness, that he'd fly off the handle so violently just because his least favorite student has outwitted him again and one of his boyhood rivals is again at large. It's even a little funny, if you dislike the character enough. But if Snape genuinely believed that Sirius, not Peter Pettigrew, was the man who had betrayed James and Lily Potter to Voldemort—after Snape had promised his loyalty to Dumbledore in exchange for their protection—then it's not funny at all, and it's not for the sake of some petty public-school grudge that Snape wants Sirius back behind bars, and in fact he has a right to wonder what in the hell is Harry playing at, because as far as anyone knows this newfound godfather is the same man directly responsible for his parents' murder. That scene always bothered me, because it seemed so out of character. Now it doesn't. It's not a personal affront; it's old pain raked up again.
And there are so many layers. I don't doubt it's true, what Dumbledore tells Harry at the end of the first book: "Your father did something Snape could never forgive. He saved his life. Funny, the way people's minds work, isn't it? Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt." Needing James Potter to save his skin from a prank of Sirius Black's? I imagine Snape resented it to the end of his days. But to imply that any protection Harry might receive from Snape is simply paying off that old debt— The truth is the best misdirection.
...that said, there are still all of these bits of worldbuilding that could have been so fantastic.
no subject
Yes. The scene that just came into focus for me is the finale of Prizoner of Azkaban, where Sirius Black escapes and Snape goes completely spare. At the time, this seems to point to Snape's general instability and unpleasantness, that he'd fly off the handle so violently just because his least favorite student has outwitted him again and one of his boyhood rivals is again at large. It's even a little funny, if you dislike the character enough. But if Snape genuinely believed that Sirius, not Peter Pettigrew, was the man who had betrayed James and Lily Potter to Voldemort—after Snape had promised his loyalty to Dumbledore in exchange for their protection—then it's not funny at all, and it's not for the sake of some petty public-school grudge that Snape wants Sirius back behind bars, and in fact he has a right to wonder what in the hell is Harry playing at, because as far as anyone knows this newfound godfather is the same man directly responsible for his parents' murder. That scene always bothered me, because it seemed so out of character. Now it doesn't. It's not a personal affront; it's old pain raked up again.
And there are so many layers. I don't doubt it's true, what Dumbledore tells Harry at the end of the first book: "Your father did something Snape could never forgive. He saved his life. Funny, the way people's minds work, isn't it? Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt." Needing James Potter to save his skin from a prank of Sirius Black's? I imagine Snape resented it to the end of his days. But to imply that any protection Harry might receive from Snape is simply paying off that old debt— The truth is the best misdirection.
...that said, there are still all of these bits of worldbuilding that could have been so fantastic.
There's a lot of extraneous snogging.