Talk:Eileen Prince

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Harry Potter, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter universe. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Unknown This article has not been rated on the quality assessment scale. Unknown This article has not been rated on the importance assessment scale.

Contents 1 Blood purity 2 Nickname,HBP 3 Hair color and more 4 Eileen and Tobias Snape

[edit] Blood purity

Hermione conjectures in Ch 25 that IF Prince's father was a Wizard and her mother a Muggle, that makes Eileen a "Half-blood prince". She was speculating. Later, when we learn who the HPB is, this suggests that Eileen was Pure-blood. We know for sure Hermione found a marriage announcement in the Prophet which said Tobias Snape was a Muggle who married Eileen Prince (ch 30). Friday 19:30, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Ah, I see now. Very sorry. --12.203.175.223 19:37, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

No biggie, just figured it should be sourced here to prevent rampant speculation. Friday 19:39, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Though it does put into aside question of what you would call the child of a Muggle and Half-blood witch/wizard. --12.203.175.223 19:48, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, it's always possible Eileen wasn't pure blood. We don't know. Snape would still consider himself a half blood tho, unless he was entirely muggle born (which leads me to believe he's definitely not muggle born.) Friday 19:51, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

12.203.175, JK made it clear that the child of a Muggle and Half-blood would be a Half-blood. Basically, EVERYONE is Half-blood unless both their parents were muggles (then they're muggle-born) or both were pure-blood (then they're pure-blood).

[edit] Nickname,HBP

The description of events as discovered by hermione is still incorrect. I do not have a precise enough recollection to check them without re-reading the book. It has definitely not been established that snape called himself half blood prince. He has admitted only that he was called the half blood prince. Calling yourself Lord Voldermort is plainly adopting a title, but calling yourself half-blood would basically be adopting an insult. I am not sure whether the book says hermione believed he did this, however.Sandpiper 02:18, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

If I recall correctly he wrote it on his own Advanced Potions book, which is how they found out about the HBP in the first place.. Jarwulf 17:53, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Someone wrote it into the book. We do not know whether he did, and in fact we do not know whether it was his book. Precisely, we know the book said it was 'property of the HBP', and had helpful hints in the same handwriting. Then, we know that Snape claimed to have created some of the spells in it (at least a year before it was class textbook), and that he was the HBP. It remains possible, for example, that Lily wrote the book and gave it as a farewell present to Snape. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sandpiper (talk • contribs) 00:36, 18 November 2005.

This is clearly getting ridiculous. Snape knew how to cure Scermptsa – a spell mentioned only in the HBP's book, clearly not a spell mentioned or taught in school. Who would know it? The creator of the spell, Snape. He also knew about Levicorpus. He is also extremely suspicious when he Slughorn praises Harry as a great Potion-maker, and knew that his old book was still in the cabinet. Harry says it himself: Snape didn't say anything because he would trip up Dumbledore.

The book is assigned to all sixth years. We have no proof at all that Lily ever befriended Snape – we see her defend him, but Snape rebuffs her. Lily calling herself a Half-Blood when she is clearly a Muggle-born? And Prince? That seems ridiculous. The book also contians a lot of Dark Arts spells %ndash; Sirius says that Snape knew more curses in his frist year than half of the seventh years. lily in the Dark Arts? Not probable.

The theory that Lily wrote the potions and Snape the spells is diluted by the fact that the handwriting in both areas is shown as the same. In the U.S edition check p. 189 for the potions and p. 238 for the curses. I would also like to add that the HBP's book is over fifty years old, which is why Harry didn't think his parents could have written that book. It makes a lot more sense that Elieen Prince bought it and gave it to her son as a hand-me-down. Hbdragon88 01:51, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

All the age of the book really tells us is that it was likely second hand at the time Lily and Snape were in classes together. We know nothing about Eileen which suggests she had anything to do with what was written inside it. It makes as much sense to argue that Severus bought it second hand for school. The Weasley's also buy second hand books, so it is not a novel idea. Hermione originally thought it might be Eileens because of the name, but we don't really have any reason to think it was ever hers.

No, the idea would be that Lily invented the name for Snape. This fits very well with the notion of them being friends, and the fact that it is a particular kind of name which could only be used in a friendly way in quite limited circumstances. It was secret, and an insult. Lily, being a mudblood could use the phrase half-blood as a sort of compliment for a friend. We know they were classmates, and we know Lily was the sort of person who made friends with the most unlikely people, and none are more unlikely than snape. The idea then would be that she gave her book to him, and wrote her nickname for him into it to formalise her giving it to him.

I think everyone agrees that it is one handwriting only, so one writer, and that this does fit the description, such as we have, of Snape's handwriting. But we do not have a description of Lily's writing. What we do have is the testimony from the books that she was the potions genius, and he was the curses genius. If they hated each other, how did both their work get into the same book? Harry thinks that his father could not have written the book, for some reason he did not consider whether it was his mother. Surprising really, considering he keeps copying the book and Slughon keeps telling him he is doing exactly what his mother did. Still, Harry always gets it wrong (and Hermione gets it right, thats how JKR writes this stuff)...

I think Snape tried to use sectumsempra in the fith year flashback? anyway, it would not be in the least surprising that he was very suspiscious of Harry now having the book, if Harry miraculously starts behaving in class exactly like his mother, which he never did with Snape teaching. Also, Snape pretty much has to have had that book all those years (left in his storeroom). How else did he learn to be so good at potions? Sandpiper 01:57, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

The underlying problem is that we have nothing in the books at all to indicate that Lily and Snape had any kind of relationship. The only interaction we see is in Snape's worst memory, in which he calls her a Mudblood. As a fanfic writer, it's lovely to think the two secretly liked each other, but I do not see much, if anything at all, that supports this in canon.

As for secondhand, I concede that it probably does make sense that it was secondhand by Lily's time, not necessarily connecting it to Elieen Prince.

Yes, we know Lily was a dab hand in potions. However, Snape might have been just as gifted, but we don't know because Slughorn was courting Harry's friendship and never mentioned Snape. If it's the same handwriting, we can conclude it's from the same person. Lily's handwriting is irrelevent unless the book is hers, since we see the SAME handwriting for spells and potions. We know that Lily probably wasn't into the Dark Arts and wasn't as clever as Snape in that area. But because we don't know about Snape's potions skills, we CAN'T assume that both of their efforts are put together in the book. The evidence points to Snape's work entirely.

Slughorn simply tells him that he's as good as his mom, not that he does exactly what his mom does. - Hbdragon88 23:15, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Do we? How do we know that lily was not into dark arts? Slughorn said she should have been in his house, Slytherin. She was exactly the sort to go against what was expected. the fact that there is no strong evidence of a relationship between lily and Snape also simply means there is no evidence for no relationship either. instead we can only judge on the circumstantial evidence of these people being in the same (small) classes at the same time, and necessarily interacting. Then we have what evidence we are given about which person was good at what. No one has ever said that Snape was good at potions at school. As well to assume that pettigrew was the all-time potions student, he does after all brew one to give Voldemort his body back.

Um, Slughorn does say that Harry is as good as his mother, but also that he does the same things as her. For example, instead of brewing an antidote he whips out a bezoar, exactly as she did. Exactly as Snape does not do; Snape is the studious theoretical sort, not the inspired genius sort. In the parallel scene in Harry's class to that previous class with Snape, Hermione is the one working dilligently to analyse the potion, who is the parallel drawn to Snape.

There is also a distinction in the writings in the book; it is the curses which are described as full of crossings out and corrections, as if they were being worked out, not the potions. As if the writer knew potions inside out, but had to work at the curses. Sounds more like lily than Severus. But I am also aware of the opposite argument, that the potions are exact because they are simply copied down from their originator Lily, whereas the curses Snape had to work out and hence include his own workings. But either way there is a disticnction made in the books between the two cases and the abilities of the two people, and both get represented in the potions book. Sandpiper 23:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hair color and more

I can't find a reference in the books saying she had dark hair, so I removed it.

Also removed "pure-blood" (Harry called her that, but he doesn't know) and "possibly Slytherin" (groundless speculation). -- 217.159.160.66 07:56, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't written from a limited perspective; it's supposed to encompass all knowledge that is out there. And Harry did not just call Elieen a pure-blood; it is a fact. If Tobias Snape is a Muggle, and Snape calls himself the half-blood prince, then Elieen had to be a pure-blood. Hbdragon88 22:53, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, technically it may not be. the term half-blood would seem to include quarter-blood, and perhaps even any-fraction-blood. So a half-blood might be the son of another half-blood marrying a muggle. Sandpiper 00:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eileen and Tobias Snape

There is a quite successful page for James and Lily Potter, which has combined information for the two characters. It has rather more information than is on the Eileen Prince and Tobias Snape pages. It seems to me these two could be combined. Comments? Sandpiper 08:39, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I have to somewhat disagree. While it is easy to combine the two together, you're looking at writing an "Elieen_Prince_and_Tobias_Snape" article, for saying that it is "Elieen Snape" ties the fact that Elieen Prince is Snape's mother. Kyd said it best in his edit. Hbdragon88 03:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Eileen Prince is also a distinct character for part of the book: the crossing-looking former Gobstones Captain whom Hermione thinks might have been the "Half-Blood Prince." She warrants a seperate article -- if only to avoid the spoilers inherent in an immediate association with Tobias (or Severus) Snape. -Kyd 06:39, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I take your point, but who exactly is going to read these articles unless they are seeking information about Eileen Prince, and the existence of a spoiler tag one line down is not going to stop them reading that she married Snape. there is not much else to say about her. I am not convinced the spoiler policy is entirely logical. Sandpiper 02:07, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

and talking of spoilers, who slipped in a gratuitous killing of Albus Dumbledore, what did that have to do with her biography? Sandpiper 02:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I did it. It provides a bit of context in my opinion. Also, it's after the 'spoiler' warning, so I can't see how it can be a problem. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.50.76.193 (talk • contribs) 13:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC).

You can't assume that. That's why there are spoiler tags splattered on almost every page. Hbdragon88 00:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

• On the Tobias Snape talk page there is support for the merging of these two articles. I propose to merge the two but keep the title as just Eileen Prince as she is the more prominant of the two in the books. There really isn't enough information on Tobias to warrant his own article, any information we do know about him would easily fit within the context of this article. Anyone clicking on a link for Tobias would be redirected here, someone would only click on Tobias after they have found out about the whole Snape/Prince thing as he is only mentioned after the revelation, so the spoiler issue is not really a problem. I will do the merger shortly, if anyone feels strongly enough about keeping them seperate please post so it can be discussed. Death Eater Dan 20:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

(indent reset)

Searching for "Tobias Snape" will redirect you to Eileen Prince. All written, wikified incidences of Tobias Snape will lead to Eileen Prince. Whoops. You can't avoid avoid spoilers unless you divorce the — ahem — happy couple and force them to sleep in seperate beds. -Kyd 23:35, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but what is wrong with being directed to eileen prince if you search for Tobias snape? The only thing we know about him is he is a muggle, married eileen and upset his son. there is nothing else to put in his article. It is a fantasy to say that someone will avoid learning that if they see a line saying he is a HP character, followed by a soiler warning, followed by that information. It is impossible not to read it, so it might as well go directly to her page. Under what circumstances would anyone look up tobias snape but not want to know this information?Sandpiper 00:33, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. Someone who encounters the name, out of context, on a discussion forum, and wonders as to the degree of relation to Severus Snape (father, brother, son, second cousin, etc.) without yet knowing the whole HBP angle (i.e. new fans to the series, ones who still haven't read the sixth installment). Most readers will probably figure out the Half-Blood Prince's identity when he is introduced through sarcastic annotations in a potions textbook (I did months before the release -- lucky guess prompted by JKR keeping hush-hush about Snape's magical parentage). However, I know a lot of people whose reading experience was ruined by the whole S.k.D. meme, and, thus, I'm merely advising that we be sensitive and err on the side of caution. -Kyd 09:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

but if someone comes here to look up something about Tobias, then just sees his name as a character, followed by a spoiler warning, what will they do? Give up trying to find informtaion, or simply carry on reading and ignore the spoiler, even if they havn't seen past it already? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sandpiper (talk • contribs) 02:09, 4 February 2006.

I can't say. Just thought I'd lend my two knuts to the matter. -Kyd 04:46, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I like the way that there are two different pages for the two different people. As a user, to be able to click separately on the family tree boxes and get to different pages aids usablity. It's clear and easy. I think that we're going to learn more about Lily and James Potter AND Tobias and Eileen Prince in Book 7. I know that the essense of Wikipedia is flexibility, but why not just accept that these are important characters to the back story and give them each a separate page now? And what no images? There's loads of great fanart out there that makes entries more readable, why does it always have to be movie images? After all HP is a book, not a film series. (sorry I am useless about uploading images, even on pages I start myself, or I would do it myself) Is there some kind of agreement about what HP images that can be used that I am not aware of? Because it is a pity if only 'official' commercial art is being used to illustrate pages. Penguin2006 16:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I think images from the films are used because they are immediately recogniseable, so anyone who has only seen the film will recognise the character and know it is the right page. Help s to identify the character. Anyone who has only read the book will have their own unique idea of what the character should look like.

The issue of having separate pages is something which bothers me. I think that it makes an article, any article, less useful if immediately relevant information is on a separate page. I do not like having to call up extra pages to find stuff. I also do not like having two articles containing virtually the same information. This is contrary to all good principles of information storage. Better to have everything in one place, and redirect from other possible titles. Which is what traditional encyclopedias do. Sandpiper 10:22, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

She's a ravenclaw bee tee dubbleyou