I think it's intentionally ambiguous--ie we never actually SEE it--but I always assumed he was Marked. And Draco was in very, very deep--we see him tasked with killing Dumbledore, nearly killing others, as well as torturing people. We also know Regulus was a DE and he was certainly not very old when he was Marked since he died so young. But I find either scenario believable. It doesn't throw me out of a fic one way or the other.
The other thing though is that the Mark fades. So any fic post-war, I don't expect it to be noticeable. Snape shows his Mark as proof Voldemort returned. That wouldn't make any sense unless it was gone otherwise.
Snape strode forward, past Dumbledore, pulling up the left sleeve of his robes as he went. He stuck out his forearm and showed it to Fudge, who recoiled.
"There," said Snape harshly. "There. The Dark Mark. It is not as clear as it was an hour ago, when it burned black, but you can still see it. Every Death Eater had the sign burned into him by the Dark Lord."
Even here, it's not clear only an hour after he was called. So years later? With no Voldemort around? Perhaps a faint scar at most. Because again otherwise I don't understand, well, anything about Snape and his Mark. How could Dumbledore have defended him if he only needed to show his arm? (Though, Dumbledore certainly is known to overlook things when convenient.)
Not sure whether that helps or not really. Like I said, I think he is Marked but I don't think, unless it's set HBP or DH, it actually makes a HUGE difference. It would just be another scar. ETA: At most. It's possible it wouldn't show at all.
The other thing I am adding is regarding the art. I think, if anything, that's just correcting what the MOVIE tells us. She keeps it unclear and I can see wanting the art to reflect what is actually in the book. I don't think that means he either does or doesn't have it. The illustration is just saying, "we don't know from canon."
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2014-12-19 02:46 pm (UTC)The other thing though is that the Mark fades. So any fic post-war, I don't expect it to be noticeable. Snape shows his Mark as proof Voldemort returned. That wouldn't make any sense unless it was gone otherwise.
Snape strode forward, past Dumbledore, pulling up the left sleeve of his robes as he went. He stuck out his forearm and showed it to Fudge, who recoiled.
"There," said Snape harshly. "There. The Dark Mark. It is not as clear as it was an hour ago, when it burned black, but you can still see it. Every Death Eater had the sign burned into him by the Dark Lord."
Even here, it's not clear only an hour after he was called. So years later? With no Voldemort around? Perhaps a faint scar at most. Because again otherwise I don't understand, well, anything about Snape and his Mark. How could Dumbledore have defended him if he only needed to show his arm? (Though, Dumbledore certainly is known to overlook things when convenient.)
Not sure whether that helps or not really. Like I said, I think he is Marked but I don't think, unless it's set HBP or DH, it actually makes a HUGE difference. It would just be another scar. ETA: At most. It's possible it wouldn't show at all.
The other thing I am adding is regarding the art. I think, if anything, that's just correcting what the MOVIE tells us. She keeps it unclear and I can see wanting the art to reflect what is actually in the book. I don't think that means he either does or doesn't have it. The illustration is just saying, "we don't know from canon."