I dislike Lupin's character for the same reason as the OP. What pissed me off the most was him asking Harry to be his son's godfather.

I've also come to dislike Hermione's character. She's began to strike me more as a wish fulfilling self insert with "flaws" that don't really matter.

 

I don't get how many people have 'come to dislike' characters after reading the books. That means any like or dislike is mostly fanon.

In my mind, a rereading of the Harry Potter books leads you to liking characters you didn't like (i.e. Snape) instead of suddenly disliking new ones. Rowling didn't hide anything that would make you dislike a character. No one was a secret bad guy. Dumbledore wasn't a plotting sociopath in his ivory tower, Hermione wasn't a frigid bitch.

The reality is that many people were better than Harry at a lot of things, but he had the pure courage and willingness to die for a cause that made him the hero instead of others.

 

Most of us read the books while we were kids in elementary school. As you grow up your perspective changes and you see things in a different light. Furthermore, literary analysis is certainly applicable here. Rowling might not have "hidden" anything, but there are many things in the series which you notice only as you reread it.
That said, I don't think my impression of characters changed that much, though I can definitely see how it would.

 

I definitely stopped liking Harry.

 

I'd say that I pretty much dislike the same people I always disliked. But after re-reading the books as a (theoretically) more mature adult I disliked them for different reasons.

I disliked Snape as a kid, much as I was supposed to, because he was an overbearing authority figure who shat on the protagonist, my stand-in.

I dislike Snape as an adult because he's a petty, petulant and spiteful man-child with a victim mentality. He has the ability to be better, he has a reason to be better but he steadfastly clings to the ghosts of the past so that he never has to re-examine the narrative he concocted as a naive teenager. Grow the fuck up Snape.

I disliked Umbridge as a kid because she was cruel and vindictive.

I dislike Umbridge as an adult because, even more than that, she is wilfully blinkered. Cruelty is bad, but cruelty in the name of ignorance is worse.

I disliked Malfoy as a kid because he was always making life difficult to Harry and because he was a bully.

I dislike Malfoy as an adult because he's representative of so much that can go wrong with young kids. The sense of entitlement and bloated self-worth. The completely deluded world view and unquestioning loyalty to a learned set of values. As an eleven year old I can let him off with it. As a 16-17 year old I expect better. He fails to deliver.

 

I like Ron more than before.
He's much funnier retrospect since I read HP when I was ~9 or 10 years old. So many great jokes from him.

 

Wow, I didn't expect all of the Snape hate in here. I'm not going to label Snape as anything near my favorite character, but I actually do think that Snape is just a product of his life's experiences. And it's especially silly to tell Snape to "just grow up" -- that's not how real life works. Most people don't just "get over things", much as we would like to think that we do. Most of the time we avoid them, and move on with life. Snape doesn't have that opportunity.

[long winded-explanation incoming]
I don't know that we ever get a clear glimpse of his childhood, but it is heavily implied that Snape's father was a drunken violent man who more than likely abused Snape. Moreover, his father was a muggle and as such Snape would have been inclined to sympathize with Riddle's cause from the get-go -- after all, he only really experienced a few very unpleasant muggles in his lifetime (namely Petunia and his father).

And that was just the beginning for Snape. After he joined Hogwarts, he not only began to be bullied by the Marauders but his best and probably only real friend distances herself from him due to his inclination towards the Dark Arts. Now I'm not saying that that inclination was a good one -- but it would have been very appealing for a kid who is weak and bullied to try and gain power any way he can.

After losing lily entirely, Snape goes full-on darkside because that's really all he has left. There's no evidence that he ever had good friends outside of lily, and he wasn't really recognized by any form of 'high society' that might have kept him in check. Slughorn took some interest in his potion skills, but even then he really couldn't compete with the beautiful or popular students like lily, James, hell even Sirius was likable in his own way. Snape grew up in an abused home, was almost certainly very reserved and stand-offish, and would have come across as a dick. He likely was a dick, but people from fucked up homes aren't often known for being kind.

So he joins Voldemort. My guess is that half of that was just a big "fuck you" to all the people who ever did anything wrong to him in his life -- his father, James, and especially lily. I don't remember reading any details about the time after he joined Voldemort to the time he overheard the prophecy, but to be honest my guess is that he mainly was used for his potion skills over his dueling skills. And we know that he wasn't batshit like Bellatrix, so I don't think it likely that he was out killing and raping (though that's just speculation).

Anyway, he eventually overhears the prophecy and realizes it's significance to Voldemort. He doesn't have any reason to suspect that lily would be the target of this prophecy. In fact, he probably didn't actually spend much time thinking about the implications of the prophecy and likely just went straight to Voldemort -- After all, it would have been an incredible opportunity to gain more power, which is likely all he had left at this point. But then everything goes wrong and Harry (along with lily) is made one of the targets of the prophecy.

At this point Snape has a choice -- he can continue down the same path he already was, and attempt to gain pointless power. Or he can attempt to protect lily (and by extension Harry). He choses lily, and takes an incredible risk not only by revealing himself to Dumbledore, but also by acting as a spy against Voldemort.

You know the rest of the story. lily is killed, Harry comes to Hogwarts, Snape acts like a dick to Harry, etc. But people fail to realize that Snape is literally reminded of everything that went wrong with his life every single time he is around Harry. Harry not only looks like James but also in some ways is very similar to him (Gryffindor, quidditch pro, very popular, etc.) Also, Harry does have many instances of fighting against Snape due to Snape's dickishness, which is definitely warranted but at the same time only reinforces the stereotypes which Snape held Harry to. So it goes on in an endless circle, with Snape hating on Harry and Harry hating on Snape, and neither one ever getting the full truth of the other's story.

But the real kicker for me is the revelation that Snape is the one who leads Harry to the Gryffindor sword. I mean, this is at the height of the war, when there is little hope that Harry will succeed. Snape could just go on with his life, and get the power he always wanted but never really had. But maybe he finally realizes that Harry is not James Potter. Maybe he realizes that it was his own fault that lily spurned him. Or maybe he just realizes that Voldemort won't ever let anyone have real power besides himself. Whatever the reason, he gives Harry what he needs to finish Voldemort -- and in that moment, he is really overcoming all of the miserable shit that has been thrown at him his entire life.
[end wall of text]

TL;DR Snape is just a human being who projects his fairly horrible previous life onto the situations of the present. Yes, he is a dick. Yes, he is stuck in the past. But hating Snape is like hating the abused dog who bites your hand when you try to pet it. He's a grown man who struggles with real problems that real people face. What is there to hate about that?

 

Hah, thanks for pointing that out! I really should stick to just lurking, but whenever I'm up past 1:00 AM I always get the urge to post my opinions for some reason. Anyway, I'd love to hear why you disagree with me. It's just my opinion anyway. Maybe it's just been too long since I've read the books!

 

I don't have the time nor the inclination to respond to this at length so instead I will simply say this:

Snape's a human. Not a dog. We generally hold people to higher standards.

A dog does not have the twin luxuries of self-reflection and logic. Snape does, he simply chooses not to employ them when they might show himself wanting.

 

tl;dr - there's no literary value in a wronged Snape. Although bullied some by kids, he doesn't experience a true harshness of life until later. Harry's the mirror opposite. He experiences true, harrowing bullying and worse from adults: his relatives (mental/psychological, not physical), Voldemort, Death Eaters, Rita Skeeter/Newspaper (character assassination summer of fifth year), and government (Umbridge and to a lesser extent, Fudge). They are meant to be mirrors to each other.
-------------

No, Snape is the result of an authorial anti-Harry. In fact, the entire serious revolves not around Harry and Voldemort, but Harry and Snape; mirror opposites in almost every way, but both driven for the same, mutual goal: the protection of Harry and downfall of Voldemort.

Harry willingly makes it to that goal through a long series of his own choices based on the consequences of a single choice someone else made. Snape unwillingly dies before making it that goal after a long series of decisions foisted upon him do to consequences of one decision he made. (That he could always say "Screw this" and walk away isn't the point in the text).

And that is only the beginning of the comparisons between them, all of which lead to the point that you are meant to truly like Harry, but see he is capable of doing some bad things, and you are meant to truly dislike Snape, but see he is capable of doing some good things. (His care and concern for Dumbledore, for instance, seems to fall far beyond simply doing things because he loved Lily).

 

You know, that's the part that bothered me the most about him. Whenever I think of it, I can't help but imagine Snape skipping merrily towards Voldemort's lair, thinking 'I just heard a part of a prophecy about a child that's going to defeat the Dark Lord, I should totally report it to Voldemort so he could target and MURDER AN UNBORN BABY!'

Anyone who thinks Snape wasn't an egotistical, vile wretch is deluded.

 

Snape is an asshole.

 

I personally dislike Firenze. Not because of what he does (apart from letting Harry ride on his back), but because of what he represents. His predictions of the future, unlike Trelawney's, are always correct, and have less opportunity for free will. Trelawney's prophecies tell what may happen, or give options, or happen to close to the event for significant butterflies. The prophecies of Firenze do not. His prophecies are inescapable. And I cannot like someone who damages the possibility of free will significantly in any 'verse.

 

The fact that he knows what choices you're likely to make does not mean said choices aren't going to be free.

 

It helps that no one ever knows what the fuck the centaurs are talking about.

 

"Mars is bright tonight——"

"Stop it you half-horse. You'll never take my free will away!"