Why Didn't Dumbledore Ever Reprimand Snape?
sjmc...@gmail.com
Severus Snape has always been my least favourite character. He's a
middle-aged guy that's so pathetic that he bullies an 11 year old
because he had porblems with the child's father in high school--could
you be any more immature? I'm sure DD knows how Snape treats his
students, so why does he allows Snape to abuse his powers to torment
and pick on defenseless children? Why has DD never said, "Dude, that's
not cool. You're a teacher, and a grown man...I won't allow you to
treat the students like crap"? For that matter, why hasn't anyone
else?
zgirnius
Maybe this is what Snape's like when he's *really trying* to be nice ;)
Toon
I'll go with the tried and true: Builds Character.
Troels Forchhammer
<news:1129945956....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
sjmc...@gmail.com enriched us with:
> This may sound blasphemous to the hardcore Snapers out there, but
> Severus Snape has always been my least favourite character.
My opinion of Snape is strictly divided into my opinion of Snape as a
man (where I agree completely with you -- he is, IMO, at least as
despicable as Voldemort), and my opinion of him as a literary
character, where I think he is probably Rowling's greatest literary
achievement to date (he is one of these villains that does require a
much better actor than the hero <GG>).
<snip Snape's behaviour>
I am sure this is the best he is capable of with respect to pretending
to repent his Death Eater ways ...
> I'm sure DD knows how Snape treats his students, so why does he
> allows Snape to abuse his powers to torment and pick on defenseless
> children? Why has DD never said, "Dude, that's not cool. You're a
> teacher, and a grown man...I won't allow you to treat the students
> like crap"?
Well, Dumbledore would never had said that -- would never in his life
have used 'dude', I'm sure ;-)
As for the actual question ...
Q40: Why does Professor Dumbledore allow Professor Snape to
be so nasty to the students (especially to Harry,
Hermione, and Neville)?
JKR: Dumbledore believes there are all sorts of lessons in
life; horrible teachers like Snape are one of them!
<http://www.hp-
lexicon.org/library/ref/intvw/20001020_BarnesNoble.html#Question40>
<http://tinyurl.com/dv5yf>
It is another emotional mistake -- Dumbledore doesn't realise just how
damaging Snape's so-called 'teaching' has the potential of being (that
none of his non-Slytherin students has ever comitted suicide as a
direct result of his abuse is a wonder, according to one psychologist
I've spoken to about it).
> For that matter, why hasn't anyone else?
Who'd dare?
McGonagall would feel obliged to follow Dumbledore's example (as would,
probably, the other Heads of House), and who else would dare?
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid mail is <t.forch(a)email.dk>
A good bookshop is just a genteel Black Hole that knows how to read.
- (Terry Pratchett, Guards! Guards!)
Manky Badger
<sjmc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129945956....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Perhaps if a few more teachers acted like him in real life the schools
wouldn't be in the state they are now ?
:o)
Lucy
We mainly see Snape from Harrys ( POV ), and Harry doesn't like it when
people don't treat him as the famous, most important everything revolves
around him character. Snape like DD thinks Harry need pulling down a peg or
too they just have different methods of achieving the same result. I bet
they nearly wept when they first found out it was H Potter and not N
Longbottom that was the chosen one, and since then Snape has done more than
anyone in the task of keeping Harry's feet on the ground which shows
whatever his motives that he is an excellent teacher/mentor.
--
Lucy.
mewthree
"Aetesaki" <ma...@usenet.no> wrote in message
news:1129981...@spool1-east.superfeed.net...
>
> On 22-Oct-2005, Toon <to...@toon.com> wrote:
>
>> I'll go with the tried and true: Builds Character.
>
> Just FYI, in a weaker person, like Neville, it also builds suicides.
> But then perhaps Neville's even stronger than Harry.
>
>
> --
> Aetesaki
> Bullies are in essence murderers. They kills a persons will to live.
>
> Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.usenet.com
mewthree
"Toon" <to...@toon.com> wrote in message
news:f5rjl196qgbn02ecp...@4ax.com...
do the slytherin's character's not need building then?
richard e white
> On 22-Oct-2005, Toon <to...@toon.com> wrote:
>
> > I'll go with the tried and true: Builds Character.
>
> So bullying builds character?
It is an old idea that some still belive. And for the most part these
people are like Vernon. Remember his coment that what most people
needed was a good thrashing?
I don't belive this idea. But there are people that do.
>
> Just FYI, in a weaker person, like Neville, it also builds suicides.
> But then perhaps Neville's even stronger than Harry.
It also coses some to crak up and go after the person with a weapon if
they don't get help.
>
>
> --
> Aetesaki
> Bullies are in essence murderers. They kills a persons will to live.
>
> Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.usenet.com
What always surprises me is the number of people that will watch a bully
mess up some one and they will just sit there and watch, and say nothing
about it.
--
Richard The Blind Typer
Lets Hear It For Talking Computers.
Franklin Duke
Two things occur to me:
1. Jo isn't perfect: she has written a character that isn't subtle enough.
She painted him with too broad a brush for the sake of story development (in
effect, she didn't know how else to create the dynamic between Snape and
Harry in a convincing way. WAIT, WAIT, DON'T KILL ME YET! :>)
OR
2. In the wizarding world, people like Snape are more common. I guess the
tremendous power of magic brings out the worst in a lot of people who aren't
mature enough to handle it. ("Absolute power corrupts absolutely.") And, a
lot of people who are raised in wizarding households are twisted, it
appears. Unfortunately, knowledgeable teachers like Snape can be real
bastards at times in the real world. I've seen it myself in school. Snape's
character is "over-the-top" for dramatic reasons.
Franklin Duke
"Franklin Duke" <fdu...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:m5adnazHbr8...@comcast.com...
Another thought occurs to me:
3. The wizarding world lags behind our own in terms of social
consciousness - slavery still exists (house elves) and teachers in earlier
centuries have been really hateful f***ers (cruel enough to be fired if they
were around today).
PFG
wrote:
>Why has DD never said, "Dude, that's
>not cool. You're a teacher, and a grown man...I won't allow you to
>treat the students like crap"?
Dumbledore seems to keep at Hogwarts lots of people whom he deems
to be useful in the eventual final battle against Voldemort, or who, if they
ever fell in the hands of Voldemort, could do serious harm to the 'good'
side (think of Trelawney), and as defeating Voldemort is for Dumbledore
the most important thing, this outweighs the bad features of some of his
staff. Dumbledore considers Snape to be very useful as a spy
against Voldemort. Besides, Snape, as nasty and pathetic as he really is,
is a *terrific* teacher all the same.
Now, lots of people say that Dumbledore has been clearly mistaken
about Snape, but the question here was about Dumbledore's motives,
not whether he was actually right. I for one think that Dumbledore
has not been mistaken and I expect that we will learn much more
on Snape in the Book 7.
--
Pawel
Fish Eye no Miko
> We mainly see Snape from Harrys ( POV ), and Harry doesn't
> like it when people don't treat him as the famous, most important
> everything revolves around him character.
Oh, please. He's grown up being treated like crap... why would he suddenly
expect everyone to treat him like royalty?
> Snape like DD thinks Harry need pulling down a peg or too
Down from WHAT? Being an abused child? That's what he was when he came to
Hogwarts.
> they just have different methods of achieving the same result. I
> bet they nearly wept when they first found out it was H Potter
> and not N Longbottom that was the chosen one,
What the hell did you expect?
God, Lucy, why do you even read these books if you hate Harry so much?
He's the MAIN character. He's the HERO. That's NOT gong to change. If
you can't deal with that, maybe you should read some other books. Or write
your own, where the racist, arrogant blonde jerk is the hero.
Catherine Johnson.
Fish Eye no Miko
> We don't know that he hasn't as the stories are told from Harry's
> perspective. DD does not seem to be the type who would reprimand a
> teacher in front of students so even if he did speak to Snape it
> would likely be in the privacy of the Headmaster's office.
If that's the case, why does Snape show no sign of changing? Does he act
any differently in book four than in book one? And remember, he's been
teaching for ten years before Harry come to Hogwarts, and wasn't treating
the students very nicely then, either. If DD was gong to have a talk with
Snape about his attitude and teaching methods, it should have happened
before Harry ever came.
Catherine Johnson.
--
fenm at cox dot net
"Since when is 'Shut up' an invitation?"
-Roronoa Zoro, _One Piece_.
Fish Eye no Miko
> Dumbledore: Look Severus, you hated James, you hate most people,
> you're really not much of a likeable guy. Why don't we play that
> as a strength? Harry's going to get a lot of attention just because
> of who he is, and I worry about possible consequences. You,
> however, are in a good position to bring him down a few notches,
> deflate his head a little bit. Assuming, of course, you don't go
> overboard and deliberately hurt him.
> Snape: Consider it done.
> This doesn't speak to the abuse that Snape inflicted on others, like
> Hermione or Neville, or Gryffendors in general.
Or the fact that Harry's already grown up in an abusive environment; why
does he need to be "brought down a notch"? A notch from what? From being
treated like crap by his own relatives??
And if this conversation happens before Harry comes to Hogwarts, it makes
even LESS sense. DD has NO clue how Harry acts.. Maybe he should wait and
SEE if Harry acts like he's got an inflated head before he asks Snape to
deflate it. Besides, his whole point in leaving him with Muggle relatives
was suppose to stop Harry from becoming arrogant. Isn't this supposed
conspiracy with Snape just piling on?
Sorry, but the "Good Cop, Bad Cop" theory of why Snape treats Harry so
badly and gets away with it has holes it big enough for Buckbeak to fly
though.
Catherine Johnson.
--
fenm at dot com
"Take it from El Santo, folks--people who like exotic meat dishes with
secret ingredients are even more dangerous than people whose names are
anagrams of "Dracula'."
-El Santo, from his review of _Shriek of the Mutilated_.
Lucy
>"Fish Eye no Miko" wrote
>> Lucy wrote:
>
> > We mainly see Snape from Harrys ( POV ), and Harry doesn't
> > like it when people don't treat him as the famous, most important
> > everything revolves around him character.
>
> Oh, please. He's grown up being treated like crap... why would he
suddenly
> expect everyone to treat him like royalty?
The first book Harry yes is unfairly treated but as the series continues
Harry becomes more and more like we hear James was.
>
> > Snape like DD thinks Harry need pulling down a peg or too
>
> Down from WHAT? Being an abused child? That's what he was when he came
to
> Hogwarts.
DD tells Prof Mc his reasons for leaving Harry with the Dursleys he is
already bringing him down even before Harry has had a chance to be big
headed, Snape continues in the same vane as soon as Harry arrives at school.
I don't think they are fair in doing this but I also find it hard to
separate the two and conclude one was right to use your words in making
Harry an abused child and the other wrong to abuse him further in class.
>
> > they just have different methods of achieving the same result. I
> > bet they nearly wept when they first found out it was H Potter
> > and not N Longbottom that was the chosen one,
>
> What the hell did you expect?
Sorry you have lost me here?
> God, Lucy, why do you even read these books if you hate Harry so much?
I don't hate Harry, neither do I find him without fault, Harry in book 1 was
lovely Harry in book 5 was a pain, I began to like him again in book6 but
still small things like not wanting to go to Hagrid when one of Hagrid's
pets died I found a sad reflection on how much Harry has changed.
> He's the MAIN character. He's the HERO.
And doesn't he just know it, whatever happened to the "I don't think I can
be a wizard" Harry
> That's NOT gong to change.
I think he will change more back to his former self, a more reluctant Hero.
I think he will apologize to Ginny and ask for her help.
> If
> you can't deal with that, maybe you should read some other books.
I don't see a problem with the hero of the book not been cleaner than clean,
the books apart from 5 are superb
I think I could happily read the books and deal with Harry been good bad or
indifferent, I can't quite grasp just because the books are centered around
Harry why people seem incapable of accepting he does some bad things, would
you leave him alone in your room ? DD did and what happens he straight into
things he shouldn't touch, Snape did, same result.
> Or write
> your own, where the racist, arrogant blonde jerk is the hero.
Nice phrase :-) I think it is you not I that should write a book. I for one
would buy it.
--
Lucy..
Kish
> perspective. DD does not seem to be the type who would reprimand a
> teacher in front of students so even if he did speak to Snape it would
> likely be in the privacy of the Headmaster's office.
Well, we sure know that if he has, Snape ignored him.
Kish
> <sjmc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1129945956....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>This may sound blasphemous to the hardcore Snapers out there, but
>>Severus Snape has always been my least favourite character. He's a
>>middle-aged guy that's so pathetic that he bullies an 11 year old
>>because he had porblems with the child's father in high school--could
>>you be any more immature? I'm sure DD knows how Snape treats his
>>students, so why does he allows Snape to abuse his powers to torment
>>and pick on defenseless children? Why has DD never said, "Dude, that's
>>not cool. You're a teacher, and a grown man...I won't allow you to
>>treat the students like crap"? For that matter, why hasn't anyone
>>else?
>
>
>
> Two things occur to me:
>
> 1. Jo isn't perfect: she has written a character that isn't subtle enough.
> She painted him with too broad a brush for the sake of story development (in
> effect, she didn't know how else to create the dynamic between Snape and
> Harry in a convincing way. WAIT, WAIT, DON'T KILL ME YET! :>)
Uh-uh. :-p She's said he's meant to be sadistic, horrible and abusive.
> Unfortunately, knowledgeable teachers like Snape can be real
> bastards at times in the real world. I've seen it myself in school.
So has Rowling. She mentioned early that Snape is based on her /least/
favorite teacher from school.
So your 2 and/or 3 may very well be true, but as for 1--he's meant to be
as bad as he looks, all right.
Kish
> sjmc...@gmail.com in <1129945956....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Why has DD never said, "Dude, that's
>>not cool. You're a teacher, and a grown man...I won't allow you to
>>treat the students like crap"?
>
>
> Dumbledore seems to keep at Hogwarts lots of people whom he deems
> to be useful in the eventual final battle against Voldemort, or who, if they
> ever fell in the hands of Voldemort, could do serious harm to the 'good'
> side (think of Trelawney), and as defeating Voldemort is for Dumbledore
> the most important thing, this outweighs the bad features of some of his
> staff. Dumbledore considers Snape to be very useful as a spy
> against Voldemort. Besides, Snape, as nasty and pathetic as he really is,
> is a *terrific* teacher all the same.
Um, well. We only have one account of a student doing particularly well
or particularly poorly in Potions as compared to other subjects: Neville
got a bad Potions grade in first year. Since then, we haven't been told
how well students do in his class--though I can't see how favoring
one-quarter of his students and abusing the other three-quarters could
possibly fail to cripple him as a teacher, for both sets of students.
If Neville never hears when he does something right and Draco never
hears when he does something wrong, neither is really learning, and we
know that Snape, when he can't think of anything negative to say about
Hermione's potion, scowls into her cauldron and says nothing at all.
Spoilers for HBP.
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Page 239, Scholastic edition, "On the other hand, the Prince had proved
a much more effective teacher than Snape so far."
Once or twice, long before HBP came out, I said that Snape would
probably have been a better teacher if he had written instructions on
the blackboard and left the room without once speaking. I never
expected it to be formally put to the test, but there it is: Snape's
written instructions had proved a much more effective teacher than the
totality of Snape.
gjw
<Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote:
Rowling's rationalizations aside, I suspect that the only real reason
that Dumbledore hasn't reprimanded Snape is story-external. If he did,
we wouldn't have Snape to kick around anymore.
In the same way that she wanted Harry to be an orphan (and so disposed
of every single relative), I think she simply wanted Harry to have a
nasty, sadistic teacher at Hogwarts. Dickens seems to have been an
influence with Rowling, and his stories (and boarding school stories
in general) are filled with pompous, abusive teachers (and other
adults in positions of authority), as well as the requisite student
bullies. It makes for good drama during the school year. Snape fills
this classic role, and also serves as the local villain (during times
when the more serious threat of Voldemort is still at a distance).
Draco fills the familiar role of the rich, snotty bully at the school,
but keeping Draco nasty seems an easier task to explain. It's much
harder to come up with explanations of why Dumbledore would tolerate
Snape. In the real world, he wouldn't. But in the Potterverse, where
Snape is a given, he simply must.
Paskunia
@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> This may sound blasphemous to the hardcore Snapers out there, but
> Severus Snape has always been my least favourite character. He's a
> middle-aged guy that's so pathetic that he bullies an 11 year old
> because he had porblems with the child's father in high school--could
> you be any more immature?
I'm a yank, but I understand the old British school system enough to know
that teachers had a certain latitude with their students in terms of
treatment, that they could be Marine drill sergeants if they so desired, if
it meant that the students would be the better for it. or, as another
poster put it, treatment like that built character.
Harry never understood his treatment by Snape until later. If he got mad at
Snape, it was out of the frustration of being treated like a dog by an even
bigger dog, for no reason than for who he was- the son of James Potter,
whom Snape detested.
Kish
> "Fish Eye no Miko" <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote in
> news:qUv6f.4722$i%.3342@fed1read07:
> Geo (who has no intention of writing his own book or story, especially
> not "where the racist, arrogant blonde jerk is the hero.")
Don't take everything directed to other posters as directed to you.
Particularly, if it's directed to other posters with a history of
insisting Draco is brave and noble and lets Harry win at Quidditch.
Jean Lamb
characterization of Snape on a teacher she loathed etc. I'm amazed that she
has shown him doing anything good at all, given that back history. I believe
this has influenced her writing of him immensely, and that we're lucky Snape
as a character has any depth at all. (I know that if I were to have literary
fun with a couple of people I managed to survive, that I might not be as
charitable). I think in some instances the character has come alive under
her fingers and surprised the heck out of her (mine run away with the ball
on fairly regular occasions, so I would not be surprised if Snape had done
that as well). Authors just _think_ they control characters.
I agree that Snape has no business teaching at Hogwarts. But how much choice
has he had in the matter? Was it teaching at Hogwarts or Azkaban he had to
pick from? If so, he probably wonders on a regular basis if he did the right
thing, actually. It's hard enough being a teacher. Having to teach the child
of someone who tormented you for seven years and is _still_ considered a
Hero is bad enough. Having to do so involuntarily can't be much fun at all,
especially when this child gets a boatload of extra privileges and is
allowed to break the rules on a regular basis by the Headmaster (this makes
it VERY difficult to enforce any rules with any child, obviously).
The fact is, in the books Harry is whipsawed between the cruelty of the
Dursleys and Snape and the indulgence of the Headmaster and nearly all the
other staff. This is not generally a prescription for a stable personality,
and results in the Harry we see in books 5 and 6.
--
Jean Lamb, tlamb...@charter.net
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for you are crunchy and good with
lemon drops."
--
Jean Lamb, tlamb...@charter.net
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for you are crunchy and good with
lemon drops."
Richard Eney
mewthree <pa...@mewthree.plus.com> wrote:
>"Toon" <to...@toon.com> wrote
>> sjmc...@gmail.com wrote:
<snip>
>>> I'm sure DD knows how Snape treats his students,
>>> so why does he allows Snape to abuse his powers to torment
>>>and pick on defenseless children? Why has DD never said, "Dude, that's
>>>not cool. You're a teacher, and a grown man...I won't allow you to
>>>treat the students like crap"? For that matter, why hasn't anyone
>>>else?
>>
>> I'll go with the tried and true: Builds Character.
>
We don't know what goes on in the Slytherin common room. Maybe
they get all the "character-building" treatment in private.
=Tamar
Richard Eney
George <boygeorg...@OFTHISyahoo.com> wrote:
>"Fish Eye no Miko" <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote
>>
>>> Dumbledore: Look Severus, you hated James, you hate most people,
>>> you're really not much of a likeable guy. Why don't we play that
>>> as a strength? Harry's going to get a lot of attention just because
>>> of who he is, and I worry about possible consequences. You,
>>> however, are in a good position to bring him down a few notches,
>>> deflate his head a little bit. Assuming, of course, you don't go
>>> overboard and deliberately hurt him.
>>> Snape: Consider it done.
>>> This doesn't speak to the abuse that Snape inflicted on others, like
>>> Hermione or Neville, or Gryffendors in general.
>>
>> Or the fact that Harry's already grown up in an abusive environment;
>> why does he need to be "brought down a notch"? A notch from what?
>
Precisely.
Harry went to Diagon Alley with Hagrid, and the moment he entered the
Leaky Cauldron, people lined up to shake his hand. Hagrid probably
mentioned that to Dumbledore. Just from that scene, DD could tell
that the wizards were likely to give Harry a swelled head. Dd had a
month to plan, if he did (and I think he did), how Harry would be
approached by the teachers. A long time ago I posted a scenario for
that first teacher's meeting.
The attention hit again as soon as he was identified at the railroad
station. The Weasley kids were agog, and he was also told that
everyone on the train was talking about him. When Draco found out,
he wanted to "collect" Harry as one of his group before they even
got to school.
>> From being treated like crap by his own relatives??
>> And if this conversation happens before Harry comes to Hogwarts,
>> it makes even LESS sense.
>
>> DD has NO clue how Harry acts..
>
>If we are to believe HPB 3 (Will and Won't), Dd already knows something
>about the Dursley situation, unless he completely, totally and utterly
>ignored it until HBP.
As far as we know, Dd knew nothing about it except what he might have
heard from listening to portrait gossip (or from "watching Harry closely"
which he says he has done). If he's really been watching Harry that much,
he probably knows about the ragged, oversize clothing that Harry packs
every year; it's only in the movies that Harry bought school clothes that
fit. In the books his Dursley clothes are covered by the school robes.
Not to mention the Christmas "presents". Dd knows enough about how the
Dursleys have treated Harry.
But Dumbledore grew up in the mid-19th century, and in the wizard culture,
which is way behind the muggle culture. He truly does not understand
some of the subtleties of human psychology. At best, he might agree
with Dickens. He grew up in a world where people routinely had
childhoods that were as bad or worse than Harry's and considers that
a normal baseline.
Then there's the other reason why Dd left Harry there. He couldn't be
sure that Harry wasn't possessed by Voldemort. Quite aside from the
blood protection spell, leaving him with a muggle family meant that any
suspiciously powerful early magic would be really obvious. Snape's
job in the first year was to be as suspicious as possible, in order to
catch any signs that Harry was acting too much like Riddle. The cloak
was a test. The Mirror was a test. Even the set up with the silly
"don't go in the corridor" announcement and the simple magical barriers
that any competent wizard could pass was a test, to see whether Harry
would try for the Stone to use it himself. Harry managed to pass those
tests (getting through the barriers with the help of friends, instead
of doing it by being astoundingly precocious), but the clincher was
when Dd saw Voldemort leave Quirrell. After that, Dd was convinced,
or says he was (IIRC) but Snape kept up being suspicious.
>> Maybe he should wait and SEE if Harry acts like he's got an inflated
>> head before he asks Snape to deflate it.
>
>The sudden onslaught of attention that comes from significant life
>changes (common muggle examples would be winning the lottery, becoming an
>"overnight sensation" in music or theater, etc.), can have very negative
>effects on a person.
JKR has said in interviews that she thinks of Harry as damaged by
his abusive childhood.
>> Besides, his whole point in leaving him with Muggle relatives
>> was suppose to stop Harry from becoming arrogant.
>> Isn't this supposed conspiracy with Snape just piling on?
>> Sorry, but the "Good Cop, Bad Cop" theory of why Snape treats
>> Harry so badly and gets away with it has holes it big enough
>> for Buckbeak to fly though.
In CoS, we see Snape and McGonagall playing "good cop, bad cop" when
Harry and Ron borrow the car without permission, thus acting like
juvenile car thieves and breaking the most important wizard law (Don't
Let Muggles See You = Don't Get Caught). Flying onto the grounds is
almost an announcement of arrogance - Snape as first line of defense
goes out to meet them. After he brings them in and grills them a while,
McGonagall has a turn, and then Dd is brought in to be "good cop" and
give them a warning. I am certain that those interviews were watched
magically before McGonagall and Dd went in. They were not only rule-
enforcing, they were a mild preventative - look at the reaction of the
rest of the school: they all thought it was totally cool (except
Hermione).
=Tamar
Kish
> Then there's the other reason why Dd left Harry there. He couldn't be
> sure that Harry wasn't possessed by Voldemort. Quite aside from the
> blood protection spell, leaving him with a muggle family meant that any
> suspiciously powerful early magic would be really obvious. Snape's
> job in the first year was to be as suspicious as possible, in order to
> catch any signs that Harry was acting too much like Riddle. The cloak
> was a test. The Mirror was a test. Even the set up with the silly
> "don't go in the corridor" announcement and the simple magical barriers
> that any competent wizard could pass was a test, to see whether Harry
> would try for the Stone to use it himself. Harry managed to pass those
> tests (getting through the barriers with the help of friends, instead
> of doing it by being astoundingly precocious), but the clincher was
> when Dd saw Voldemort leave Quirrell. After that, Dd was convinced,
> or says he was (IIRC) but Snape kept up being suspicious.
Ah ah. Dumbledore never says he was convinced Harry wasn't possessed by
Voldemort...because Dumbledore never says that he considered the
possibility that Harry was possessed by Voldemort, although in OotP he
does say he was afraid that if Voldemort ever learned of the link
between himself and Harry he would try to possess Harry.
There's nothing wrong with theorizing, but, imho, it's important to keep
a clear distinction between "theory" and "fact spelled out in the books
or in Rowling's interviews." Harry grew up with the Dursleys? Fact.
Snape abuses his students? Fact. Snape is or was at any point during
the series suspicious that Harry was possessed by Voldemort? Theory.
Richard Eney
Kish <Kis...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>Richard Eney wrote:
>
>> Then there's the other reason why Dd left Harry there. He couldn't be
>> sure that Harry wasn't possessed by Voldemort. Quite aside from the
>> blood protection spell, leaving him with a muggle family meant that any
>> suspiciously powerful early magic would be really obvious. Snape's
>> job in the first year was to be as suspicious as possible, in order to
>> catch any signs that Harry was acting too much like Riddle. The cloak
>> was a test. The Mirror was a test. Even the set up with the silly
>> "don't go in the corridor" announcement and the simple magical barriers
>> that any competent wizard could pass was a test, to see whether Harry
>> would try for the Stone to use it himself. Harry managed to pass those
>> tests (getting through the barriers with the help of friends, instead
>> of doing it by being astoundingly precocious), but the clincher was
>> when Dd saw Voldemort leave Quirrell. After that, Dd was convinced,
>> or says he was (IIRC) but Snape kept up being suspicious.
>
>Ah ah. Dumbledore never says he was convinced Harry wasn't possessed
>by Voldemort...because Dumbledore never says that he considered the
>possibility that Harry was possessed by Voldemort, although in OotP he
>does say he was afraid that if Voldemort ever learned of the link
>between himself and Harry he would try to possess Harry.
O.K., good point. The fact that in OotP Dd tells Harry that he was afraid
Voldemort would try to possess Harry _if_ Voldemort learned of the link
might possibly mean that Dd didn't consider the other possibility earlier.
But Dd is talking to Harry at that point. The fact that Dd knew there was
a connection and that such a connection might be used that way implies to
me that Dd was already thinking about it years earlier. Dd doesn't tell
Harry a lot of things. I still think the entire first year was a series
of tests.
Dd says (OotP.37.The Lost Prophecy) that "I guessed, fifteen years ago,
when I saw the scar on your forehead, what it might mean. I guessed
that it might be the sign of a connection forged between you and
Voldemort.... More recently I became concerned that Voldemort might
realize that this connection between you exists.... I believed it
could not be long before Voldemort attempted to force his way into
your mind."
When Harry was an infant, Dd guessed that the cut (it wasn't a scar
yet) might mean Voldemort was connected to Harry somehow. But
Dd doesn't say how recently he began to worry about the possibility
that Voldemort would possess Harry. If Dd _originally _wasn't worried
about the possibility of future possession, it could be that he just
didn't think of it, _or_ it could be that he thought it had already
happened. If the latter, then after he saw that Voldemort was
manifestly not in Harry at the end of PS/SS, then he might have begun
to worry that it might still happen.
Theory, yes. But not actually prohibited by anything in canon, I believe.
>There's nothing wrong with theorizing, but, imho, it's important to keep
>a clear distinction between "theory" and "fact spelled out in the books
>or in Rowling's interviews." Harry grew up with the Dursleys? Fact.
>Snape abuses his students? Fact. Snape is or was at any point during
>the series suspicious that Harry was possessed by Voldemort? Theory.
Now, Snape is another matter. I have no direct information about Snape's
beliefs in so many words. But Dd skipped over exactly what he originally
believed was the connection between Harry and Voldemort; if that is
the hint I think it is, would he not have told Snape to be alert for
any evidence of it? Of all people available to Dumbledore, Snape
would be the one most able to recognize traits of Voldemort.
=Tamar
richard e white
What do you see as the boat load of extras that harry gets?
Fish Eye no Miko
> "Fish Eye no Miko" <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote:
>> George wrote:
>>
>>> Dumbledore: Look Severus, you hated James, you hate most people,
>>> you're really not much of a likeable guy. Why don't we play that
>>> as a strength? Harry's going to get a lot of attention just
>>> because of who he is, and I worry about possible consequences.
>>> You, however, are in a good position to bring him down a few
>>> notches, deflate his head a little bit. Assuming, of course, you
>>> don't go overboard and deliberately hurt him.
>>> Snape: Consider it done.
>>> This doesn't speak to the abuse that Snape inflicted on others,
>>> like Hermione or Neville, or Gryffendors in general.
>>
>> Or the fact that Harry's already grown up in an abusive
>> environment; why does he need to be "brought down a notch"? A
>> notch from what?
>
> "Harry's going to get a lot of attention just because of who he
> is,..."
Ok, fine:
How long does it take until Draco starts picking on Harry? Not all of the
"attention" he gets is positive.
>> From being treated like crap by his own relatives??
>> And if this conversation happens before Harry comes to Hogwarts, it
>> makes even LESS sense.
>
>> DD has NO clue how Harry acts..
>
> If we are to believe HPB 3 (Will and Won't), Dd already knows
> something about the Dursley situation, unless he completely,
> totally and utterly ignored it until HBP.
Ah, you're right, And we learn about Arrabelle Figg...
But.. then doesn't that reinforce my point? Why would DD, knowing the way
the Durselys treat Harry, ask a teacher to continue such treatment?
>> Maybe he should wait and SEE if Harry acts like he's got an
>> inflated head before he asks Snape to deflate it.
>
> The sudden onslaught of attention that comes from significant life
> changes (common muggle examples would be winning the lottery,
> becoming an "overnight sensation" in music or theater, etc.), can
> have very negative effects on a person.
So, to counteract it, he asks a teacher to ABUSE him?
>> Besides, his whole point in leaving him with Muggle relatives
>> was suppose to stop Harry from becoming arrogant.
>> Isn't this supposed conspiracy with Snape just
>> piling on? Sorry, but the "Good Cop, Bad Cop" theory of why Snape
>> treats Harry so badly and gets away with it has holes it big enough
>> for Buckbeak to fly though.
>
> I find it interesting that you ignored my first paragraph:
>
> "If one accepts the possibility that Dumbledore and Snape were
> collaberating on all kinds of things, possibly including Dd's
> death, and we know from PS/SS that Dd wanted Harry to be raised as
> a normal child, not a celebrity, is it possible that Dd&S were
> running a kind of "good cop-bad cop" scenario on Harry?"
> Note the phrase, "is it possible," and the question mark at the
> end. I'm asking a question, not making an assertion. You ignore
> that fact in your rant.
Ok, than: No, I don't think they were. I think Snape's just a jerk.
> Geo (who has no intention of writing his own book or story,
> especially not "where the racist, arrogant blonde jerk is the
> hero.")
Well, I was addressing that to Lucy, who seems to want Draco to be the hero
of the books.
Catherine Johnson.
--
Fish Eye no Miko
>> "Fish Eye no Miko" wrote
>>> Lucy wrote:
>>
>>> We mainly see Snape from Harrys ( POV ), and Harry doesn't
>>> like it when people don't treat him as the famous, most important
>>> everything revolves around him character.
>>
>> Oh, please. He's grown up being treated like crap... why would he
>> suddenly expect everyone to treat him like royalty?
>
> The first book Harry yes is unfairly treated but as the series
> continues Harry becomes more and more like we hear James was.
He and his friends gang on up people minding their own business and attack
them for no reason? When does this happen?
>>> Snape like DD thinks Harry need pulling down a peg or too
>>
>> Down from WHAT? Being an abused child? That's what he was when
>> he came to Hogwarts.
>
> DD tells Prof Mc his reasons for leaving Harry with the Dursleys he
> is already bringing him down even before Harry has had a chance to
> be big headed, Snape continues in the same vane as soon as Harry
> arrives at school.
And in both cases, they do it not at anyone's request, but because they're
abusive jerks.
> I don't think they are fair in doing this but I also find it hard to
> separate
> the two and conclude one was right to use your words in making Harry
> an abused child and the other wrong to abuse him further in class.
I'm not sure I get what you're saying...
>>> they just have different methods of achieving the same result. I
>>> bet they nearly wept when they first found out it was H Potter
>>> and not N Longbottom that was the chosen one,
>>
>> What the hell did you expect?
>
> Sorry you have lost me here?
You really thought Neville was going to be the Chosen One? While reading
the HARRY POTTER books, you almost cried when you found out HARRY POTTER
was going be the Chosen One instead of someone else?
>> God, Lucy, why do you even read these books if you hate Harry so
>> much?
>
> I don't hate Harry,
You sure seem to.
> neither do I find him without fault,
I have yet to find anyone who thinks Harry's perfect. But there's a
difference between that and the way you react to him. Your comment above
about finding out Harry was the CO is a good example of this...
> Harry in book 1 was lovely
See, I don't even know if I but that, given your comment in another thread:
"Draco, Dreamy Draco, Devilishly Dreamy Draco, the boy who holds out the
hand of friendship to Harry, Horrible Harry, Hideously horrible Harry,"
<and you wonder why I think you hate him...?>
> Harry in book 5 was a pain,
And most people actually agree with you.
> I began to like him again in book6 but still small things like not
> wanting
> to go to Hagrid when one of Hagrid's pets died I found a sad reflection
> on how much Harry has changed.
You mean the pet that made no attempt to stop his children from eating him?
I don't know WHY Harry would be hesitant to come mourn his death...
>> He's the MAIN character. He's the HERO.
>
> And doesn't he just know it,
Care to explain that?
> whatever happened to the "I don't think I can be a wizard" Harry
You want him to be an insecure little kid forever? How is that healthy?
>> That's NOT gong to change.
>
> I think he will change more back to his former self,
That's not what I meant.
>> If you can't deal with that, maybe you should read some other
>> books.
>
> I don't see a problem with the hero of the book not been cleaner
> than clean,
Again, who here ever claimed he was?
> the books apart from 5 are superb I think I could happily read the
> books and deal with Harry been good bad or indifferent, I can't
> quite grasp just because the books are centered around Harry why
> people seem incapable of accepting he does some bad things,
WHO? Who does this? You keep saying people act like he's perfect, but I
don't see it at all.
> would you leave him alone in your room ? DD did and what happens
> he straight into things he shouldn't touch, Snape did, same result.
Yes, Harry is very nosey. He often gets into things he has no business
getting into.
>> Or write your own, where the racist, arrogant blonde jerk is the hero.
>
> Nice phrase :-)
Can you deny that Draco is all those things?
> I think it is you not I that should write a book. I for one would buy it.
<sigh>
I just don't have the drive...
Toon
wrote:
>
>>"Fish Eye no Miko" wrote
>>> Lucy wrote:
>>
>> > We mainly see Snape from Harrys ( POV ), and Harry doesn't
>> > like it when people don't treat him as the famous, most important
>> > everything revolves around him character.
>>
>> Oh, please. He's grown up being treated like crap... why would he
>suddenly
>> expect everyone to treat him like royalty?
>
>The first book Harry yes is unfairly treated but as the series continues
>Harry becomes more and more like we hear James was.
According to Snape.
angel
people don't treat him as the famous, most important everything
revolves
around him character. Snape like DD thinks Harry need pulling down a
peg or
too they just have different methods of achieving the same result. I
bet
they nearly wept when they first found out it was H Potter and not N
Longbottom that was the chosen one, and since then Snape has done more
than
anyone in the task of keeping Harry's feet on the ground which shows
whatever his motives that he is an excellent teacher/mentor.
--
NO way huzay!! The only reason I reckon Snape was in Hogwarts was
because of Voldemort!! He was taking orders from him and were planning
a conspiracy against DD from the very beginning, I dont know how DD
ever trusted Snape. He was the one who betrayed him in the end. Com ing
back to Harry, I don't think Harry EVER liked the attention he got, and
hated Snape because he thought Snape was probably involved in his
fathers death! Snape hated him because he was Voldemorts tail, and as
everyone knows, Voldemort completely DESPISES Harry.
Lucy
"Fish Eye no Miko" <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote in message
news:4nG6f.8426$i%.853@fed1read07...
> Lucy wrote:
>
> >> "Fish Eye no Miko" wrote
> >>> Lucy wrote:
> >>
> >>> We mainly see Snape from Harrys ( POV ), and Harry doesn't
> >>> like it when people don't treat him as the famous, most important
> >>> everything revolves around him character.
> >>
> >> Oh, please. He's grown up being treated like crap... why would he
> >> suddenly expect everyone to treat him like royalty?
> >
> > The first book Harry yes is unfairly treated but as the series
> > continues Harry becomes more and more like we hear James was.
>
> He and his friends gang on up people minding their own business and attack
> them for no reason? When does this happen?
Ron is not Sirius, Hermione has more bottle than Lupin, Harry has felt what
its like to be the victim so (IIRC) it doesn't happen but the potential
signs are there, thinking he should be a prefect not Ron, going off to the
village against everybody's advice.
>
> >>> Snape like DD thinks Harry need pulling down a peg or too
> >>
> >> Down from WHAT? Being an abused child? That's what he was when
> >> he came to Hogwarts.
> >
> > DD tells Prof Mc his reasons for leaving Harry with the Dursleys he
> > is already bringing him down even before Harry has had a chance to
> > be big headed, Snape continues in the same vane as soon as Harry
> > arrives at school.
>
> And in both cases, they do it not at anyone's request, but because they're
> abusive jerks.
>
> > I don't think they are fair in doing this but I also find it hard to
> > separate
> > the two and conclude one was right to use your words in making Harry
> > an abused child and the other wrong to abuse him further in class.
>
> I'm not sure I get what you're saying...
I'm saying DD appears to be just as guilty as Snape, and the main thread
question is "Why Didn't Dumbledore Ever Reprimand Snape?"
>
> >>> they just have different methods of achieving the same result. I
> >>> bet they nearly wept when they first found out it was H Potter
> >>> and not N Longbottom that was the chosen one,
> >>
> >> What the hell did you expect?
> >
> > Sorry you have lost me here?
>
> You really thought Neville was going to be the Chosen One?
No, I was refering to Snape and DD feelings when they found out.
> While reading
> the HARRY POTTER books, you almost cried when you found out HARRY POTTER
> was going be the Chosen One instead of someone else?
Nope, again I was referring to DD and Snapes feeling, I think DD and Snape
must have been hoping Neville was going to be the chosen one as they knew
Harry would have some of his fathers less favorable qualities. Its the only
excuse I can see for their joint behavior towards Harry.
>
<Snip>
> > neither do I find him without fault,
>
> I have yet to find anyone who thinks Harry's perfect. But there's a
> difference between that and the way you react to him. Your comment above
> about finding out Harry was the CO is a good example of this...
I have a feeling you misread my comments above, which is no doubt due to bad
phasing on my part.
>
> > Harry in book 1 was lovely
>
> See, I don't even know if I but that, given your comment in another
thread:
> "Draco, Dreamy Draco, Devilishly Dreamy Draco, the boy who holds out the
> hand of friendship to Harry, Horrible Harry, Hideously horrible Harry,"
> <and you wonder why I think you hate him...?>
Ah throw my own quotes at me eh, I was referring really to Daniel and Tom
the Harry and Draco of the films.
>
> > Harry in book 5 was a pain,
>
> And most people actually agree with you.
That would be a first.
>
> > I began to like him again in book6 but still small things like not
> > wanting
> > to go to Hagrid when one of Hagrid's pets died I found a sad reflection
> > on how much Harry has changed.
>
> You mean the pet that made no attempt to stop his children from eating
him?
> I don't know WHY Harry would be hesitant to come mourn his death...
It is not Harry's feeling towards the dead monster that concern me its his
lack of feelings towards Hagrid.
>
> >> He's the MAIN character. He's the HERO.
> >
> > And doesn't he just know it,
>
> Care to explain that?
" ' I'm the one who's going to kill him, And if I meet Severus Snape along
the way,' he added 'so much the better for me' "
>
> > whatever happened to the "I don't think I can be a wizard" Harry
>
> You want him to be an insecure little kid forever? How is that healthy?
Perhaps you are right, I just miss the Harry that was so pleased to get a
visit to the zoo.
<Snip>
> >> Or write your own, where the racist, arrogant blonde jerk is the hero.
> >
> > Nice phrase :-)
>
> Can you deny that Draco is all those things?
Not in all honesty no, but he is Dashing and Brave and cool and if Harry
could bring him on side then they could defeat anybody.
>
> > I think it is you not I that should write a book. I for one would buy
it.
>
> <sigh>
> I just don't have the drive...
That's a shame most of us just don't have the talent.
--
Lucy...
Lucy
"Toon" <to...@toon.com> wrote in message
news:n3fml1la2ubk2iqgr...@4ax.com...
And Sirius and Lupin.
--
Lucy.
Lucy
"angel" <hoticen...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130066526.2...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> We mainly see Snape from Harrys ( POV ), and Harry doesn't like it when
>
> people don't treat him as the famous, most important everything
> revolves
> around him character. Snape like DD thinks Harry need pulling down a
> peg or
> too they just have different methods of achieving the same result. I
> bet
> they nearly wept when they first found out it was H Potter and not N
> Longbottom that was the chosen one, and since then Snape has done more
> than
> anyone in the task of keeping Harry's feet on the ground which shows
> whatever his motives that he is an excellent teacher/mentor.
>
> --
>
> NO way huzay!!
What all of it?
>The only reason I reckon Snape was in Hogwarts was
> because of Voldemort!! He was taking orders from him and were planning
> a conspiracy against DD from the very beginning,
Then why would he want the DADA position if he was in league with He Who Had
Cursed That Post he would know it was the wrong job to apply for?
> I dont know how DD
> ever trusted Snape.
that is the big question and the one that would lead us to Snapes true
loyalties, my best guess is I've no idea,
lesser guesses include Snape seeking a way to destroy both DD and Big V and
therefore able to fool both as his actions would in DD eyes weaken His
Darkness and visa versa.
> He was the one who betrayed him in the end.
Yet according to DD if it hadn't been for Snapes quick actions after the
ring had done whatever it did, then he would have been dead already!
> Com ing
> back to Harry, I don't think Harry EVER liked the attention he got,
I think that depends on the type of attention he gets.
> and
> hated Snape because he thought Snape was probably involved in his
> fathers death!
He hates Snape a long time before he finds out Snape was the spy, yes he
knew Snape was a DE but I don't think he ever connected him with the death
of his parents before book 6
>Snape hated him because he was Voldemorts tail, and as
> everyone knows, Voldemort completely DESPISES Harry.
>
I not so sure that Snape does hate Harry, true he seems to take great
pleasure in verbally abusing him and he did truly hate him after Harry
delved into Snapes private memories yet he does keep helping Harry out, Book
1 he saves his live Book 2 he teaches him how to duel, book 3 he attempts to
rescue him from Sirius, book 4 He ignores TDL summons, Book 5 he doesn't
supple the truth liquid potion to that horrible woman,
--
Lucy..
Ard Rhi
> Severus Snape has always been my least favourite character. He's a
> middle-aged guy that's so pathetic that he bullies an 11 year old
> because he had porblems with the child's father in high school--could
> students, so why does he allows Snape to abuse his powers to torment
> and pick on defenseless children? Why has DD never said, "Dude, that's
> not cool. You're a teacher, and a grown man...I won't allow you to
> treat the students like crap"? For that matter, why hasn't anyone
> else?
>
Because when it comes right down to it, he is still an effective teacher and
entitled to how he sees or treats others. He doesn't abuse them. For that,
you may want to examine how Umbridge "punished" Harry. As Dumbledore has
noted several times with Harry, life can't be all peaches and cream.
Given how James treated Severus, it is understandable for Snape to be wary
of Harry. Harry and company felt free to continue that grudge. While Severus
is the older, that doesn't mean his middle name should be doormat. He and
Harry provoke each other and Snape takes every advantage he can. Simply
because he does so doesn't make him bad. He seems to have earned his little
sparring matches with Harry, unlike Umbridge.
Severus tried to save Harry in book one, Harry and his friends chose to
believe otherwise. Severus WAS right about Lupin knowing the way Sirius was
getting into the castle, but not divulging it. Lupin may not have been
helping directly and Sirius may not have been a threat, but that doesn't
mean it was alright for Lupin to do what he did. In book four, Harry was
shown that Snape works for Dumbledore and Harry STILL had a grudge against
him by book five.
Yes, Severus could have handled things differently, but the reason
Dumbledore or no one else steps in is because it isn't up to them t decide
how Severus conducts himself or what he should tolerate from Harry. He is
not exactly the bully that was Umbridge and Harry is not the innocent
victimized saint.
It balances out.
Ard Rhi
Fish Eye no Miko
> Because when it comes right down to it, he is still an effective
> teacher and entitled to how he sees or treats others.
No. Being a good teacher doesn't "entitle" you to be a sadist.
> He doesn't abuse them.
Tell that to Neville.
> For that, you may want to examine how Umbridge "punished" Harry.
Just because someone is WORSE doesn't make Snape's treatment of certain
students right.
> As Dumbledore has noted several times with Harry, life can't be all
> peaches and cream.
Oh, GOD. I'm so tired of that agreement. You have a teacher who GOES OUT
OF HIS WAY to mistreat CERTAIN students. NOT to toughen them up, but
because he's a sadistic jerk. Excusing it as some sort of way of teaching
kids to toughen up is just ridiculous.
> Given how James treated Severus, it is understandable for Snape to
> be wary of Harry.
That doesn't explain why he abuses Neville.
> Harry and company felt free to continue that grudge.
??? It was SNAPE who continued it. Snape started it by picking on Harry
in the first Potions class. They didn't even KNOW there was any "grudge"
until later that year.
> While Severus is the older, that doesn't mean his middle name should be
> doormat. He and Harry provoke each other
No, SNAPE picked on Harry, as well as mistreating others in his House, and,
surprise, Harry resented that. Snape brought it on himself by assuming
Harry was going to be a certain way and treating him thusly. He had acted
different, so would have Harry.
> and Snape takes every advantage he can.
Re: He abuses his authority.
> Simply because he does so doesn't make him bad.
Yeah, it kinda does.
> He seems to have earned his little sparring matches with Harry,
He threw the first punch. How is that "earning"anything? He's the CAUSE of
those "sparring" matches.
> unlike Umbridge.
Again, comparing him to someone worse doesn't make him ok.
> Severus tried to save Harry in book one, Harry and his friends
> chose to believe otherwise.
They didn't KNOW he'd done it till the end of the book. And when Harry
found out he DID believe it.
And given the way Snape treats them, is it really a surprise that they
didn't believe he was interested in their well-being?
> Severus WAS right about Lupin knowing the way Sirius was getting
> into the castle, but not divulging it.
And...? Even DD didn't believe him then. And what, exactly, were the Trio
supposed to do?
> Lupin may not have been helping directly and Sirius may not have
> been a threat, but that doesn't mean it was alright for Lupin to do
> what he did.
True.
> In book four, Harry was shown that Snape works for
> Dumbledore and Harry STILL had a grudge against him by book five.
Gee, I wonder why? Oh, that's right--cuz Snape treats him like CRAP. Just
because he works for DD doesn't mean Harry has to LIKE him.
> Yes, Severus could have handled things differently,
I'll take "Understatements of the Year" for $100, Alex...
> but the reason Dumbledore or no one else steps in is because it isn't
> up to them t decide how Severus conducts himself
Yeah, actually, it is. That's one of the functions of a Headmaster.
> or what he should tolerate from Harry. He is not exactly the bully
> that was Umbridge and Harry is not the innocent victimized saint.
Which doesn't mean what he does is RIGHT.
And again, focusing on his treatment of Harry ignores his treatment of
other students he has no reason to treat that way at all. Again, why is he
such a jerk to Neville?
> It balances out.
A teacher picking on students to the point that he becomes a boggart of a
student who has had some seriously bad things in his past "balances out"?
How do you ya figure?
Catherine Johnson, who's no longer worried about being a "Snape apologist".
Wow.
Jean Lamb
>> Dursleys and Snape and the indulgence of the Headmaster and nearly all
>> the
>> other staff. This is not generally a prescription for a stable
>> personality,
>> and results in the Harry we see in books 5 and 6.
>>
>> "Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for you are crunchy and good
>> with
>> lemon drops."
>
> What do you see as the boat load of extras that harry gets?
>
>
> --
> Richard The Blind Typer
> Lets Hear It For Talking Computers.
>
Fred and George giving it to him, but are we so sure that DD didn't know
about it already?), not getting hit with a zillion detentions for various
violations (can you say "flying car"? "Whomping Willow" and "sneaking out
after hours to stalk Draco") that would have gotten any other student but
one of the Trio booted out the door come to mind. Harry also gets special
meeting wtih Dumbledore on a fairly regular basis to be rewarded and
instructed, and don't you think the other teachers _notice_ that kind of
thing? Of course nobody on the staff of Hogwarts would ever let Harry slide
on his schoolwork just to suck up to the Headmaster, nope, never ever
happens. In HBP he basically cheats his way through Potions with the help of
the Half-Blood Prince's old book--does no one but myself think this was set
up by a Headmaster through Slughorn because Harry wasn't going to pay
attention any other way? (Myself, I think if Hermione Granger is doing a
potion out of the book and it's not coming out right, there is something
seriously wrong with the book, but I digress). He's constantly insolent to
teachers he doesn't like, even when normal self-preservation would demand he
keep his mouth shut (Umbridge, not just Snape, and in HBP it's Filch, too).
Fortunately most of the teachers know better than to demand more than the
minimum of dear Harry, except for McGonagall (to her credit, she does call
Harry down for sloppy work). Of course Harry really is good in the practical
for DADA, mainly because he likes to stay alive. And even when the
administration is not obviously working towards his greater glory, his
enemies are (Barty Crouch Jr., GOBLET OF FIRE). I very much suspect that
many students in Hufflepuff still wonder just who, really, put Harry's name
in the Goblet, despite the Official Story.
But Hufflepuffs do know to blame Voldie for Cedric's death. However, some of
them likely wonder if Voldie would have shown up for the winner if Harry had
not been involved at all in the Tri-Wizard Tournament. I'm certain everyone
was told the truth about Barty Crouch Jr. and his involvement with getting
Harry's name into the Goblet. But how many of them really believe it? Barty
was Kissed really, really fast, and that was Fudge's doing. But given how
many times Fudge has asked DD for advice, how many will believe that it was
really Fudge's idea to act so quickly? Of course, none of them will say a
word. After all, right now Slytherin is blamed anything that goes wrong at
the school. Why rock the boat?
Harry also received blatant favoritism in points from other teachers in OOtP
because they hated Umbridge. Justified, because I hated her too. But it was
still favoritism in front of the whole school. Draco's the only one by HBP
that does anything to Harry, and look what happened to him. (Draco, frankly,
has to be one of the most incompetent evil-doers in history. He's forever
getting his head, and other body parts, handed to him. He should really
consider a career change, rather like the Dumb Crooks on Parade who would
actually make more money working at McDonald's). Harry is certainly not as
bad as the twins, but by now even an Occamy would be able to figure what a
very bad idea it is to disturb Mr. Potter while he is at Hogwarts. People
can and do figure these things out about who the administration favorite is
in far less blatant situations than the one surrounding Harry Potter.
Kish
>>>The fact is, in the books Harry is whipsawed between the cruelty of the
>>>Dursleys and Snape and the indulgence of the Headmaster and nearly all
>>>the
>>>other staff. This is not generally a prescription for a stable
>>>personality,
>>>and results in the Harry we see in books 5 and 6.
>>>
>>>Jean Lamb, tlamb...@charter.net
>>>"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for you are crunchy and good
>>>with
>>>lemon drops."
>>
>>What do you see as the boat load of extras that harry gets?
>>
>>
>>--
>>Richard The Blind Typer
>>Lets Hear It For Talking Computers.
>>
> --Well, the Invisibility Cloak,
I think you're not being objective here. Something he inherited from
his father is an indulgence from the staff of Hogwarts? Do you consider
the staff of Hogwarts to favor Draco as well? He's certainly inherited
a lot more from his parents than Harry has--/what/ was the price on that
necklace in Borgin and Burke's?
> access to the Marauders' Map (ok, that was
> Fred and George giving it to him, but are we so sure that DD didn't know
> about it already?),
Regardless, it's only favoritism from the staff if Dumbledore would have
stopped anyone else from having the map. We can't prove either way if
he would--oh wait. Yes we can. Fred and George had it for years.
> not getting hit with a zillion detentions for various
> violations (can you say "flying car"? "Whomping Willow" and "sneaking out
> after hours to stalk Draco") that would have gotten any other student but
> one of the Trio booted out the door come to mind.
By all means--prove that Cho Chang would have gotten worse than Harry
and Ron did if she'd flown a flying car into the Whomping Willow. No?
Then it's your opinion, not a fact, that doing so "would have gotten any
other student but one of the Trio booted out the door." Oh, Snape says
he would have expelled a Slytherin for doing so. Do you believe him? I
sure don't, considering his perfect record of never punishing a
Slytherin for anything onstage.
And as for stalking Draco, if Harry had been the only student sneaking
out after hours there would have been no one to stalk. Yet Draco
somehow escapes being expelled too...
> Harry also gets special
> meeting wtih Dumbledore on a fairly regular basis to be rewarded and
> instructed,
In HBP, you mean? The way you're phrasing this makes it sound like it's
happened ever since the first book.
>(Myself, I think if Hermione Granger is doing a
> potion out of the book and it's not coming out right, there is something
> seriously wrong with the book, but I digress). He's constantly insolent to
> teachers he doesn't like, even when normal self-preservation would demand he
> keep his mouth shut (Umbridge, not just Snape, and in HBP it's Filch, too).
Filch is not a teacher, and if Harry is "insolent" to him that's 1) a
lot less than Filch is to students all the time, 2) less than Filch is
to a teacher named Rubeus Hagrid, and 3) less than other students are to
Filch (Fred and George come to mind, but Filch treats the students as
the enemy--to expect them to treat him with respect in return is unfair.
Like Umbridge, like Snape, he doesn't deserve respect, so why should
he get it?).
> I very much suspect that
> many students in Hufflepuff still wonder just who, really, put Harry's name
> in the Goblet, despite the Official Story.
Um...reality check here. You do realize that any Hufflepuffs who think
someone other than the villain of GoF (avoiding spoilers) put Harry's
name in the Goblet are /wrong/, and that the "Official Story," as you
put it, is the truth, right?
> Harry also received blatant favoritism in points from other teachers in OOtP
> because they hated Umbridge. Justified, because I hated her too. But it was
> still favoritism in front of the whole school.
But only favoritism for being the famous Harry Potter if any other
student who had done the same thing Harry had, caused as much trouble
for Umbridge, trouble wouldn't have gotten the same points. Do you
suppose Fred and George would have gotten detention from teachers other
than Umbridge for the swamp, if they hadn't left Hogwarts?
Fish Eye no Miko
>> What do you see as the boat load of extras that harry gets?
>>
> --Well, the Invisibility Cloak,
Which was his dad's, and therefore belongs to him.
> access to the Marauders' Map (ok, that was Fred and George giving
> it to him, but are we so sure that DD didn't know about it already?),
Again, as the son of one of the Map's creators, it arguably belongs to him
by right of inheritance (the surviving Marauders don't really need it).
Even if DD had handed it to him on a silver platter, it wouldn't be an
"extra", it'd be his by right.
> not getting hit with a zillion detentions for various violations (can
> you
> say "flying car"? "Whomping Willow" and "sneaking out after hours to
> stalk Draco")
And he does get plenty of detention for other things he does.
> that would have gotten any other student but one of the Trio booted
> out the door come to mind.
And you know this because...?
> Harry also gets special meeting wtih Dumbledore on a fairly regular basis
> to be rewarded and instructed,
Well, seeing as he's the savior of the whole Wizarding world, I don't see
that as that much of an indulgence. DD is trying to help the whole of the
Wizarding world--hell, and the Muggle world too--by helping Harry out now
and then. It's not like he's giving him the answers to quizzes and tips on
how to cheat at Quidditch.
> and don't you think the other teachers _notice_ that kind of thing?
Again, so? It's in EVERYONE'S best interest that DD helps Harry out a bit.
Well, unless you're a DE...
> Of course nobody on the staff of Hogwarts would ever let Harry
> slide on his schoolwork just to suck up to the Headmaster, nope,
> never ever happens. In HBP he basically cheats his way through
> Potions with the help of the Half-Blood Prince's old book
And none of the teachers are aware of it.
> --does no one but myself think this was set up by a Headmaster
> through Slughorn because Harry wasn't going to pay attention any
> other way?
No, no one else does.
> (Myself, I think if Hermione Granger is doing a potion out of the
> book and it's not coming out right, there is something seriously
> wrong with the book, but I digress). He's constantly insolent to
> teachers he doesn't like, even when normal self-preservation would
> demand he keep his mouth shut (Umbridge, not just Snape, and in HBP
> it's Filch, too).
And he often gets punished for it.
> Fortunately most of the teachers know better than to demand more
> than the minimum of dear Harry,
Oh, give me a break. If that were true, how did he get good grads on his
OWLS, which weren't given by the teachers at Hogwarts?
> except for McGonagall (to her credit, she does call Harry down for
> sloppy work).
So does Snape. And can you prove Flitwick and Sprout don't?
> Of course Harry really is good in the practical for DADA,
> mainly because he likes to stay alive. And even when the
> administration is not obviously working towards his greater glory,
> his enemies are (Barty Crouch Jr., GOBLET OF FIRE).
No, Crouch was trying to get him in a position for him to get KILLED. I
think you need to re-read the end of GoF.. The whole scene in the
graveyard...
> I very much suspect that many students in Hufflepuff still wonder just
> who, really, put Harry's name in the Goblet, despite the Official Story.
Who?
> But Hufflepuffs do know to blame Voldie for Cedric's death.
> However, some of them likely wonder if Voldie would have shown up for the
> winner if Harry had not been involved at all in the
> Tri-Wizard Tournament.
Which is why Crouch involved him in the first place. Duh.
> I'm certain everyone was told the truth about Barty Crouch Jr. and
> his involvement with getting Harry's name into the Goblet. But how
> many of them really believe it?
Does it matter? What does ANY of this have to do with Harry supposedly
getting special treatment?
> Harry also received blatant favoritism in points from other
> teachers in OOtP because they hated Umbridge.
And so where other students. Didn't Sprout give Hermione a large number of
points for answering a very simple question?
> Justified, because I hated her too. But it was still favoritism in front
> of the whole school.
But it wasn't just Harry getting it.
> Draco's the only one by HBP that does anything to Harry,
> and look what happened to him.
Again, this has what to do with the topic at hand?
<snip>
> Harry is certainly not as bad as the twins, but by now even an Occamy
> would be able to figure what a very bad idea it is to disturb Mr. Potter
> while he is at Hogwarts. People can and do figure these things out
> about who the administration favorite is in far less blatant
> situations than the one surrounding Harry Potter.
I'll ask you what I asked Lucy: Considering how you seem to feel about
Harry, why do you bother reading these books? How can you read books where
a character you seem to have so much contempt for is the hero?
Catherine Johnson.
Fish Eye no Miko
> "Fish Eye no Miko" <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote:
>> George wrote:
>>> "Fish Eye no Miko" <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote:
>>>> George wrote:
>>>>
>> Why would DD, knowing
>> the way the Durselys treat Harry, ask a teacher to continue such
>> treatment?
>
>>> Again:
>>> "Harry's going to get a lot of attention just because of who he
>>> is,..." and:
>>> The sudden onslaught of attention that comes from significant life
>>> changes (common muggle examples would be winning the lottery,
>>> becoming an "overnight sensation" in music or theater, etc.), can
>>> have very negative effects on a person.
>
> The muggle world is littered with examples and unhappy stories
> resulting from significant changes. The wizarding world is exempt
> from that?
> Richard Eney, in his post, provides some very good examples and
> makes some excellent points.
Ok, that's a good point. But, "So I'll let me teachers treat him like crap
if they want" is NOT a remedy to that.
And none of this addresses the issue of why Snape treats other students
badly and gets away with it.
>>>> Maybe he should wait and SEE if Harry acts like he's got an
>>>> inflated head before he asks Snape to deflate it.
>>>
>>> The sudden onslaught of attention that comes from significant life
>>> changes (common muggle examples would be winning the lottery,
>>> becoming an "overnight sensation" in music or theater, etc.), can
>>> have very negative effects on a person.
>>
>> So, to counteract it, he asks a teacher to ABUSE him?
>
> The only answer I can give you is another question: How many times
> in how many different ways has Dumbledore expressed that he trusts
> Snape implicitly.
Yes, when Harry asks DD if Snape is on their side. I don't think they've
ever discussed Snape's teaching methods. It's two separate issues. And it
*doesn't* answer my question. Do you really think letting an abusive
teacher mistreat a student is the way to keep him from becoming to
arrogant?
> I do not argue that Snape abused Harry.
Ok.. you're just saying he's doing it... for a reason? Because DD asked
him to? What?
>>> "If one accepts the possibility that Dumbledore and Snape were
>>> collaberating on all kinds of things, possibly including Dd's
>>> death, and we know from PS/SS that Dd wanted Harry to be raised as
>>> a normal child, not a celebrity, is it possible that Dd&S were
>>> running a kind of "good cop-bad cop" scenario on Harry?"
>>> Note the phrase, "is it possible," and the question mark at the
>>> end. I'm asking a question, not making an assertion. You ignore
>>> that fact in your rant.
>>
>> Ok, then: No, I don't think they were. I think Snape's just a
>> jerk.
>
> On that we can agree. But like it or not, he's a jerk that Dumbledore
> trusts.
Again, on an issue that has nothing to do with his teaching ability or
style.
Catherine Johnson.
Jean Lamb
> father is an indulgence from the staff of Hogwarts? Do you consider the
> staff of Hogwarts to favor Draco as well? He's certainly inherited a lot
> more from his parents than Harry has--/what/ was the price on that
> necklace in Borgin and Burke's?
--Good point, but Harry was *given* the cloak by Dumbledore, I think, when
Harry was only 11. Is that really old enough to use it responsibly?
> Regardless, it's only favoritism from the staff if Dumbledore would have
> stopped anyone else from having the map. We can't prove either way if he
> would--oh wait. Yes we can. Fred and George had it for years.
--Well, but Fred and George are also Gryffindors. But that's another issue.
>> not getting hit with a zillion detentions for various
>> violations (can you say "flying car"? "Whomping Willow" and "sneaking out
>> after hours to stalk Draco") that would have gotten any other student but
>> one of the Trio booted out the door come to mind.
>
> By all means--prove that Cho Chang would have gotten worse than Harry and
> Ron did if she'd flown a flying car into the Whomping Willow. No? Then
> it's your opinion, not a fact, that doing so "would have gotten any other
> student but one of the Trio booted out the door." Oh, Snape says he would
> have expelled a Slytherin for doing so. Do you believe him? I sure
> don't, considering his perfect record of never punishing a Slytherin for
> anything onstage.
--Ok, you're right. It is my opinion. To be honest, I can't think of _any_
student who has been expelled. For anything.
> And as for stalking Draco, if Harry had been the only student sneaking out
> after hours there would have been no one to stalk. Yet Draco somehow
> escapes being expelled too...
--Good point. Then again, Sirius Black managed to avoid being expelled for
nearly murdering Snape. And I suspect there were several times when Harry
left the building only _suspecting_ that Draco was actually out there (or
did he use the Map? I'll be honest, I can't remember). Why didn't Harry ever
show the map to Dumbledore to get Draco expelled, if he did have it?
>> Harry also gets special
>> meeting wtih Dumbledore on a fairly regular basis to be rewarded and
>> instructed,
>
> In HBP, you mean? The way you're phrasing this makes it sound like it's
> happened ever since the first book.
--No, Harry gets visited by Dumbledore or is in his office on a fairly
regular basis since the first book. Ok, it's often in the infirmary, but I
don't get the impression that the headmaster visits every kid in there.
Harry is definitely in the office to be rewarded after the end of CoS ("It
is your choices that make the difference" to reassure Harry that he isn't
EEEEvil because the Hat recommended Slytherin). There are a couple of
meetings in the infirmary during PoA, with the whole TimeTurner business.
There's several meetings during GoF (cough cough pensieve cough cough). And
of course, the famous office-wrecking scene in OOtP. We won't even the
mention the Yearly Awarding of the Cup to Gryffindor that begins when Harry
starts Gryffindor.
Let's take an office. The boss is a smoker. Only one other person is. The
boss and the other person have daily smoking breaks together. Are the rest
of the people in that office going to make a fuss if the smoker punts his or
her work? Only if they're Snape or much braver than I am, that's for sure.
> Filch is not a teacher, and if Harry is "insolent" to him that's 1) a lot
> less than Filch is to students all the time, 2) less than Filch is to a
> teacher named Rubeus Hagrid, and 3) less than other students are to Filch
> (Fred and George come to mind, but Filch treats the students as the
> enemy--to expect them to treat him with respect in return is unfair. Like
> Umbridge, like Snape, he doesn't deserve respect, so why should he get
> it?).
--Filch is still a staff member, and in physical danger if it ever comes out
that he's a Squib. Frankly, if I had to see that Fred and George didn't
wreck the school, I'd start seeing them as an enemy, too. Yes, they're cute,
but they are disruptive and have put a fair number of people in the
infirmary or to St. Mungo's (cough cough Montague cough cough).
> Um...reality check here. You do realize that any Hufflepuffs who think
> someone other than the villain of GoF (avoiding spoilers) put Harry's name
> in the Goblet are /wrong/, and that the "Official Story," as you put it,
> is the truth, right?
--I'm saying that any Hufflepuffs who disagree with the Official Story are
wrong, because we happen to know it from Harry's point of view. But none of
them who are wrong are going to speak up, either. It would be extremely easy
for disgruntled Hufflepuffs who are upset over Cedric Diggory's death to
_not_ believe the official story, because they've had four years now of
Harry Potter is Always Glorious, and extremely difficult for Dumbledore to
prove the truth, because Barty Crouch Jr. has been Dementorized. It would be
considered in character, though wrongly, for someone who couldn't find out
the truth in any other time to decide that the coverup in now in action and
just shrug it off.
And for two years in a row, a non-Gryffindor Quidditch Captain was
eliminated. It did not happen in HBP, but I suspect some people might have
expected it to.
>
> But only favoritism for being the famous Harry Potter if any other student
> who had done the same thing Harry had, caused as much trouble for
> Umbridge, trouble wouldn't have gotten the same points. Do you suppose
> Fred and George would have gotten detention from teachers other than
> Umbridge for the swamp, if they hadn't left Hogwarts?
--As it was they waltzed away from any responsiblity for what they did to
other students as well. Though both Fred and George were of legal wizarding
age, there was no word of legal action. In the States, the Montagues would
have sued both Hogwarts and the Weasley twins, even if all the injuries were
eventually healed (yes, Draco found out about the Vanishing Cabinets from
Montague. But we don't know the circumstances. Montague could still have
been undergoing therapy at St Mungo's, on his deathbed, or completely
healthy. We simply don't know).
As for Harry, it did happen because of Umbridge's prejudice--but it still
happened to _Harry_. Students who were unaware of the 'payback' aspect of
things merely saw business as usual.
You've never worked in an office where the boss had a favorite that wasn't
you, have you?
--
Jean Lamb
> Harry, why do you bother reading these books? How can you read books
> where a character you seem to have so much contempt for is the hero?
>
> Catherine Johnson.
--Well, I used to like him. In book 5, a lot of his problems could easily be
blamed on Umbridge, though I didn't like what the twins got away with. In
book 6, I _didn't_ like him very much, but I do most of the other
characters. It is getting a bit boring that Gryffindors are good no matter
who gets hurt, and that Slytherins are always evil even if they're nearly
murdered while wandless, and that Rowling reinforces the idea that
everything that Harry does is right even when it's scummy. Villains are
_supposed_ to be scummy (cf Draco), and it bothers me when the supposed
heroes act the same but it's ok when they do it. I was glad to see Hermione
worry about Montague in book 5 and McGonagall set Harry down over the
'unfairness' of his detention. But there's getting to be less and less of
that.
Yes, Harry is special and the savior of the Wizarding World etc. But I grew
up on the Lensman books, where heroes didn't throw snits and did the right
thing even when people they didn't like were involved. It's called basic
fairness. We don't expect it from villains. We do from heroes, even if
they're Gryffindors.
Things are supposed to be wrong if they're wrong no matter who does them.
Yeah, Filch was annoying in book 6, but he was trying to safeguard the
school by not letting dangerous items get in (though they did anyway).
And I hated the way Hermione was treated, frankly--I mean, giving her that
brain-slug and all over Won-Won.
I do want to see how things come out, and I do hope Harry learns that
becoming like one's enemy is generally not the best solution.
Richard Eney
Lucy <Lu...@chandos.dy.udf> wrote:
>"Toon" <to...@toon.com> wrote
>> >>"Fish Eye no Miko" wrote
>> >>> Lucy wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > We mainly see Snape from Harrys ( POV ), and Harry doesn't
>> >> > like it when people don't treat him as the famous, most important
>> >> > everything revolves around him character.
>> >>
>> >> Oh, please. He's grown up being treated like crap... why would he
>> >> suddenly expect everyone to treat him like royalty?
>> >
>> >The first book Harry yes is unfairly treated but as the series continues
>> >Harry becomes more and more like we hear James was.
>>
>> According to Snape.
>
>And Sirius and Lupin.
Snape is projecting, but there is _some_ point to his description:
Harry has a normal amount of childish arrogance, thinking that it won't
matter if he goes to Hogsmeade without permission, even though he knows
that he was being specially protected and allowed to stay at the Leaky
Cauldron _because_ he was in danger. Lupin disapproved of that and
told him so.
Mostly they talk about how much Harry _looks_ like James.
Sirius was actively disappointed because Harry _didn't_ behave like James.
Sirius wanted Harry to join him as the fifth Marauder and be a rebel.
Sirius didn't know about all the times that Harry wandered around the
school in the cloak, but compared to the number of times James probably
did, Harry probably was a virtual stay-at-home.
Harry's superficial similarity to James is mainly from being a teenager
and from having had the kind of life experience that taught him he
couldn't trust adults, couldn't expect any help from them even if he
asked for help, and could expect them to be wrong. After all, he was
right about someone trying for the Stone, he was right about hearing
something in the halls and that he wasn't the Heir of Slytherin, he
was right to listen to what Sirius had to say. He didn't cheat to
enter the Tournament, either, and he was right when he thought it was
someone trying to kill him.
But he is arrogant. Not as arrogant as James, but somewhat.
Harry was wrong about some things, too, and so far, he hasn't
thought about those times much, except for the end of OotP.
He was wrong about who was after the Stone, he was wrong about trusting
the contents of the Diary as long as he did, and he was wrong when he
thought he could get away with attacking Draco (defending Ron, but still
attacking Draco) in Hogsmeade. He acted like the kid he was when he
postponed working on the egg problem, and lied to Hermione about it.
He has been wrong in almost every book about who was causing the
real trouble.
He's been very slow to learn how to ask for help from his friends.
It took him five years to learn to read the instructions. He
doesn't think his schoolwork is important - yet it's his only chance
to learn all the magic he needs to fight Voldemort. And now that he
knows absolutely that the fight is imminent, he's planning to avoid
learning any more magic, and once again trying to avoid getting any
help from his friends. Either he's really trusting Dumbledore's
statement that his ability to love is all he needs, or he's being
arrogant in assuming that he will be able to fight Voldemort just with
what he knows, when in fact he can't beat the average DE if the average
DE weren't holding back because of being ordered not to attack Harry.
=Tamar
Richard Eney
George <boygeorg...@OFTHISyahoo.com> wrote:
>"Jean Lamb" <tlamb...@charter.net> wrote in
>news:BAU6f.11745$xk2....@fe06.lga:
>>> By all means--prove that Cho Chang would have gotten worse than Harry
>>> and Ron did if she'd flown a flying car into the Whomping Willow.
>>> No? Then it's your opinion, not a fact, that doing so "would have
>>> gotten any other student but one of the Trio booted out the door."
>>> Oh, Snape says he would have expelled a Slytherin for doing so. Do
>>> you believe him? I sure don't, considering his perfect record of
>>> never punishing a Slytherin for anything onstage.
>>
>> --Ok, you're right. It is my opinion. To be honest, I can't think of
>> _any_ student who has been expelled. For anything.
>
>negligent homicide, based on the evidence available at the time.
And getting caught with a very illegal, very dangerous pet.
=Tamar
Richard Eney
Fish Eye no Miko <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote:
<snip>
>> Of course nobody on the staff of Hogwarts would ever let Harry
>> slide on his schoolwork just to suck up to the Headmaster, nope,
>> never ever happens. In HBP he basically cheats his way through
>> Potions with the help of the Half-Blood Prince's old book
>
>And none of the teachers are aware of it.
>
>> --does no one but myself think this was set up by a Headmaster
>> through Slughorn because Harry wasn't going to pay attention any
>> other way?
>
>No, no one else does.
I think it was set up by Snape, and possibly also by Dumbledore.
>> (Myself, I think if Hermione Granger is doing a potion out of the
>> book and it's not coming out right, there is something seriously
>> wrong with the book, but I digress).
Yes, absolutely. Slughorn teaches the book fairly well, but even
though he can recognize why the additions improve the potions, he
has never published an improved potion book (nor has Snape, but at
least Snape seems to have been teaching the improved potions in
class - he puts the formulas in the board, he doesn't say turn to
page 15).
>> Of course Harry really is good in the practical for DADA,
>> mainly because he likes to stay alive. And even when the
>> administration is not obviously working towards his greater glory,
>> his enemies are (Barty Crouch Jr., GOBLET OF FIRE).
>
>No, Crouch was trying to get him in a position for him to get KILLED.
>I think you need to re-read the end of GoF.. The whole scene in the
>graveyard...
But Crouch Jr was teaching him how to resist Imperius, and working to
help him win the Tournament - which effectively was towards Harry's
greater glory - because then it would be a greater win for Voldemort.
It's the "worthy opponent" problem.
>> Harry is certainly not as bad as the twins, but by now even an Occamy
>> would be able to figure what a very bad idea it is to disturb Mr. Potter
>> while he is at Hogwarts. People can and do figure these things out
>> about who the administration favorite is in far less blatant
>> situations than the one surrounding Harry Potter.
It doesn't say much for Draco's intelligence that he hasn't been able to
figure it out. Even Lucius tells him that it isn't wise to be seen as an
enemy of someone with a good public image like Harry.
If you list all the things Harry has done as though you were a prosecutor
bound to bring him up on charges, he has a fairly long rap sheet. The
rap sheet for Draco is fairly long, too. Considering that most of the
wizard world gets their news from the equivalent of two competing
tabloid newspapers and a lot of gossip, it's highly likely that large
numbers of Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws are dubious about Harry's qualities.
After all, he has been directly involved in the loss of several teachers
and one very popular student. They're perfectly willing to boo and hiss
when he loses points and to believe that he's evil when there is very
little evidence for it. Now he's been seen to come running down from the
tower that was blocked so only a DE could go there, and he was the last
person to leave. They have only his word for it that Snape attacked
Dumbledore. Sure, the teachers believe it, and all the non-Slytherin
students hated Snape. But I wonder how many of the students who have been
on the sidelines all six years are just a little dubious. For the last
couple of years, new students have cringed at being Sorted into Gryffindor,
partly because of the anti-Harry newspaper campaign. I don't think that's
been entirely erased.
=Tamar
Richard Eney
George <boygeorg...@OFTHISyahoo.com> wrote:
>dic...@radix.net (Richard Eney) wrote
>>>"Fish Eye no Miko" <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote
>>
>>>
>>>If we are to believe HPB 3 (Will and Won't), Dd already knows
>>>something about the Dursley situation, unless he completely, totally
>>>and utterly ignored it until HBP.
>>
>> heard from listening to portrait gossip (or from "watching Harry
>> closely" which he says he has done). If he's really been watching
>> Harry that much, he probably knows about the ragged, oversize clothing
>> that Harry packs every year; it's only in the movies that Harry bought
>> school clothes that fit. In the books his Dursley clothes are covered
>> by the school robes. Not to mention the Christmas "presents". Dd
>> knows enough about how the Dursleys have treated Harry.
>
>Actually, there is another source, one that makes Catherine wrong about
>Dd having no clue how Harry acts, and me and you partially wrong:
>Arabella Figg. She first shows up in PS/SS (2 The Vanishing Glass), and
>the text indicates that she has known (watched over?) Harry for years.
>Not until OOTP do we actually meet her.
You are right. She has been sending reports, too, and stays in touch with
the Order. And she clearly states that if she had made his visits enjoyable,
the Dursleys would have found another child minder. So it was well known
that the Dursleys would prevent anything that Harry enjoyed.
=Tamar
richard e white
No Harry does not like collens or lockharts fonning over him. He also dislikes
the people who take draccos way of dealing with harry's fame. Harry for his
part rather likes to just blend in and not be known at all. He likes being part
of the crowd.
I think JkR does a lot of this because of her reaction to her own sudden fame.
>
> > and
> > hated Snape because he thought Snape was probably involved in his
> > fathers death!
>
> He hates Snape a long time before he finds out Snape was the spy, yes he
> knew Snape was a DE but I don't think he ever connected him with the death
> of his parents before book 6
Harry hated snape ever sence snape Statterd attacking Harry in class for no
reason. oddly it is not shown in the print until snape docks a point for not
stopping nevel from messing up. The constant sniping at Harry just makes it get
worse. That type of attack with out a reason builds bad blood faster then any
other way.
>
>
> >Snape hated him because he was Voldemorts tail, and as
> > everyone knows, Voldemort completely DESPISES Harry.
> >
>
> I not so sure that Snape does hate Harry, true he seems to take great
> pleasure in verbally abusing him and he did truly hate him after Harry
> delved into Snapes private memories yet he does keep helping Harry out, Book
> 1 he saves his live
To keep his place well hid.
> Book 2 he teaches him how to duel,
No. He uses one spell on lockhart because snape wants to smack down lockhart.
Then he puts harry in a spot where he knows harry has not been told what to do
and tells Dracco what to do. And dracco attacks before the start of the demo.
tho who's idea that was we don't know. This is not teaching. Harry and the
others just got one spell out of this and they had to practis it in there own
commen room.
> book 3 he attempts to
> rescue him from Sirius,
Or he just wanted to kill black for past deeds. He was also trying to get lupin
in trouble. Keeping harry and co safe would just prove that he was in the
right. remember he wanted to take lupin and black before anyone got in the
way. This is still self serveing to me.
> book 4 He ignores TDL summons,
His options there are unclear. if he only staded to keep on DD good side there
is still nothing for harry to gain.
> Book 5 he doesn't
> supple the truth liquid potion to that horrible woman,
And the why is still unclear. It would not have matterd anyways as the
questions she asked Harry could not answer anyways. Black was hidden by the
charm that hids number 12 and harry did not know where DD was. so there was
nothing there. But there where facts about snape that harry could have told so
the reason as to why snape did not give the potion over matters little.
> To me it still looks like snape is out for just himself.
>
> --
> Lucy..
richard e white
> >> The fact is, in the books Harry is whipsawed between the cruelty of the
> >> Dursleys and Snape and the indulgence of the Headmaster and nearly all
> >> the
> >> other staff. This is not generally a prescription for a stable
> >> personality,
> >> and results in the Harry we see in books 5 and 6.
> >>
> >> Jean Lamb, tlamb...@charter.net
> >> "Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for you are crunchy and good
> >> with
> >> lemon drops."
> >
> > What do you see as the boat load of extras that harry gets?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Richard The Blind Typer
> > Lets Hear It For Talking Computers.
> >
> --Well, the Invisibility Cloak,
Witch was his. it belonged to Harry's father. DD only returned it to him. I
also see this as a test. DD wanted to see what harry would use it for. We also
don't know how many kids at hogwarts have them. for all we know many of the
richer kids may have them.
> access to the Marauders' Map (ok, that was
> Fred and George giving it to him, but are we so sure that DD didn't know
> about it already?
I would say yes as DD did not seam to know about when the fake mad eye talked
about it.
> ), not getting hit with a zillion detentions for various
> violations (can you say "flying car"?
They did get detention for that one and a letter home. We would need to see
some one elses detentions for the same thing to know if they got off light. And
remember that part of the blame was put on ron's dad. witch was the reason for
a fine.
> "Whomping Willow" and "sneaking out
> after hours to stalk Draco") that would have gotten any other student but
> one of the Trio booted out the door come to mind.
I think your wrong here. We don't know if the staff even knew about this. and
as dracco did not get caught either but for the one time he was let off this is
not something that the other kids did not get that harry did. It is just that
harry did not get caught. But many kids are caught out and we never see them
get it either. colloens was out late and found the basllask.
So we don't really knows what it takes to get kicked out for most kids.
> Harry also gets special
> meeting wtih Dumbledore on a fairly regular basis to be rewarded and
> instructed,
Up until the last book harry saw dd more often for getting in trouble. And many
times the only reason harry was not punished was no proff. And I rather think
DD is this way with all the kids.
in the last book is the change and DD is trying to get harry ready for the
battle with V. Tho I don't see this as being done well.
> and don't you think the other teachers _notice_ that kind of
> thing? Of course nobody on the staff of Hogwarts would ever let Harry slide
> on his schoolwork just to suck up to the Headmaster, nope, never ever
> happens.
I don't think most of the teachers would ever go easy on any student. well
snape did on crab and goyl. But many of the othersdid not change. And when
mcgonical did not give home work so harry would be able to practis she gave that
same no home work to every one in the class. and most likely the other classes
to.
the only teachers who gives harry an easy time was slughorn and Hagrid. Hagrid
was willing to do that for anyone that was friendly with him and old sluggy
thought harry was a wiz do to the book. slug was trying to reward good work.
this only works as a perk if slug knew what was in the book he gave harry. Mind
you I'm not so sure that slug horn did not know what was in the book so this
might be a point for your case. woun't know unless we ever find out.
> In HBP he basically cheats his way through Potions with the help of
> the Half-Blood Prince's old book--does no one but myself think this was set
> up by a Headmaster through Slughorn because Harry wasn't going to pay
> attention any other way?
No. To me that does not fit DD's character. Mind you though I would not be
surprised if Slughorn did not do it to try and get harry in the slug club.
> (Myself, I think if Hermione Granger is doing a
> potion out of the book and it's not coming out right, there is something
> seriously wrong with the book, but I digress).
I agree here. I think it is time to find a better text book.
> He's constantly insolent to
> teachers he doesn't like, even when normal self-preservation would demand he
> keep his mouth shut (Umbridge, not just Snape, and in HBP it's Filch, too).
>
Some people will always fight back when they see a wrong. and harry was
punished for thoes coments. So why do you think getting in trouble for opening
your mouth means that your getting a perk? Not getting punished for opening
your mouth like dracco in snape's class is a perk. Getting punished is the
norm.
> Fortunately most of the teachers know better than to demand more than the
> minimum of dear Harry, except for McGonagall (to her credit, she does call
> Harry down for sloppy work).
By Harry's owls we see that he was E level in most things. So the work level
was being held up. And flitwick all so gives homework when Harry is not up to
the right level.
> Of course Harry really is good in the practical
> for DADA, mainly because he likes to stay alive. And even when the
> administration is not obviously working towards his greater glory, his
> enemies are (Barty Crouch Jr., GOBLET OF FIRE). I very much suspect that
> many students in Hufflepuff still wonder just who, really, put Harry's name
> in the Goblet, despite the Official Story.
I don't think so now that V is shown to be back. Up til that point I think you
where right.
>
> But Hufflepuffs do know to blame Voldie for Cedric's death. However, some of
> them likely wonder if Voldie would have shown up for the winner if Harry had
> not been involved at all in the Tri-Wizard Tournament. I'm certain everyone
> was told the truth about Barty Crouch Jr. and his involvement with getting
> Harry's name into the Goblet. But how many of them really believe it? Barty
> was Kissed really, really fast, and that was Fudge's doing. But given how
> many times Fudge has asked DD for advice, how many will believe that it was
> really Fudge's idea to act so quickly? Of course, none of them will say a
> word. After all, right now Slytherin is blamed anything that goes wrong at
> the school. Why rock the boat?
I still don't see this as a perk to harry. and after fudges hunt to go after
harry and DD I don't think any one thinks that dd had anything to do with the
dementors and what fudge was doing with them. Not to mention sence the
dementors went to V. Like I said before dureing book five I think most of the
people crossed from the way your thinking to Harry's thinking.
But harry paid a lot of blood and pain for his stance. witch means that this is
not a perk.
>
> Harry also received blatant favoritism in points from other teachers in OOtP
> because they hated Umbridge. Justified, because I hated her too. But it was
> still favoritism in front of the whole school.
No. The kids knew why harry was getting thoes points. It was the only way that
the teachers could show who they belived. This was much more inportant for the
other kids then harry. It started the other kids to start comeing to terms with
what was really going on.
> Draco's the only one by HBP
> that does anything to Harry,
You mean other then q and V in book one.
The snake and tom in book two.
and so on through the books.
> and look what happened to him. (Draco, frankly,
> has to be one of the most incompetent evil-doers in history. He's forever
> getting his head, and other body parts, handed to him. He should really
> consider a career change, rather like the Dumb Crooks on Parade who would
> actually make more money working at McDonald's). Harry is certainly not as
> bad as the twins, but by now even an Occamy would be able to figure what a
> very bad idea it is to disturb Mr. Potter while he is at Hogwarts. People
> can and do figure these things out about who the administration favorite is
> in far less blatant situations than the one surrounding Harry Potter.
In book 5 the admin was out after potter as well.
I can see where you get the idea. But the admin not doing something because
they don't know is not a perk.
I was not saying that potter did not break rules. for that seams to be done all
the time at hogwarts by many of the students. The thing is to be a perk it has
to be known about and still let slide. And it seams that you don't agree with
how much punishment Harry got for each minor rule breaking or crime. I don't
know why you tried to add events where he was punished for what he did often far
worse then the comment or back talked demanded.
but to know how much harry should have gotten we would have needed to see others
not related to harry get there punishment.
richard e white
> > I'll ask you what I asked Lucy: Considering how you seem to feel about
> > Harry, why do you bother reading these books? How can you read books
> > where a character you seem to have so much contempt for is the hero?
> >
> > Catherine Johnson.
>
> --Well, I used to like him. In book 5, a lot of his problems could easily be
> blamed on Umbridge, though I didn't like what the twins got away with. In
> book 6, I _didn't_ like him very much, but I do most of the other
> characters. It is getting a bit boring that Gryffindors are good no matter
> who gets hurt, and that Slytherins are always evil even if they're nearly
> murdered while wandless,
First off Peter was a grif so there not all good. And Slughorn is not bad even
if he is a socal climber.
> and that Rowling reinforces the idea that
> everything that Harry does is right even when it's scummy. Villains are
> _supposed_ to be scummy (cf Draco), and it bothers me when the supposed
> heroes act the same but it's ok when they do it.
I think your missing what JKR is aiming at. The idea is that your own actions
are more inportant then rules.
For exsample if you see a cop killing some one do you stop it?
the right thing to do is yes, but the laws will be twisted against you from the
moment you step in to help. but dose that mean you just watch and report what
you saw?
> I was glad to see Hermione
> worry about Montague in book 5 and McGonagall set Harry down over the
> 'unfairness' of his detention. But there's getting to be less and less of
> that.
> Yes, Harry is special and the savior of the Wizarding World etc. But I grew
> up on the Lensman books, where heroes didn't throw snits and did the right
> thing even when people they didn't like were involved.
You could take the all good or all evil of thoes books?
I prefure shads of gray myself. I also don't want a squeaky clean character
that is no where real. I like the charaters to be more life like and human.
> It's called basic
> fairness. We don't expect it from villains. We do from heroes, even if
> they're Gryffindors.
But are the rules and laws always fair in real life? What is wrong with a book
that talks about doing something that is right even if it is against the law of
the school?
>
> Things are supposed to be wrong if they're wrong no matter who does them.
> Yeah, Filch was annoying in book 6, but he was trying to safeguard the
> school by not letting dangerous items get in (though they did anyway).
>
> And I hated the way Hermione was treated, frankly--I mean, giving her that
> brain-slug and all over Won-Won.
>
> I do want to see how things come out, and I do hope Harry learns that
> becoming like one's enemy is generally not the best solution.
>
But if you never show someone makeing misstakes it tends to show the younger
readers that the dections are always easy. So when they have a hard decition
they often think they are screwed up because they are haveing a hard time
understanding what is right.
>
> -
> Jean Lamb, tlamb...@charter.net
> "Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for you are crunchy and good with
> lemon drops."
richard e white
> PFG wrote:
> > sjmc...@gmail.com in <1129945956....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Why has DD never said, "Dude, that's
> >>not cool. You're a teacher, and a grown man...I won't allow you to
> >>treat the students like crap"?
> >
> >
> > Dumbledore seems to keep at Hogwarts lots of people whom he deems
> > to be useful in the eventual final battle against Voldemort, or who, if they
> > ever fell in the hands of Voldemort, could do serious harm to the 'good'
> > side (think of Trelawney), and as defeating Voldemort is for Dumbledore
> > the most important thing, this outweighs the bad features of some of his
> > staff. Dumbledore considers Snape to be very useful as a spy
> > against Voldemort. Besides, Snape, as nasty and pathetic as he really is,
> > is a *terrific* teacher all the same.
>
> Um, well. We only have one account of a student doing particularly well
> or particularly poorly in Potions as compared to other subjects: Neville
> got a bad Potions grade in first year. Since then, we haven't been told
> how well students do in his class-
In book 6 Snape tells dracco that Crab and goyl had to work better on there class
if they wanted an owl this time around.
I think it was about there potions work as well. So it seams that you can retake
owls and that Crab and Goyl really messed up on the owls in there 5 th year.
> -though I can't see how favoring
> one-quarter of his students and abusing the other three-quarters could
> possibly fail to cripple him as a teacher, for both sets of students.
> If Neville never hears when he does something right and Draco never
> hears when he does something wrong, neither is really learning, and we
> know that Snape, when he can't think of anything negative to say about
> Hermione's potion, scowls into her cauldron and says nothing at all.
That is because he is a good potions maker but a lousy teacher. I had one like
that my self. He was a good tecknichine but not a good teacher. Rather then teach
you how to use the machines he would just do it for you. So many kids came out
with good looking peces but no skills to do it them self.
I think most of snapes students got by with the book and notes from others and did
well enugf to get an owl.
>
>
> Spoilers for HBP.
>
> 20
>
> 19
>
> 18
>
> 17
>
> 16
>
> 15
>
> 14
>
> 13
>
> 12
>
> 11
>
> 10
>
> 9
>
> 8
>
> 7
>
> 6
>
> 5
>
> 4
>
> 3
>
> 2
>
> 1
>
> Page 239, Scholastic edition, "On the other hand, the Prince had proved
> a much more effective teacher than Snape so far."
>
> Once or twice, long before HBP came out, I said that Snape would
> probably have been a better teacher if he had written instructions on
> the blackboard and left the room without once speaking. I never
> expected it to be formally put to the test, but there it is: Snape's
> written instructions had proved a much more effective teacher than the
> totality of Snape.
True. You are right about that.
Lucy
>"richard e white" wrote
>> Lucy wrote:
>
> > "angel" <hoticen...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1130066526.2...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >
> > pleasure in verbally abusing him and he did truly hate him after Harry
> > delved into Snapes private memories yet he does keep helping Harry out,
Book
> > 1 he saves his live
>
> To keep his place well hid.
Do you mean to fool DD?
If so I am no longer certain of Snapes motives here, if Quirrel had had his
way, how would it of effected Snapes position?
>
>
> > Book 2 he teaches him how to duel,
>
> No. He uses one spell on lockhart because snape wants to smack down
lockhart.
> Then he puts harry in a spot where he knows harry has not been told what
to do
> and tells Dracco what to do. And dracco attacks before the start of the
demo.
> tho who's idea that was we don't know. This is not teaching. Harry and
the
> others just got one spell out of this and they had to practis it in there
own
> commen room.
Well yes agreed, but Snape, how did Lockhart put it, 'Happy volunteered to
assist him', true his motives could have been to show Lockhart up in front
of the school but he was doing a pretty good job on his own on that front
and Snape giving his spare time to help out has to have some ulterior
motive. And if we take a look at what happens Snape ensures Harry duels
Draco and possibly gives Draco ideas on which spell to use in effect he is
helping Harry deal with unsportsmanlike like dueling.
<Snip to end agreed points>
--
Lucy..
Richard Eney
richard e white <chip...@cox.net> wrote:
>Jean Lamb wrote:
>> Catherine Johnson wrote
>> > I'll ask you what I asked Lucy: Considering how you seem to feel about
>> > Harry, why do you bother reading these books? How can you read books
>> > where a character you seem to have so much contempt for is the hero?
>>
>> --Well, I used to like him. In book 5, a lot of his problems could easily
>> be blamed on Umbridge, though I didn't like what the twins got away with.
>> In book 6, I _didn't_ like him very much, but I do most of the other
>> characters. It is getting a bit boring that Gryffindors are good no matter
>> who gets hurt, and that Slytherins are always evil even if they're nearly
>> murdered while wandless,
>
>First off Peter was a grif so they're not all good. And Slughorn is not bad
>even if he is a socal climber.
>
>> and that Rowling reinforces the idea that everything that Harry does is
>> right even when it's scummy. Villains are _supposed_ to be scummy
>> (cf Draco), and it bothers me when the supposed heroes act the same
>> but it's ok when they do it.
>
>I think you're missing what JKR is aiming at. The idea is that your own actions
>are more inportant than rules.
>For example if you see a cop killing some one do you stop it?
>the right thing to do is yes, but the laws will be twisted against you from the
>moment you step in to help. but dose that mean you just watch and report what
>you saw?
>> I was glad to see Hermione worry about Montague in book 5 and McGonagall
>> set Harry down over the 'unfairness' of his detention. But there's
>> getting to be less and less of that.
>>
>> Yes, Harry is special and the savior of the Wizarding World etc. But I grew
>> up on the Lensman books, where heroes didn't throw snits and did the right
>> thing even when people they didn't like were involved.
>
>You could take the all good or all evil of those books?
I grew up on them too, and I liked them just fine. There is one slight difference
and that is that most if not all of the Lensmen were fully grown adults with
strong ethical systems already.
>I prefer shades of gray myself. I also don't want a squeaky clean character
>that is no where real. I like the characters to be more life like and human.
The distinction for me is in the hero as role model. I am fine with having
a character struggle with ethical questions. I am not so happy with showing
him being rewarded for doing pretty much the same thing the villain is criticized
for doing. "It's right because we're wearing the white hats today" is a
very bad justification. Lupin admits that his gang's behavior in school was
not admirable in all ways; he's the most adult of the marauders. But his
responses are overshadowed by the bad-boy attraction of Sirius, who did send
an unwarned student to meet a werewolf because he thought it was funny.
I feel the attraction of the Sirius character, but I still think he committed
attempted murder at the age of 16.
Hermione occasionally speaks up against it, but the average kid is going
to agree with Harry - after all, he's the hero and she's just the
rule-following hindrance who sometimes panics in a crisis. Rowling has
shown Harry gloating over having food when someone else was hungry _because_
the other person was hungry - yeah, it was Dudley, but the point is, that is
not an admirable quality and it has never been criticized by any other
character. She apparently thinks the Twins are innocently hilarious, when
all of their jokes involve not-so-subtle attacks on other people.
>> It's called basic fairness. We don't expect it from villains. We
>> do from heroes, even if they're Gryffindors.
>
>But are the rules and laws always fair in real life? What is wrong with a book
>that talks about doing something that is right even if it is against the law of
>the school?
The point is not that life isn't fair. We know that. A book that is read
by children - and in this case, enormous numbers of children - will have an
impact on their belief systems. The hero is inevitably taken as a role model.
Harry has been the hero for six books now. And he still isn't behaving like
someone I'd want in my life. He's still breaking any rule he feels like
breaking, justifying it as necessary when most of the time it's just that he's
bored. Much of the time, it isn't that Harry is doing the right thing in spite
of school rules - he is doing the wrong thing, misusing the cloak to go party
in Hogsmeade and attack Draco - and he is shown getting away with it. He is
careless with the cloak, leaves it behind on the tower in PS/SS, and DD gives
it back to him.
>> Things are supposed to be wrong if they're wrong no matter who does them.
>> Yeah, Filch was annoying in book 6, but he was trying to safeguard the
>> school by not letting dangerous items get in (though they did anyway).
<snip>
>> I do want to see how things come out, and I do hope Harry learns that
>> becoming like one's enemy is generally not the best solution.
>
>But if you never show someone making mistakes it tends to show the younger
>readers that the decisions are always easy. So when they have a hard decision
>they often think they are screwed up because they are having a hard time
>understanding what is right.
If we ever saw Harry having a hard time making the ethical decision, that
would be good. But what we usually see is Harry deciding that he wants
to go look in the mirror again, and having to be told not to and also
having the mirror hidden away from him. Or harry deciding that he wants
to buy candy, so it's okay to sneak out through an unknown tunnel and
visit Hogsmeade without permission when the whole school and the whole
town have been put under Dementor guard just to protect him. Lupin chews
him out about it, but Harry never had a twinge before he did it. He is
completely thoughtless. It took five books for him to think ahead at
all, and that's four books too many.
=Tamar
Ard Rhi
"Fish Eye no Miko" <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote in message
news:bLR6f.8455$i%.6294@fed1read07...
> Ard Rhi wrote:
>
>> Because when it comes right down to it, he is still an effective
>> teacher and entitled to how he sees or treats others.
>
> No. Being a good teacher doesn't "entitle" you to be a sadist.
Nor is he a sadist.
>> He doesn't abuse them.
>
> Tell that to Neville.
He doesn't abuse Neville. Neville doesn't have a hand for potions and Snape
has no tolerance for those who can't make the cut. It's not in his job
description that he must be the kindly old teacher complete with smile
wrinkles who forgives a student's lack of work. Neville is perfectly capable
of doing the work as shown when Hermione helped him. Neville simply is
afraid of Snape and while Snape doesn't help that, he is not obligated to do
so.
>> For that, you may want to examine how Umbridge "punished" Harry.
>
> Just because someone is WORSE doesn't make Snape's treatment of certain
> students right.
It does, however, take his treatment out of the category of "abuse"
>> As Dumbledore has noted several times with Harry, life can't be all
>> peaches and cream.
>
> Oh, GOD. I'm so tired of that agreement. You have a teacher who GOES OUT
> OF HIS WAY to mistreat CERTAIN students. NOT to toughen them up, but
> because he's a sadistic jerk. Excusing it as some sort of way of teaching
> kids to toughen up is just ridiculous.
Yet you cannot deny it. Dumbledore lets Severus have a free hand and was
under no obligation to do so like he did with Umbridge who was sent by the
Ministry. The apparent conclusion is that while you may not like Severus,
there is something to his methods.
>> Given how James treated Severus, it is understandable for Snape to
>> be wary of Harry.
>
> That doesn't explain why he abuses Neville.
He doesn't abuse Neville.
>> Harry and company felt free to continue that grudge.
>
> ??? It was SNAPE who continued it. Snape started it by picking on Harry
> in the first Potions class. They didn't even KNOW there was any "grudge"
> until later that year.
Snape started it. The trio continued it. Just as when they immediately and
WRONGFULLY inferred Snape was trying to curse Harry. Rather than see they
had no real proof, they simply lashed out. They have continued to do so
(with the notable exception of Hermione who now demands proof and is fine
with Severus) from that day forward.
>> While Severus is the older, that doesn't mean his middle name should be
>> doormat. He and Harry provoke each other
>
> No, SNAPE picked on Harry, as well as mistreating others in his House,
> and, surprise, Harry resented that. Snape brought it on himself by
> assuming Harry was going to be a certain way and treating him thusly. He
> had acted different, so would have Harry.
The ends do not justify the means. Harry can't blame Severus for choices HE,
Harry, made. I can dislike the driver who cut me off in the right lane all I
like, but if I run the next red light to get ahead of him, I cannot claim I
was justfied by how the other driver handled. Neither can Harry in his
situations.
>> and Snape takes every advantage he can.
>
> Re: He abuses his authority.
I said takes advantage, not abuses authority.
>> Simply because he does so doesn't make him bad.
>
> Yeah, it kinda does.
>
>> He seems to have earned his little sparring matches with Harry,
>
> He threw the first punch. How is that "earning"anything? He's the CAUSE
> of those "sparring" matches.
He is not obligated to like Harry. Up until Harry started believing the
absolute worst of Snape exactly what punch did Severus throw?
>> unlike Umbridge.
>
> Again, comparing him to someone worse doesn't make him ok.
>
>> Severus tried to save Harry in book one, Harry and his friends
>> chose to believe otherwise.
>
> They didn't KNOW he'd done it till the end of the book. And when Harry
> found out he DID believe it.
They didn't KNOW anything, but they believed the worst of him and went so
far as to set his cloak on fire, spy on him, etc. He deserved none of that,
but they did anyway. And the only reason Harry believed Snape tried to save
him was because the villain was standing right in front of him and
confessing. Even then he still wanted to get confirmation from Dumbledore
before believing it. Harry would rather believe the worst of Snape than
think Snape might EVER be justified.
> And given the way Snape treats them, is it really a surprise that they
> didn't believe he was interested in their well-being?
Uninterested in their well-being is a far cry from making him out as a
killer and taking action against him, which, prior to that, he had not done.
Again to use the analogy above, a driver can cut me off in a lane does not
make him a killer or entitle me to tailgate and ram him off the road.
>> Severus WAS right about Lupin knowing the way Sirius was getting
>> into the castle, but not divulging it.
>
> And...? Even DD didn't believe him then. And what, exactly, were the
> Trio supposed to do?
Perhaps something new like trust Snape. Prior to that, he'd done nothing to
hurt them or have them hurt. The closest he came to it was having Draco sick
a snake on Harry. A snake Severus wanted to scare Harry with as he got rid
of it himself... after Harry made the rather startling announcement of his
parselmouth ability.
>> Lupin may not have been helping directly and Sirius may not have
>> been a threat, but that doesn't mean it was alright for Lupin to do
>> what he did.
>
> True.
>
>> In book four, Harry was shown that Snape works for
>> Dumbledore and Harry STILL had a grudge against him by book five.
>
> Gee, I wonder why? Oh, that's right--cuz Snape treats him like CRAP.
> Just because he works for DD doesn't mean Harry has to LIKE him.
Exactly. Neither is obligated to like the other and if Harry is
disrespectful (he is), then he incurs the consequences. If Snape gets
embarrassed, then he earns that, too. But to say Snape must be told to like
Harry by Dumbledore as if he were a child is wrong. Same as Dumbledore does
not tell Harry that his father was an arrogant prick that Snape is fully
empowered and justified to dislike and Harry should forgive him that.
>> Yes, Severus could have handled things differently,
>
> I'll take "Understatements of the Year" for $100, Alex...
COULD have does not equal SHOULD have. I could tell you that lightening up
on the sarcasm would make your post a bit more reputable, but I am presuming
you're not a child and it is not my place. I made a post so I deal with the
consequences. That simple.
>> but the reason Dumbledore or no one else steps in is because it isn't
>> up to them t decide how Severus conducts himself
>
> Yeah, actually, it is. That's one of the functions of a Headmaster.
A Headmaster's job is NOT to determine the personalities of his teachers or
enforce sanctions on those personalities. Severus had done nothing outside
the parameters of his job while Harry, Ron, and Hermione had done stuff WAY
outside of the parameters of their respective ages and status. While it can
be argued those things came to a good end, stuff like the flying car,
setting Snape's cloak on fire, disrespecting him in class, sneaking illegal
dragons out of the castle, etc. was not a necessary or helpful. Those things
were done because Harry felt like it.
Harry was given detention for SOME of that stuff but not brought under any
strict controls because Dumbledore releases people should be free to make
choices and incur consequences.
>> or what he should tolerate from Harry. He is not exactly the bully
>> that was Umbridge and Harry is not the innocent victimized saint.
>
> Which doesn't mean what he does is RIGHT.
> And again, focusing on his treatment of Harry ignores his treatment of
> other students he has no reason to treat that way at all. Again, why is
> he such a jerk to Neville?
What has he done to Neville except exhort him to *gasp* do a proper job of
potion-making?! How awful.
He expects Neville to do as well as the others. Terrible. Just terrible.
And when Neville didn't, Snape got frustrated. Please don't bring up
Severus's so-called cruelty to Trevor. The students experiment with animals
all the time from Care of Magical Creatures to Transfiguration so that
experiment was nothing new.
Surprise, Neville's toad was on the line and despite following the exact
same instructions as given by Snape, because they came from Hermione, he did
well.
Conclusion: Neville is afraid, Snape senses it and it disgusts him, Neville
makes a hash of his work until pushed. Is there abuse in this? No. Can Snape
stand to be nicer? Definitely. SHOULD he be? A wise person knows better than
to even TRY to delegate someone's personality, fictional or not.
Before you say he favors Slytherins, I have 2 comments. A) So does
McGonagall favor her house as she made clear when she reminded Harry to do
well at Quidditch when she gave them no homework. Neville does badly in her
class, too, but simply because she is just "stern" it's okay. B) the OWL was
overseen by an independent authority so Draco Malfoy, who was favored by
Severus, managed to do fine on his own WITHOUT the favoritism. Neville,
unsurprisingly, did not.
>> It balances out.
>
> A teacher picking on students to the point that he becomes a boggart of a
> student who has had some seriously bad things in his past "balances out"?
> How do you ya figure?
I ask again, what has Snape done to make Neville fear him so? Can you point
to an example that proves Neville isn't just being a bit... timid?
> Catherine Johnson, who's no longer worried about being a "Snape
> apologist". Wow.
> --
> fenm at dot com
> "Take it from El Santo, folks--people who like exotic meat dishes with
> secret ingredients are even more dangerous than people whose names are
> anagrams of "Dracula'."
> -El Santo, from his review of _Shriek of the Mutilated_.
Ard Rhi
Dawn Myers
I think Snape's seeming hatred of Harry is primarily a cover. Dumbledore
told Harry from the very beginning that Snape did *not* hate him and I
think this is true. Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle are all in Snape's
house--all of them with fathers he knows are Deatheaters. As a properly
"loyal" fellow Deatheater, the very last thing Snape would want to do is
to seem kind or even fair and decent to Harry and his friends.
So why would Dumbledore then reprimand Snape for acting the way he must?
Regardless of whatever Snape's personal feelings towards Harry may be.
Dawn
Kish
> "Fish Eye no Miko" <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote in message
> news:bLR6f.8455$i%.6294@fed1read07...
>
>>Ard Rhi wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Because when it comes right down to it, he is still an effective
>>>teacher and entitled to how he sees or treats others.
>>
>>No. Being a good teacher doesn't "entitle" you to be a sadist.
>
>
> Nor is he a sadist.
Funny, that's not what the author says.
>
>
>>>He doesn't abuse them.
>>
>>Tell that to Neville.
>
>
> He doesn't abuse Neville.
Jeez. Have you ever actually read a Harry Potter book?
>>>For that, you may want to examine how Umbridge "punished" Harry.
>>
>>Just because someone is WORSE doesn't make Snape's treatment of certain
>>students right.
>
>
> It does, however, take his treatment out of the category of "abuse"
What a ridiculous statement. So because one man breaks all four of his
wife's limbs, another man who merely breaks three of his is not abusing her?
>>>Given how James treated Severus, it is understandable for Snape to
>>>be wary of Harry.
>>
>>That doesn't explain why he abuses Neville.
>
>
> He doesn't abuse Neville.
I suppose if you keep repeating it it must be true.
>>>and Snape takes every advantage he can.
>>
>>Re: He abuses his authority.
>
>
> I said takes advantage, not abuses authority.
Yes, the people who said he abuses his authority are 1) the author, and
2) the people who have actually comprehended the books. Not you.
>>>Simply because he does so doesn't make him bad.
>>
>>Yeah, it kinda does.
>>
>>
>>>He seems to have earned his little sparring matches with Harry,
>>
>>He threw the first punch. How is that "earning"anything? He's the CAUSE
>>of those "sparring" matches.
>
>
> He is not obligated to like Harry. Up until Harry started believing the
> absolute worst of Snape exactly what punch did Severus throw?
Can you think of any reason to believe you'd be able to read it on the
newsgroup when you apparently couldn't read it in the books? I sure can't.
>>>Severus WAS right about Lupin knowing the way Sirius was getting
>>>into the castle, but not divulging it.
>>
>>And...? Even DD didn't believe him then. And what, exactly, were the
>>Trio supposed to do?
>
>
> Perhaps something new like trust Snape. Prior to that, he'd done nothing to
> hurt them or have them hurt.
HAHAHAHAHA!
...Wait, you're serious, aren't you?
>>>In book four, Harry was shown that Snape works for
>>>Dumbledore and Harry STILL had a grudge against him by book five.
>>
>>Gee, I wonder why? Oh, that's right--cuz Snape treats him like CRAP.
>>Just because he works for DD doesn't mean Harry has to LIKE him.
>
>
> Exactly. Neither is obligated to like the other and if Harry is
> disrespectful (he is), then he incurs the consequences. If Snape gets
> embarrassed, then he earns that, too. But to say Snape must be told to like
> Harry by Dumbledore as if he were a child is wrong.
It's not about /liking/ Harry. Snape is a teacher. He has a moral
obligation to treat his students fairly, and he doesn't.
>>>Yes, Severus could have handled things differently,
>>
>>I'll take "Understatements of the Year" for $100, Alex...
>
>
> COULD have does not equal SHOULD have. I could tell you that lightening up
> on the sarcasm would make your post a bit more reputable,
And I could tell you that not contradicting the author and the books
about what happens in the books would make your post more worth reading.
As it is, I don't think you have a lot to say about reputable posts.
Indeed, COULD have does not equal SHOULD have. Since that means you
haven't said anything critical of Snape, here, I will: Snape SHOULD
treat his students fairly, Snape SHOULD refrain from abusing his power,
Snape SHOULD be supportive rather than sadistic, Snape SHOULD NOT bully
children. And you SHOULD try harder to comprehend what you read and
less hard to make it something it's not.
>>>It balances out.
>>
>>A teacher picking on students to the point that he becomes a boggart of a
>>student who has had some seriously bad things in his past "balances out"?
>>How do you ya figure?
>
>
> I ask again, what has Snape done to make Neville fear him so? Can you point
> to an example that proves Neville isn't just being a bit... timid?
<<Please don't bring up Severus's so-called cruelty to Trevor.>>
So do you actually mean, "Can you point to an example that I won't
poo-poo, deny, and dodge?" Evidently not. It is manifestly impossible
to prove anything to one is willfully blind.
Kish
> Here's this newbie's take on the Snape question:
>
> I think Snape's seeming hatred of Harry is primarily a cover. Dumbledore
> told Harry from the very beginning that Snape did *not* hate him and I
> think this is true.
Erm, no. Dumbledore told Harry that Snape did hate him, that he had
hated Harry's father and now hated Harry for that.
> Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle are all in Snape's
> house--all of them with fathers he knows are Deatheaters. As a properly
> "loyal" fellow Deatheater, the very last thing Snape would want to do is
> to seem kind or even fair and decent to Harry and his friends.
Snape was well-known to openly favor the Slytherins well before Harry
ever came to Hogwarts.
And if he can get away with saving Harry's life by explaining to
Voldemort that he has to keep his cover, he could certainly get away
with not abusing his students. Indeed, if Voldemort has ever noted how
Snape acts toward his students, I would expect it to be in the context
of "you'd be a more useful agent if you could more believably act like a
teacher instead of a Death Eater stuck pretending to be a teacher, Snape."
Ard Rhi
"Kish" <Kis...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:zvu7f.6930$tV6....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
> Ard Rhi wrote:
>> "Fish Eye no Miko" <fis...@deadmoon.circus> wrote in message
>> news:bLR6f.8455$i%.6294@fed1read07...
>>
>>>Ard Rhi wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Because when it comes right down to it, he is still an effective
>>>>teacher and entitled to how he sees or treats others.
>>>
>>>No. Being a good teacher doesn't "entitle" you to be a sadist.
>>
>>
>> Nor is he a sadist.
>
> Funny, that's not what the author says.
>
>>
>>
>>>>He doesn't abuse them.
>>>
>>>Tell that to Neville.
>>
>>
>> He doesn't abuse Neville.
>
> Jeez. Have you ever actually read a Harry Potter book?
I notice you provided no example.
>>>>For that, you may want to examine how Umbridge "punished" Harry.
>>>
>>>Just because someone is WORSE doesn't make Snape's treatment of certain
>>>students right.
>>
>>
>> It does, however, take his treatment out of the category of "abuse"
>
> What a ridiculous statement. So because one man breaks all four of his
> wife's limbs, another man who merely breaks three of his is not abusing
> her?
What does Snape do to Harry that is the equivalent of breaking 3 limbs?
Please explain.
>>>>Given how James treated Severus, it is understandable for Snape to
>>>>be wary of Harry.
>>>
>>>That doesn't explain why he abuses Neville.
>>
>>
>> He doesn't abuse Neville.
>
> I suppose if you keep repeating it it must be true.
Again, no example. The author says dislike him, so you dislike him.
Ms. Rowling is a wonderful author and I am not keen on Snape, but there is a
difference between disliking someone and thinking they should be reprimanded
simply because I dislike them. Snape is not a child, he has not acted
outside the boundaries of his job, and has twice had the best interests of
the trio in mind only to be disbelieved and disregarded for it. Even
unfairly accused... because he's not nice.
>>>>and Snape takes every advantage he can.
>>>
>>>Re: He abuses his authority.
>>
>>
>> I said takes advantage, not abuses authority.
>
> Yes, the people who said he abuses his authority are 1) the author, and 2)
> the people who have actually comprehended the books. Not you.
Sticks and stones...
>>>>Simply because he does so doesn't make him bad.
>>>
>>>Yeah, it kinda does.
>>>
>>>
>>>>He seems to have earned his little sparring matches with Harry,
>>>
>>>He threw the first punch. How is that "earning"anything? He's the CAUSE
>>>of those "sparring" matches.
>>
>>
>> He is not obligated to like Harry. Up until Harry started believing the
>> absolute worst of Snape exactly what punch did Severus throw?
>
> Can you think of any reason to believe you'd be able to read it on the
> newsgroup when you apparently couldn't read it in the books? I sure
> can't.
All this flash and no fire. You bandy insults and claim it's all there in
black & white, but you provide nothing. An example or three... Not even one.
>>>>Severus WAS right about Lupin knowing the way Sirius was getting
>>>>into the castle, but not divulging it.
>>>
>>>And...? Even DD didn't believe him then. And what, exactly, were the
>>>Trio supposed to do?
>>
>>
>> Perhaps something new like trust Snape. Prior to that, he'd done nothing
>> to
>> hurt them or have them hurt.
>
>
> HAHAHAHAHA!
>
> ...Wait, you're serious, aren't you?
Yes.
>>>>In book four, Harry was shown that Snape works for
>>>>Dumbledore and Harry STILL had a grudge against him by book five.
>>>
>>>Gee, I wonder why? Oh, that's right--cuz Snape treats him like CRAP.
>>>Just because he works for DD doesn't mean Harry has to LIKE him.
>>
>>
>> Exactly. Neither is obligated to like the other and if Harry is
>> disrespectful (he is), then he incurs the consequences. If Snape gets
>> embarrassed, then he earns that, too. But to say Snape must be told to
>> like Harry by Dumbledore as if he were a child is wrong.
>
> It's not about /liking/ Harry. Snape is a teacher. He has a moral
> obligation to treat his students fairly, and he doesn't.
No one should be able to arbitrate what is and is not a moral obligation. I
don't recall anyone in this newsgroup having the title of saint bestowed
upon them to do so.
>>>>Yes, Severus could have handled things differently,
>>>
>>>I'll take "Understatements of the Year" for $100, Alex...
>>
>>
>> COULD have does not equal SHOULD have. I could tell you that lightening
>> up on the sarcasm would make your post a bit more reputable,
>
> And I could tell you that not contradicting the author and the books about
> what happens in the books would make your post more worth reading. As it
> is, I don't think you have a lot to say about reputable posts.
Nor did I. But you know what they say about opinions...
> Indeed, COULD have does not equal SHOULD have. Since that means you
> haven't said anything critical of Snape, here, I will:
Before the continuation of the tirade, I'd love to know you got from how you
from "could have not equalling should have" to "that means you haven't said
anything critical of Snape". I freely admitted he takes advantage of his
position and that he didn't have to carry the grudge to Harry.
The question of the original post is to why he was not reprimanded and my
position is that he does not deserve it. Dumbledore is not a saint to decide
who should act how, Severus is not a child that Dumbledore should reprimand
him for using his position as he sees fit WITHIN its parameters, and Harry
is not a victim that he bears no responsibility for the continuing of the
grudge despite heavy evidence that Snape has tried to help him.
> Snape SHOULD treat his students fairly, Snape SHOULD refrain from abusing
> his power, Snape SHOULD be supportive rather than sadistic, Snape SHOULD
> NOT bully children. And you SHOULD try harder to comprehend what you read
> and less hard to make it something it's not.
Your suggestions are noted, but it is only your viewpoint. I would think
some people would be wise enough to know that trying to enforce a single
viewpoint no matter how well intentioned you think it is is the height of
arrogance. I don't push my opinion, I gave a response without attacking
anyone. For that, you respond with flames.
To quote Burger King, "Have it your way."
>>>>It balances out.
>>>
>>>A teacher picking on students to the point that he becomes a boggart of a
>>>student who has had some seriously bad things in his past "balances out"?
>>>How do you ya figure?
>>
>>
>> I ask again, what has Snape done to make Neville fear him so? Can you
>> point to an example that proves Neville isn't just being a bit... timid?
>
> <<Please don't bring up Severus's so-called cruelty to Trevor.>>
>
> So do you actually mean, "Can you point to an example that I won't
> poo-poo, deny, and dodge?" Evidently not. It is manifestly impossible to
> prove anything to one is willfully blind.
At this point, I'd settle for ANY reasonable example. Take away the insults
and disagreements from your post and we're left with not a single scrap of
evidence to support your view.
I've noted the times Severus has had the best interests of the trio in mind
despite their resistance.
I've noted how he never stepped outside the parameters of his office.
I've noted the total lack of evidence on your part.
The absolute best you can say is that because the author wrote him to be
dislikable, he should be reprimanded and you claim yourself as arbitrator.
Dislikable people do not automatically deserve reprimands or judgments or
the whole world would deserve it.
Sorry, but you'll have to pardon me if I am not quite ready to accept your
version of judgment simply because you say I should.
Ard Rhi
richard e white
> >"richard e white" wrote
> >> Lucy wrote:
> >
> > > "angel" <hoticen...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:1130066526.2...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > I not so sure that Snape does hate Harry, true he seems to take great
> > > pleasure in verbally abusing him and he did truly hate him after Harry
> > > delved into Snapes private memories yet he does keep helping Harry out,
> Book
> > > 1 he saves his live
> >
> > To keep his place well hid.
>
> Do you mean to fool DD?
No. I think it was to try to fool the rest of the wizarding world. DD seams
to be rock solid for some reason.
>
>
> If so I am no longer certain of Snapes motives here, if Quirrel had had his
> way, how would it of effected Snapes position?
It would make some wounder if Q had help.
>
> >
> >
> > > Book 2 he teaches him how to duel,
> >
> > No. He uses one spell on lockhart because snape wants to smack down
> lockhart.
> > Then he puts harry in a spot where he knows harry has not been told what
> to do
> > and tells Dracco what to do. And dracco attacks before the start of the
> demo.
> > tho who's idea that was we don't know. This is not teaching. Harry and
> the
> > others just got one spell out of this and they had to practis it in there
> own
> > commen room.
>
> Well yes agreed, but Snape, how did Lockhart put it, 'Happy volunteered to
> assist him',
And you belived that wind bag? He tries to take credit for everything. I
rather think DD asked snape to make sure lockhart did not do to much damage.
> true his motives could have been to show Lockhart up in front
> of the school but he was doing a pretty good job on his own on that front
I did not mean show up. I mean smack down as in attack for the shear fun of
attacking a pompus little twit. I see this as vary with in snapes personalty.
> and Snape giving his spare time to help out has to have some ulterior
> motive.
I rather think getting to attack lockhart would get snape there alone. But I
also think he was there to keep the damage down. And yes I think DD asked
snape to do that. But then there is the chance of getting info on how good the
students really are first hand.
> And if we take a look at what happens Snape ensures Harry duels
> Draco and possibly gives Draco ideas on which spell to use in effect he is
> helping Harry deal with unsportsmanlike like dueling.
o. He is makeing harry a target and a victom of cheating at dueling. To teach
some one means how to fight against cheating you would at least need to
talk to the person and tell them what to do to try and defend them selfs or to
stop or avoid the cheaters attack. The only one Snape was teaching at that
dueling club was dracco. Snape even knew that the thing lockhart showed was
worthless. Harry was just a target for the snake spell.
>
> <Snip to end agreed points>
>
> --
> Lucy..
richard e white
I am sorry but so far I have not seen harry and dracco doing the same thing. Unless
you are talking about attacking others and in thoes cases the why is always
inportant. or sneaking out of bed but again the why is the main diffrance.
and with out some exsamples of what you find wrong then I see no way to go on with
this point.
> "It's right because we're wearing the white hats today" is a
> very bad justification. Lupin admits that his gang's behavior in school was
> not admirable in all ways; he's the most adult of the marauders. But his
> responses are overshadowed by the bad-boy attraction of Sirius,
What atteration? I found him random and reckless and maybe partly insane.
> who did send
> an unwarned student to meet a werewolf because he thought it was funny.
> I feel the attraction of the Sirius character, but I still think he committed
> attempted murder at the age of 16.
Like I said I never saw him as anything else. I totaly agree with this but black was
never a hearo to me. He is one of the shades of gray that is vary near the middle
point to me. In fact Lupin was the only one of harry's father old group that I would
even say was near hearo.
>
> Hermione occasionally speaks up against it, but the average kid is going
> to agree with Harry - after all, he's the hero and she's just the
> rule-following hindrance who sometimes panics in a crisis. Rowling has
> shown Harry gloating over having food when someone else was hungry _because_
> the other person was hungry - yeah, it was Dudley, but the point is, that is
> not an admirable quality and it has never been criticized by any other
> character.
I disagree here. Remember that dudly use to eat all the things harry liked even if it
made him sick. And harry was not gloating that dudly was starveing. He was gloating
that dudly was on a diet, a diet that the hole house went on, and dudly was still
being given more then Harry. What harry was gloating about was that he had slightly
stale cake when dudly didn't. That is not a bad trate to me at all.
> She apparently thinks the Twins are innocently hilarious, when
> all of their jokes involve not-so-subtle attacks on other people.
We are back to the gray with this pair. and like black I think they go to far at
times. But the wizarding world is much harder then the muggle one. With things
easyer to fix things are diffrent. Tho the bit with the cabnet should have gotten
them in trouble.
>
> >> It's called basic fairness. We don't expect it from villains. We
> >> do from heroes, even if they're Gryffindors.
> >
> >But are the rules and laws always fair in real life? What is wrong with a book
> >that talks about doing something that is right even if it is against the law of
> >the school?
>
> The point is not that life isn't fair. We know that. A book that is read
> by children - and in this case, enormous numbers of children - will have an
> impact on their belief systems. The hero is inevitably taken as a role model.
But you put to many of the characters in the hearo area. Not all the grifs are ment
to be hearos.
>
> Harry has been the hero for six books now. And he still isn't behaving like
> someone I'd want in my life. He's still breaking any rule he feels like
> breaking, justifying it as necessary when most of the time it's just that he's
> bored.
I don't see this the way you do. Most of the time harry only breaks rules when he
sees the need. But he isn't meant to be perfect. He is meant to be a boy learning
how to be a man while at the same time learning to be a hearo.
> Much of the time, it isn't that Harry is doing the right thing in spite
> of school rules - he is doing the wrong thing, misusing the cloak to go party
> in Hogsmeade and attack Draco
And the reader is meant to see how harry feels about it when he realizes that he made
a misstake. That is why he is learning to be something better. If he was always good
the people would not see harry learn anything.
> - and he is shown getting away with it.
You might want to remember the bit where lupin talks to harry after they leave snapes
office. He was told off in a way that hit harry harder because it went straight to
his emotions.
> He is
> careless with the cloak, leaves it behind on the tower in PS/SS, and DD gives
> it back to him.
I don't think this is a good point to talk about as it was oeasy to see why JKR had
this happen. She needed to remove the cloak beforethe talk in mcgonical's office.
But as to the returning it what did you want to happen? DD to steal it?
But I belive dd was testing harry most of the first year. He was looking for trates
that V had. And what ever you want to say about the dragon bit it did not show any of
V's trates.
> As to weather dd should have given a cloak like that to a 11 year old in the first
> place or wait until he was 16 kind of depends on weather you wanted to make sure
> what the kid might do with power and how many lives depend on the answer.
>
> >> Things are supposed to be wrong if they're wrong no matter who does them.
> >> Yeah, Filch was annoying in book 6, but he was trying to safeguard the
> >> school by not letting dangerous items get in (though they did anyway).
> <snip>
> >> I do want to see how things come out, and I do hope Harry learns that
> >> becoming like one's enemy is generally not the best solution.
> >
> >But if you never show someone making mistakes it tends to show the younger
> >readers that the decisions are always easy. So when they have a hard decision
> >they often think they are screwed up because they are having a hard time
> >understanding what is right.
>
> If we ever saw Harry having a hard time making the ethical decision, that
> would be good. But what we usually see is Harry deciding that he wants
> to go look in the mirror again, and having to be told not to and also
> having the mirror hidden away from him. Or harry deciding that he wants
> to buy candy, so it's okay to sneak out through an unknown tunnel and
> visit Hogsmeade without permission when the whole school and the whole
> town have been put under Dementor guard just to protect him. Lupin chews
> him out about it, but Harry never had a twinge before he did it. He is
> completely thoughtless. It took five books for him to think ahead at
> all, and that's four books too many.
Not for the kids I know. getting them to even feel bad about something is not easy
either. But people make bad choices as well. This is one way of linking the reader
with the characters. In writeing the more real you make the character the stronger
the bond is unless you go to far. every one makes mistakes and does silly things.
And we learn from them. What is wrong with harry doing the same. Tho I would have
thought he would have learned a bit faster after book 4.
>
>
> =Tamar
Jean Lamb
>> The distinction for me is in the hero as role model. I am fine with
>> having
>> a character struggle with ethical questions. I am not so happy with
>> showing
>> him being rewarded for doing pretty much the same thing the villain is
>> criticized
>> for doing.
>
> I am sorry but so far I have not seen harry and dracco doing the same
> thing. Unless
> you are talking about attacking others and in thoes cases the why is
> always
> inportant. or sneaking out of bed but again the why is the main diffrance.
> and with out some exsamples of what you find wrong then I see no way to go
> on with
> this point.
-Let's take a look at Book 6. Draco catches Harry _in the Slytherin_ car
(shall we guess what would have happened to a Slytherin caught the same way?
Oh, wait, we've already seen it--jelly legs, We Three Slugs of Slytherin Are
etc.). Draco gets Harry's wand because Harry isn't paying attention. Harry
thinks that he's in no danger because Draco is a Cowardly Wuss who has to
depend on Crabbe and Goyle. Surprise! It is nasty to break Harry's nose and
leave him under the Cloak in the empty Hogwarts train, but Draco is
supposedly a villain, after all. Villains do stuff like that. Never mind
that the Trio has done tons of stuff to him and his friends, remember, it
never counts when you do mean stuff to Slytherins! Harry's learned that
lesson well enough from the twins. Harry, on the other hand, learns very
little from this except to wait till Draco is broken down emotionally,
crying even, and without his wand to try out a lovely new spell. Harry is
horrified at the results, but it's Moaning Myrtle who brings help, not
Harry. And not long after, Harry goes whinging to McGonagall about his
Horrible Detention. He is not the least concerned that he almost killed
someone by then. After all, he's a Gryffindor and Draco Always Deserves It.
(just the way Snape always did, right?). I am not in the least bit surprised
that AD froze Harry when he was trying to win Draco's soul. AD probably knew
all about the incident, no doubt spending most of a weekend with a shrieking
Snape upset over what happened to Draco--and probably heard from McGonagall
that Harry apparently is not having any ethical problems. However accidental
the spell's damage was, Harry planned to have fun at least against someone
not holding a wand. He was upset at all the blood, but he got over it
really, really fast. Remember, Draco had to _take_ his wand There _is_ an
ethical difference here between fighting better and attacking someone
already wandless, and it doesn't show Harry up very well. Given that Harry
does so poorly against opponents with a wand (Draco earlier, and Snape later
on), one has to doubt his effectiveness in magical battle later.
>
But as I said, Harry learned from the Twins that any effective damage
against any Slytherin is all to the good, and AD has done nothing to correct
this.
As I said before, I expect a bit more from heroes than that degree of
ethical callousness.
>
>> "It's right because we're wearing the white hats today" is a
>> very bad justification. Lupin admits that his gang's behavior in school
>> was
>> not admirable in all ways; he's the most adult of the marauders. But his
>> responses are overshadowed by the bad-boy attraction of Sirius,
>
> What atteration? I found him random and reckless and maybe partly insane.
--Yes, and Harry still loves him so. What little he learned that Sirius did
that was bad is all negated now, because as far as Harry is concerned, AD
would still be alive if Lupin _had_ killed Snape. I suspect that Harry
admires Sirius even more now.
>
>> who did send
>> an unwarned student to meet a werewolf because he thought it was funny.
>> I feel the attraction of the Sirius character, but I still think he
>> committed
>> attempted murder at the age of 16.
>
> Like I said I never saw him as anything else. I totaly agree with this
> but black was
> never a hearo to me. He is one of the shades of gray that is vary near
> the middle
> point to me. In fact Lupin was the only one of harry's father old group
> that I would
> even say was near hearo.
>
--Right. I like Lupin too, but he barely speaks up as a prefect when his
friends are torturing someone (are you listening, Ron Weasley?). He never
takes action, even when he believes that Black may be guilty, to keep Black
out of the castle. He became distracted and didn't take his potion, then
nearly murdered the children and Snape (unconscious at the time). Black did
save the kids from Lupin. Lupin never told any of the school authorities
that Snape wasn't lying when he no doubt complained about the Marauders.
When three lie, and one is silent, the four will be believed and their
victim will not.
>> Hermione occasionally speaks up against it, but the average kid is going
>> to agree with Harry - after all, he's the hero and she's just the
>> rule-following hindrance who sometimes panics in a crisis. Rowling has
>> shown Harry gloating over having food when someone else was hungry
>> _because_
>> the other person was hungry - yeah, it was Dudley, but the point is, that
>> is
>> not an admirable quality and it has never been criticized by any other
>> character.
>
> I disagree here. Remember that dudly use to eat all the things harry
> liked even if it
> made him sick. And harry was not gloating that dudly was starveing. He
> was gloating
> that dudly was on a diet, a diet that the hole house went on, and dudly
> was still
> being given more then Harry. What harry was gloating about was that he
> had slightly
> stale cake when dudly didn't. That is not a bad trate to me at all.
>
--It was still gloating.
>> She apparently thinks the Twins are innocently hilarious, when
>> all of their jokes involve not-so-subtle attacks on other people.
>
> We are back to the gray with this pair. and like black I think they go to
> far at
> times. But the wizarding world is much harder then the muggle one. With
> things
> easyer to fix things are diffrent. Tho the bit with the cabnet should
> have gotten
> them in trouble.
>
--But it didn't. They left in a blaze of glory that even McGonagall
participated in. Of course the whole school (do you really think the
Slytherins _liked_ Umbridge, or just went along?) admires them. They wanted
to leave anyway. No consequences for the twins, only profits!
>> >> It's called basic fairness. We don't expect it from villains. We
>> >> do from heroes, even if they're Gryffindors.
>> >
> But you put to many of the characters in the hearo area. Not all the
> grifs are ment
> to be hearos.
>
--They are by Rowling.
>>
>> Harry has been the hero for six books now. And he still isn't behaving
>> like
>> someone I'd want in my life. He's still breaking any rule he feels like
>> breaking, justifying it as necessary when most of the time it's just that
>> he's
>> bored.
>
> I don't see this the way you do. Most of the time harry only breaks rules
> when he
> sees the need. But he isn't meant to be perfect. He is meant to be a boy
> learning
> how to be a man while at the same time learning to be a hearo.
--And he's not doing a very good job of it. The only way he'll learn Potions
is if he thinks he's cheating. Hard work is only for grinds like Hermione,
and he enjoys doing better than she does despite the fact she's actually
working at this.
>
>> Much of the time, it isn't that Harry is doing the right thing in spite
>> of school rules - he is doing the wrong thing, misusing the cloak to go
>> party
>> in Hogsmeade and attack Draco
>
> And the reader is meant to see how harry feels about it when he realizes
> that he made
> a misstake. That is why he is learning to be something better. If he was
> always good
> the people would not see harry learn anything.
>
--He's not worrying about making mistakes any more. He's too busy hating
Snape. He doesn't need to listen to anybody now that AD's gone, and he's
been pretty clear about that part.
>> - and he is shown getting away with it.
>
> You might want to remember the bit where lupin talks to harry after they
> leave snapes
> office. He was told off in a way that hit harry harder because it went
> straight to
> his emotions.
>
--Yes, and this lasted all of five minutes.
>> He is
>> careless with the cloak, leaves it behind on the tower in PS/SS, and DD
>> gives
>> it back to him.
>
> I don't think this is a good point to talk about as it was oeasy to see
> why JKR had
> this happen. She needed to remove the cloak beforethe talk in mcgonical's
> office.
> But as to the returning it what did you want to happen? DD to steal it?
> But I belive dd was testing harry most of the first year. He was looking
> for trates
> that V had. And what ever you want to say about the dragon bit it did not
> show any of
> V's trates.
>
>> As to weather dd should have given a cloak like that to a 11 year old in
>> the first
>> place or wait until he was 16 kind of depends on weather you wanted to
>> make sure
>> what the kid might do with power and how many lives depend on the answer.
>
--We found out. And still gets to keep it.
--And at the end of book 6 he's stopped learning. He knows it all now.
Though love has been pounded into him as the key, he's pushing Ginny away.
The fact that the hand on her clock is _already_ at Mortal Danger is
apparently no clue to him that their being together can't make the situation
any worse. His mind is made up (when isn't it, I ask you). He knows that he
must avenge AD and dispose of Voldemort (in that order, pretty much). He
totally disregards his utter incompetence in attacking or even defending
himself against Snape, and he never wonders once why Snape didn't take him
captive if Harry wasn't allowed to be killed.
>
How many of his friends will die for him in Book 7 because he won't take the
time to think? I guess we'll find out...
--
Efren Irizarry, II
<snip>
> Harry, on the other hand, learns very
> little from this except to wait till Draco is broken down emotionally,
> crying even, and without his wand to try out a lovely new spell.
A rather biased view of the events of that scene. I'll post part of it
here:
[BEGIN quote, Ch. 24 Sectumsempra]
And Harry realized, with a shock so huge it seemed to root him to the
spot, that Malfoy was crying — actually crying — tears streaming down
his pale face into the grimy basin. Malfoy gasped and gulped and then,
with a great shudder, looked up into the cracked mirror and saw Harry
staring at him over his shoulder.
Malfoy wheeled around, drawing his wand. Instinctively, Harry pulled out
his own. Malfoy's hex missed Harry by inches, shattering the lamp on the
wall beside him; Harry threw himself sideways, thought Levicorpus! and
flicked his wand, but Malfoy blocked the jinx and raised his wand for
another —
"No! No! Stop it!" squealed Moaning Myrtle, her voice echoing loudly
around the tiled room. "Stop! STOP!"
There was a loud bang and the bin behind Harry exploded; Harry attempted
a Leg-Locker Curse that backfired off the wall be-hind Malfoy's ear and
smashed the cistern beneath Moaning Myr-tle, who screamed loudly; water
poured everywhere and Harry slipped as Malfoy, his face contorted,
cried, "Cruci —"
"SECTUMSEMPRA!" bellowed Harry from the floor, waving his wand wildly.
[END quote]
So, you say that Harry "waited till Draco is broken down" to do, well,
I'm not sure what. Yet he didn't know that Draco was "broken down"
before he entered the bathroom; he just wanted to spy on Draco as usual
and neither knew nor speculated on what sort of mood he'd find Draco in.
Then when he saw Draco crying, he was "shocked." Thus he was not
waiting for Draco to break down at all, since seeing Draco in that state
shocked him.
Then you say that Draco was wandless, and in this you are 100%,
absolutely incorrect, as you can see for yourself.
1. Harry did not enter the bathroom with his wand drawn; if he meant to
ambush Draco in that bathroom, surely he would have drawn it before
entering?
2. Draco not only had his wand, but he was the first to draw it, and
the first to throw a curse.
3. After an exchange of curses from both combatants, Draco was the
first to try a really nasty curse--namely, one of the Unforgiveables
itself, Crucio.
4. Draco NEVER lost his wand at any point in that duel, until Harry hit
him with Sectumsempra. Then, "[Draco] staggered backward and collapsed
onto the waterlogged floor with a great splash, his wand falling from
his limp right hand."
So all your stuff about the ethics of attacking unarmed opponents is
irrelevant in this case. Draco drew first, Draco attacked first, and
Draco attempted a really nasty bit of Dark Magic before Harry did. My
recommendation to you is that you stick to the actual evidence of the
books, rather than fabricating some of your own...it hurts your case
when you do so.
<snip>
--
Efren Irizarry, II
Fish Eye no Miko
> The question of the original post is to why he was not reprimanded
> and my position is that he does not deserve it. Dumbledore is not a
> saint to decide who should act how,
Ok, this is just crap. Yes, DD IS under an obligation to see that the
students at his school are not mistreated. It's part of his JOB. And, so
yes, it is up to him to decide how his teachers act.
> Severus is not a child
He sure acts like it sometimes.
> that Dumbledore should reprimand him for using his position as he sees
> fit WITHIN its parameters,
DD employs Snape. So, again, yeah, DD does have the right to reprimand him
if HE feels Snape has stepped out of line. What SNAPE sees and the
"parameters" of his job is irrelevant, since DD is in charge of he school,
and is the one who ends up answering to the parents. When Lupin was outed,
it wasn't him getting the letters, but DD.
> and Harry is not a victim that he bears no responsibility for the
> continuing of the grudge despite heavy evidence that Snape has tried to
> help him.
Just because Snape was a good guy and trying to save his life doesn't mean
he didn't act like a jerk towards him.
>> Snape SHOULD treat his students fairly, Snape SHOULD refrain from
>> abusing his power, Snape SHOULD be supportive rather than
>> sadistic, Snape SHOULD NOT bully children. And you SHOULD try
>> harder to comprehend what you read and less hard to make it
>> something it's not.
>
> Your suggestions are noted, but it is only your viewpoint. I would
> think some people would be wise enough to know that trying to
> enforce a single viewpoint no matter how well intentioned you think
> it is is the height of arrogance.
Again, if you employ someone, you DO have some control over what they do
(have you ever seen the rules for teacher in the 19th century? wow).
Especially when they deal with other people, and you are responsible for
the welfare of those people.
Catherine Johnson.
--
fenm at cox dot net
"I haven't bitch-slapped someone since Tucson."
-Ignignokt, _Aqua Teen Hunger Force_.
Meghan Noecker
<tlamb...@charter.net> wrote:
>lesson well enough from the twins. Harry, on the other hand, learns very
>little from this except to wait till Draco is broken down emotionally,
>crying even, and without his wand to try out a lovely new spell.
What book were you reading? Malfoy drew his wand first. They both
fired off some curses at each other. Harry's first choices were
levicorpus, which was blocked, leg locker, which missed, and then
sectumsepra, which cut off Malfoy's *crucio* curse.
Malfoy *did* have his wand, and Malfoy was attempting an unforgivable
curse on Harry.
Where did you get the idea that Malfoy had no wand and was just
sitting there innocently?
>Harry is
>horrified at the results, but it's Moaning Myrtle who brings help, not
>Harry.
The scene takes place very quickly. Harry goes straight to Malfoy,
horrified, and kneels down next to him. It's only a few seconds before
Snape comes in. We don't know what Harry was going to do, but
considering that he went *to* Malfoy, and knelt next to him, I believe
he meant to try and help him. He certainly made no attempt to hide or
run away.
>And not long after, Harry goes whinging to McGonagall about his
>Horrible Detention.
When is this? He was chewed out by McGonagall in the common room.
There's no mention of him complaining about the detentions to her.
>He is not the least concerned that he almost killed
>someone by then.
He was horrified when it happened. And he never defended himself to
Snape. He lied about the book, and he said he didn't intend to do that
- he didn't know what it would do.
But he never told Snape that Malfoy had tried to use an unforgivable
on him. He never argued about what he did, nor did he blame Malfoy for
having it coming to him. He admitted that he did it, though he didn't
know what it was going to do. And while he did say that he didn't
agree he should have detention, and he tried to avoid missing the
quidditch match, he didn't whine. He backed down and accepted his
punishment.
>really, really fast. Remember, Draco had to _take_ his wand There _is_ an
>ethical difference here between fighting better and attacking someone
>already wandless, and it doesn't show Harry up very well.
Where are you getting this? Malfoy dropped his wand when Harry hit him
with the Sectumsempra. He was not wandless when Harry attacked. It's
page 522 of the US version. The middle of chapter 24.
When did Harry attack somebody that was wandless?
--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com
zgirnius
> It is nasty to break Harry's nose and
> leave him under the Cloak in the empty Hogwarts train, but Draco is
> supposedly a villain, after all.
Certainly. Goodness, in my first read-through I thought after Spinner's
End that Draco's mission was to kill Harry (something Voldemort has not
managed...). I was quite relieved to see Harry with a broken nose ;)
> Jean Lamb wrote:
> Harry, on the other hand, learns very
> little from this except to wait till Draco is broken down emotionally,
> crying even, and without his wand to try out a lovely new spell.
Hem hem. Let's review the events in the book, shall we? Please turn to
Chapter 24 "Sectumsempra", p. 522 US edition. There will be no need to
talk. No, even better, I shall wave my wand and make the relevant text
appear on the screen a la Snape for us all to see...
> Malfoy gasped and gulped and then, with a great shudder, looked up into the
> cracked mirror and saw Harry staring at him over his shoulder.
> Malfoy wheeled around, drawing his wand. Instinctively, Harry pulled out his
> own.
So, Draco draws first. Continuing...
> Malfoy's hex missed Harry by inches, shattering the lamp on the wall beside
> him; Harry threw himself sideways, thought *Levicorpus!* and flicked his
> wand, but Malfoy blocked the jinx and raised his wand for another -
Not only does Draco draw first, he casts the first hex. Continuing
again (I skip Myrtle's exhortations to stop)
> There was a loud bang and the bin behind Harry exploded; Harry attmpted a
> Leg-Locker Curse that backfired off the wall behind Malfoy's ear and smashed
> the cistern beneath Moaning Myrtle, who screamed loudly; water poured
> everywhere and Harry slipped as Malfoy, his face contorted, cried,
> '*Cruci-"
> "*SECTUMSEMPRA*!" bellowed Harry from the floor, waving his wand wildly.
Draco again escalates the duel by attempting an Unforgivable. (One
which Harry had experienced, let us recall... Harry's response, while
boneheaded (IMO, I'm with Hermione here, not Ginny) was an act of
desperation.
> Jean Lamb wrote:
> Harry is
> horrified at the results, but it's Moaning Myrtle who brings help, not
> Harry.
Technically, you are right. However, Harry's actions at this moment
(aside from ineffectual mumbling) are to drop down beside Draco,
presumably out of some idea that he could do something to help. He
can't, but I truly believe that is what he is thinking, to the extent
that he is capable of thought at this point. Snape's entry is almost
immediate.
> And not long after, Harry goes whinging to McGonagall about his
> Horrible Detention. He is not the least concerned that he almost killed
> someone by then. After all, he's a Gryffindor and Draco Always Deserves It.
This, too, appears not to have happened. Same chapter, p. 529:
> Harry had already been called out of the common room to endure fifteen
> highly unpleasant minutes in the company of Professor McGonagall, who told
> him he was lucky not to have been expelled and that she supported
> wholeheartedly Snape's punishment of detention every Saturday until the end
> of term.
*She* initiated the meeting, not Harry. And no mention is made of his
complaining to her, either. Personally I doubt he could have gotten a
word in edgewise if he had dared, which I doubt he would have.
> I am not in the least bit surprised
> that AD froze Harry when he was trying to win Draco's soul. AD probably knew
> all about the incident, no doubt spending most of a weekend with a shrieking
> Snape upset over what happened to Draco--and probably heard from McGonagall
> that Harry apparently is not having any ethical problems.
I'm sure Dumbledore did know of the incident. But I don't think
McGonagall would have reported a lack of remorse, because I do not
think she would have perceived one. Because there wasn't one. Harry
really is sorry he did this, IMO. I believe him when he tells Hermione
on p. 530, same chapter:
> "I'm not defending what I did!" ... "I wish I hadn't done it, and not just
> because I've got about a dozen detentions. You know I wouldn't've used a
> spell like that, not even on Malfoy..."
I think DD froze Draco because he was sure he could not have a normal
conversation with Draco in Harry's presence, *especially* after the
incident. Not because he expected Harry to harm Draco, but because he
was sure Harry could and would not keep his mouth SHUT under the
circumstances. And Draco would feel pressured by Harry's presence to
"act tough", making it that much harder for DD to make him face the
fact that he, Draco, is *not* a killer.
> Jean Lamb wrote:
> However accidental
> the spell's damage was, Harry planned to have fun at least against someone
> not holding a wand. He was upset at all the blood, but he got over it
> really, really fast.
Again, not a fair rendition of Harry's thoughts and feelings at all. He
goes to the bathroom to spy on Draco, because he sees him with Myrtle
in the Marauder's Map. He is completely shocked to realize that Draco
is crying and has no thought at all about having fun with him. He
recovers from his shock just in time to draw his own wand after Draco
attacks.
> Jean Lamb wrote:
> As I said before, I expect a bit more from heroes than that degree of
> ethical callousness.
If you are talking about the twins, I must join in a chorus of "Amen,
sister!"
> Jean Lamb wrote:
> --Yes, and Harry still loves him so. What little he learned that Sirius did
> that was bad is all negated now, because as far as Harry is concerned, AD
> would still be alive if Lupin _had_ killed Snape. I suspect that Harry
> admires Sirius even more now.
Well, yes, naturally. Sirius died in a battle helping to protect Harry
and his friends from Death Eaters. "Nothing in his life became him like
the leaving of it" and all...not to mention that Harry must realize in
some corner of his heart that he bears some responsibility for the
events that lead to Sirius' death. A guilt, IMO, that he projects onto
Snape...making his nascent feelings about the Marauders maybe being
bullies to Snape that he started to consider in Book 5 disappear
completely by the end of the same book.
> Jean Lamb wrote:
> --But it didn't. They left in a blaze of glory that even McGonagall
> participated in. Of course the whole school (do you really think the
> Slytherins _liked_ Umbridge, or just went along?) admires them. They wanted
> to leave anyway. No consequences for the twins, only profits!
There's one book left...we can hope! And in this book, it turns out
that the stuffing of Montague into the cabinet is what gave Draco his
oh-so-clever idea. And the Darkness Powder was a Weasley WW product.
Not that I expect the twins to get all depressed about any of this, it
is not their style...
> Jean Lamb wrote:
> --They are by Rowling.
I can't wait to see how she digs Peter the Gryffindor out of the hole
she's dug him into in the next book, in that case. It will have to be
very creative or very over-the-top...
> Jean Lamb:
> --And he's not doing a very good job of it. The only way he'll learn Potions
> is if he thinks he's cheating. Hard work is only for grinds like Hermione,
> and he enjoys doing better than she does despite the fact she's actually
> working at this.
Well, I agree Harry is not going to grow up to be a Potions Master. He
is not now, nor will he ever be, studious. He mostly only learns things
when he needs them. (And I don't mean for a grade...to accomplish
something he sees as worthwhile).
> Jean Lamb:
> --He's not worrying about making mistakes any more. He's too busy hating
> Snape. He doesn't need to listen to anybody now that AD's gone, and he's
> been pretty clear about that part.
Yes, I agree. At the end of HBP Harry has completely lost it where
Snape is concerned. He's never been this angry and hate-filled at
anyone before. But I believe that Harry's relationship with Snape is
unique, not typical. It has grown worse and worse in the course of the
series. And while Snape's nastiness to Harry helped to lay the
foundation, a lot went into it that I would not put at Snape's door. In
Book 3, Harry I think blames Snape to some extent for Peter getting
away and Sirius remaining a fugitive. (This is not a fact-based
reaction on Harry's part. He needs someone to blame, and there is
Snape!) And this same mechanism comes into play at the end of Book 5.
Sirius is dead because Snape goaded him, not because Harry went on a
wild goose chase to the MoM. (Again, not fact-based.) By Book 6 Harry
has a deep unreasoning hatred of Snape. Seeing him kill Dumbledore
takes him completely over the edge where Snape is concerned.
To some extent (though you got some of the facts wrong) I can see where
you are getting your misreading of Harry's emotions in the Sectumsempra
chapter. (Misreading just IMO, of course!!) I believe he is really,
truly sorry he used that spell on Draco. We see a lot of evidence of
this, the kneeling in the water and blood at Draco's side, the
descriptions of Harry's emotional state ("horrified by what he had
done", "it did not occur to Harry for a second to disobey", "shaking",
"could not even find it in himself to tell Moaning Myrtle to be quiet,
as she continued to wail and sob with increasingly evident enjoyment").
I think it is because *Snape* is the teacher who walks in to this scene
that Harry offers only the very minimal explanation "I didn't mean it
to happen" and "I didn't know what that spell did" instead of breaking
down and expressing the feelings which seem indicated by the narrator.
However horrified he is by what he has done, he is not going to let
Snape see him upset. (Sort of like Draco's first reaction when Harry
sees him crying is to attack...I think Draco's reaction was born of
mortification to be discovered in such a state by his enemy.)
> Jean Lamb:
> --And at the end of book 6 he's stopped learning. He knows it all now.
> Though love has been pounded into him as the key, he's pushing Ginny away.
Yes, but that is because he *does* love her. It is not a rejection of
love, it is an example of boneheadedness (which Ginny is IMO going to
handle in a very sensible way, which is not arguing at this point).
> Jean Lamb:
> His mind is made up (when isn't it, I ask you). He knows that he
> must avenge AD and dispose of Voldemort (in that order, pretty much).
Well, he actually says he is going Horcrux hunting. So I guess that is
priority 1. If Snape shows himself Harry will just consider that a
bonus. (More boneheadedness...)
> Jean Lamb:
> He
> totally disregards his utter incompetence in attacking or even defending
> himself against Snape, and he never wonders once why Snape didn't take him
> captive if Harry wasn't allowed to be killed.
Yes, indeed. And I am sure these two will meet again. It should be
quite, erm, *interesting*...
> Jean Lamb:
> How many of his friends will die for him in Book 7 because he won't take the
> time to think? I guess we'll find out...
Oh, I hope not...
I think the Ginny thing is likely to be resolved before the school year
starts (assuming it does). Probably at the wedding. Ginny is just
biding her time and picking her moment. (She's been doing it for years,
she won't stop now.) The Horcrux hunt is going to involve some planning
sessions with Ron and Hermione. Harry has as far as I can see no clue
where to look for most of the remaining Horcruxes, so this will be
necessary. And Hermione is already able to influence Harry in a
positive way (he agreed to check on Sirius at her insistence, Kreacher
is to blame that this precaution did not work.) I think that now that
she and Ron have (apparently) settled their differences this can only
get better.
The above reassures me about Harry in general. But there is his problem
with Snape. Because I don't think Snape is a "bad guy", I don't think
an encounter with him is likely to lead to the deaths of Harry's
friends. It's Snape I worry about...
> Jean Lamb, tlamb...@charter.net
> "Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for you are crunchy and good with
> lemon drops."
Hee hee, love your sig!
Tim Bruening
zgirnius wrote:
Why didn't Harry tell any of the teachers that Draco had attempted the Cruciatis
Curse?
Meghan Noecker
<tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>Why didn't Harry tell any of the teachers that Draco had attempted the Cruciatis
>Curse?
>
What good would it do?
He would appear to be whining. They probably wouldn't believe him
anyway.
And, he did feel guilty about what he did.
Kish
I wrote:
>>Snape SHOULD treat his students fairly, Snape SHOULD refrain from
>>abusing his power, Snape SHOULD be supportive rather than
>>sadistic, Snape SHOULD NOT bully children. And you SHOULD try
>>harder to comprehend what you read and less hard to make it
>>something it's not.
>
>Your suggestions are noted, but it is only your viewpoint. I would
>think some people would be wise enough to know that trying to
>enforce a single viewpoint no matter how well intentioned you think
>it is is the height of arrogance.
On the other hand, I, at this point, am fully aware that some people are
stupid enough to refuse to admit that they see what they see, to argue
with an author's clear and explicit statements about what her
characters' motivations are, and to excuse horrendous abuse with
boneheaded claims ranging from "that didn't really happen, whatever the
book says" to, "another character is worse, so you can't say that
character is bad."
That doesn't mean it doesn't disgust me, just that it doesn't surprise
me anymore.
Troels Forchhammer
<g...@example.net> enriched us with:
>
<snip>
> Rowling's rationalizations aside, I suspect that the only real
> reason that Dumbledore hasn't reprimanded Snape is story-external.
Yes, of course.
That is generally the reason why Dumbledore has to make these
mistakes. Where would we have been if Dumbledore had seen through
Quirrell in PS, and had told Harry about the prophecy in that book as
well, taking Harry under his own wings to teach Harry as much as
possible in preparation for his task ...
For the books to work at all, Dumbledore (and other adults
surrounding Harry) simply have to make disastrous mistakes so that
the Trio can 'fix' things. The nice new thing we learned in the
interview is that Rowling has a story-internal explanation that is
consistent with Dumbledore's personality in the books, also his
nearly omniscient knowledge about magic etc.
> If he did, we wouldn't have Snape to kick around anymore.
I would actually guess that Dumbledore did reprimand Snape, but never
enough to stop Snape from abusing his students.
> In the same way that she wanted Harry to be an orphan (and so
> disposed of every single relative), I think she simply wanted
> Harry to have a nasty, sadistic teacher at Hogwarts.
Precisely. He simply /has/ to be there, and consequently Dumbledore
cannot do anything that would drive him out before his time.
<snip>
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <t.forch(a)email.dk>
We're leaving WISDOM
to starve and thirst
when we cultivate
KNOWLEDGE as such.
The very best comes
to the very worst
WHEN IGNORANTS
KNOW TOO MUCH.
- Piet Hein, /When Ignorants --/
Jean Lamb
Bangs ears in oven door)
>> "I'm not defending what I did!" ... "I wish I hadn't done it, and not
>> just
>> because I've got about a dozen detentions. You know I wouldn't've used a
>> spell like that, not even on Malfoy..."
>
> I think DD froze Draco because he was sure he could not have a normal
> conversation with Draco in Harry's presence, *especially* after the
> incident. Not because he expected Harry to harm Draco, but because he
> was sure Harry could and would not keep his mouth SHUT under the
> circumstances. And Draco would feel pressured by Harry's presence to
> "act tough", making it that much harder for DD to make him face the
> fact that he, Draco, is *not* a killer.
--Oh, yes. Two brains on testosterone is _not_ pretty. But Harry would try
to defend Dumbledore whether or not Draco actually did anything; it would
just _look_ like attacking. Just like in _Stranger in a Strange Land_
Valentine Michael Smith learned how to wait in fullness with such efficiency
it _looked_ like he was doing Warp 90.
> Again, not a fair rendition of Harry's thoughts and feelings at all. He
> goes to the bathroom to spy on Draco, because he sees him with Myrtle
> in the Marauder's Map. He is completely shocked to realize that Draco
> is crying and has no thought at all about having fun with him. He
> recovers from his shock just in time to draw his own wand after Draco
> attacks.
--My bad. You're right.
>
>> Jean Lamb wrote:
>> As I said before, I expect a bit more from heroes than that degree of
>> ethical callousness.
>
> If you are talking about the twins, I must join in a chorus of "Amen,
> sister!"
--Do Not Get Me Started on Those Two. Erg. Anybody know Molly's Floo
coordinates? She and I _must_ talk.
> Well, yes, naturally. Sirius died in a battle helping to protect Harry
> and his friends from Death Eaters. "Nothing in his life became him like
> the leaving of it" and all...not to mention that Harry must realize in
> some corner of his heart that he bears some responsibility for the
> events that lead to Sirius' death. A guilt, IMO, that he projects onto
> Snape...making his nascent feelings about the Marauders maybe being
> bullies to Snape that he started to consider in Book 5 disappear
> completely by the end of the same book.
--My point entirely. As long as he blames Snape, he doesn't have to blame
himself, and the longer he can keep glorifying Sirius Black.
> There's one book left...we can hope! And in this book, it turns out
> that the stuffing of Montague into the cabinet is what gave Draco his
> oh-so-clever idea. And the Darkness Powder was a Weasley WW product.
> Not that I expect the twins to get all depressed about any of this, it
> is not their style...
--Of course not. That would mean taking responsibility for their acts.
>
> I can't wait to see how she digs Peter the Gryffindor out of the hole
> she's dug him into in the next book, in that case. It will have to be
> very creative or very over-the-top...
--Good point. But he still owes Harry a Life Debt (we've already gone a few
rounds on what Harry owes, if anything to Snape etc. on this one).
>
> Well, I agree Harry is not going to grow up to be a Potions Master. He
> is not now, nor will he ever be, studious. He mostly only learns things
> when he needs them. (And I don't mean for a grade...to accomplish
> something he sees as worthwhile).
--Well, true. But I did not like the way he took satisfaction in Hermione
having problems with a crappy book while he swanned through with a crib.
That might gain him points with some Gryffs (and certainly with some of the
Slytherins, who would be lost in admiration and wished they had a copy), but
any Ravenclaws would _not_ be amused.
>
> Yes, I agree. At the end of HBP Harry has completely lost it where
> Snape is concerned. He's never been this angry and hate-filled at
> anyone before. But I believe that Harry's relationship with Snape is
> unique, not typical. It has grown worse and worse in the course of the
> series. And while Snape's nastiness to Harry helped to lay the
> foundation, a lot went into it that I would not put at Snape's door. In
> Book 3, Harry I think blames Snape to some extent for Peter getting
> away and Sirius remaining a fugitive. (This is not a fact-based
> reaction on Harry's part. He needs someone to blame, and there is
> Snape!)
--He probably thinks by now it's a pity that Black didn't smack Snape harder
on the ceiling during that horrid Mobilicorpus scene. I'm glad, actually,
they didn't put that into the movie. Sirius Black would have been hissed by
every medical worker who attended. One can only wonder how bad the
concussion was, and if was ever properly treated.
And this same mechanism comes into play at the end of Book 5.
> Sirius is dead because Snape goaded him, not because Harry went on a
> wild goose chase to the MoM. (Again, not fact-based.) By Book 6 Harry
> has a deep unreasoning hatred of Snape. Seeing him kill Dumbledore
> takes him completely over the edge where Snape is concerned.
--Exactly. If it rains during a Quidditch game, it's Snape's fault by now.
> To some extent (though you got some of the facts wrong) I can see where
> you are getting your misreading of Harry's emotions in the Sectumsempra
> chapter. (Misreading just IMO, of course!!)
--Yes. I'm back from the oven doors. Smells like roast chicken in there.
I believe he is really,
> truly sorry he used that spell on Draco. We see a lot of evidence of
> this, the kneeling in the water and blood at Draco's side, the
> descriptions of Harry's emotional state ("horrified by what he had
> done", "it did not occur to Harry for a second to disobey", "shaking",
> "could not even find it in himself to tell Moaning Myrtle to be quiet,
> as she continued to wail and sob with increasingly evident enjoyment").
> I think it is because *Snape* is the teacher who walks in to this scene
> that Harry offers only the very minimal explanation "I didn't mean it
> to happen" and "I didn't know what that spell did" instead of breaking
> down and expressing the feelings which seem indicated by the narrator.
> However horrified he is by what he has done, he is not going to let
> Snape see him upset. (Sort of like Draco's first reaction when Harry
> sees him crying is to attack...I think Draco's reaction was born of
> mortification to be discovered in such a state by his enemy.)
--Makes sense. He would admit his dismay to _anyone_ besides Snape (ok,
maybe Filch). But the actual effect seems odd.
> Yes, but that is because he *does* love her. It is not a rejection of
> love, it is an example of boneheadedness (which Ginny is IMO going to
> handle in a very sensible way, which is not arguing at this point).
--This is your brain on testosterone, etc.
>> Jean Lamb:
>> His mind is made up (when isn't it, I ask you). He knows that he
>> must avenge AD and dispose of Voldemort (in that order, pretty much).
>
> Well, he actually says he is going Horcrux hunting. So I guess that is
> priority 1. If Snape shows himself Harry will just consider that a
> bonus. (More boneheadedness...)
--True. Sigh.
> Yes, indeed. And I am sure these two will meet again. It should be
> quite, erm, *interesting*...
--Oh, yeah!
> Oh, I hope not...
> I think the Ginny thing is likely to be resolved before the school year
> starts (assuming it does). Probably at the wedding. Ginny is just
> biding her time and picking her moment. (She's been doing it for years,
> she won't stop now.) The Horcrux hunt is going to involve some planning
> sessions with Ron and Hermione. Harry has as far as I can see no clue
> where to look for most of the remaining Horcruxes, so this will be
> necessary. And Hermione is already able to influence Harry in a
> positive way (he agreed to check on Sirius at her insistence, Kreacher
> is to blame that this precaution did not work.) I think that now that
> she and Ron have (apparently) settled their differences this can only
> get better.
>
> The above reassures me about Harry in general. But there is his problem
> with Snape. Because I don't think Snape is a "bad guy", I don't think
> an encounter with him is likely to lead to the deaths of Harry's
> friends. It's Snape I worry about...
--My prediction, which I have stated before, is that Harry will kill Snape,
will find out that Snape was following orders from AD, will be dismayed for
a sum total of five minutes, but will somehow convince himself that he was
right to kill Snape anyway, and his friends, wanting to support him, won't
make a big deal about Snape's death despite what they actually think. Filch
and Hagrid will probably mourn (Filch is probably friends with Snape--I
mean, they're on 'will you patch me up terms' in PoS) and Hagrid will catch
that Snape was really following AD's orders and be upset that another AD
follower is gone. Both of which Harry and his friends can easily ignore.
Filch is hated and Harry thinks he's outgrown Hagrid (in fact, I get the
funny feeling that Harry is a little bit embarrassed by the giant these
days, but I've obviously misread stuff before). Minerva will mourn a friend,
Remus will mourn his Wolfsbane Potion (though I suspect he'll feel some
relief that he doesn't have to feel guilty about being almost the instrument
of Snape's death any more--petty, yes, but he won't say anything about it),
and Moody will be extremely miffed off that he didn't get to interrogate
that blasted Death Eater one last time. But everyone will rally around
Harry, because he's about to be served up to Voldie and mustn't be too
stressed about things (necessity rules in wartime). I suspect Voldie will
have fun with the murder--'killed your own best spy, how bright is THAT?'
will be the least of it, but in the end Harry will Triumph and Live Happily
Ever After. If Hogwarts re-opens after that, I suspect there will only be
three houses. But given the physics of rivalry, one of them will end up the
Hated House within the next five years (if it takes that long). Just my
take, mind you.
> Hee hee, love your sig!
>
--Yes, it is fun...I keep wondering what AD puts in them, actually.
--
Meghan Noecker
<tlamb...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>
>--Well, true. But I did not like the way he took satisfaction in Hermione
>having problems with a crappy book while he swanned through with a crib.
>That might gain him points with some Gryffs (and certainly with some of the
>Slytherins, who would be lost in admiration and wished they had a copy), but
>any Ravenclaws would _not_ be amused.
>
He offered to let Hermoine use the book too. She refused to do
anything that wasn't in the official text book. So, I don't see how he
was happy that she was having problems. Considering how upset she was
with him, I'm sure he wished she would accept the help of the book.
I saw several times where Hermione needs to get used to the idea that
she won't always be the best. She has a bit of maturing to do also.
But isn't that important in a coming of age type book? The kids have
to learn to deal with obstacles and setbacks.
Toon
>Again, not a fair rendition of Harry's thoughts and feelings at all. He
>goes to the bathroom to spy on Draco, because he sees him with Myrtle
>in the Marauder's Map. He is completely shocked to realize that Draco
>is crying and has no thought at all about having fun with him. He
>recovers from his shock just in time to draw his own wand after Draco
>attacks.
But he does use an unknown spell. And Levicorpus indicates it's not
all white magic. Even if ultimately harmless, and enjoyable by Ron
after the pintail shock wore off. Harrys till hasn't learned the
dangers of using unknown spells. he wouldn't use a bad spell, but it
never occurs to him that it could be a bad spell.
>
>> Jean Lamb:
>> --And at the end of book 6 he's stopped learning. He knows it all now.
>> Though love has been pounded into him as the key, he's pushing Ginny away.
>
>Yes, but that is because he *does* love her. It is not a rejection of
>love, it is an example of boneheadedness (which Ginny is IMO going to
>handle in a very sensible way, which is not arguing at this point).
>
She knew the moment he said it, it was for some "noble and stupid
reason". she knows he's doing this to protect her, but she's fine
with facing V with him. Not even out of revenge for what his Diary
did to her, but for Harry's sake.
>Oh, I hope not...
>I think the Ginny thing is likely to be resolved before the school year
>starts (assuming it does). Probably at the wedding. Ginny is just
>biding her time and picking her moment. (She's been doing it for years,
>she won't stop now.) The Horcrux hunt is going to involve some planning
>sessions with Ron and Hermione. Harry has as far as I can see no clue
>where to look for most of the remaining Horcruxes, so this will be
>necessary. And Hermione is already able to influence Harry in a
>positive way (he agreed to check on Sirius at her insistence, Kreacher
>is to blame that this precaution did not work.) I think that now that
>she and Ron have (apparently) settled their differences this can only
>get better.
I'm sure Harry will stay at the Borrow as he tries to figure things
out. His real family's there. Godric Hollow's a nice place to visit,
but e won't set up shop there for more than a few days, if any. and
while he's at the Burrow, Ginny'll be right up there in his face.
Toon
Noecker) wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:47:06 -0700, Tim Bruening
><tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Why didn't Harry tell any of the teachers that Draco had attempted the Cruciatis
>>Curse?
>>
>
>What good would it do?
>
>He would appear to be whining. They probably wouldn't believe him
>anyway.
>
>And, he did feel guilty about what he did.
And it never was fired. it's not even self defense. In the US, if
someone picks up, let's say a lamp, and you attack them (because they
were going to attack you first), it's not self defense, no matter how
threateningly it's done.. But if they throw it at you, and it hits
you, you're golden.
Kish
Draco said "Cruci--"
Do you have to wait for the person to finish throwing the lamp before
you can respond? What if it's a nasty spiky lamp filled with a great
deal of very hot oil?
Of course, it was stupid of Harry to use an unknown spell. No one, not
even Harry anymore*, is arguing that.
*Though we'll see if Harry's actually learned anything next time he has
a chance to try out an unknown spell, eh?
(No no /no/, there is nothing mn and a limited degree of humor about
this post.)
Aaron
Troels Forchhammer wrote:
> > In the same way that she wanted Harry to be an orphan (and so
> > disposed of every single relative), I think she simply wanted
> > Harry to have a nasty, sadistic teacher at Hogwarts.
>
> Precisely. He simply /has/ to be there, and consequently Dumbledore
> cannot do anything that would drive him out before his time.
>
But what if Hermione travels back in time, and kills Snape before their
first year? What would happen then?
;)
> Troels Forchhammer
-Aaron
zgirnius
> zgirnius:
> >Again, not a fair rendition of Harry's thoughts and feelings at all. He
> >goes to the bathroom to spy on Draco, because he sees him with Myrtle
> >in the Marauder's Map. He is completely shocked to realize that Draco
> >is crying and has no thought at all about having fun with him. He
> >recovers from his shock just in time to draw his own wand after Draco
> >attacks.
>
> But he does use an unknown spell. And Levicorpus indicates it's not
> all white magic. Even if ultimately harmless, and enjoyable by Ron
> after the pintail shock wore off. Harrys till hasn't learned the
> dangers of using unknown spells. he wouldn't use a bad spell, but it
> never occurs to him that it could be a bad spell.
Oh, I think he expected it to be a bad spell (it was labelled 'for
enemies' after all). When he considered using it before, he was
thinking of trying it on McLaggen, not Ron. What he was not expecting
was that it would inflict life-threatening damage. Not that I think he
considered the matter in detail, but I believe he was expecting some
kind of fairly distracting and/or incapacitating curse/jinx/hex. We
have lots of examples of these-jelly legs, bat-bogey, impediment,
leg-locker, etc. They wear off and cause no lasting damage to the
victim.
zgirnius
Aaron wrote:
> But what if Hermione travels back in time, and kills Snape before their
> first year? What would happen then?
Assuming that time travel in the WW works along the lines of Novikov's
theories as summarized elsewhere by Troels, nothing. Not that I've read
the references or anything. I decided that I prefer the messy equations
in my life to have absolutely *no* conceivable applicability to Real
Life whatsoever a long time ago. (Except the obvious application of
paying the rent...) Hermione would simply fail.
The mechanism in this case would not even be very mysterious ;)
I mean, I like Hermione, she's my favorite character, but a mission to
kill Snape! You are confusing her with some action heroine or other.
Not that she would try, either. For whatever reason, she appears not to
be (at present) in the 'kill Snape' camp. Her reaction to Harry calling
him a murderer is 'Well...yes', hardly a ringing endorsement of the
sentiment, especially in light of recent events. And later in the same
conversation, she cuts Harry off before he can complete a statement
that Snape too was evil when he was in school with "'Evil' is a strong
word".
zgirnius
> Jean Lamb wrote:
> --Oh, yes. Two brains on testosterone is _not_ pretty. But Harry would try
> to defend Dumbledore whether or not Draco actually did anything; it would
> just _look_ like attacking.
Though if DD had not frozen Harry, he would appear in less need of
immediate defending, as he could certainly have blocked the
Expelliarmus IMO.
> Jean Lamb wrote:
> --My point entirely. As long as he blames Snape, he doesn't have to blame
> himself, and the longer he can keep glorifying Sirius Black.
Well, I don't agree his mistake is how he views Sirius. Especially with
Sirius dead, I don't have a problem if Harry prefers to remember the
good about him. I think it is possible to keep this opinion of Sirius
while rethinking Snape. Life is complicated. It is possible for two
people, both of whom in the final analysis choose to work for the
'good', but who still really do not get along.
> > zgirnius:
> > I can't wait to see how she digs Peter the Gryffindor out of the hole
> > she's dug him into in the next book, in that case. It will have to be
> > very creative or very over-the-top...
> Jean Lamb:
> --Good point. But he still owes Harry a Life Debt (we've already gone a few
> rounds on what Harry owes, if anything to Snape etc. on this one).
Yes, but if you are right about the totally heroic role of all
Gryffindors, is this enough? Is acting to fulfill a life debt
sufficiently heroic? It currently looks like he has a LOT to make up
for.
> > Jean Lamb:
> --Well, true. But I did not like the way he took satisfaction in Hermione
> having problems with a crappy book while he swanned through with a crib.
> That might gain him points with some Gryffs (and certainly with some of the
> Slytherins, who would be lost in admiration and wished they had a copy), but
> any Ravenclaws would _not_ be amused.
Well, yes. The Hat did not consider Ravenclaw for Harry. But it sure
did for Hermione, their values in this area are different. I don't see
it as Hermione having better ethics, though. It is more, that this is
an area in which Harry is not invested in the same way Hermione is.
Harry would never (IMO) cheat in any way at Quidditch. Hermione would.
(Did, on Ron's behalf! She disapproved of the Felix ploy, but that was
IMO because actually using Felix under those circumstances is
*illegal*). And really, for the same reasons Hermione disapproves of
cheating at academics.
> Jean Lamb:
> --Makes sense. He would admit his dismay to _anyone_ besides Snape (ok,
> maybe Filch). But the actual effect seems odd.
Tastes vary. I really loved this scene in the book, and thought it did
a wonderful job with all four characters involved. I found Harry's
reactions not odd at all.
> Jean Lamb:
> --My prediction, which I have stated before, is that Harry will kill Snape,
> will find out that Snape was following orders from AD, will be dismayed for
> a sum total of five minutes, but will somehow convince himself that he was
> right to kill Snape anyway, and his friends, wanting to support him, won't
> make a big deal about Snape's death despite what they actually think.
Gee, that's pretty dark. I don't think so. First, how would Harry kill
Snape? In a straight-up fight I am not convinced he could, however much
he might desire it. (This is the only set of circumstances in which I
can see Harry trying to kill anyone...) We've never seen him cast the
AK, or even try it.
If he was in an advantage situation, I just don't see him trying
something lethal. Crucio, yes. But I am firmly convinced that if it
really worked, Harry would shortly thereafter be horrified, even with
Snape as the victim. I think he'd revert to Plan B, incapacitate Snape
and turn him over to the authorities. (Who might then turn around and
hand him to a Dementor, probably after an impressive show trial, yes,
we at the MoM are working hard to keep you safe, sure...)
Though that last bit I don't expect, either. I'm expecting Snape to get
killed by a bad guy (Voldemort, most likely).
> Jean Lamb:
> but in the end Harry will Triumph and Live Happily
> Ever After.
I hope so! I worry about Harry too. Horcruxes, the scar, Love and
Self-Sacrifice and all that...I can see JKR killing him off. Or not. I
hope for not.
> Jean Lamb:
> If Hogwarts re-opens after that, I suspect there will only be
> three houses. But given the physics of rivalry, one of them will end up the
> Hated House within the next five years (if it takes that long). Just my
> take, mind you.
Well, JKR did say the Sorting Hat is always right. In addition to
Sorting students, it also gives advice, and the advice has been that
Hogwarts needs all four houses to work together. I expect a
rehabilitation of Slytherin House's image in Book 7. Book 6 has set up
a number of Slytherin characters in a more sympathetic light than
previous books. It introduced Slughorn, showed us the motherly side of
Narcissa Malfoy, showed us a Draco who apparently does not want to
follow in Daddy's footsteps, and gave us RAB, who if he *is* Regulus
Black, will be a particularly admirable Slytherin. (I'm avoiding the
Snape issue...)
Kish
Spoilers for HBP.
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
> I mean, I like Hermione, she's my favorite character, but a mission to
> kill Snape! You are confusing her with some action heroine or other.
> Not that she would try, either. For whatever reason, she appears not to
> be (at present) in the 'kill Snape' camp. Her reaction to Harry calling
> him a murderer is 'Well...yes', hardly a ringing endorsement of the
> sentiment, especially in light of recent events. And later in the same
> conversation, she cuts Harry off before he can complete a statement
> that Snape too was evil when he was in school with "'Evil' is a strong
> word".
But she explains that what she means is that Harry shouldn't beat up on
himself for having failed to realize the she was right and the Half
Blood Prince was evil because she /didn't/ think the Prince was evil,
merely nasty. "I never would have guessed he was a potential
killer"--Snape is, she says, a killer. "Well...yes," /is/ an
affirmation; it's certainly not "Well, no"--which she could quite easily
say by pointing out that Snape was certainly not a murderer (yet) when
Elaine gave birth to him. Hermione never, after Dumbledore's death,
suggests that she doesn't believe Snape is an evil, murderous Death Eater.
zgirnius
Kish wrote:
> Spoilers for HBP.
> 20
>
> 19
>
> 18
>
> 17
>
> 16
>
> 15
>
> 14
>
> 13
>
> 12
>
> 11
>
> 10
>
> 9
>
> 8
>
> 7
>
> 6
>
> 5
>
> 4
>
> 3
>
> 2
>
> 1
> suggests that she doesn't believe Snape is an evil, murderous Death Eater.
Correct, I never said otherwise. What she is not, is ready to join a
lynch mob. (Or travel back in time to kill a pre-SS/PS Snape..)
If there is a meeting between Snape and the Trio in Book 7, I expect
Hermione will be the 'voice of reason' as she was in the Shack scene in
PoA. If Snape shows any signs of wanting to talk rather than fight, I
suspect she will urge Harry to listen, just as she urged Snape to
listen to Sirius and Lupin PoA.
Toon
Noecker) wrote:
But the books are Harry's coming of age, no Hermione's.
Toon
>Toon wrote:
>> On 26 Oct 2005 07:06:44 GMT, frie...@zoocrewphoto.com (Meghan
>> Noecker) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:47:06 -0700, Tim Bruening
>>><tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Why didn't Harry tell any of the teachers that Draco had attempted the Cruciatis
>>>>Curse?
>>>>
>>>
>>>What good would it do?
>>>
>>>He would appear to be whining. They probably wouldn't believe him
>>>anyway.
>>>
>>>And, he did feel guilty about what he did.
>>
>>
>> And it never was fired. it's not even self defense. In the US, if
>> someone picks up, let's say a lamp, and you attack them (because they
>> were going to attack you first), it's not self defense, no matter how
>> threateningly it's done.. But if they throw it at you, and it hits
>> you, you're golden.
>
>Draco said "Cruci--"
>
>Do you have to wait for the person to finish throwing the lamp before
>you can respond? What if it's a nasty spiky lamp filled with a great
>deal of very hot oil?
Actualy, if you dodge the lamp, there's not much legally to be done.
Sadly, it's only if it hits you. The law is big on damage. Like
liable. Sure, saying lies is wrong, but for a lawsuit, you've got to
show your name/rep/etc was damaged. IE, if I said you were an
argumentive, closed minded fool, and you were kicked off your debate
team for it, you have a case. If nobody says boo to you about it,
you've got nothing.
You could claim domestic dispute, but those rarely involve more than
warnings. Not unless you're shirtless and attack the cops. But it's
on record, especially if you can prove the other was the instigator,
should anything worsen. It's now known this was a mounting problem,
and is now believable in saying it can get worse.
Toon
>zgirnius wrote:
>Spoilers for HBP.
>20
>
>19
>
>18
>
>17
>
>16
>
>15
>
>14
>
>13
>
>12
>
>11
>
>10
>
>9
>
>8
>
>7
>
>6
>
>5
>
>4
>
>3
>
>2
>
>1
>
>
>
>
>
>But she explains that what she means is that Harry shouldn't beat up on
>himself for having failed to realize the she was right and the Half
>Blood Prince was evil because she /didn't/ think the Prince was evil,
>merely nasty. "I never would have guessed he was a potential
>killer"--Snape is, she says, a killer. "Well...yes," /is/ an
>affirmation; it's certainly not "Well, no"--which she could quite easily
>say by pointing out that Snape was certainly not a murderer (yet) when
>Elaine gave birth to him. Hermione never, after Dumbledore's death,
>suggests that she doesn't believe Snape is an evil, murderous Death Eater.
I guess it depends on what the meaning of is, is. Is Snape currently
a killer? Or always the killer type.
Toon
she won't TT back to kill Snape, because its against MOM laws, and she
had to agree not to do such thins when she got her Time Turner.
Nobody's gonna do that because it's against the law, and it's Azkaban
for you. Plus, I don't think many people know wizards can time
travel. and Harry just isn't smart enough to rationalize temporal
mechanics for life saving. He'd never even think to try and change
history for the better.
richard e white
> >> The distinction for me is in the hero as role model. I am fine with
> >> having
> >> a character struggle with ethical questions. I am not so happy with
> >> showing
> >> him being rewarded for doing pretty much the same thing the villain is
> >> criticized
> >> for doing.
> >
> > I am sorry but so far I have not seen harry and dracco doing the same
> > thing. Unless
> > you are talking about attacking others and in thoes cases the why is
> > always
> > inportant. or sneaking out of bed but again the why is the main diffrance.
> > and with out some exsamples of what you find wrong then I see no way to go
> > on with
> > this point.
>
> -Let's take a look at Book 6. Draco catches Harry _in the Slytherin_ car
> (shall we guess what would have happened to a Slytherin caught the same way?
> Oh, wait, we've already seen it
No we have never seen the reverse. dracco has never slipped in and just tried
to over hear Harry and co. And I don't think they would break dracco's nose
after they deffeted him. In the place you mentioned you have dracco and co
gloating about sedrick. and they where hit with spells and left. It just so
happens that many attacked at the same time. But then they pushed them out into
the hall to be found. The scond time harry did not attack because dracco and co
tried to trap harry and the DA members did it. But again once the battle was
over they where left alone. none of them attacked a defenless person. Tho they
did attack a unknowing person.
> --jelly legs, We Three Slugs of Slytherin Are
> etc.). Draco gets Harry's wand because Harry isn't paying attention. Harry
> thinks that he's in no danger because Draco is a Cowardly Wuss who has to
> depend on Crabbe and Goyle. Surprise! It is nasty to break Harry's nose and
> leave him under the Cloak in the empty Hogwarts train, but Draco is
> supposedly a villain, after all. Villains do stuff like that. Never mind
> that the Trio has done tons of stuff to him and his friends, remember, it
> never counts when you do mean stuff to Slytherins! Harry's learned that
>
There is a diffrence between attacking some one in frount of them and doing it
from behind. and dracco does one worse and does it when harry can't do anything
about it and then trys to hide the evadence til later. But as you say dracco is
the bad guy.
> lesson well enough from the twins. Harry, on the other hand, learns very
> little from this except to wait till Draco is broken down emotionally,
> crying even, and without his wand to try out a lovely new spell. Harry is
> horrified at the results, but it's Moaning Myrtle who brings help, not
> Harry.
Now you are blameing the person who was attacked for starting the fight? Harry
went there to see what dracco was up to and found him crying. Dracco attacked
when he saw harry at the door. And both of them made mistakes. And yes harry
made a mistake when he used that spell. But Dracco was going for an
unforgiveble. Why harry never mentions that is a wounder. And again harry gets
detention for this and as far as we see dracco gets none.
but this is back to what I said about harry learning to be something. If you
want young people to learn this is better. for it shows that something unplaned
might happen from what looks like nothing dangerous. This is more likely to
teach then a character that never makes mistakes.
> And not long after, Harry goes whinging to McGonagall about his
> Horrible Detention. He is not the least concerned that he almost killed
> someone by then.
Yes he is. He was just hopeing to get things moved around so he could play in
the last game. And what a good lessen to show that the lead character can't
have things his own way and that he has to pay for his mistakes.
> After all, he's a Gryffindor and Draco Always Deserves It.
> (just the way Snape always did,
This is to vage to answer.
> right?). I am not in the least bit surprised
> that AD froze Harry when he was trying to win Draco's soul. AD probably knew
> all about the incident, no doubt spending most of a weekend with a shrieking
> Snape upset over what happened to Draco--and probably heard from McGonagall
> that Harry apparently is not having any ethical problems. However accidental
> the spell's damage was,
When to people start useing spells that both could mame or kill it is often hard
to find either of them felling sad about it.
> Harry planned to have fun at least against someone
> not holding a wand.
What are you talking about? Harry and dracco where both throwing spells at each
other. The only question of how it would end was who would get the knock out
first. given another moment and it might have been dracco with cruseo.
I am not defend what either of them did. But the way JKR wrote it teaches more
to the reader then if harry had stuck to stunning and defence spells.
> He was upset at all the blood, but he got over it
> really, really fast. Remember, Draco had to _take_ his wand There _is_ an
> ethical difference here between fighting better and attacking someone
> already wandless, and it doesn't show Harry up very well. Given that Harry
> does so poorly against opponents with a wand (Draco earlier, and Snape later
> on), one has to doubt his effectiveness in magical battle later.
Dracco attacked first. Harry did not attack dracco with out a wand.
>
> >
> But as I said, Harry learned from the Twins that any effective damage
> against any Slytherin is all to the good, and AD has done nothing to correct
> this.
Most of the time harry does pay for his actions. and we often see thinking over
weather he should get involed. He looks at what might happen and he decides
weather he is willing to pay that cost. When he decides yes he goes out and
does the thing.
>
>
> As I said before, I expect a bit more from heroes than that degree of
> ethical callousness.
I think the main problume is that you want a compleated hearo where I want some
one who learns to do the right thing witch is not always the leagle thing.
>
> >
> >> "It's right because we're wearing the white hats today" is a
> >> very bad justification. Lupin admits that his gang's behavior in school
> >> was
> >> not admirable in all ways; he's the most adult of the marauders. But his
> >> responses are overshadowed by the bad-boy attraction of Sirius,
> >
> > What atteration? I found him random and reckless and maybe partly insane.
>
> --Yes, and Harry still loves him so. What little he learned that Sirius did
> that was bad is all negated now, because as far as Harry is concerned, AD
> would still be alive if Lupin _had_ killed Snape. I suspect that Harry
> admires Sirius even more now.
Why do you think how the main character feels changes how the reader will see
the character flaws?
>
> >
> >> who did send
> >> an unwarned student to meet a werewolf because he thought it was funny.
> >> I feel the attraction of the Sirius character, but I still think he
> >> committed
> >> attempted murder at the age of 16.
> >
> > Like I said I never saw him as anything else. I totaly agree with this
> > but black was
> > never a hearo to me. He is one of the shades of gray that is vary near
> > the middle
> > point to me. In fact Lupin was the only one of harry's father old group
> > that I would
> > even say was near hearo.
> >
> --Right. I like Lupin too, but he barely speaks up as a prefect when his
> friends are torturing someone (are you listening, Ron Weasley?). He never
> takes action, even when he believes that Black may be guilty, to keep Black
> out of the castle. He became distracted and didn't take his potion, then
> nearly murdered the children and Snape (unconscious at the time). Black did
> save the kids from Lupin. Lupin never told any of the school authorities
> that Snape wasn't lying when he no doubt complained about the Marauders.
> When three lie, and one is silent, the four will be believed and their
> victim will not.
How do you know the Marauders where not punished? In fact we learned from black
that they spent a lot of time in detention. It is best to stick to the books
when trying to prove things as the rest are guesses.
>
>
> >> Hermione occasionally speaks up against it, but the average kid is going
> >> to agree with Harry - after all, he's the hero and she's just the
> >> rule-following hindrance who sometimes panics in a crisis. Rowling has
> >> shown Harry gloating over having food when someone else was hungry
> >> _because_
> >> the other person was hungry - yeah, it was Dudley, but the point is, that
> >> is
> >> not an admirable quality and it has never been criticized by any other
> >> character.
> >
> > I disagree here. Remember that dudly use to eat all the things harry
> > liked even if it
> > made him sick. And harry was not gloating that dudly was starveing. He
> > was gloating
> > that dudly was on a diet, a diet that the hole house went on, and dudly
> > was still
> > being given more then Harry. What harry was gloating about was that he
> > had slightly
> > stale cake when dudly didn't. That is not a bad trate to me at all.
> >
> --It was still gloating.
What do you expect from a 14 year old? To not glot would take the reaction
right out of any beliveable thinking.
I would not even be reading something that off realty.
I begin to see why you like the two dementional lens men stuff.
>
>
> >> She apparently thinks the Twins are innocently hilarious, when
> >> all of their jokes involve not-so-subtle attacks on other people.
> >
> > We are back to the gray with this pair. and like black I think they go to
> > far at
> > times. But the wizarding world is much harder then the muggle one. With
> > things
> > easyer to fix things are diffrent. Tho the bit with the cabnet should
> > have gotten
> > them in trouble.
> >
> --But it didn't. They left in a blaze of glory that even McGonagall
> participated in. Of course the whole school (do you really think the
> Slytherins _liked_ Umbridge, or just went along?
Many of them liked it because they got power out of it. others no doubt just
tried to get by. we just don't see much of them. as the ones that wanted power
sucked up to the toad and became part of her squad.
> ) admires them. They wanted
> to leave anyway. No consequences for the twins, only profits!
Right a person in the mom takes over and has problumes and then the problumes
leave and she does not try and sick other mom people on them? But this is
another area where we don't have the information to really answer. we don't
know if they where fined or not. because for some reason no letters ever come
in to tell us.
>
>
> >> >> It's called basic fairness. We don't expect it from villains. We
> >> >> do from heroes, even if they're Gryffindors.
> >> >
> > But you put to many of the characters in the hearo area. Not all the
> > grifs are ment
> > to be hearos.
> >
> --They are by Rowling.
Where did she say that?
I remember courage and chivalry but that is all I have run across.
and most people don't understand chivalry these days. And as the hat is 1000
years old or so I belive it would refur to the old meaning of chivalry. Witch
is rather mean and bloody.
So you want what he is going to be doing to get back to V? for if he told the
people who asked him that is what would happen. Besides he is the one who needs
to do it. if he is to be the hearo then he has to do it himself and not let the
ones thatthink they should be in comand take comand of what he needs to do. the
next book will tell us if harry has learned to be a hearo or an idiot. I think
both are possable from what I have seen so far.
>
> >> - and he is shown getting away with it.
> >
> > You might want to remember the bit where lupin talks to harry after they
> > leave snapes
> > office. He was told off in a way that hit harry harder because it went
> > straight to
> > his emotions.
> >
> --Yes, and this lasted all of five minutes.
How much do you want to read about how messed up harry's was.
do you want to read long bits of how harry thought he messed up? if you do try
the hornblower set of books.
richard e white
> Toon wrote:
> > On 26 Oct 2005 07:06:44 GMT, frie...@zoocrewphoto.com (Meghan
> > Noecker) wrote:
> >
> >
> >>On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:47:06 -0700, Tim Bruening
> >><tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Why didn't Harry tell any of the teachers that Draco had attempted the Cruciatis
> >>>Curse?
> >>>
> >>
> >>What good would it do?
> >>
> >>He would appear to be whining. They probably wouldn't believe him
> >>anyway.
> >>
> >>And, he did feel guilty about what he did.
> >
> >
> > And it never was fired. it's not even self defense. In the US, if
> > someone picks up, let's say a lamp, and you attack them (because they
> > were going to attack you first), it's not self defense, no matter how
> > threateningly it's done.. But if they throw it at you, and it hits
> > you, you're golden.
>
> Draco said "Cruci--"
>
> Do you have to wait for the person to finish throwing the lamp before
> you can respond? What if it's a nasty spiky lamp filled with a great
> deal of very hot oil?
It depends. if you want the prosacuters to not take it to cort then yes you have to
let it hit and do damage. If you want to try and get 12 people to belive you in cort
then no. Tho with a lamp it is harder to prove. If they had a gun it is easyer to
prove you where being attacked for some reason. I think it has something to do with
why you might have the diffrent object in your hand.
>
>
> Of course, it was stupid of Harry to use an unknown spell. No one, not
> even Harry anymore*, is arguing that.
>
> *Though we'll see if Harry's actually learned anything next time he has
> a chance to try out an unknown spell, eh?
>
> (No no /no/, there is nothing mn and a limited degree of humor about
> this post.)
ashy0802
Plus, doesn't the book suggest that they broke most, if not all, of the
time turners when they were trying to escape the DE? Maybe I'm wrong.