Tidbits of Snapeness, and Peter's strength

[Firebolt]

No: HPFGUIDX 7822

<Is it possible that Snape was involved with the attack
upon Neville's parents during his "spying" days, which
imprinted on Neville's brain (perhaps he was there
during the attack when he was only 2 years old, or the
like), and that has pre-disposed Neville against
Snape, whether he realizes that's why he acts like a
git in the class or not (melting cauldrons, etc...)...>

Dumbledore said at Karkaroff's trial (I forget the chapter number - 'The
Pensieve') that Snape had become a spy *before* Voldemort fell. The Longbottoms
were attacked afterwards, because Crouch Jr. and Co. were trying to find out
where Voldemort, who had already fallen, was currently located.

<Oh i had a point/ Everyone makes Snape out to be in Voldies inner circle
turned spy.  How do we know that he wasn't a spy for dumbledore to begin
with?  Remember, Dumbledore knows stuff that the Ministry didn't know.  And
someone said that even all of Voldies followers didn't even know who each
other were.  Therefore, i conclude that it is entirely possible for snape
not to be a bad guy at all.>

Again, at Karkaroff's trial, Dumbledore said that Snape had been a Death Eater
before turning back to the good guys.

<Peg wrote:

"You know, many fan fic writers act as if Peter was merely a
tag-a-long, not as good at magic as James, Sirius and Lupin,
not "really" one of the four, almost sort of resented. I think this
diminishes the fact of his betrayal. It seems to be a sort of
squeamishness/reluctance to claim Peter as "one of us"--because it's
too scarey to imagine that someone you have totally accepted and
considered one of your team could have betrayed you."

Ebony said:

Interesting observation.  Over the holiday I thought about the
significance of Peter's name.  The Biblical Peter wasn't on
the fringes of things; he was a leader amongst the Twelve... and yet
he betrayed Christ.  This is also why Ron is not immune to fulfilling
this role in his generation... because he *is* trusted.>

Quite apart from the Ron-the-traitor debate, Peter is portrayed as a weakling
for two reasons apart from squeamishness:

1. McGonagall says in the Hogsmeade conversation that Peter wasn't in the 'same
league as Potter and Black, talent-wise', and that she was 'often quite harsh
with him' for that reason. If you'll notice, she's also quite harsh with
Neville, who doesn't exactly have a lot of aptitude in Transfig (or much of
anything else, for that matter, although my theory is that it's more a block
coming from fear of what happened to his more-than-competent-parents or simple
lack of self-esteem than a lack of talent...but I digress), which sort of makes
people think of Peter as a less likable version of Neville, coupled with the
sqeamishness.

2. Lupin states that Peter needed all the help he could get from James and
Sirius to become an Animagus.

This isn't to say that he's as useless as a lot of people seem to think he is,
just not very brilliant, either. And I don't think he was on the fringes at all
- I doubt Sirius, James, and Lupin are really the elitist-genius type, and so
there's no real reason for them to have excluded him.

~Firebolt

Kassie Ostrander wrote:

> Hello, i hope everyone is having happy holidays and is keeping up with HP
> news.... Has anyone tried the Everyflavor Betts Beans?  I can't find them
> here in Michigan.
>
> Oh i had a point/ Everyone makes Snape out to be in Voldies inner circle
> turned spy.  How do we know that he wasn't a spy for dumbledore to begin
> with?  Remember, Dumbledore knows stuff that the Ministry didn't know.  And
> someone said that even all of Voldies followers didn't even know who each
> other were.  Therefore, i conclude that it is entirely possible for snape
> not to be a bad guy at all.
>
> VOX ET PRAETEREA NIHIL
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at egroups.com