[HPforGrownups] Defending Snape (naturally)/Predestination

[Edblanning at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 34606

In a message dated 03/02/02 18:43:27 GMT Standard Time, cindysphynx at home.com 
writes:
> 
> ::tearing sound of velcro as the gloves come off::
> 
> I would match Lupin's error rate with Snape's any day.  Snape 
> mastered the art of screwing things up long ago.  Here are the Top 10 
> reasons Snape is a champion, Grade A, first-class, Number One screw-
> up:
> 
(Eloise shouts 'Expelliarmus' quickly) . I hope the formatting's clear, it 
may have done strange things when I edited this.

> 1.  Snape wants to tip the students that Lupin is a werewolf, but he 
> can't get the point across well enough.  He is finally reduced to 
> just telling the kids outright:  "Hey guys, did I ever mention that 
> Lupin is a werewolf?"  Not very impressive.
> 
He hopes they will suss it whilst writing the essay, but Hermione (OK. it 
*is* Hermione who does realise) is the only one who actually appears to have 
written it: Lupin lets them off. But I totally agree that his telling the 
Slytherins is one of Snape's worst, nastiest, pettiest moments
> 
> 2.  He picked the Forces of Evil instead of the Forces of Good by 
> becoming a DE in the first place.  
> 
And, I would say, had been groomed to do so. And he was far from alone. As I 
ranted in my paranoic essay, people (let alone wizards) like Voldemort with 
his insidiously evil message are capable of corrupting the most decent of 
people. We didn't have a very good start, in this respect, I feel.
> 
> 3.  A ten-year old girl solved Snape's potions obstacle in about 1 
> minute.
> 
Dealt with by other contributors. But an exceptional 10 year old. And why 
should his obstacle be any better than any of the others? Quirrel's own was 
the only one they probably couldn't have coped with, and he had conveniently 
disabled it himself.
> 
> 4.  Snape, a fully-qualified wizard, can't figure out the Marauder's 
> Map, but Fred and George, underage students, could.
> 
But the Marauder's map is so childish in spirit and it required a desire to 
make mischief in order to make it work. I doubt Snape was ever a child, 
sprang middle-aged from his mother's womb, if you ask me, and his sneaking 
around is never in the spirit of a light-hearted prank. He comes over all 
pompous with the map, which of course responds appropriately.
Lupin and Crouch-Moody aren't using it lightheartedly, of course, but it will 
surely co-operate with its maker and Crouch receives the map in working mode.
> 
> 5.  Snape lets Moody intimidate him into not investigating who had 
> burgled his office.  He also used a locking charm that Moody broke 
> rather handily, not once, but twice.

Totally agree with second point. Think I'd be a bit intimidated by someone I 
thought was an Auror when the Dark Mark was burning on my forearm and I 
didn't want anyone else to know I'd been a DE, though.

> 6.  An 11-year old girl crept into Snape's office and stole more 
> potions ingredients again.

Agreed
> 
> 7.  Snape can't prove that Harry went to Hogsmeade, when all he had 
> to do was threaten to burn the map unless Harry came clean.

He did threaten to and when Harry stops him correctly assumes that it 
involves instructions to get to Hogsmeade. I don't think he *wants* to burn 
it: he wants to know its secret and if Harry had merely confessed in the face 
of a threat, it wouldn't have been proof, would it?, not proof he could take 
to Dumbledore. ( Although undoubtedly D *would* believe that Harry had been 
sneaking out, and wouldn't let Snape know it )

> 8.  Snape may have allowed Fudge to bring the dementor to Moody's 
> office, where it promptly sucked out Crouch Jr.'s soul, making him as 
> responsible or even more responsible than McGonagall.

*May* is the operative word. If Dumbledore can't override the Minister for 
Magic, then neither can Snape.

> 9.  He is responsible for Peter's escape, and as a result, 
> Voldemort's re-birth.  Had he listened in the Shrieking Shack, there 
> would have been an additional wizard there to keep control of the 
> situation.  Snape also might have Crouch Sr.'s blood on his hands for 
> needlessly detaining Harry as Harry searched for Dumbledore.

I talk about part of this below.
Snape *listen*? What do you want, miracles?Yes, I take your point, but from 
Snape's POV, he knew what was happening, he didn't need to listen. Also, he's 
constitutionally predisposed not to want to hear anything that Hermione has 
to say. An unfortunate character defect, this conviction that he is always 
right. 
Needlessly detaining Harry has always annoyed me. It is ridiculously petty, 
even for Snape and I see at as an uncharacteristically clumsy plot device, 
both to ensure that Crouch Sr does get murdered and to throw suspicion on 
Snape.

> 10.  Experienced dueler that Snape is, he allowed three underage 
> wizards to disarm him.  This occurred because Snape didn't have the 
> good sense to disarm the kids right away (note that Lupin did disarm 
> the students when he arrived in the Shack).  

Well, if you were Snape, would you expect a student to *dare*? And he was 
unlucky that it was the three of them together, it wasn't exactly planned, 
was it? I think that he usually has such authority over students that he 
really expected that his view would prevail. If he expected anything, that 
is. I don't think he was really concentrating on anything other than Sirius 
and Lupin.

But as you say, nobody's perfect. I can take a few imperfections!

Regarding 9 above,
Barb writes:> 
> > Peter's escape *is* the result of a mistake on Snape's part; 
> > although even Dumbledore admits that Snape's assessment of the 
> > situation (that the children were confounded) is more convincing, 
> > and that Sirius hasn't been acting like an innocent man. Snape was 
> > still doing what he thought was right, however misguided. I have 
> > an impish inclination to blame the others in the shack for not 
> > reviving Snape (maybe binding him up, then reviving him) when they 
> > should have -- it would have helped matters quite a bit.
> > 
> > Since there are several other factors responsible for Voldemort's 
> > return, I'd say Snape bears only a small part of the blame here.
> 
> For instance, Snape and Lupin are mutually to blame for not making 
> sure he'd taken his Wolfsbane Potion that night.  It was really 
> Lupin's transformation into a werewolf that caused them all to 
> scatter and made it possible for Pettigrew to escape.  (And why 
> didn't Sirius, Lupin or Snape stun the little rat?)  

Because as you say, Lupin had just transformed. Or are you referring to him 
as 'a little rat' *before* his transformation? Yes, stunning him instead of 
merely handcuffing him would have been a safer option.
(But what of the plot? or are we saying the plot is weak? Pettigrew had to 
escape or Book Four would have been completely different!)
Seriously, getting back to the story, dear Sybil had predicted Pettigrew's 
escape, hadn't she? In this case, we could assume that all of this is 
pre-ordained, that the characters are merely agents of Fate, or a higher 
authority or something and in that sense didn't have a choice....or not, I 
know this could be argued either way ( that the prediction is simply of what 
will happen beacause of everyone's incompetance, but somehow the prediction 
doesn't really sound like that). 

Throughout the series, IMO there is a growing sense that things are being 
worked out according to some pre-ordained plan.
Dumbledore witholds information from Harry somewhere early on IIRC, saying it 
isn't time for him to know. Then there's the notorious 'gleam of triumph'. 
Dumbledore believes that Wormtail being in Harry's debt is a Good Thing. 
There's the feeling that he knows an awful lot that he's not letting on.
Trelawney's prediction is her second genuine one, according to Dumbledore. 
What was the first one?
I am wondering if it did concern the way in Harry is to be the agent of 
Vodemort's ultimate defeat and that many of the 'weaknesses' that the 
characters display are actually not just handy plot devices, but necessary to 
the ultimate working out of a prophecy. ( Which I suppose in a work of 
fiction could come to the same thing, but heck, I'm no philosopher.)
What I don't get, though, is how this would mesh in with the theme of 
personal choice. (Yet another theme with religious parallels, the tension 
between free will and pre-destination.

Eloise


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]