[HPforGrownups] HRH vs Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle (Was Snape & Neville's Memory)

[porphyria at mindspring.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 36713

Kitty and I were discussing whether or not Snape's cruel attitude towards Neville might have some hidden benefit for his memory, his magical development, whatever. I said:

<<
Yeah, at the risk of sentimentalizing Snape, I'd say the books do hint at this very possibility. Regardless of how mean Snape is to Neville, he's warm and fuzzy compared to Neville's own family. Uncle Algie literally endangers the child's life (multiple times) in order to smoke out his magical ability, which is one among several indications that adrenaline directly affects wizarding skills. 
>>

And Uncmark replied:

<<
Excuse me? the Longbottom's uncle may have physically endangered him, but Snape emotionally abuses Neville and the other Griffindors daily. 
>>

Well, for starters, I think dropping a child out of a window or off a pier is much worse than insulting him, especially when he's 11 and he's already used to stern treatment from his elders. I'm not sure how you can justify Uncle Algie as 'not so bad' if that is in fact what you are trying to do.

Furthermore, I'm quite aware of the fact that my reading that 'Snape might have Neville's best interests in mind' is counter-intuitive, nonsensical in real life, and perhaps quite mistaken. It's intended as an ironic reading, right or wrong. Apart from the canonical examples I cited, I am also situating this reading within JKR's Potterverse, which is very different from ours. For one thing, characters are often the opposite of what they seem and their motives are often misconstrued in canon. So I don't think it's totally off base to wonder if a given situation is exactly the opposite from the way it appears. For another think, JKR has a pretty black sense of humor, and I think my theory does too. Tormenting Neville for his own good is just as funny (or unfunny, depending on your taste) as chopping up and stewing anthropomorphic Mandrakes, IMO. 

More importantly, the Potterverse has a completely different set of mores and norms than ours. In many ways it's more Medieval, more honor bound and much tougher. For a better description of this, you should go back to an old post of Elkins, #34421, where she describes the Warrior Ethos of wizarding culture and how un-squeamish they are about violence and physical risk and how much they loathe timidity and cowardice. To me this indicates that we shouldn't judge Snape, Algie, Gran or anyone else by literal, real-world standards.

Let me say *very* quickly that this in no way implies that I think Elkins agrees with my theory about Neville and Snape! Somehow I doubt she does. ;-) It's just that I think her observation about the Warrior Ethos was really brilliant and well put.

There are degrees to this theory. If the idea that, deep down inside, Snape has nothing but warm fuzzy feelings for Neville and the rest of the Gryffs is just too sickening for you to bear, and I think I might even agree, there is still the possibility that there might be an inadvertent benefit to Neville (and an interesting plot device) if he gets a giant adrenaline rush in a future book, and that if Snape is the cause it might be entirely accidental. This saves us from attributing anything but malice to Snape, but it still makes use of the many associations the book makes between memory charm, magical ability in general, and suffering. 

Anyway, Uncmark also wrote:

<<
So we're to believe he mistreats the Gryffindors out of kindness? One flaw in that plan, shouldn't he also mistreat the Slytherin's to encourage the same growth?
>>

I think you might have misunderstood what Kitty and I were agreeing on, because we were both theorizing that he *does not* mistreat the Slytherin because he doesn't care if they toughen up or not. He *wants* to weaken them, see? Again, this theory might be far fetched and OOC for Snape, and I'm the last person to argue it isn't. But I could make the same tweak I just did above and say that regardless of whom Snape really likes, the effect is the same. And then I'd be agreeing with everything you said:

<<
Harry, Ron, and Hermione, compared to Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle have faced more challenges and will continue to face more them. Curiously, HRH are motivated to learn more through selfless action than MCG are throu selfish ambition.
>>

This, and the rest of your post, I completely agree on. Then again, of course HRH are heroic, selfless, brave and giving. That's the whole point, right? I think the real problem is the Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle are not sufficiently strong enough adversaries for HRH for dramatic appeal. You are right that they never bother taking a stand for anything, and they don't appear tough enough to do so. I actually find it a bit of a flaw that 'selfish ambition,' so far, hasn't been portrayed as that powerful or enticing a path for the students. It should be a little more seductive, shouldn't it? So HRH can bravely resist?

Just a thought.

~~Porphyria