[HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's (un)fair grading (just got long)

[Pen Robinson]

No: HPFGUIDX 74644


On Friday, Aug 1, 2003, at 10:46 Europe/London, M.Clifford wrote:

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pen Robinson <pen at p...> wrote:
>
>> *If* the OWLs are based on old-fashioned O-Level exams (and they do
>> appear to be), then bibphile is correct: marks awarded in class
> during the year are irrelevant to the grades achieved in the OWL
> examination. [The current UK equivalent to O-Levels, the GCSEs, *do*
> have a considerable element of course-work included in the final
> grades.  But O-Level grades were awarded solely on examination
> performance.  And it does appear to me that the OWLs are done in the
> same way, entirely by external examiners.]
>>
>
> Valky replies:
> Terrific! that puts that debate to bed for me!
> Right or wrong there is a possibility that the course work is
> involved. Not really a matter I care to debate lengthily, right or
> wrong.

Why bring it up, then?   It seems to me that it is unnecessary to be 
quite so rude.

>
>>>
>>> Longer answer; A response like this it appears to me,actually begs
>>> the question.
>>> Does **Snape** know that only the OWLs count on Harry's marks.
>>
>> Of course he does.
>
> Valky replies:
> Very well then if that's all you wish to say on the matter.

It doesn't really seem worth debating the notion that the Hogwards 
Potions Master has so little idea what is involved with the OWLs that 
he doesn't know whether the marks he awards count towards the OWLs or 
not.

>>>
>>> Why? oh why??? Would he bother awarding a zero or even setting the
>>> test if it has no effect on the kids marks.
>>> Sheeesh!!!
>>
>> Huh?
>>
>> How about, personal satisfaction for Snape, who wanted to upset
> Harry?
>
> Valky's Reply:
> I seee....
> Are you saying thats a fair award for Harry's work then?

Certainly not, and I have no idea how you could deduce such a thing 
from what I did say.  You asked why he would bother awarding a zero, or 
even setting the test, if it has no effect on the marks; I offered a 
possible answer.  It is so patently obvious that Snape is not giving 
Harry the fair reward for his work that I did not think it necessary to 
mention it.
>
>> How about, he could pretty well tell from the appearance of the
> potion that it would get a good mark, and he couldn't bring himself
> to award one (reasons might vary from spite to a deep-cover
> disguise).
>
> Valky's reply:
> Indifferent to this argument, really. Snape dropped the potion in a
> deliberate act of spite. Cover schmover, what difference does one
> exceeding pass make unless.... hmmm perhaps it would be prudent not
> to let the dark side know Harry can make a real potion. (sarcasm
> hint). Blow me over with a feather, Snape wants Harry to defeat the
> Dark Lord!

Again, I don't think much of your tone.  I offered a possible answer to 
your 'Why?'  - note that my suggested answer was that Snape could not 
bring himself to award the deserved good mark.   That was why he 
dropped the potion - because if he marked it, the mark would have had 
to be a good one.

  His motive for not wishing to award a good mark might, I suggested, 
vary from spite to deep-cover disguise - interpretation of motives will 
vary from reader to reader.   Which, incidentally, is why Snape is such 
a fascinating character.

>
>> In
>> this respect his action is ambiguous - I mean, Snape-loathers can
>> assume that he is a mean-spirited git, while at the same time
>> Snape-lovers can assume that he knows perfectly well Harry has
> achieved competence, but for reasons of policy must maintain the anti-
> Harry front by giving him a zero, secure in the knowledge that it
> makes no difference to the important OWL results.
>
> I am not a Snape loather. I call myself a realist.
> Snapes mystery and secrecy could yet reveal he is no more than a
> bitter retrousse who's reasons for being on the side of good are as
> scathing and hate filled in detail as his manner as a teacher.
> The speculation that he is a deeply angsted sweet-heart who never
> beleived with his being that the Dark Arts held no beauty is just
> that, speculation. Let it not end, indeed. Snape-lovers have a place
> on this list. Of intrigue in a character Snape is the King.
> However the brand Snape-loather does not apply to everyone who
> refuses to be overwhelmed by the instant compassion that arises from
> theories of Snapes long lost love and other such.
>
> What I am trying to relate is that the boundary you have drawn in
> your above statement demonstrates a disregard for the truth.

What?

Trying, charitably, to assume that you are not being rude on purpose, I 
have to ask you why my belief that Snape's action is ambiguous is 
grounds for you to accuse me of lying.   I characterised neither myself 
nor you as either a Snape lover or a Snape loather, but gave two of the 
possible options for interpreting his behaviour.

> Indeed a Snape-lover !also! *could* assume that Snape is just a mean
> spirited git. The canon certainly does hold a veritable mass of
> inference in support of it.

True, and I very nearly said so, but simply didn't bother to belabour 
the obvious.  It would be hard for anyone to deny that canon provides 
many examples of Snape behaving like a mean spirited git.

> So those of us to whom logic is more important *must* accept there
> will _always_ be a 'Snape-Lover' who simply _refuses_ to see it that
> way.
> And while so many of us do with amassed courtesy, there is an
> undignified cavort of Snape-Lover creed who dispense with courtesy in
> their replies and insult the logic they appear to be unable to
> comprehend.
> _Told ya I wanted to pick a fight_ :b

Yes, but I really don't see why you decided to pick it with me.  I'm 
not at all impressed.
>
> On the other hand a 'Snape-loather' as you put it, if indeed a
> loather of any of JKR's creations could possibly exist in HP fandom,
> !also! *could* assume Snape is merely maintaining his anti-Harry
> front. I am sure if we all did Snape fandom would simply overrun the
> list and anyone who spoke ill of the mysterious man would be promptly
> booted.
> Ok OK perhaps not so definately booted, but I have been lynched on
> several occassions by the Snape camp.
> The thing that sticks in my craw is the aggro.
> Heal the list Snape-Lovers. If you are so filled deeply with
> compassion for the underdogs and the abused...........
> Why so abusive?

 From someone whose 'logic' seems to consist of ranting at odd tangents 
in response to an attempt to answer what appeared at the time to be 
reasonable questions, the question 'why so abusive?' seems... hmm.  
Impertinent.
>
> Back to the subject, someone who wanted to handle Snape without the
> kid gloves and rose petals might actually agree with this statement
> and yet still think it is unfair grading. Is that OK? Or does that
> person deserve to have their own character ripped to shreds for it?

Again, I have no idea what you are talking about.   Are you accusing me 
of ripping your character to shreds?
>
>>
>> As to why he would bother setting a test if it had no effect on the
> OWL grades, well, teachers do need some means of assessing their
> students' progress, don't they?
> This seems to be Snape's method: get the kids to make a potion and
> see how well they've done it.  Seems entirely
>> reasonable to me.  Not that I learned Potions, but when I was
> studying for my O-Levels, teachers did tend to set us work, and mark
> it...
>>
>> Pen
>
> Terrific well you've wrapped that up nicely. Obviously Snape is
> entirely fair in his behaviour because it didn't count toward the
> final mark.

This is another example of 'logic', is it?   Did I at any stage state 
that I thought Snape was being 'entirely fair'?

I pointed out that if Snape's class marks do not count towards OWLs, 
then his sabotage of Harry's potion sample was not going to have any 
effect on Harry's OWL grade.

> The debate remains. Snape grades fairly. Rubbish! He deliberately
> caused Harry to recieve a failed grade in his class.
> Right or wrong that's what happened isn't it.
>

Snape deliberately caused Harry to get a zero mark, yes.    My point is 
- it doesn't matter; but my logic probably escapes you.

Pen