Snape's (un)fair grading

[marinafrants]

No: HPFGUIDX 74848

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deb" <readzalot at s...> wrote:
> Snape intentionally made Harry get a zero in Potions, when Harry
> obviously made it correctly.
> 
> I think it was a good lesson for Harry to learn - even if you do it
> right, do not leave your work unattended in the face of those who 
you
> do not trust.

But Harry is forever being called a prejudiced, ungrateful brat on 
this list for failing to trust Snape.  Yet here he shows the barest, 
teeniest amount of trust -- he trusts Snape to perform his teaching 
job to minimum requirements -- and you're arguing that he shouldn't 
have done it, and must immediately be taught that he made a mistake?

In fact, the most common criticism that's been directed at Harry for 
five books now, and OOP in particular, is that he fails to trust and 
rely on other people when he should.  He keeps important information 
to himself when he should share it.  He doesn't go for help when 
help is available.  He runs off to handle crises on his own, when 
other people are better suited.  Why does Snape get praised for 
teaching Harry to be paranoid and distrustful, and then Harry gets 
pilloried for *being* paranoid and distrustful?

If Snape hadn't done such a good job instilling this supposedly 
necessary "lesson," Harry might've actually gone to him after 
receiving the fake vision of Sirius being tortured, instead of 
feeling that he had to handle the situation entirely on his own.

> 
> I bet Harry will never just drop off his potion and turn away 
> again.

And why, exactly, is this a good thing.
> 
> I bet Harry will never make a potion outside of class and leave it
> unattended.

Harry didn't leave his potion unattended.  He left it with Snape, 
whose job was to attend it.

I bet Harry will never trust Snape to behave in a fair or non-
malicious manner.  And, sure enough, Harry doesn't.

> 
> But, we don't know (yet) whether Snape enjoyed doing it because he 
is
> mean, or whether he did it because of "tough love" or whether the
> truth is a bit of both.

If Snape really believes he's doing Harry good by treating him like 
this, then he's dangerously deluded and shouldn't be allowed 
anywhere near Harry ever again.

Is this really what Harry (or any other child) needs to be taught?  
That he should never, ever, put the smallest trust into anyone, even 
in people who have specifically been placed in positions of trust?  
That everyone around him must be treated with suspicion, that every 
human interaction he engages in, no matter how minor, must be 
closely monitored for potential betrayal, that rules are meaningless 
because you can't expect other people to follow them?  Sounds like a 
perfect recipe for creating the next Dark Lord to me.  If, fifty 
years from now, the Wizarding World is cowering in the shadows, 
afraid to speak Harry Potter's name, they'll have Severus Snape and 
his "tough love" to thank.

Marina
rusalka at ix.netcom.com