Snape, Sirius, and 'moral codes'

[curly_of_oster]

No: HPFGUIDX 74155

I must admit that I'm not sure quite what to make of this response, 
as most of the 'response' part is to things that I either left out 
on purpose because they don't really have anything to do with my 
main point or to things that I didn't actually say (i.e. other 
people's theories that I was restating).  Still, in the spirit of 
clarification...

Me(Lisa):
I have been following, with interest, the threads on Sirius (Much 
Ado about What? <g>), Dumbledore's use (or abuse?) of Sirius, etc., 
and I am kind of interested in the side topic, of sorts, that came 
up in these conversations regarding Snape, Sirius, and their 
respective 'moral codes.'

[snip rest of my intro]

The basic ideas seemed to be: Snape: Although he can be 
(often/always is?) an unpleasant git, he is an equal opportunity 
unpleasant git,

Random:
The Equal Opportunity Unpleasant Gits would make an excellent name 
for a band.

Me:
Yeah, you're probably right.

And back to my original post:
in that he treats everyone badly, and that he will save the life of 
even someone he hates (for the greater good?)

Random replies:
> or perhaps it's the life-debt.

Lisa:
Well, yes.  That was kind of the point of a big chunk of the Snape 
part of my post, so I'm not sure what you're getting at by pointing 
it out here.  Other people had taken Snape's trying to save Harry as 
evidence that he will save the life of even someone he hates.  This 
conclusion seemed to be stated as a general truth, so I suggested 
that perhaps the presumed reason was the 'greater good.'  I then 
went on to argue that all we could really conclude was that Snape 
will honor a life-debt, which is different from being willing to 
save *any* person he hates.

Me earlier:
Sirius: Although he would do anything, including give his life, for 
those he cares about, if he doesn't like you, you don't really 
count/don't even have rights,

Random:
> whoa, i thhink "don't have rights" is a bit harsh.

Back to me:
Again, I'm not sure what your point is here.  I quoted another 
person's description of Sirius' 'moral code,' and went on to explain 
why I didn't think this was necessarily a true/fair assessment.  I 
agree with you that 'don't have rights' is harsh.

[snip]

Me, earlier:
Snape: I am not even going to deal with the idea that he treats 
everyone equally (it was even said that he grades fairly), as I 
think that has been discussed already.  I don't think he treats 
everyone equally at all, though whether that is a major factor in 
his 'moral code' is another issue.

Random:
> Evidence?

Back to me (Lisa):
First of all, I deliberately didn't discuss this or provide evidence 
because 1) it had been dealt with in some detail by other people, in 
the posts which prompted me to write the post you're responding to, 
and 2) I was more interested in the other part of the equation (the 
saving the life of someone you hate bit), which I thought was more 
to the point of the discussion of moral codes.

As to whether Snape treats people equally, it's clear from the first 
day of potions class that he has no intention of treating at least 
Harry fairly, sneering at him that 'Fame isn't everything' when he 
can't answer a question, then accusing him of not telling Neville 
not to add quills to his potion because Harry would think that it 
would make him, Harry, look better.  PS/SS goes on to say that 
things don't 'improve for the Gryfinndors as the potions lesson 
continued,' which supports the idea that Snape favors the Slytherins 
over the Gryfinndors.  I am well aware that Snape may be playing a 
role.  You say later in your post that he may be playing a role for 
*Harry* as well, which explains why he is contemptuous and 
disdainful of him during the Occlumency lessons.  While this is 
possible, we have no evidence to that effect.  And as to grading 
fairly, I wouldn't call throwing away a student's potion and then 
giving him a zero (as Snape does in OOP) particularly 'fair.'

[snip some more discussion and a snippage of my own discussion 
of 'the Prank']

Random:
You've completely skipped that the Prank also puts Lupin in danger

Me:
Of course I have, as it has nothing to do with the subject I'm 
addressing. <g>  Someone else took Sirius' line in PoA, "It served 
him right" (re: Snape and the prank) and concluded that for Sirius, 
if he doesn't like you, you don't have any rights at all.  The point 
of my response was that 1) even given what we see with Snape and 
Sirius, I'm not sure that one can conclude that Sirius thinks this 
about Snape, and 2) even if he *does* think this about Snape, the 
relationship between Sirius and Snape is a pretty special case, and 
I wouldn't want to generalize about either one of them based on it.  
I was not, in my post, attempting a detailed analysis of the Prank 
or of Sirius' entire character (if I did, btw, I think I'd be most 
interested in the changes in the way he's portrayed from book to 
book, and what we might have seen if we'd ever had a chance to see a 
Sirius who truly had an opportunity to start to heal from the last 
12-14 years, but that's another story entirely).

Me:
Is there more to the whole 'Prank' than meets the eye??

Random:
interesting thought. discuss.

Me:
Maybe later. :)

Me, earlier:
I would also say that, as I do with Snape, I believe that if it came 
own to it, and Sirius had needed to save Snape's life for the 
rder/to defeat Voldemort, that he would have.  And, as with Snape, I 
recognize that this is a gut feeling.

Random:
I disagree.

Me:
Interesting.  Discuss. <g>  Seriously, though, as I said, my belief 
that either one of them would save the other for the 'good of the 
Order' is a gut feeling.  There is nowhere near sufficient evidence 
to draw a conclusion either way, in either case.  Gut feeling.  Feel 
free to disagree.

Lisa