OOP: James( was:Two-way Mirror and other frustrations)

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 64584

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, freddie mac <freddie_mac1 at y...> 
wrote:
> Ok, I've got a few questions about this ...
> 
> > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" 
> > > <valkyrievixen at y...> wrote:
> 
> <Lotsa snippage>
> 
> Valky wrote:
> > What is, obviously, primarily in James mind at the time
> [of bullying Severus]
> > is impressing <snip> 
> > Lily Evans that he is powerful. 
> and <snip>
> > [James thinks] she will see him as a person who does 
> > not tolerate someone who displays poor character by
> > dabbling in evil arts.
> 
> I say: Given James and Sirius' actions, what makes them a
> good judge of character?  IIRC, their reasons for singling
> Severus out were for the simple fact that he existed.  If
> he hadn't had an interest in/reputation for dark arts, they
> woudl have found another excuse. His nose, perhaps, or his
> hair? 

They aren't displaying their discriminating nature with the maturity 
that is becoming of it, yes. But I insist it *is* there.
I doubt very much that James would have used an excuse such as Snapes 
hair if he wasn't a Dark Arts lover. Much more likely, IMHO, if Snape 
was intrinsically inclined against the evil arts, like James, 
[which he was not and thats all there is to it, but I shall go on]
James would have hexed Snape if he deliberated to be annoying or rude 
to James, but NOT, and I am very firm on this, NOT because he was 
weaker, as a principle. 
James was a spoiled brat, with a principled heart. Snape was a 
dangerous boy with a very grave misunderstanding of right and wrong.
Both are normal flawed characters, I will not back down to anyone who 
is prepared to say that James and Sirius didn't stand on principle.
They did. As immature, spoiled brats however they were completely 
unable to see how unprincipled their own actions were.
   
> Valky also wrote:
> <snip> Frankly, I have faith in James <snip>
> > stopping ... the moment Snape was 
> > revealed as misunderstood ... not prefering dark evil 
> > magic. 
> and <snip>
> > I suspect his [Severus'] reverence of the black arts was 
> > prevalent enough to label him safely as a person 
> > displaying an evil character.
> 
> 
> I say: Interest in a subject does not make a person evil,
> and what gives James the right to make those judgements? In
> the real world, interest in the occult does not make a
> person evil, nor does interest in medicine make a person
> good (numerous examples of medical research that can only
> be
> described as evil).

I am more discerning than you are giving me credit for here. Snape 
used those dark arts in unprincipled manner. Of that I am sure.


> Valky also wrote:
> > Basically, I am saying that James displayed himself a
> > fool by attempting to teach someone who was in love with 
> > evil that good was essentially stronger and better.
> <snip>
> > 
> 
> 
> I say: I fail to see *how* James was attempting to
> teach "someone who was in love with evil that good was
> essentially stronger and better" by tormeting Severus for
> years.  Please give me examples that show how James
> attempted to do this.  IMHO, humiliation and relentless
> bullying is NOT an effective teaching tool about the nature
> of good vs evil.
> 
I am not saying bullying is an effective teaching tool.
All I am referring to here is James' *choice*.
He chose Snape as an example of what his power was stronger than.
In a bad way! Can I say that enough to get the point across.
Snape was an *example* of evil in James' immature spoiled brain, 
remember this was a time of peace in the WW.

> I do agree that James saving Severus from "the prank"
> showed James' intrinsic good nature (and was quite possibly
> a turning point for James, but not for Sirius), but I also
> see why Severus would not have seen that for himself.  Why
> should one incident change his perception of a person who
> has relentlessly humiliated and bullied him for years?
> 
> Freddie 
> (who cannot understand how bullying can ever be construed
> as "good")

Bullying was not good James was good and the bullying does not prove 
otherwise. That is all my argument.

Valky
Absolutely chuffed that this is becoming so intense. :D
And, mildly fearing that "Snapes Most Ardent" may become quite 
*unstable* in trying to prove that he was a good boy.