Unfinished Business (was: Did Lupin Kill Sirius?)

[jwcpgh]

No: HPFGUIDX 82980

> > Kneasy
<snip> Ole Sevvy is anger driven;  it is his essence, his being, his 
reason and his comfort. Take  it away and nothing is left but a 
shell waiting for  the undertakers.

Laura:
Yes, you said it much better than I did.  Snape would lose his 
identity without his anger.  He doesn't appear to want to change his 
identity, so I doubt he would try to rid himself of his anger.
> 
Kneasy:
> This modern predeliction for 'ridding' people of 'unhealthy' 
attitudes is understandable for society but not satisfactory for the 
individual. Something has made Snape very angry indeed; he wants 
restitution, justice, the scales balanced. That's as it should be. 
Telling someone that  their justifiable emotions are to be deplored 
is to deprive them of their individuality in the name of mass 
narcolepsis. Action and  reaction should  be equal and opposite, not 
only in physics but also in righting wrongs.

Laura:

Kneasy, I think you're quite right.  (And who really wants to live 
in a world full of Hallmark-card people?  I'll take some 
irascibility over empty-headed cheeriness any day.) But the key word 
here is "justifiable".  I read your post 69509 and I think it makes 
a lot of sense, if you can get past the giant hurdle of Snape 
actually marrying anyone.  If someone has hurt you, you have a right 
to be angry about it.  If LV killed Snape's family, it would be 
unimaginable if Snape didn't want justice.  And since that seems to 
be a scarce commodity within the MoM, Snape has fashioned his own 
plan to get it.  

I do think, though, that some of Snape's anger is not justified.  
I'll buy your theory that he's acting with Harry (and enjoying the 
part immensely),  but his anger at James and company was and is 
real.  And that's what I don't think is justified.  Canon suggests 
more than once that James and Snape hated each other from the very 
first moment they met.  Neither seems to have had any reason for 
this other than instinct.  James soon learns that SS is heavy into 
the dark arts, though, and that gives him a very good reason to hate 
and mistrust Snape.  But what about Snape?  It seems entirely 
personal with him-he doesn't like James because James is arrogant, 
doesn't follow rules, is popular and good at everything he does.  
They both find their natural allies and spend the next 7 years 
tormenting each other, with no clear winner, although James does 
score big on Snape by saving his life.  Then, a few years out of 
school, James dies and Sirius goes to prison.  The game is over and 
Snape still has tons of rage he hasn't acted on.  

I think the reason people on the list are upset by Snape's anger 
with the Marauders is that we've all had times when we've felt 
enraged and had no outlet for it.  And we know that is not a 
pleasant feeling.  If Snape only had his anger against LV, he 
wouldn't be so painful to think and read about.  But he's angry at 
everything and everyone all the time because that's just who he is.  
There can't be any satisfactory resolution because there wasn't any 
real injury to begin with.  That's the sense in which Snape's anger 
is not a healthy thing.  (I"ll get rid of the sandals and beard now.)


Kneasy:
<snip> 
 While not an adherent myself, the Mosaic tenet of  'An eye for an 
eye'has a long and distinguished record, forgiving transgressors 
gives them the opportunity to do it again. Not an optimum solution.

Laura:

For what it's worth, Jewish law has never condoned the literal 
application of that infamous verse.  It was interpreted by the 
rabbis as an instruction to seek the value of an injury in a civil 
court, i.e., the value of an eye.