Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering)

[ginnysthe1]

No: HPFGUIDX 119185


> Potioncat wrote:
> " So we have our good guy Snape who isn't a nice guy.
> 
> We have our nice guy Riddle who isn't a good guy. He of course 
became
> someone who is neither good nor nice.
> 
> Will we have a nice, good guy Slytherin?....You know, that just
> doesn't sound right. "

> Del replied:
> I know it doesn't sound right, and that's exactly what's bothering 
me.
> Why couldn't ambitious and cunning people be also quite good and 
nice,
> at least on an inter-personal level, when nothing is at stake ?
> 
> As for Snape being a good guy, I still have my reservations. He's on
> the side of good, granted, but since we still don't know what his
> motives are, we can't be absolutely certain that he's good.

Kim here:
FWIW, here are the definitions of ambitious and cunning (since I love 
definitions):

Ambitious: 1. Possessing, or controlled by, ambition; greatly or 
inordinately desirous of power, honor, office, superiority, or 
distinction; 2. Strongly desirous.

Cunning: 1. Knowing; skillful; dexterous; 2. Wrought with, or 
exhibiting, skill or ingenuity; ingenious; curious; 3. Crafty; sly; 
artful; designing; deceitful.

I think those words often have negative connotations when used with 
people and for good reason.  They tend to be people you can't really 
trust even on an inter-personal level.  Maybe we just have to accept 
Slytherins for what they are or tend to be and not expect them to be 
otherwise.  But if something good comes of their ambitiousness, 
great.  And if they develop into people who are more than just 
cunning and ambitious, even better!

And also FWIW, I already trust Snape.  Not sure exactly why though.

Kim