What's wrong with being bad ?

[darrin_burnett]

No: HPFGUIDX 101941


> > And I'm wondering : what's wrong with that ? Isn't he entitled to
> > choose as he wants ? It makes his and others' lifes harder, but so
> > what ? Isn't it still his right as a human being to live as he 
chooses
> > ? If others disagree (and many do), it is their right to fight 
him and
> > prevent him from hurting them. But if he likes darkness rather 
than
> > light, and cruelty rather than niceness, what Higher Rule is he
> > breaking, if he doesn't believe in a Higher Force ?
> > 


Kneasy:
 
> He's entitled -  so long as he accepts responsibility for the 
consequences. And this applies to *any* behaviour by *anybody*. A 
condition that some  only apply to those they're not fond of. They 
>change the rules for those they like.

I'm familiar with the concept of changing the rules, having read 
numerous "Draco is just being picked on, but Harry is REALLY mean -- 
look how he treats the Creeveys!" posts on this list.

> My tenets:
> You are responsible for your actions.
> You must accept responsibility for any consequences arising from 
those  actions.

So... any fallout from any abuse, be it Harry's, Neville's or 
Snape's, is ultimately the fault of THAT person, rather than the 
subterranean layers of hate built up through abuse.

Good. Excellent. I like that. 

And my first application of the rules is:

Get.

Over.

It.

Snape.

Now.

That felt good!

> OK, that's the basic rules (or some of them) that I live by. How do 
they impinge on Snape?
> What effect have his actions had? Any that are significant? Any 
effect at all?
> He passes snide comments. So what? What are their effects? Minimal.

Ah, the advocate for the bully downplays the effects of the bullying 
on the victim.

> He throws  Harry out of the Occlumency teaching. With what effect?
> Not much, Harry wasn't going to learn anyway. Harry had already 
decided not to co-operate. Any action by Snape was icing on the cake -
 it just gave Harry *his* excuses - "It's all Snape's fault!" Wrong. 
Does not compute.

Actually, Harry HAD shown flashes, glimpses of promise, and Snape did 
not exploit them. Never once do we see TEACHING from Snape. We 
see "close your mind," "master your emotions," "defend yourself" or 
essentially, "How come you're not getting it?"

And again, in the debriefing in D-Dore's office, he does not bring up 
Harry's part in the mess, which I grant is there, but blames himself 
for thinking Snape, who is responsible for his own actions and must 
accept the consequences, could grow up enough to deal with it.

Snape chose to give up. Whether he believed he was justified or not 
is irrelevant. He made that choice and for his role, must accept the 
consequences.

Just as Harry must accept his part, and I believe he ultimately will, 
once the grief of Sirius' death fades a bit, for not applying himself 
as diligently as he should have.

> 'Bad" is a value judgement; it is not objective, it depends on the 
prevailing circumstances. An action or behaviour can be bad on one 
>day, acceptable the next.

No, sometimes bad is bad all the time. Some actions or behavior's can 
be bad one day, acceptable the next. What Snape does in his 
classrooms is not acceptable most of the time.

> Mind you, Snape doesn't give a toss anyway.
> He is sublimly indifferent to the opinions of others.

Puh-LEAZE! 

"You will respect me!"

"You should be thanking me on bended knee!"

"You didn't listen to my opinion, Headmaster!"


> There was a commentator who asked one of the activists for peace why
> they lobbied the US President and not people like the Ayatollahs or 
Saddam Hussein. Answer - "Because he listens and they don't." Guess 
which group Snape falls into? He wouldn't listen to  anything any of 
us have to say. The only reaction that I can imagine would be ironic 
>amusement.

And this is admirable, how?

This is where I sometimes think Snape defenders are defending just to 
defend. I really wonder how folks deal with the Snapes in their 
lives. My guess is not with the same open-minded stance, once it's 
applied to the real world.

> 
> Sure, lots want to  castigate him -  what effect will it have, 
except maybe to wave some 'Oh so correct' opinions in public? None. 
Zero. Zilch. Foam at the mouth if you will, it'll have no effect. 
Snape isn't listening, JKR isn't listening. And you know it. So why  
>get so  agitated?

I think you might be overestimating the tone of the Snape 
bashers. "Agitated."

I get agitated when my cat is limping, or when I don't get phone 
calls returned at work. This is recreation.

Consider me ironically amused at the Snape defending.

 
> Del's right, everyone is entitled and allowed to be bad. It's one 
of those choices that DD is whittering on about. Just so long as you 
accept responsibility for the  consequences.

I fail to see how Snape has. In his own way, he whines about his lot 
as much as any other character. He is disliked, disrespected and 
suspected of everything. 

But just because Quirrell had V-Mort on the back of his head doesn't 
mean he isn't smart sometimes. Snape flaps around like an overgrown 
bat, defends loathsome brats like Draco and generally goes out of his 
way to belittle students.

Is it his "right" to behave like an arrogant berk? Sure.

Just so long as he doesn't go whining about being thanked on bended 
knee any longer.

Darrin