Question for Snape Bashers

[lifeavantgarde]

No: HPFGUIDX 102046

>>>>delwynmarch wrote:
I, Del, wrote :
Well, I'm still waiting for someone, *anyone*, to do something about 
Snape's classes.<<<<

>>>Darrin replied :
You expect a group of students to band together and say "Hell no, we 
won't go!"<<<

>>Del replies :
Actually, they did do it with Umbridge. We are told that entire 
classes started using the Skiving Snackboxes to skip her lessons. 
But we don't hear anything like that about Potions. And I don't 
think that's just because they are all too petrified by fear to 
think of it :-)<<
 
>julie w <jjjwoolfolk at s...> wrote:
I think that is more because they know they are receiving important 
knowledge, no matter how much of a prat Snape is, in Potions, 
whereas in Umbridge's class the kids knew it was BS and not going to 
help them so they were not willing to put up with her.<

Stefanie replies:
I think the main thing to notice in the different reactions to Snape 
and Umbridge from the students is that one teacher has Dumbledore's 
express appointment to be teaching at Hogwarts, while the other has 
been appointed by Fudge. If the students are less than militant in 
their response to Snape (in contrast to their reaction to Umbridge) 
it's more out of respect to Dumbledore than for any kind of affinity 
for their Potions Master.

To address Pippin's question of whether we can just chalk up Snape's 
behavior to an abuseful past...I find it hard to say either way. We 
have an obvious example of an abuseful past in Harry, and while we 
can see his moral fiber when he spares Peter at the Shrieking Shack, 
he also has just found out that Peter is actually the one 
responsible for his parent's death. Harry hasn't had time to stew 
over the implications and far reaching consequenses in the rapidfire 
occurances at the Shack. Snape, on the other hand, for better or for 
worse has had years to stew over his grudge and let it fester. I do 
not offer this as an excuse for his actions. In all honesty, I'm 
with Harry in not completely trusting Snape (I won't rehash: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/100688 if you're 
interested)

I still stick by my theory that Snape is only at Hogwarts to be 
protected after Dumbledore reveals him to be a spy. Whether you like 
Snape, or hate him, or feel any shade of emotion between, he *is* a 
knowledgable man, no doubt, but a godawful teacher. I seems obvious 
that he doesn't want to be teaching children, and I really can't see 
him making that a career choice (unless he had no other...). He's 
been teaching for 14 years (by OotP) which would align the start of 
his teaching career at the time of Voldemort's fall.

If this is the case -- I can see why even being where he is would be 
a thorn in Snape's side. Imagine knowing that you were tethered to a 
place where you didn't want to be, doing something you didn't want 
to do day in and day out. While I still think that if Snape were to 
have had an abusive childhood (and we have no real canon proof of 
this, unlike the proof we have of Harry's abuse) he would be 
dwelling on other more painful things than James (remember, the 
title "Snape's Worst Memory" is the chapter title, nothing actually 
stated in the text), if he were stuck at Hogwarts being protected, 
then seeing Harry in 10 years would be like a jolt back to the 
reason he was "stuck" in the first place.

I say this as a possible reason, however immature I believe it could 
be. I guess I'm one of those "Snape Bashers" in question -- but I am 
appalled by the "it felt good for him to antagonize, so why 
shouldn't he do it" sentiments I've seen offered. If that were the 
case, why have morality in the first place? When we choose to do 
good, more often than not, we're battling something inside of us 
that wants to derive instant pleasure out of doing something "bad." 
If "if it feels good, do it" is an excuse for Snape, then half of 
our laws in existance should in respects be moot.

Stefanie, 
who still can't see the line Snape has clearly drawn that his 
vindictiveness will not cross.