Evaluating Snape (was: Re: Lupin's resentment )

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 94146

-> {Silverthorne}
By the same token, he [Snape] is not physically abusive--other then 
Neville (who already had his insecurities well ingrained into his 
 head by his own Grandmother), the students are not affected overly 
> > much by Snape's words other then having a distinct dislike for 
> > him. And although you may disagree, compared to what Umbridge does 
> > to the students, an acid tongue is minor indeed. The problem with 
> > people claiming 'verbal abuse' is that they forget one very 
> > important thing--unlike physcial abuse, you *can * ignore it. 
> 
> Susan:
> Stepping in to disagree just a wee bit here.  You are correct that 
> Snape does not appear to physically abuse his students.  However, I 
> would argue that what he does to Neville borders on bullying and, 
> more importantly, that what he does w/ Harry is something different 
> altogether than verbal abuse or physical abuse.  
> 
> Let's call it GRADE ABUSE.  Think of those times when Snape is not 
> only snarly or acidic or sarcastic in his comments towards Harry, 
> but when he **totally unfairly**--with no foundation--gives Harry a 
> zero on the day's potion.  At least twice that I can think of Harry 
> was given a zero when he either flat-out didn't deserve the zero or 
> someone *else* [was it Draco?] caused the potion flask to be 
> broken.  And IIRC, comments are made throughout the books which 
> imply that Snape *routinely* gives Harry unwarranted zeros and 
> delights in doing so.  
> 
> If Harry were a poor enough student to routinely deserve zeros, that 
> would be one thing.  But that clearly does not appear to be the 
> case.  Snape abuses his power and assigns zeros where they are not 
> due, just to be cruel to Potter.  Whether he is trying to teach some 
> kind of "life lesson" is debatable but is irrelevant in my mind.  
> This is clear abuse of power.
> 
> I know, I know.  Lots of the time I defend Snape and argue that he 
> is, overall, a good guy.  I also do believe he is extremely talented 
> as a potionmaker.  But when it comes to his teaching methods, I will 
> often argue that he is out of line.  This is part of the "not a nice 
> guy" even though he's a "good guy" in the fight against Voldy, I 
> guess.
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan


Carol:
In one instance, it's partly Hermione's fault. Harry spills or drops
his potion, she has helpfully emptied his cauldron with a vanishing
spell, and there's nothing to turn in. So Harry gets a zero for having
no potion. There's no other grade to give him. The apparent pleasure
in giving Harry a zero may be psychological abuse, though that's
stretching it a bit, but the grade isn't grade abuse. It's the only
possible grade under the circumstances. But note that the incident
occurs in Harry's OWL year, and it's the OWL grades that will
determine whether Harry is in Snape's NEWT Potions class. I'm betting
he will be, along with Harry, Ron, Hermione, Draco, just possibly
Neville, and possibly some Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs because the
class structure is different for NEWT courses--but not, unless I'm
very wrong about Snape's grading policy, Crabbe or Goyle.

One more thing, and I know this is just my opinion, not canon: I don't
think the lesson Snape is teaching Harry in most of these instances is
that life is hard but that *you must follow directions*. You *must*
add the hellebore at the end of step 3. And why single out Harry to
explain why his potion went wrong, and not Goyle, whose potion nearly
set the classroom on fire? Because it's Harry who will need to use
these potions, the particular potions for which Snape pointed out his
specific mistakes, in some future book. At the very least, he will
need to use moonstones and bezoars. (Okay, I'll eat a bezoar if I'm
wrong, but only if you obtain it for me first. ;-) )

Carol, who is still certain that there's a method in Snape's meanness
(and promises to stop repeating this phrase even though she likes it)