Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs)

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 118609


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" 
<delwynmarch at y...> wrote:
> And finally, we don't know what was Snape's intent. Just because
> someone knows bad hexes doesn't mean he will automatically use 
them. For all we know, maybe Snape would just have retreated to the 
castle with his wand covering James and Sirius.
> 

Valky:
Really good point Del, although I think a shadow is cast upon it by 
the canon from Lupin that Snape never missed an opportunity to curse 
James. Perhaps in this case it might have been different, that is 
certainly a possibility.


> 
> Valky wrote :
> " Why? In the time of the reign of Voldemort, when a mad "DARK 
ARTS"  wizard is killing anyone and any innocent thing he comes 
across, this is the time we are referring to. 
> How can you possibly question whether the Dark Arts are worse than 
> childish pranks.
> He is killing people, potioncat. It's like asking a semite if 
they'd  rather a brown coat in their house or a frog in their bed. "
> 
> Del replies :
> LV is killing people and he should be punished for that. But Snape
> wasn't killing anybody as far as we know, so at first glance I 
don't see why he should be punished.
>

Valky:
I agree with your point, you might like to note that the question I 
was replying to is Is Dark Arts worse than hexing people just 
because you can. In the context of the story, it is the Dark Arts 
that is killing their loved ones and James hexes do not much but 
give him a bad name. Most importantly *death and destruction* does 
not wear off, bat-bogey does. THis, I think, is the difference 
intrinsically implied by the separation of Dark Arts from common 
Hexes. Hence my inference that a childish prank cannot be worse than 
Voldemorts reign of terror. I am not making sense am I.


Del: 
> People are entitled to their opinions and likings. In a relatively
> free world like the WW, nobody has any right to punish them for 
those. Snape was in the Dark Arts. But we are not told that he did 
anything bad with them. He knew curses and hexes and he called Lily 
a Mudblood. Those things are respectively dangerous and bad, but 
they don't make Snape a criminal. He wasn't abusing anyone, either 
physically or verbally, at the time James and Sirius attacked him : 
this attack was *unjustified*. 
> 

Valky:
I don't reach for justification of the attack, though. Just a better 
understanding of James. 
I recall not long ago, Del that you made here an excellent case for 
the Hero/Saving people thing over compassion in Harry. I was 
compelled by your argument to alter my opinion. I know see quite 
well that Harry *has* the saving people thing, to a large extent 
over compassion for others suffering and I have lifted the blueprint 
you gave me and laid it over James profile. It's a perfect match. 
You might call it Guerilla war tactics but I see a classic case of 
hero complex, in the framework that you laid out.
ie saving people that didnt ask to be saved, marching in to 
overpower a percieved threat without actually considering the whole 
picture... sounds like the "Guerilla theory" of the worst meory to 
me.

Del:
> But now we get to the really important part of the puzzle. If the
> attack was indeed based on James's dislike of the Dark Arts and the
> link between LV and the Dark Arts, then it definitely wasn't a
> childish prank : it was political (can't think of a better word). 
It's on the same level as the enmity between the DA and the I Squad, 
and even though there's a bit of childishness in it, much of it is 
based on a very adult battle for political power.
>

Valky:
Oh yes, I wholeheartedly agree. As I see it James and Sirius both 
held themselves quite as the *adults* of the situation. 
I think the biggest culprit of this self righteous sense of superior 
maturity was Sirius. He had a serious agenda from a young age, where 
I believe James main ambition was to steal the glory from the Dark 
Side, poke fun at *it's* proclamation of absolute power.  
James didn't see Snape, he saw the Dark Arts and nothing more, and 
he thought he could save the world by lightening their hearts 
against it. Snape was *convenient* as long as he carried the "I 
believe in the Dark Side" banner in James mind, he didn't really 
exist only the banner did and it was James anti-flag. So he burned 
it. I guess that explains how I see it, a bit.



> Del, still wondering what's so bad about that memory that it would 
be Snape's worst

Valky:
I really think it has to do with Lily. Perhaps not with Snapes 
feelings about her, but how heavily her words that day have weighed 
on his heart since. The day she almost saved him perhaps.
Lily Lily.... we really should dissect her part in it like we have 
everyone else's.