Quesiton for Snapeophiles and -phobes RE Dumbledore, Snape, and Harry

[dzeytoun]

No: HPFGUIDX 114659


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, juli17 at a... wrote:
> > 
> 
> Julie sez:
> 
> I definitely can't agree with your assessment. 


<SNIP
> 
> Snape falls in the second category. He's definitely a miserable 
git, 
> but he's yet to do anything evil, even to Harry or Neville. (Verbal 
abuse 
> doesn't quite qualify, IMO). 

I will disagree with this strongly.  Verbal abuse most definitely 
does qualify as evil.

And, yes, we don't know what he did
> when he was a DE, but until we do, we can't conclusively say if
> he's done anything evil. Voldemort, OTOH, has killed repeatedly, 
> including Harry's parents, Bertha Jorkins by torture,  had a child
> -Cedric-killed on his orders, as well as attempting to kill two 
other 
> children (Harry and Ginny). He's also directed the DEs to torture
> and/or kill hundreds (maybe thousands) of other wizards. Even if 
> we haven't *seen* these things, we know them to be true, unless
> we believe the whole WW is delusional. Evil is as evil does, and
> Voldemort has done plenty of evil things. 

But, even granted all this is true, IF we had to make a judgement on 
what we have SEEN, well...

And, as Alla has said in her post, therein lies a major weakness in 
the plot.  Voldemort and the Death Eaters are so far off stage it's 
hard to react emotionally to them as a threat at all.

Snape, on the other hand, is very much on stage and it's quite easy 
to react to his evil (and yes, I think he is on the balance an evil 
person, albeit one who probably works for the "good" side).


> 
> IMO, there's really no comparison between Voldemort and Snape
> when it comes to matters of evil, even if Snape is the much more 
> complexly drawn character. 
> 
 
And yet we really as yet have no basis for such a comparison, based 
on what has actually been SHOWN to us.


Dzeytoun