Snape--Abusive?

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 114825


Alex wrote:
> Snape's motivation, we know nothing about. We can debate (and have
> been doing) the possible motivations for his behavior. But we can't
> know. His actual motivations are a black box. If he's behaving the
> way he does toward Harry because he *actively wants to cause lasting
> harm*, then I'd say, absolutely, yes, he's abusive. But most of the
> other motivations that have been suggested are, at worst, ambiguous 
> in terms of determining whether his behavior is abusive or not. If 
> he's just being an as**ole without considering the impact his 
> behavior might have, then *maybe* I could see calling him abusive. 
> If he's doing the best he knows how (perhaps using the pedagogical 
> methods that were in use when he was in school or that he was 
> exposed to at home), then I'd say no, not abusive. Same if he has 
> for some reason decided that sarcasm and humiliation are the best 
> ways to get through to Potter.

KMC:
> > > Snape is venting frustration with Neville not abuse. 

Alla:
> > If the result of his "venting frustration" is that said student 
> > is scared of the said teacher more than anything , in my book it 
> > is abuse.
 
Sophierom:
> This thread has made me want to ask JKR: do you see any difference
> between Umbridge's abuse and Snape's bullying/abuse/harsh teaching
> methods (since we all disagree about what exactly to call Snape's
> behavior)? How about the Dursleys' abuse and Snape's? Of 
> course, I can't ask Rowling, so I'll ask all of you instead. 
> 
> Obviously Umbridge is physically abusive with that evil quill, the
> Dursleys are emotionally/verbally abusive, and Snape is potentially
> verbally/emotionally abusive (I agree with those who argue that he 
> is at times abusive)...but is Umbridge's behavior worse than 
> Snape's? Because I admit to having a much stronger emotional 
> reaction to Umbridge than Snape.  Same with the Dursleys.  This 
> could  be, simply, because Snape has a few redeeming qualities 
> (mainly, he's saved Harry's life and Dumbledore says he trusts 
> him). 
> 
> So, I guess I'm asking about motivation, which Alex brought up in 
> the original post. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that we 
> believed that Snape does have slightly more noble  motives than 
> Umbridge (who seems to wield crulety for the sake of being cruel) 
> and the Dursleys (who seem to act out of fear and 
> ignorance) ...does that make Snape's behavior okay? Do the ends
> justify the means? 


SSSusan:
How I wish we had answers to these kinds of questions!  I think, from 
what I've read around here in the last year and a quarter, that most 
of us would say that Umbridge is definitely abusive, and many have 
qualified her as evil.  With her, we really don't see anything 
redeeming or noble about her, no "good motive/bad method" kind of 
thing.  

The Dursleys' behavior has been a little more debatable.  I have seen 
them as abusive; others have argued that it didn't go that far.  
Ultimately, for me, threatening to deprive a child of meals and 
locking him in a cupboard qualified as abuse, and JKR *has* 
identified Vernon as her least-favorite character.  But, still, 
especially with Petunia, there is some consideration of the 
motivations for their behavior.  Is it really all because the 
Dursleys are just nasty people who care about keeping the neighbors 
from talking about them?  Or do they have real fear of the magical 
world *for a reason* and so their behavior is somewhat 
understandable, if still deplorable?

With Snape, for as much information as we're missing about him, we do 
get MORE information than we get with either DJU or the Dursleys.  We 
see him in action in the classroom, in the halls.  We get lots of 
sneering and detention-giving.  We see favoritism and apparent 
selective picking-on of particular students.  We know he was into the 
Dark Arts as a kid and a DE, so we can imagine what he might have 
been capable of.  Yet we know he chose to leave that behind.  We know 
DD trusts him.  We know he does follow orders.  We know he did save 
Harry's life.  WHY?  Damn it, we don't know!  

So, yes, I think with Snape there's more there to fuel a firm opinion 
one way or the other, but there are also more layers of complexity 
and ambiguity concerning true motivation & beliefs, more questioning 
about what's REAL Snape and what might be a put-on for the purposes 
of maintaining a cover with the baddies.

Frustrating in some ways, but fun, too.

Siriusly Snapey Susan