[HPforGrownups] James and Snape. Was. Re: Snape and Harry again.

[feklar]

No: HPFGUIDX 114908

> Valky:
> I really do not believe that they don't work in their simplest
> iteration. Snivelling is a derogatory that implies poor moral
> fibre "weakness and unpleasantness". Sirius calls Snape by the name
> Snivellus, and therefore he could be implying poor morality.
> The evidence further to back up that Sirius would be inclined to
> accuse Snape of "weakness and unpleasantness" is plentiful
> throughout the books. Sirius: calls him a "Lapdog" and up to his
> eyeballs in Dark Arts; says he never missed a chance to curse his
> friend; accuses him of going out of his way trying to get the
> marauders expelled....
> It is clear to me that Sirius *would* accuse 15 year old Snape of
> being a weak and unpleasant person. He would consider Snape to lack
> virtue, and he *would* intend the name Snivellus to imply this.

Feklar:

I agree that Sirius meant all those things, I think he'd also cheerfully
imply a whole lot of other unsavory things, true or not, if he had time.
Ultimately, the nickname is, at best, conclusory not evidentiary.  I think
it's worth keeping in mind that "snivel," even in the Brit dictionaries, has
several meanings and inferences.  I have no doubt JKR is aware of all of
them and that the word is usually used as a insult not a statement of fact.

> Valky:
> Lily shows herself by her virtues in the pensieve, and Lupin has
> some evidence of a conscience, so I won't argue what you have said
> about them.
>
> James, on the other hand....... Most everything we can say about
> James would be highly speculative, and I assume that *this* is the
> characterisation choice that JKR made.

I guess I'm willing to assume the pensieve was as revelatory about Lily's
virtues as it was about James and Sirius' "sins."  Not sure why the one is
so much more speculative than the other.

I think I posted another thing somewhere about people not being all black
and white.  People are perfectly capable of being generally ok guys, yet
being unreasonably mean to certain individuals.  To me, that's a more
realistic characterization than having a couple of kids somehow know who's
*really* a bad guy and who's just ugly and anti-social.

> Valky:
> if I could, I would refer to the passages in GOF and POA when Snape
> is suddenly confronted with Sirius. The manner in which he pleads
> with Dumbledore IIRC does suggest Snape in these roles.
> Unfortunately for me I have lent my GOF and POA to my sister and I
> cannot read it to refresh my memory, I just recall thinking in those
> moments, that Snape was acting pretty weak.

Feklar:

True, in those passages he really had reverted to brathood.

> Feklar:
>  > As for Snape, we have even less evidence of what his sense of
> morality was. Personally, based on his adult personality, I lean
> towards the idea that his conscience was, like Sirius' and James', a
> bit late-blooming.  I can see him as a fairly amoral intellectual
> until some crisis of conscience drove him from the DEs to
> Dumbledore.  As an adult, I think he choses to be amoral
> >
>
> Valky:
> I tend to disagree because I think the moment in Occlumency when his
> sense of compassion flickers for a moment in front of Harry is a
> good indication of his true morality. Frankly I don't think James

Feklar:

I saw that as more of a sense of empathy; he knows what it is to be abused.
I think he is aware of conventional morality, but doesn't place much stock
in it--possibly because those who were lauded as being moral role models
didn't act much better than himself or other Slytherins.

<snip>

> Valky:
> No I really don't think they would have shunned Remus if they'd
> known first. Two things I agree with to some extent are:

Feklar:

My impression was that the bias against werewolves is so entrenched that
it's not seen as bias, but good sense.  I suspect their reaction would have
been much the same as Ron's reation:  was DD mad to let Lupin in?  HG's
choice not to tell even H&R seems to indicate that even she thought
ordinary, nice-guy wizards would not react in a nice way to a werewolf.

> Valky:
> Of course we know that they were opposed to prejudice. James
> certainly made a lot of racket about the ills of saying mudblood in
> the pensieve scene. It is a travesty to say we don't have at least a

To me that was James defending a girl he had a crush on.  It's just as
possible that if he hadn't had such an intense interest in bothe LE and SS,
he would have ignored them.

> little indication that they were tolerant. Hagrid loved them, Remus
> loved them, they were in Gryffindor the *most* tolerant house.

Actually, I would think Hufflepuff is the most tolerant.  The very nature of
Gryffindor seems like it would spawn a level of conflict and intolerance,
which in the books it does--they need something to be courageous and brave
against.

> > btw, w/r/t to the Neville hypothetical, I think James and Sirius
> would have despised Neville.  Sirius didn't like that Harry
> wasn't "adventurous" enough, how much worse would he think of
> Neville, who not only wasn't adventurous (and unlike Peter wasn't
> interested in sucking up or applauding their antics), but also was
> fairly morally aware at a young age and might have called them on
> some of their actions or reported them?  More irony with
> > names:  Neville could easily be Sniville.
> >
>
> Valky:
> Ahh but Neville would not do this, note that DD gave him ten house
> points for having the *courage* to stand up to his mates when he
> could more easily but less concientiously have *snivelled* to some
> teacher instead.

Feklar:

I have to disagree that going to a teacher would be less conscientious, but
in any case, I again think SB and JP would echo Ron:  standing up for
himself and the right thing was ok, so long as it wasn't impeding them.

Feklar