Vengeance on Snape?Re: Snape--Abusive?

[dzeytoun]

No: HPFGUIDX 115142


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" 
<justcarol67 at y...> wrote:
> 
> > 
> 
> Carol notes:
> For the record, vengeance is not justice. Merriam-Webster defines
> "justice" (in part) as "the quality of being just, impartial, or 
fair
> b (1) : the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action (2) :
> conformity to this principle or ideal," which forces us to define
> "just" (again partially) "2 a (1) : acting or being in conformity 
with
> what is morally upright or good : RIGHTEOUS."
> 
> "Vengeance," OTOH, is "punishment inflicted in retaliation for an
> injury or offense : RETRIBUTION."
> 
Very good, Carol.  I will agree with you that vengeance and justice 
are not the same thing.  Having said that, it does not, in my own 
opinion, particularly remove my desire to see Snape put in his place 
firmly and in an entertaining fashion.  As Alla has pointed out, 
vengeance may not be very nice in real life but there's nothing wrong 
with it in a book (particularly if its well-deserved and juicy).  
After all, when discussing Snape's behavior, some people constantly 
point out that Hogwarts is not RL and Snape is not bound by RL 
expectations.  I think it is somewhat inconsistent and very unfair to 
expect Harry to be bound by RL rules when Snape is not.  

Actually, if you want my guess as to how this will turn out, I think 
the whole thing will be moot because Snape will be dead.  After all, 
what would he do after the war?  His whole adult life has been 
dedicated to getting revenge on James and Voldemort.  With the one 
gone and Harry either dead or in ascendency, Snape will be a man 
leftover from another time.  Particularly if he does not change he 
will be a rather pathetic figure.

Now, on the subject of vengeance vs justice, how do you see that in 
the following situations:

1) The trio vs Draco.  The trio are not "properly appointed 
officials," yet they punish Draco regularly and in an entertaining 
manner

2) Harry vs Voldemort.  Harry has to kill Voldemort.  Is that 
Justice?  If it is, how is he the one to carry it out?  Harry is not 
a "properly appointed official."  Or do we consider the prophecy, as 
the voice of God, so to speak, to override existing social and legal 
arrangements?  If so there is probably a brisk trade in fake 
prophecies.

Finally, on the subject of vengeance and justice, I agree that 
philosophically, theologically, and legally they are two different 
matters.  Having said that, in real life they are rarely, if ever, 
separate.  I once heard, for instance, a superior court judge say 
that "one legitimate function of the criminal court is to provide a 
socially approved and controlled form of vengeance."  Now, he wasn't 
speaking from legal theory so much as his personal experience of how 
the "justice" system actually works and its social and psychological 
functions in real society.

Also I would agree, as I believe you have pointed out and Alla has 
pointed out, that justice is at root a moral concept.  As such, 
ultimately it parts ways with questions of authority, legitimate or 
not.  As another judge, this one in South Africa, said in the novel A 
DRY WHITE SEASON "Justice is rooted in heaven.  Laws and rules are at 
best only cousins of justice, and often they are not even on speaking 
terms.  Therefore it is often necessary to appeal to justice above 
the law."

But all of that is separate from the issue of Snape, and I will stand 
by my belief that if he does not change, some form of humiliating 
experience in the form of justice and/or vengeance would be 
entertaining, satisfying, and perfectly appropriate within the bounds 
of a novel as well as a way of wrapping up that particular conflict.

Dzeytoun