Teen Conflict (was: "Lapdog" and "snivel")

[onnanokata]

No: HPFGUIDX 115773


justcarol67 wrote:
 
-Valky wrote:
<snip>
   
I tend to compound the nature of the issue with the fact that "Dark 
Magic" and "Lord Voldemort" were the bane of the very society that 
these boys existed in, making James and Sirius view of what was and 
wasn't decent quite the highground of the two. And is probably why 
Snape was unpopular and James/Sirius the opposite. <snip>
 
Carol responds:
Does taking the moral high ground make kids popular? It may just be
that three-quarters of the students (Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, and
Hufflepuff) shared James's and Sirius's views that blood didn't matter
and one-quarter (the Slytherins) shared Severus's views. No doubt
there were exceptions in both cases, but I'm generalizing here.

Dharma replies:

In some situations, it is clear to me that morality matters for 
adolescents.  In the real world, I went to high school that was very 
ethnically integrated, however, we had a problem white supremacist.  
Once it became known that a student held these views, it was taken 
very seriously by his/her peers, and had a direct effect on 
popularity.  The majority ostracized the supremacists and made 
serious efforts to make sure that everyone knew who expressed such 
views.  If one of the kids holding these views went on attack against 
a minority student, we would have a riot.  The majority would disrupt 
the running of the school until they were able to either get their 
hands on the supremacists, or every teacher and administrator in the 
building had been called in to halls to stop the chaos.  At which 
point the instigators of the riot would insist on refusing to budge 
until administration punished to the offending supremacists and their 
parents were called.  This went on at least 2 times a year for 6 
years.  And
just to be clear, this was in the 90's.

Pushing the bit of real life to side for a moment.  I'd just like 
reiterate something that others have hinted at, or said in the past 
on this topic.  At 15, the Hogwarts kids are 2 years away from going 
into the adult world.  There does not seem to be much in the way of 
delayed adolescence in the Wizarding World.  By the time we see James 
hexing Snape, they very well could have had some very adult sense of 
morality.  Their views on pureblood supremacy really could have been 
intellectually and morally very important at that time.  

They were only 2 years away from being expected to participate fully 
in the adult world.  At the time the Marauders and Snape are 15 years-
old violence is increasing, and they are facing going out into that 
world.  Why wouldn't any of the older students have an opinion about 
this situation?  James may have initially been popular for other 
reasons, but his stance against the Dark Arts could have impacted how 
others perceived him as well. 

Carol wrote:
 
As for popularity, we don't really know that Severus was unpopular.
That's Harry's perception. Some of the students (we don't know how
many) were apprehensive; others (again, we don't know how many) were
amused. It may be that the majority, like Lupin, just sat there, not
making their feelings known. And we've already established that
Snape's Slytherin friends were mostly older and had left Hogwarts. Any
others who remained may have been the save-your-own-skin variety (say,
Walden Macnair). Their behavior might not relate in any way to shared
beliefs about blood purity. Nor is there any reason to believe that
Severus at this time was loyal to Voldemort. He was only fifteen (or
barely sixteen) and most likely had not yet been recruited to join the
DEs. (Why would they want a kid not yet at the peak of his powers who
couldn't even apparate?)

Dharma replies:

I agree that Snape might not have been loyal to Voldemort, but the 
perception that he supported the Dark Arts, could have impacted the 
way people viewed him.  Even if some of the students did not agree 
with James' bullying behavior, they may have held a negative general 
view of Snape as well.  We don't know why they were looking 
apprehensive.  It is significant to me that only Lily is willing to 
confront James. 

Is the student body generally afraid of James?  That could be, but 
then why is he consistently described as popular and not intimidating 
or overly aggressive?  As an adult, even Snape describes James 
arrogant but not as a generally aggressive individual.  The exception 
might be "The Prank," which would depict James a manipulative rather 
than physically intimidating
Which leads me to other thoughts
Are the 
apprehensive students not interested enough in Snape's safety to risk 
entering a conflict with James, who is a very talented young Wizard?  
This seems more likely to me.  Or, could it be that those who were 
apprehensive about the happenings had seen James/Sirius and Snape in 
conflict enough times to think, "This could get very dangerous!"  
Given any of these situations, the students are generally not very 
supportive of Snape where this conflict is concerned.

Carol wrote:

As for James and Sirius, their popularity, as I understand it, was
based in James's case on athletic ability (rather like the popularity
of Viktor Krum), as well as a desire to be on the good side of a kid
who's likely to hex people in the corridors "because they exist."
Sirius's popularity, such as it was (girls ogling him) appears to be
based solely on looks. He certainly was not popular because of his
personality, which is arrogant in the extreme. He is rude not only to
Severus but to his friends Remus and Peter. Whether he has rejected
the family philosophy or not, he behaves like a Black, as if he were
royalty, not deigning to speak politely to anyone and expecting James
to entertain him when he's bored.

Dharma replies:

Lily was very angry with James when she makes this comment.  We don't 
know how accurate it is to say that James will hex just anyone.  He 
might have been arrogant and quick to the draw, but is there any 
canon for people who are not angry with James accusing him of hexing 
people for being annoying.  He was a bit of a show off, but where is 
the evidence that other students generally feared him?  Lily's angry 
outburst is not enough to convince me personally.  She very well 
could have been exaggerating a negative character trait out of 
frustration and anger in that moment.

As to Sirius
he could be "acting like a Black", or he could be just 
carried away with his own cleverness.  His negative attitude could 
just reflect over-confidence.  By this time he is good Quidditch 
player, is one of the two brightest students in his year, has pulled 
off the animagus transformation right under Dumbledore's nose and is 
very handsome.  Maybe he's just obnoxious teen and not necessarily 
acting from a place of class superiority. 

Carol wrote:
 
The majority of the students at Hogwarts, especially the muggleborns
and halfbloods, probably shared the idea that pureblood superiority
was bunk. They knew from their own experience that muggleborns could
be as magically powerful as anyone else. James and Sirius would not be
popular for believing what most other students believed. They were
popular for the same reason particular kids are popular in Muggle
schools: athletic ability on the one hand and good looks on the other.
And if Severus really was as unpopular as Harry perceives him to be,
it would have been for similar reasons: he was a skinny,
stringy-haired kid with his nose in a book. Clearly not the sort for
James or Sirius to hang around with even if he hadn't been a Slytherin
enamored of the Dark Arts (or so Sirius says).

Dharma replies:

In the real world people, including adolescents, do rally around 
those who are willing to stand up for their beliefs.  Even if most of 
the students did think that pureblood supremacy was a bunch of non-
sense, they might have identified with someone who was willing to say 
so publicly.  If James was willing to share his views regularly, that 
might have attracted the attention of others.  

I do agree with the idea that Snape was very likely unpopular for 
aesthetic reasons.  People in general do judge others on superficial 
traits.  That seems to be a consistent problem in the Wizarding World 
as well.

Carol wrote:

If it had been a matter of the high moral ground, James and Sirius as
the aggressors would have been frowned down and Severus as the victim
would have been supported by his peers. But morality seldom comes into
play in schoolboy battles, regardless of the political or cultural
philosophy the boys have been indoctrinated with at home.

Dharma replies:

This view, to me, presumes that the other students had not reason to 
questions Snape's morality.  They may have reasons to have little 
regard for Snape.  Could it be that in the escalation of the conflict 
between James/Sirius and Snape that Snape had been up to some 
nastiness of his own that we don't know about?  It seems to me that 
our information on events leading up to the pensieve is too sparse to 
completely eliminate morality as an issue for the onlookers.  

Also, older students might have been able to deal with the 
inconsistencies of life and personal interaction.  Perhaps the 
students could generally see James, Sirius and Snape as good people, 
but chalk the unending conflict up to irrational anger and poor 
decision-making on both sides.   If they truly always mutually 
disliked one another, why would the other students believe that 
intervening would change the situation?  Lily was willing to speak 
up, but why no one else? More mature students could well have viewed 
it as immaturity that Sirius, James and Snape would have to out grow, 
but not the sole criterion on which any of their fundamental 
personalities should have been judged.