Harry self-effacing? (Was: Potter and Peanuts)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 127085


>>Betsy:
<snip>
>Actually, I think if Harry had been a bit more self-effacing when 
he and Snape first meet in Potions class in PS/SS, their 
relationship might have gotten off to a much better start.<

>>Geoff:
>More self-effacing?
>What's the guy supposed to do? Lie on the floor and let Snape wipe 
his feet on him?<

Betsy:
Well... yeah.  At least from Snape's point of view.  In that first 
scene in PS/SS I believe Snape is trying to accomplish several 
things.  He's establishing himself as a good little Harry-Potter-
hating Death Eater, letting the class know that he is not a 
professor to be taken lightly, demonstrating that he expects 
students to dive deeply into their studies if they hope to do well 
in his class, and establishing his dominance over James Potter's son.

I don't think Snape's introduction to the world of potions is new.  
I think he gives the same spiel, complete with robe twirling, to 
every first year class.  I'll bet though, that he spreads his 
impossible questions around.  (None of the older students speak of 
Snape picking out a scapegoat, anyway.)  In this case he spends his 
spleen on Harry alone.  As I said, I think Snape does this for a 
variety of reasons, but one of them is definitely (though possibly 
subconsciously) a question of dominance.  And he very much wants 
Harry to show his belly.

I think the reason Snape wants this is that James pretty much 
dominated Snape throughout their school years; the pensieve scene in 
OotP was one of pure dominance.  The only way James could have 
further proved his point was to out and out rape Snape. Snape was 
shown to have few friends, and Sirius' poke about Snape being 
Lucius' lapdog suggests that Snape turned to older housemates for 
protection, among other things.  I do think Snape got his own back.  
The fact that James and Sirius felt they needed to take on Snape 
together suggests he was usually formidable in one-on-one clashes.  
But James had a second in Sirius.  There's no suggestion that Snape 
had a similar friend of his own.  So I think Snape generally got the 
bad end of that particular war.

The fact that Harry so resembles his father was a major point 
against him in Snape's eyes.  And I wonder if Snape was trying to 
prove something to himself when he first takes Harry on.  I also 
wonder if their relationship might have been less adversarial if 
Harry had completely yielded.

*BUT*, I also recognize that it would have been impossible for Harry 
to yield.  His personality precludes such submission. Which is a 
good thing; the challenges Harry has faced and will face demands a 
certain self-assurance.  And JKR makes the strength of Harry's 
character plain to the reader in the first scenes with Harry and the 
Dursleys.  The Dursleys are constantly demanding that Harry yield, 
that he buy into their definition of him, and Harry, politely, 
cleverly, and sometimes silently, refuses to do so.  This quiet 
strength is one of the things I love about Harry.

So while I recognize what Snape was asking of Harry, I also 
recognize that Harry could never give in to Snape as much as Snape 
demanded.  I'm glad the scene played out the way it did.  I don't 
think Harry should have answered any differently.  But I can see how 
Harry's quiet defiance did nothing to settle Snape's fears of like 
father like son.  (Though honestly, I think Harry has much more in 
common with Snape than James as far as personalities go, and I hope 
Snape recognized that fact through the Occlumency lessons. We shall 
see.)  If Harry *had* been a Charlie Brown, I think Snape would have 
been satisfied.  The readers, however, would not have been.

Betsy, who fully recognizes the circular nature of her statements 
but can totally live with it. *g*