Is Snape nice or good?

[nrenka]

No: HPFGUIDX 127127


> --- JaanisE wrote:
>> So, Snape really is not so good after all, he's horrible,
>> sadistic, not pleasant - from the quotes. We only call him good
>> because he's on the OotP's side.

> Magda:
> 
> Well, that's the only "good" that really counts in the end, isn't it?

Any means to achieve an end?  Not a principle that's gotten 
unqualified support so far in the series, it seems to me.  One 
question which is not really solvable right now is whether it is 
(good, right, take your pick of adjectives) to tolerate behavior that 
is generally not considered (insert positive adjective here) because 
the person carrying it out is also responsible for things that are 
(second positive adjective here).

The more interesting question, IMO, is whether such negative behavior 
(things which are not nice, and not meaning 'nice' in the shallow 
sense of the word--things such as "horrible and sadistic") are not 
contrary to the achievement of ultimately good things.

I tend to think that one of the themes of OotP is that little everyday 
behavior does indeed matter in the larger fight.  Trust was something 
needed and sorely lacking between any number of parties of the white 
hats, but trust is not something built up solely from large, 
abstract "good" behavior that has not even been obviously manifest, 
but from cognizance of character, which depends on the everyday.

In that regard, and I humbly submit that *so far* this has been 
supported textually as well, being not horrible is an important (but 
not sole!) component of the good.

As in all things on this topic, future revelations could cause 
profound re-readings of past events.  Which is to say, it ain't set in 
stone.

-Nora gets back to books of hours