Harry's story , NOT Snape's (was Re: "An old man's mistakes")

[nrenka]

No: HPFGUIDX 139010

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
wrote:
 
> Pippin:
> But this is Harry's story, not Snape's.
> It's Harry who has to become a mature and capable adult, which
> means learning to accept that there are adults who may not be as 
> mature and capable as he is, but are not deserving of the word
> 'evil', which as Hermione says is awfully strong. Is that really
> the word we want to use for nasty school teachers?

Evil is a word that one could use for a murderer--and you must admit 
that the jury is eminently out upon that one.  Perhaps the story is 
going to be that one has to leave aside some genuine evils to deal 
with others--but one must not discount the lesser evil as what it is 
simply because of the circumstances.

<snip>
 
> Yet Snape's past history is kept from us, which certainly *doesn't*
> tell us that it's not important. You might as well argue that it
> wasn't important whether Vader was really Luke's father, since
> Lucas didn't resolve that in The Empire Strikes Back.

Let me clarify this; what I meant was that given the problematization 
of Snape in the book, we may well be framing the questions completely 
wrong to begin with.

> Pippin:
> How can he be right when he's making judgments the same way
> he always has, with anger and prejudice? Is it the idea that once
> you grow up, you can trust your prejudices? Bleh!

The idea may well be that you can trust your instincts, your gut, 
your heart.  In interview (which you noted elsewhere), JKR says that 
Harry can't do Occlumency--and she says that yes, he is damaged, but 
also that he is too fundamentally honest with himself about his 
experiences to *repress* them.  I found it interesting that (contrary 
to my thoughts) Occlumency has now been framed as something those who 
can cut themselves off from the better emotions, such as pity, excel 
at.  Repressing the emotions is generally (I ain't a psychologist, so 
anyone can hop in) not a healthy thing.

Dumbledore told us that Harry's heart saved him, not his ability to 
block his mind.  The solution may be more of an emotionally-centered 
one (forgiveness, realization of that sort) rather than 
intellectually (Harry works out all the events and plot nuances).  I 
suspect that not getting the latter would be a disappointment to many 
readers who like to try to figure everything out by the details, but 
I can see it not happening.  Or it could.

> Pippin:
> You mean conspiracy theories like, Dumbledore is running a secret 
> organization of spies, Snape has managed to worm his way back into 
> what passes for Voldemort's confidence, Snape was the eavesdropper, 
> Lupin is spying on the werewolves? Those theories?
> I can't take credit for 'em. But I definitely read 'em all here. And
> they're canon now. 

Oh, I was thinking more along the lines of "Snape was only acting in 
the Shrieking Shack upon Dumbledore's orders so that Peter would end 
up sent back to Voldemort bearing a life debt to Harry", or "Snape 
and Dumbledore had a plan created long in advance so that Dumbledore 
knew everything and Snape actually cast an Impedimenta instead of an 
Avada Kedavra because Dumbledore told him to" actually.  Or any of 
the things about Neville having memory charms and being set up as a 
sleeper agent, Lily having known she was going to die and plotting 
with whoever to set up the events as they went down, etc.

You know, normal stuff in the Safe House. :)

-Nora sits up in Switzerland, way above the shores of the Bay