[HPforGrownups] Re: Apologizing to Snape? (was: Harry's story, not Snape's)

[lady.indigo at gmail.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 139065

On 8/29/05, dumbledore11214 <dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> I am arguing that Snape hated teaching Harry so much that he would 
> do anything to get out of it and why don't kill to birds with one 
> stone? Get out of the job abd crash Harry's image of his father 
> right in front of his eyes.



This, of course, fits your reading of Snape. I have the feeling that Snape's 
anger was entirely genuine, that he would rather die than allow Harry to see 
him in that position. After all, all he ever said directly to Harry about 
James is that he was arrogant; the rest we learned from other avenues, such 
as his interactions with Sirius. Unless I'm misremembering certain details, 
which I well could be, but I still doubt Snape's pride would make him want 
to broadcast that part of his past to someone he despises. He's probably 
ashamed of how weak he was, hence his calling Lily a Mudblood when she 
defended him, and hence his very violent reaction towards Harry when Harry 
intruded into the Pensieve.

Have you noticed how mildly Dumbledore talks about Harry's excursion 
> in the Pensieve before they start their lessons?
> 
> Granted we don't know whether he talks about Harry's looking in his 
> Pensieve or Snape's? But doesn't he smile?
> 
> And if DD IS JKR's moral compass in many questions ( whether I agree 
> with it or not), seems like he is not terrible upset with Harry, no?


Dumbledore smiles at the entire 'fiasco' of the lessons, the Pensieve 
incident included. I think, as far as he's concerned, that he believes Harry 
and Snape must learn these things on their own. It's that hands off approach 
that has kept Snape teaching in the school in the first place, after all. 
Besides, Harry did something far from completely unforgiveable and I don't 
expect an incredible amount of ire from someone removed from the situation. 
I just think the decent thing to do is admit you were wrong, which I'll 
continue to believe whether or not JKR agrees with me.

> 
> Alla:
> 
> I am glad we agree on the fact that Snape was abusing Harry during 
> Occlumency lessons. :-) I submit though that we do not know that 
> Snape's teaching methods were designed to Harry anythinbg whatsoever.
> 
> What we do know though is that Harry was feeling much worse after 
> his Occlumency lesson and while it is possible that it was normal 
> reaction, it is also possible that Snape was delibertely weakening 
> his mental defenses and opening his mind further to Voldemort.


Quite possibly, but I don't really buy this. I doubt it's that easy to 
weaken a human mind; certainly Dumbledore would have noticed, as well. And I 
think Snape's summary of what Occulmancy takes is spot on for the kind of 
magic it is. Yes, repressing one's emotions is generally bad, but in this 
context sometimes one has to. I'm reminded of a movie I once saw where they 
said a perfect liar makes a perfect spy. Altogether, Harry *chose* to react 
the way he did, Snape's attempts to push him in one direction or the other 
regardless.


Alla:
> 
> Harry was NOT defending James after he saw the pensieve scene, but I 
> do not think he should apologise to Snape for what his father did, 
> especially when we may not know the whole story with Marauders and 
> Snape? You know, there is that "Slytherin gang", whom Snape was 
> running with and who, IMO, was helping Snape a great deal to fight 
> Marauders.
> 
> That Slytherin gang contained such nice members as dear Bella, whom 
> we know that she is a sadist now and may have been a sadist at 
> much earlier age.


I'm referring to before the Pensieve scene, the whole four book span where 
Harry thought the critiques against his father were unjustified and built 
the man up in his mind. As far as Snape's gang of Slytherins, I didn't 
exactly see them springing to his aid during a very public scene. In fact, 
Snape seemed to be entirely alone, and again alludes to that same thing: 
"Your father would only fight me when it was four against one." Lupin 
doesn't claim Snape had vast numbers of friends to back him up when he 
confirms the memory Harry saw, either.
And again, he doesn't necessarily have to apologize FOR James; he can hardly 
control what his father did. He does have to say 'what my father did was 
wrong, and you were right about him.' Both of which go without saying. 

Alla:
> 
> Sorry if I cannot be as understanding about the man, who especially 
> if he was abused himself, took the road of abusing those who are 
> weaker than him.
> 
> Who made himself to be Neville's greatest fear, who threatened to 
> poison Neville's pet.
> 
> Who, it appears, made his purpose in life to make Harry hate him.


Have you ever studied the children of child abusers or alcoholics? They very 
often grow up to do those same things themselves. I doubt the wizarding 
world has therapy. Again, as I've stated repeatedly, I think Snape is 
emotionally damaged enough that you can't expect the same things from him 
that you can expect from Harry. He's in no way had the same support and 
advantages. I know that right now we're a culture of blame, and I'll 
definitely say that some of this has come down to Snape's poor choices - 
I'll never excuse him for going to Voldemort, for instance - but overall he 
needs a certain amount of understanding. Dumbledore provided this, but one 
man who has other concerns for fifteen years isn't enough to turn the tide 
altogether.

> 
> 
> IMO, JKR as I read her intentions , which could be wrong of course, 
> disagrees with you. If she wanted Harry to apologise, IMO she would 
> have wrote about it.


I disagree. Harry's thoughts and actions regarding Snape have constantly 
been influenced by prejudice. This is important, and if she's taking Harry 
in the direction I think she is then his continuing lack of trust will be 
relevant in the seventh book, where we've gone beyond apology and it's the 
abandoning of prejudice - by both men - that will have the significance.

And doesn't Harry say in the beginning that he decided to blame 
> Snape for Sirius because it was easier to cope or something like 
> that?
> 
> So, Harry does blame himself and where JKR wants him tot ake a high 
> road, he most certainly does, IMO.


I completely understand why Harry blamed Snape, and how that's probably part 
of his grieving process, and I still don't think it's right of him. It's 
incredibly colored by bias, very unhealthy for him, and has nothing to do 
with taking the high road. I could even completely forgive him for this if 
he at least leveled 'blame' fairly. Didn't Fred and George (who I love, 
don't get me wrong, but who are morally ambiguous too sometimes) say a few 
cutting things to Sirius as well?

Lady Indigo:
> > Harry's moving further and further towards the Dark Side of the 
> Force 
> > through his hate, and I'm surprised at how few people in both 
> camps see 
> > that.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Harry was being tempted by Dark Art Spells, true, I think he passed 
> the test nicely, but isn't it telling that Half Blood Prince was the 
> one who was seducing him?


I think it's telling that Harry was cheating, pretty much pulling a Lockhart 
no less, yet still saw it as completely unfair that he was being punished 
and Hermione was angry about it. At age 16. That's a sign of incredible 
immaturity and some very dark (or Slytherin, or what have you) tendencies.
Plus, I don't care who posted a bomb recipe on the Internet. It's whether or 
not you use it that matters. Especially when you have no idea who was behind 
it, and used it without knowing what it would do.
Sectumsempra or no, I thought the tragic thing behind the Prince's book was 
that Harry grew to trust those instructions and learned so much from them, 
could have learned so much from *Snape* (of the benevolent, Potions-related 
variety, of course), if they both were big enough to listen to each other.

As to moving to Dark Side in general, I think Dumbledore sums it up 
> really well:
> 
> "and yet, Harry despite your privileged insight into Voldemort's 
> world ( which,incidentally, is a gift any Death Eater would kill to 
> have), you have never ben seduced by the Dark Arts, never, even for 
> a second, shown the slightest desire to become one of Voldemort's 
> followers!"
> "Of course, I haven't" said Harry indignantly. "He killed my mum and 
> dad!" - HBP, p.511


And this is definitely not what I meant.
Voldemort has nothing to do with it. Umbridge isn't a Death Eater either, 
but she's a terrible person. Harry's heart, unlike Dumbledore (the pinnacle 
of goodness), is filled with hatred, resentment, and anger. Much like 
Snape's, really, and often because of Snape's baiting. This would be 
dangerous for him even if Voldemort had never existed, on a purely personal 
level.

Lady Indigo:
> >> Snape was publicly humiliated and arguably sexually harassed when 
> he was 
> > minding his own business. 
> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I never understood " the sexual harassment" analogy, frankly, but I 
> understand it even less after HBP.
> 
> "Oh, that one had a great vogue during my time at Hogwarts," said 
> Lupin reminiscently. "There were a few months in my fifth year when 
> you couldn't move for being hoisted into the air by your ankle." - 
> HBP, p.336
> So, it seems to me that the curse was very widely used.
> 
> I don't think that JKR would so casually throw there sexual 
> harassment association.


It has nothing to do with JKR's intentions there; often things like that are 
dismissed, but to me that's what it was. I'm not talking about being dangled 
upside-down in public and humiliated, though that's bound to hurt anyone; 
I'm talking about where James threatens to take his pants down. If you feel 
at all sexually exposed, that's enough to warrent the term for me. We're all 
affected by things differently, and I've seen and heard of people damaged by 
less. So I can only hope James didn't do this.

- Lady Indigo


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]