What cultural standards we are using to determine whether Snape is abusive ?

[Miles]

No: HPFGUIDX 144319

> Lupinlore:
> I don't know about everybody else, but I'm finding this whole thread
> immensely enjoyable! :-)

Miles:
Just two days before I did not think so, because we just circled in the
discussion, repeating our arguments. Now we seem to dig a bit deeper.

> Lupinlore:
> I, for one, most certainly do not expect fiction to mirror the real
> world, especially in moral matters.

again Lupinlore, in a different mail:
> Interesting point, Orna.  However, I'm not sure it's relevant, at
> least not from the perspective from which some of us are coming.  I,
> for instance, could not possibly care less about what is or is not
> abuse by the standards of the WW.

and again, from an earlier Mail:
> Oh, I absolutely agree.  Snape is a child abuser, over and out.

Miles:
Sorry for patchworking with your quotes ;).
So, let us put it together. Relating to Snape's behaviour in class, you
a) do not care whether this is thought to be abusive in the fictional world
it takes place,
b) do not think, that moral in fiction should mirror real life, and
c) disapprove common definitions of child abuse, that emphasise lasting
damage as a key criterion

a) has been discussed by Orna, who IMO showed very convincing evidence that
Snape is not seen as abusive in the wizarding world *and* by his students
inside the fiction.
b) would just end the discussion, because we all know, that there is no
guarantee that bad deeds are punished.
c) would be a chance for a clinical discussion beyond "I feel this, you feel
that"

What remains, is your very personal impression what is abusive, and your
very personal benchmark for good literature concerning moral, that is: it
has to reflect your moral considerations and assessments.
Eeerm... difficult to discuss then. Or better: there is no chance of
discussion with the target of some kind of agreement, because I would not
try to change your moral creed, and you would not try (or succeed) to change
mine. And there is no point in just describing our personal moral beliefs -
not on this list. So - end of discussion?

I will try to affect a) instead, and maybe c) later (not in this mail).

> Alla wrote:
> Personally, I DO consider Snape's defense as not abusive by the
> standards of WW society one of the strongest ones, sort of. What I do
> not consider a strong argument is the defense of the society, which
> does nothing about Snape.

Miles:
But these are very different things.
I totally agree, that the Wizards' Society is corrupt, foul. We see this
almost anytime Ministry is involved, we see it with Fudge, Scrimgeour,
Umbrigde, Bagman, Crouch, even Percy. We see it according to the legal
system, the censorship and many other things.
I do not see Hogwarts as foul or corrupt. And I do not see the moral
standards of Hogwarts as foul or corrupt - we all know the man who is
responsible for these standards.

Alla:
> What we do NOT know IMO is that whether wisarding kids are
> emotionally more resilient than "muggle" kids  and IMO they are not.
> That is why I am very much in doubt that JKR intends US the readers
> to take Snape's behavior as something innocent, even if WW could care
> less.

Miles:
Whether something is abusive or not, to some extent has to do with the
society a child lives in.
Someone mentioned ancient Greek society some days before. Sexual
interactions between male teachers and male students were common for
centuries. That was not considered as abusive - it was not a question of
power misuse, it was not to be kept secret, everyone could speak about it.
We can consider that if it caused damage to the boys at all, this can't be
compared to the awful aftermath of sexual abuse in our world.
So, should we judge Plato's sexual interactions with his students with
today's measures? I don't think so - as we should not judge paederasts of
today with Plato's measures.
Should we judge Snape's acting in classes as child abuse, despite the fact
the people in his world would not do? I don't think so.
But that does not mean to see Snape as a character we should like, according
to Rowling's intention. No, definitely Snape is a nasty person, he seems to
be almost unable to be kind or friendly (only exception - Draco), he is
unfair, I would dislike him if I knew him.
But he never crosses an important, invisible line. He never hurts or touches
any student (or pet) in class, he may threat to do so (do we believe him?),
but he seems to know what would be abuse in *his* world, and he acts
according to these rules.

Alla wrote:
> I DO think that Dumbledore is supposed to be the most progressive
> thinker in WW, what I am not sure I agree with is that Dumbledore
> approves Snape's teaching methods.
> I think he does ( and I know it had been brought up) what he did with
> Hagrid ( and that is what JKR said in interview) Dumbledore let
> Hagrid think over things on his own, hoping that he would snap out of
> his misery and only after he did not, DD went to him.

Miles:
Snape has been member of Dumbledore's staff for some 14 years. You really
think that he would not interfer for 14 years, if he would totally
disapprove Snape's teaching methods? Maybe he interfered before and Snape
changed his methods - we don't know. We see Snape acting for six years
(stop - we only see them through Harry's eyes - we should doubt his view),
and he does not change. Maybe he changed his methods before? And now, I
think we really should assume,  Dumbledore is satisfied by and large.

Miles