Long stuff about Namecalling WAS Re: James, a paragon of virtue?

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 124478


Finwitch:
<snip excellent Sirius canon regarding Marauders era ontology Thanks 
Finwitch! :D , Valky> 

> In a way, a civil war was there, within the wizard world. Being 
> underage - and still in school - none of them was a member of the 
> extremists. But everyone was *expected* and assumed to be of 
> either ideology. (In truth, I guess most weren't supporting either)
> 
> The bloodists use words like 'mudblood' and 'bloodtraitor' 
>...edit.....> 
> I suppose that 'Snivellus' - was what the pro-choice people used 
> of the bloodists, or at least it's the only specific insult I know 
> of that they used. Even that - just that he exists - if you see 
> what I mean...
>

Valky now:

Hey, I think you bring up an interesting consideration here. 
I personally, placed the name Snivellus (the word snivel/snivelling) 
as a canon support of James and Sirius collective Ideology anyway 
but the spin that you put on it reboots my POV.

>From the veiw of a pro-choice(as in DD saying it is our choices that 
reveal who we are, and not RL pro-choice ideologies) I see a name 
like sniveller, as consistent with a distinction the pro-choicer 
would make between the ontologies of Dark and Light in the WW, not 
necessarily what one would call *all* DA beings, but certainly a 
characteristic that a pro-choicer would expect to call a bloodist on.

Let me explain. As I go to understand the basis of calling Sevvie a 
sniveller, I relate to the use of the word in late 20th century 
english as I know it. To this end I find that one in the days of the 
Marauders would 'call someone on' snivelling when that person had 
demonstrated a virtueless underhanded method of self preservation or 
gain. For this reason the word sniveller was closely associated with 
cowardice and umm sucking up (manipulation).

There are some examples in the books which I believe JKR might have 
used 'snivelling' to describe the behaviour, but considering that it 
has various nuances of implied meaning, and that she probably 
planned to use it in Book 5, it's understandable that she didn't.
But there is evidence to support the connection between them and 
snivellus.

Take for example Peter Pettigrew in the Shrieking Shack. 
When he is forced to transform, after he has tried to escape, has 
heard the whole discussion between Harry and Sirius, and is facing 
finally the consequences of his behaviour, he makes several appeals 
and attempts manipulations to save himself.

First he says 'my old friends...' an emotional appeal to Remus and 
Sirius, which smacks distinctly of cowardice.

Then he tries to manipulate Remus with his lie : "Remus," gasped 
Pettigrew, and Harry could see beads of sweat breaking out over his 
pasty face, "you don't believe him, do you...? He tried to kill me, 
Remus...."

Then Sirius calls him on something which I'd like you to note:
"When did I ever sneak around people who were stronger and more 
powerful than myself? But you, Peter -- I'll never understand why I 
didn't see you were the spy from the start. You always liked big 
friends who'd look after you, didn't you? " .... then later.....
"It must have been the finest moment of your miserable life,
telling Voldemort you could hand him the Potters."

Then he begs at Sirius' knees for mercy. Note very well, that this 
is *really* repulsive to Sirius, *and* he associates Peter with 
filth in his response. Snivellus - Greasy ** Snivelling - Filthy

Pettigrew appeals to Ron and Hermione. Note very well that he calls 
Hermione *clever* and tries to manipulate Ron with emotional tactics.

And finally he appeals to Harry, with lip service to the father he 
took from him, which *really* gets *Sirius* riled.

I think that *Sirius' opinions* of Snivelling, as interpreted this 
way, are perfectly obvious. 

Another example of Snivelling, in the books is evident in none other 
than Sevvie's tight buddy, Filch. This is a slightly different 
implied meaning of snivel, but valid AFAIK, nonetheless. 

During the DU dictatorship, Filch was most pleased at the prospect 
of being able to conduct whippings again. It is interesting to note 
how "hard he tries" to get this sanction throughout the series.
 
Filch *uses and manipulates* the authority and power of others just 
like Pettigrew attempted to in the Shrieking Shack, but his purpose 
in doing so is not so much self preservation, but gain.
It is this particular meaning that I believe most likely to be the 
eventual revealed implication of Snivellus Snape as per the 
Marauders (and Lily's) "accusation" in the pensieve scene.

While DD is Headmaster of Hogwarts, Filch demonstrates a two-faced 
approach. In Dumbledores prescence he acts subserviant and 
agreeable, to his back he is most disagreeing of Dumbledore's 
rulings and liberal ideals concerning the students. 
While DU is Headmaster of Hogwarts he can't possibly speak more 
highly of her, because she is offering him what he wants. 

We'd probably all agree that a character like DU thrives on 
servility of those around her and Filch has plenty to offer. As long 
as he is continuing to press his own agenda he will bow and give 
graces *even those which aren't sincere* in order to *keep the power 
holder on his side*. This is snivelling, and, I think "the 
snivelling" to which Sirius and James refer when addressing Young!
Snape in the SWM pensieve scene.

There is some obvious affinity between Snape and Filch apparent in 
the books. And there is also an affinity between this 'snivelling" 
and bloodism. Genealogy is not a sincere judgment of a person, and 
WW graces paid on the basis of purebloodness *are not sincere*.

Try Borgin in COS, paying flat out idolatry to super-pure-pureblood 
Lucius Malfoy in Knockturn Alley, right up until the point where 
Lucius walks out of the store, then the insincerity of the "Bloodism 
Graces" is revealed in all its ugliness. Borgin *despises* Malfoy as 
a person, just as Sirius despises Snape as a person. But, of the 
two, the one who is sincere and *would not* deny his position for 
any means, is Sirius. And, as shown in the Shrieking Shack, this is 
a value that Sirius holds and has long held in the highest regard. 

Many couldn't understand why Sirius, when arrested for Lily and 
James Deaths, acted so violently mad. But understanding the Sirius 
who *cannot* deny his position and will *always* be sincere goes a 
long way to rationalising the behaviour. Naturally, a WW full of 
pureblood insincerity wouldn't understand it at all. 

So rounding off to the point, I believe that Finwitch has called it 
rightly in saying that Snivellus could be a name that the pro-
choicers (for want of a term that clashes less with RL scenarios) 
would call a bloodist. It is definitely an accusation of a behaviour 
consistent with purebloodism as an ideology.


Finwitch:
> Hmm-mm. You know - James DID battle the student-expert of the Dark 
> Arts, with spells that were so - well, *harmless*. (and of course, 
> that was part of the ideological war - at least to James). When 
James Potter (sometime after this scene, on a full moon) goes out 
and *saves* the life of Severus Snape - I think he considered that 
as the DEFEAT of Snape. And this time, his method was approved by 
Lily.
> 

Valky:
In a small way I differ in veiw of this particular point.
I believe that James saw *every* fight he won with Snape as 
defeating Snape. And I believe his rescue of Snape from the werewolf 
was entirely sincere and not in any way at all contrived or self 
interested. *I* agree that this was a larger defeat of Snape (from 
an ideological veiwpoint) than any in their history. And I do agree 
that Lily saw it as a defeat of Snape also in a sense, I even think 
that Sevvie did and still does percieve it as his most embarrassing 
defeat at the hand of James, but I think that *James* himself would 
totally disagree.

James would never see it that way if he is of any likeness to the 
James I have attempted to paint in ideological terms. Like Sirius, 
James Potter would *always* be sincere about his position. And if he 
sincerely thought that saving Snape was as a defeat of him in the 
minds of observers then Sirius would be calling *him* a sniveller. 
In the Sirius and James I have painted here, that is all they both 
could imagine it to mean. 

James would, I truly believe, be just like Harry in this matter. 
Saving a life is saving a life, he would not try to paint it any 
pretty colour for the benefit of others or attempt to contrive a 
deeper analogy for it. As far as a duty to someone in danger goes, 
there is nothing more needed to be said. This is the "Hero Complex". 

Hermione and Harry in OOtP
.........
'I'm trying to say - Voldemort knows you, Harry! He took Ginny down 
into the Chamber of Secrets to lure you there, it's the kind of 
thing he does, he knows you're the - the sort of person who'd go to 
Sirius's aid! What if he's just trying to get you into the 
Department of Myst—?'
'Hermione, it doesn't matter if he's done it to get me there or not -
they've taken McGonagall to St Mungo's, there isn't anyone from the 
Order left at Hogwarts who we can tell, and if we don't go, Sirius 
is dead!'
.........
'Harry, I'm begging you, please!' said Hermione desperately. 'Please 
let's just check that Sirius isn't at home before we go charging off 
to London. If we find out he's not there, then I swear I  won't try 
to stop you. I'll come, I'll d - do whatever it takes to try and 
save him.'
'Sirius is being tortured NOW!' shouted Harry. 'We haven't got time 
to waste.'
..........

To highlight the point..
Hermione says: You're the - the sort of person who would go....
Harry says : If we don't go Sirius is dead! and then later again 
Sirius is being tortured NOW, We haven't got time to waste.

Add the two together and you have- The sort of person who would go 
doesn't hestitate to explain anything about going. They just go NOW.
And of course don't forget that Harry takes the same attitude toward 
saving Ginny, and Fleur Delacour's sister, Dudley....

When Voldemort arrived at the doorstep of Godrics Hollow it was 
James who *ran ahead* and fought bravely and uprightly to save the 
lives of his family (Voldemort says so), just like Harry he didn't 
give thought to explaining what he wanted carved on his gravestone 
in honour of his greatness, he just did it, because if he didn't 
Harry was dead.

If James Potter doesn't have a Hero Complex I will eat my keyboard.

Valky
(wondering if JKR laughs at the James and Snape pensieve debate and 
thinks to herself, the shoe is on the other foot after HBP.)