The Dursleys, the Weasleys, Hagrid, and Snape: Nice people get a pass

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 125069


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" <bob.oliver at c...> wrote:
> 
> There has been a lot of discussion about several topics that I think
> come together.  One discussion has been about the Dursleys and
> Dumbledore.  One has been about Snape.  One has been about Molly and
> her parenting techniques.  And we have had plenty of discussions in
> the past about Hagrid and his teaching techniques.
> 
> Now, I think this raises some interesting points.  Why do those of us
> who despise the Dursleys not get upset when Molly seems to play
> favorites?  Why do those of us who despise Snape not get upset at
> Hagrid's teaching, which is physically if not emotionally dangerous.
> 
> Well, the answer of course is that the Weasleys and Hagrid are nice
> and Snape and the Dursleys aren't.  Therefore the former get a pass to
> a certain extent and the latter don't.  And, here is the clencher, I
> think THAT IS PERFECTLY APPROPRIATE.
> 


I also want to point out (thank you Nora!) that INTENTIONS seem to be
very important in the Potter Universe.  That is, what you intend to do
is what determines the morality of your actions and the reward you
deserve.

Now, this may seem to be contradictory with some things I've said
before, since back on the Christian Platonism thread I said in that
context that personal intentions and understandings aren't important.
 I'm using intention here is a different way than I was in that
thread.  I mean here "does the person intend to do good in an ordinary
daily situation or, in the grand scheme of things, do they intend to
support Dumbledore?"  As I said on the Christian Platonism thread,
supporting Dumbledore seems to be the sin quae non of grand Goodness
in the Potterverse, and supporting Voldemort the definition of grand Evil.

I think this helps us get at the reason most of us (at least most of
us who have expressed our opinions) can't see any hope for Draco.  His
intentions are so boldly and inherently bad that they mark him as evil
in the context of the Potterverse in both big and small things. 
Hagrid, on the other hand, has blatantly good intentions in all
things, and is therefore marked as good.  

With regard to Snape and the Dursleys, the intentions of the Dursleys
are somewhat mysterious but its hard to see how they can be anything
but mostly bad in everyday matters (and we don't know what they know
about the big situation).  Snape, well...  let's just say that
whatever his intentions in grand matters, its hard to see that he
means well in daily things, and therefore he can't be called good in
the full sense of the word.  Once again, I think the distinction
between "good" and "nice" is more fandom than canon, and I suspect
that will become clearer as we go along.  In the end I think we will
see there are many kinds of goodness and many kinds of evil, and I'm
not entirely sure that we are going to see (as many in the fandom
assume) a message the goodness in great things negates/overrides the
evil of small things.  Just for now I will point out that Dumbledore
has never said "Severus Snape is a good man."  He has said he trusts
him, which is entirely different.  Nor has JKR ever (that I know of)
talked about a distinction between "nice" and "good."  The closest she
has come is to say that Snape has "latent good qualities," which ain't
a ringing endorsement of the nice/good distinction.  As for Sirius
statement that "The world isn't divided into good people and Death
Eaters," that cuts more against Snape than for him.  (BTW, I don't
think Snape is going to betray DD, but I do think there is a very good
chance the darker side of his personality will lead him to do
something truly terrible, that in its turn will require him to take
drastic steps for redemption.  Snape's attraction to the Dark Arts and
the destructive mores they represent is presented in a manner very
similar to talk of an addiction.  Addicts sometimes fall of the wagon
and do very bad things.  And once you fall off, getting on your feet
again is all the harder).

Now, what about Percy?  He's good in the everyday sense, or at least
he's polite.  But he works against Dumbledore, and thus the hard logic
of the Potterverse morality condemns him.  There you have it.


Lupinlore