Trelawney was wrong,

[LadyOfThePensieve]

No: HPFGUIDX 121746


Hello,

if you read the description of Snivelly´s  physical appereance in book
5 you get indeed the impression he was mean. As a boy he looked
roundshouldred, he went in a twiching manner and he wore "mean"
cloths, too.


Everybody should really clean the mind of our ideas of him. Book Snape
is no Alan Rickman. He simply doesn´t look good. 



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at m...>
wrote:
> 
> Potioncat is snipping several comments:
> Carol wrote:
> > So Trelawney, as usual, is not so much wrong as misreading the
> > information available to her, just as she misreads the dog in the
> > crystal ball as a Grim.
> 
> Potioncat:
> To keep us all balanced here I have some observations and questions.
> 
> The Lexicon describes Snape as tall.  But I don't see their source.  
> Does anyone know of any canon for Snape's height? (Oop does have him 
> as "rather shorter" than Sirius.) But I don't recall Harry as ever 
> thinking of Snape as short so he must be at least of average height.
> (Although I'm reminded of Dustin Hoffman, as Hook saying, "To a ten- 
> year-old I'm huge.")
> 
> Trelawney was using Harry's physical description and personal past 
> to determine his sign.  Well, if a short dark person is really 
> associated with Capricorn, Trelawney was correct....and obviously 
> Harry was defiant enough to be born on the wrong date! (I don't 
> know, is it correct?)
> 
> All kidding aside, not all the short dark wizards can be 
> Capricorns.  And the only way Trelawney could be correctly reading 
> Snape's sign at that moment was if something of Snape was in Harry.  
> Which is the logic for it being Tom Riddle's sign she was 
> predicting. 
> 
> So I don't think it was Snape she was talking about. Unless of 
> course, it's a bit of Snape that was transferred to Harry and that 
> would open a whole new set of good/Snape  bad/Snape posts....
> Potioncat