James, a paragon of virtue? Was: Why Do You Like Sirius?

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 123281


>>Carol:
>I think that James's admirers are generally the same people who like 
(I won't say admire) Sirius. They praise James for his "values" 
or "principles" because he would never call Lily a "mudblood." (He 
didn't say that he wouldn't use the term to insult a Muggleborn he 
didn't like, but I suppose it's fair to say that he wouldn't do so, 
just as some people would never call a girl a b***ch even if they 
hated her. It's just a word that he's been taught not to use and so 
he doesn't.)<

>>Nora:
>Yes, but...from the perspective of literary economy (and there is a 
bunny sitting next to me at the present, a soft, fluffy bunny), 
there's something very significant about that whole scene.
>To be direct: JKR likes to use little shorthand things and 
descriptions that, when we think about them, tell us a whole lot more 
about a person.  "Mudblood" seems to certainly be one of them.  It is 
not a word that travels alone; it immediately labels someone who uses 
it as of a certain ideological bent.  And as I've argued before, 
*everyone* has ideology whether they are conscious or not of it--and 
this was an era where ideology seems to have mattered, greatly.
>It *is* a strong insight into how James has been raised that he 
reacts so categorically to the word, just as it's an insight into 
Draco, Young!Snape, and Voldemort--the three people (I think...) 
we've heard use it.  It's been so reserved in actual use in the 
series that it really hits you when you hear it--and it tells you 
something fundamental about the user.<

Betsy:
*pets the bunny*  I agree that the term "mudblood" is being used as 
shorthand. But I don't think we should overlook other shorthand 
images being used in this scene.  The description of Sirius's perfect 
hair, and his easy manner, James studied casualness with the stolen 
snitch, and his own artfully mussed hair, even Peter's wrapt 
attention to James's every move all paint a picture of spoiled 
arrogance.  Then compare that to Snape, hunched in the shadows, 
awkward and ugly and alone.  JKR knew exactly what she was setting up 
here.   

To top off the discriptive difference between Snape and James/Sirius 
we have an unprovoked attack in which two boys ambush one.  So it's 
fairly obvious (to me at least) that JKR meant for readers to be 
repulsed by the behavior of James and Sirius and she meant for 
readers to feel sympathy for Snape.

But then JKR throws us a curve.  First, when Snape hits back he 
actually draws blood rather than hexing away James' and Sirius' 
wands.  It's a telling choice.  And then JKR adds in the "mudblood" 
word.  And, as you point out, Nora, having Snape use that particular 
word says something about his background and ideology, just as James' 
dislike of that word says something about his.

But is JKR really saying, "Don't worry about it folks.  Snape's still 
a baddie, James is still good.  Please ignore everything leading up 
to this point!" ?  It doesn't make sense.  Not when she's worked so 
hard to turn the readers *away* from James and Sirius in the scene 
setup.  There must be more to it than can simply be judged by who 
will say "mudblood" and who won't.  And I wonder if JKR is suggesting 
that perhaps there is more to a person than their family background.

That Snape's automatic response to danger is to lash out with magic 
that appears dark (I'm assuming it is because blood was drawn), and 
he so easily uses the term "mudblood" says something about how he was 
raised, true.  And that James does not use dark magic (most of his 
spells are recognizable and taught at Hogwarts) and seems horrified 
by the "mudblood" word says something about how he was raised.  And 
yet, James is not a good person in this scene.  He's a classic bully 
and he takes his rage at Lily's rejection out on someone he's 
overpowered by force of numbers and surprise.  Neither of these 
actions speaks to James's way being right.  In fact, it seems to say 
the opposite.  

After seeing this scene, Harry actually thinks his father might be 
capable of rape.  That's a pretty horrifying thought for JKR to have 
her protagonist think about his father.  So I think she's telling us 
more here - maybe about the possiblity of change, maybe about the 
ability of folks to raise above their upbringing, maybe something 
about motive being as or more important than method.  I don't know 
what exactly, but I do think there's more to this scene than simply 
who used what word. 

>>Carol: 
>Neither of them has any legitimate reason for their unprovoked 
attack on Severus Snape, who is absorbed in studying the test 
questions he has just answered at great length in the DADA exam, 
which he clearly takes more seriously than they do. (And Sirius 
states that he doesn't need to study for the Transfiguration exam, 
either. Thinks highly of himself, that one.)<

>>Nora:
>Remember the canon from PoA from McGonagall about Sirius and 
James, "...very bright, of course--exceptionally bright, in fact..". 
How fondly I remember all the times I didn't have to study in high 
school...oh, those were the days.  Arrogant, yes; true, 
(unfortunately?) also yes.
>[That's enough canon, McGonagall and the studying, to argue that 
James and Sirius were actually much brighter than Severus in school, 
right? (take that with a grain of salt, everyone)]<

Betsy:
Yes, but how does JKR show us Sirius' confidence in his 
Transfiguration?  By having Siruis refuse to help Remus study!  Sweet 
Remus, whose painful werewolf transformations Sirius sees as a 
wonderful lark. Again, not very friendly to Sirius is this scene.  
And JKR uses every trick she can to make that clear.
[Canon suggests that James and Sirius were more gifted in school than 
Severus, yes.  Severus seemed pretty intense in his studying though - 
so who knows what their actual OWL and NEWT scores were like. :P]

>>Nora: <ruthlessly, but hopefully judicially, snipped by Betsy:)>
<snip>
>See, I don't want to dispute the account given--and I'm not going 
to, on a certain factual level.  But I want to throw a very 
particular wrench into the works, and it's a comparative one.
<snip>
>For one thing, we don't have the ability to seriate here while we do 
with PresentDay!Snape, and that argues even more strongly for a 
suspension of evaluation.  You can't make good statements about a 
hapax.  [Umm, to make that clearer--we have one event witnessed by us 
(albeit in an unusual way), and some sketchy accounts of other 
behavior.  With PresentDay!Snape, we have a whole string of 
observations of behavior.  The latter can be seriated, the former 
cannot.  The term comes from classical philology, and is used there 
and in semiotics, as well as archaeology.]
>Second, it feels (IMO) like a literary setup very smartly done from 
a phenomenological point of view; we the readers, riding on Harry's 
shoulder, react much as he does.  It's arguable that this will 
ultimately be revealed as an incomplete reaction.  (And I enjoy 
turning the 'limitations of Harry's POV' argument to completely 
different uses than it is usually set!)
<snip>
>We certainly don't have to like or dislike any character by 
objective criteria.  But it's really much more fun here, I think, to 
play in analytical realms.  The cage match can wait for when the 
canon is done, no? :) <

Betsy:
You're absolutely correct of course.  We the readers *know* that 
James doesn't rape Lily to conceive Harry.  We know that James *does* 
change enough to be chosen as Headboy and also enough to eventually 
give his life trying to protect his family.  So while we're horrified 
by this scene, we know that this is not the end of the story.  
(Frankly, I think the "let's feed Snape to the werewolf" scene will 
be a big turning point for James, and I *really* hope JKR will flesh 
that scene out.)

We also know that Snape becomes a Death Eater.  And I think JKR was 
careful to make Snape sympathetic but not pathetic.  He is no Neville 
Longbottom (circa PS/SS I should clairfy!).  He's immediately on the 
defense and he *never* gives up trying to get free and fight back. (I 
think the reason James and Sirius gang up on him is that Snape is 
dangerous enough to be a bit much one on one.)  I believe that JKR 
has shown us some nobility in Presentday!Snape - some good qualities 
like courage and loyalty (though I know that's contested) that at 
least hint that Snape is now on the side of the angels.  But there 
was something that started him down the wrong path, and this scene 
certainly shows us a desperate, angry boy who could very easily be 
lead astray and might have already started wandering.

I personally think that JKR gave us and Harry this scene to reinforce 
the premise that there is no perfect good or perfect evil when it 
comes to people.  And maybe to forshadow that those who seem 
hopelessly bad may have a chance at redemption.  And perhaps to 
suggest that there's more to person than good upbringing?

>-Nora gets ready to put the harm back in harmony

Betsy, adding in the ony.  (Like in Sesame Street!)