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

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 123353


>>Nora: 
>Ideology is something you're brought up with, but it is a choice as 
well, especially by that age--see below, methinks.<

Betsy:
Yes, but I think this scene shows us that *at this point* James has 
not put much thought into his ideology.  He knows what he stands for, 
and he knows what the opposite side looks like, but he chooses an 
action that as readers we'd recognize the "Death Eater Quidditch 
Hooligans" using on Muggles in the beginning of GoF.  To corrupt a 
much used phrase in my area, "What would Dumbledore do?"  I assure 
you, not hang Snape upside down and show off his undies to the world. 
(And though I don't believe in Perfect!Dumbledore, he is 
representative of James's stated ideology.)

Of course, we don't learn anything about Snape's commitment to *his* 
ideology at this time.  He may well be a true believer by this time, 
eagerly awaiting his cool new skin art.  There's no real hint on 
him.  

We also know that Sirius is going to have such a large crisis of 
conscience fairly soon.  He leaves his family at 16 IIRC, and that 
certainly speaks to him making his ideology his own (especially 
considering that he'd broken family tradition by going into 
Gryffindor in the first place).

>>Betsy:  
>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.<

>>Nora: 
>Umm, I note you snipped the part of my post where I made noises in 
that direction--the complication of the White Hats, yet the dangers 
pointed out of exonerating any character based on a perceived victim 
status.<

Betsy:
Eek!  I snipped that part because I thought it obvious that I agreed 
with those points.  I was trying to not be redundant -- sorry!  
Because I agree that while James and Sirius do not come off well, 
Snape does not come off lily-white.  Snape is a victim in this 
particular scene, but he is by no means an innocent.  His language 
and his slash at James showed that.

>>Nora:
>There is more to a person than family background--it is also a 
matter of personal choice what you choose to follow.  [And choices 
show what we really are, in the Potterverse.  Essentialist, but 
unavoidable.]  
>Sirius is the grand example of not following in the family 
footsteps, and I think that's one of the Big Thematic Issues he's 
meant to represent.  It's an important one, as we've seen fairly 
little deviation from the family line...and his situation and Percy's 
are pretty incommensurate, so I won't make that comparison.<

Betsy:
I agree that personal choice is one of the big themes of the books.  
And this scene certainly shows that a person can choose to change.  
Again, James is an absolute snot in this scene, but we *know* that 
he's more than what these actions showed him to be.  (Erm - you know 
you're just getting me all excited about the idea of a Draco 
Redemption don't you?)  Actually - it's funny that although this is 
*Snape's* memory, I feel like we the readers get more insight into 
James and a sense of his character arc than Snape's.

>>Betsy 
>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.< 

>>Nora: 
>Motive more important than method...I'm not sure about that, being 
as we've been highly critical of Slytherin philosophy, and their "any 
means to achieve their ends".  Not that I want to completely equate 
ends and motive--n'est pas la meme chose, exactly.  In fact, I'd say 
that this scene might point towards the opposite: James generally has 
fairly good motives, but his methods suck rocks.  I think the problem 
of doing things that are not only right, but doing them the right WAY 
is a big one through the series.<

Betsy:
Ah yes, but in this scene James uses the right methods (all white 
magic) to achieve an inpure motive - the humiliation of another 
student.  It's fairly clear that James and Sirius are not reacting 
defensivly at this point.

>>Nora: 
>There is more to this scene than who used what word, and we DO get 
character insights that are decidedly gray on all sides.  My main 
contention is that it's methodologically sloppy and discriminatory to 
not leave open the possibility that more things were feeding into 
this than we think, or know.  That's the point of pulling seriation 
into the discussion as well--you can't have a pattern from one 
instant.<

Betsy:
There is something to be said, however, for what the author chooses 
to show us.  I don't think this is an isolated event, no matter that 
this is the only such event we witness. I'm quite certain that this 
was not the only time the Mauraders and Snape clashed.  And I'm as 
equally certain that Snape was not always so totally routed, that any 
or all of the Mauraders suffered under his wand a time or two 
themselves.  But I think it is fairly safe to say that James and 
Sirius were very popular young boys (confirmed by McGonagall and 
Madam Rosemerta) and Snape was most definitely not (confirmed by some 
of the other memories Harry glimpsed). I doubt James was *always* an 
ass.  I'm betting that there were times he was quite nice to lesser 
beings :P.  And I'm sure (or I hope) that Snape did have some good 
times at Hogwarts.

I do think it's also fairly safe to say that there was *very* bad 
blood between Snape and James/Sirius (also confirmed in other places 
in the books).  This memory seems to suggest that perhaps the bad 
blood started on the James/Sirius side - but I agree that that 
particular conclusion is a leap.  Snape certainly acts like he was 
the wronged party.  But, we are talking about Snape here, so grains 
of salt all around. ;)
 
>>Betsy:
>Yes, but how does JKR show us Sirius' confidence in his 
Transfiguration?  By having Sirius 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.<

>>Nora: 
>Shh, or you'll attract Pippin with words like those.  A true charge, 
but for me at least, a personally understandable one; it's the noble 
thing yet the mind-numbingly boring to help those who are not as 
quick as you at something, particularly in the midst of a barrage of 
exams.  But again, I'm loathe to extrapolate that into "The Model of 
Sirius and Remus' Relationships At School".  It tells us something, 
but the other rule of seriation is that when you have new 
information, you have to alter the pattern to accomodate it.<

Betsy:
Hee!  Not Pippin!  (I'm joking.)  I don't think JKR was trying to say 
that Remus and Sirius weren't really friends, or that Sirius 
routinely treated Remus like crap. (Or even that he was being *mean* 
to Remus here.  Remus didn't seem all that upset until the attack 
actually begins.)  But I think that by having Sirius turn down a 
request from Remus who we're supposed to like, rather than Peter, who 
we aren't, she's illustrating Sirius's self-centeredness and 
arrogance with quick brush-strokes.  

I think it's also a quick way to point out that the attack on Snape 
took place because Sirius was bored.  If JKR wanted to throw Harry 
(and us) a bone (don't worry - your Dad wasn't *that* bad), there may 
have been talk of a recent wrong they needed to avenge. She could 
have had Snape idly hexing a younger student or even a fly - James 
and Sirius ride to the rescue.  But JKR specifically sets up that 
Sirius is bored and Snape is avaliable.
 
>>Betsy: 
>(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.)<

>>Nora: 
>Personally, I'm betting with sick amusement that that scene is 
actually a lot less important to anything than we think it is. That's 
my personal perversity, however.<

Betsy:
*clutches bunny and huddles in corner*

>>Nora: 
>*pets the bunny again*  Snape is currently at least somewhat 
sympathetic--which means he could become more sympathetic, but we 
could just as easily be set up for a reversal in his disfavor.  That 
is to say, we got the dirt on James this book--it's time to air all 
of Snape's bloody laundry next book (and oh do those interviews hint 
that it's there).  That's a prediction that's testable, of course, 
and will be abandoned happily if proven wrong.<

Betsy:
I would like to learn what made Snape change his mind about 
Voldemort, and why Dumbledore seems to trust him so completely.  And 
I think to learn what caused his change we will have to be shown what 
he was like pre-ideological shift.  I do not expect it to be pretty.  
Actually - I think I'll feel a little let down if it turns out Snape 
was on the softer side of the Death Eater movement.  However, if JKR 
plays to theme, showing us the darker side of James would suggest 
we're going to learn (with Harry) the lighter side of Snape.

>>Nora:
>I don't believe in ESE!Snape by any means, although I think his 
function in the series is presently deliberately ambiguous.  That 
means, by the way, that I'm professionally agnostic.  I would *like* 
to be able to like Snape (to pull in more subjective criteria) more 
than I do at present.
>However, I'm also going to put my money firmly in the 'personal 
choice' basket, which means (paradoxically) I'm esteeming Snape 
higher than you might think.  I surmise that it was his own actions 
that got him into DEdom, but consequently that it was his own actions 
that got him out.  What makes me wonder is that there is such strong 
textual and interview evidence that he retains a good number of 
decidedly negative qualities (Dumbledore won't let him have DADA for 
a good reason, as we've mentioned in the past), which makes one 
wonder about his sincerity.  I think it would, from my view, lessen 
the impact of his character arc if we end up with poor Snape, nowhere 
to turn but the DEs, rather than a willed choice--but that is also 
just speculation, and I adapt with no qualms to new canon.<

Betsy:
I agree in that I think Snape joined the Death Eaters with eyes wide 
open.  The snarling, spitting boy from the pensieve memory does not 
strike me as an easily led little duckling.  I do firmly believe in 
Redeemed!Snape (got the soap-box to prove it!) but I do agree that he 
has *some* negative qualities.  He's very slow to forgive (I wonder 
if that will change?) and he does enjoy having the little children 
quake in his presence (why else did he spend so many nights 
practicing his flowy-cloak thing?).  I am eager to learn why exactly 
Dumbledore feels Snape as DADA professor is a bad thing.  No guesses 
of my own though I don't think it's simply, Snape is so good at 
Potions, nor do I think it's, but you scare the children so (hello 
Professor Moody).
  
>>Betsy:  
>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: 
>Sirius has that thematic aspect; maybe Snape is another side of it, 
but I'm not sure.  Maybe he's the failure of the will to make the 
proper choices, paying for it until he can, but always in a struggle 
with what he really *wants* to do and what he knows that he should? 
That does explain some of the tendencies to a mild sadism (the 
enjoyment of the emotional pain of others--and yes, I stick by my 
interview guns there; really, if she says it in an interview, there's 
not much reason to expect contradictory information and all the 
reason in the world to expect confirmation, right?) and the complex 
of behaviors that can be summed up as "Dude, do you HAVE to?".  Talk 
about possibly good motives and generally poor methods...<

Betsy:
There are a lot of shadow aspects to Snape and Sirius.  The same 
obsession with James and its projection onto Harry, the same 
frustration with being put on the sidelines (OotP for Sirius, end of 
PoA for Snape), the same breaking with the "family" (Blacks for 
Sirius, Lucius et al for Snape), same taste for drama, same slowness 
to forgive, maybe even a similar ruthlessness. (It was interesting to 
me that Sirius was going to suggest a similar attack on the dragon in 
the first task of GoF that Krum used.)  They are mirror opposites in 
appearance and the pensieve scene suggests they were mirror opposites 
in their school hierarchy.  There was a thread a short while ago 
kicking around the idea that Snape and Sirius were actually half-
brothers, and though I haven't seen anything in canon to suggest this 
is so, I do think there's a thematic link.  (Perhaps this explains 
why the "Snape is really Harry's father" fanfic has become such a 
cliche?)

I agree that Snape is not a fluffy little bunny (sudden hilarious 
idea for Snape's animagus), but I do think he's *already* made his 
choice.  Dumbledore's stong confidence in Snape leads me to believe 
that Snape's choice was consciously and willingly made.  I don't get 
the sense that he looks at other Death Eaters, like Lucius Malfoy, 
and think, "Oh, why can't I...?".  Of course, I also believe that 
Snape has several different motives that require his methods - but 
that's a whole 'nother post. :)

Betsy