James, a paragon of virtue? Snape, a paragon of virtue?

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 123407


>>Betsy wrote:
>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.<

>>vmonte responds:
>Well, let's go over the other times JKR was shown us events from the 
past. In Dumbledore's penseive memories we see the Death Eater 
trials, and we are introduced to Barty Crouch and son. JKR leads us 
to believe that Crouch Senior is heartless, and that his son may have 
been innocent. And how about Tom Riddle's diary? JKR also tricks us 
here by showing us Tom as though he is a wonderful boy who saved 
Hogwarts from the monster in the chamber. She also makes us believe 
that Hagrid is responsible for opening the chamber. 
>We take what Tom Riddle tells Harry at face value. The real clue in 
that scene is when Dumbledore makes an appearance. He asks Tom 
whether there is something that he is not telling him--this is the 
clue to what is really going on in that scene.
>So, yes, I do think that she is tricking us again. Snape's memories 
are only showing us a small part of a larger picture.< 

Betsy:
Yes, JKR does enjoy faints and red herrings.  (Though I will say that 
I never really thought Hagrid was Slytherin's Heir.)  But in both of 
the examples you cite there are hints that things aren't quite what 
they seem.  Crouch looks heartless - but also broken (it set up just 
how good an actor Crouch Jr. was also), and really - Hagrid as 
Slytherin's heir?  And as you say - past!Dumbledore's suspicion of 
Tom gives us a hint.

I'm not trying to argue that young Snape was pure innocence (JKR 
carefully includes information to negate that view), nor am I saying 
that James and Sirius are absolute evil (future behavior negates 
that).  What I was pointing out was that JKR gives James and Sirius 
*no* proper excuse for attacking Snape at that time.  She didn't do 
this lightly.  There is an overall purpose for that scene and the 
realization that some of Snape's accusations against James are true 
(e.g. James most definitely strutted).  Part of it, I'm sure, is the 
usual coming of age realization that parents are not perfect.  But I 
also think there is something for us to learn about Snape, and 
possibly about judging someone based soley on house affiliation and 
family background.

Betsy