Snape's created curses (Was: Re: HBP thoughts)

[nrenka]

No: HPFGUIDX 132972

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Irene Mikhlin 
<irene_mikhlin at b...> wrote:

>> Alla: 
>> Sirius was right after all about Snape's fascination with Dark
>> Arts. 
> 
> Oh yes, these curses were so dark, that the golden gryffindor boys 
> would not touch them with the 10-foot wand. Oh wait, they did. :-)

Well, if we took Snape's opening speech in Potions as to show his 
love for that subject, what about his opening speech in DADA? :)

So, here's the question:

Where did James learn those curses from?  [We know he knows the 
upside-down one--no sign he knows the cutting one, which is far 
worse.]

The most obvious answer seems to be: he either saw them used on other 
people, potentially himself and/or some of his friends.  There's no 
way that James would have gotten ahold of Snape's prized book.

These curses seem like the kind of thing that poor, young, half-
blooded Snape would have taught/shown to the older 'gang of 
Slytherins', quite possibly as a route to acceptance and toleration 
within the House.  All of the curses created are of the kind intended 
to cause havoc, and the cutting curse is...ewww.

James et al. are sharp kids, canonically.  Probably sharp enough to 
figure out how to use something that they've seen and/or 
experienced.  It's a layer of ironic complication that Snape ends up 
having his very own sweet little creations used against him, isn't it?

> I thought that after Dumbledore treated pensieves more or less as 
> CCTV cameras, the argument about their subjectivity will be over. 
> Apparently not.

It's the question of whether a memory can be tampered with or not, 
and whether it's obvious when one has been.  DD knows that Slugworth 
has tampered, but is it possible that Snape did so as well, just more 
skillfully?

I doubt it, but the cat has been let out of the bag.
 
> So, is Harry doomed then? He did use an unforgivable
> on Bella, and if he didn't use it on Snape that wasn't
> for the lack of trying.

Bella tells him that it's incomplete, his Crucio--he doesn't really 
mean it.  There is a dividing line between trying to use one and 
actually doing it that I think is important.  [It's a tu quoque 
argument, anyways--Harry's use is irrelevant at the moment.]

I really wonder: is there, in the inherent morality of the 
Potterverse, something inherenly wrong about using AK at all 
whatsoever?  I don't know.  But with the discussion of how killing 
someone can be used to shear off part of your soul, it's very 
suggestive.

I'd really like to not believe in ESE!Snape.  There are such terribly 
good arguments either way.

But isn't it suggestive that by far the most parallel characters in 
the book are Snape and young Tom Riddle?

-Nora sighs and uses up #2 already in the day