Sirius and Prank again? Fools Rush in where Wisemen Fear to Go

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 129938

Steve/bboyminn:
And once again, in no case is Snape without guilt of his own. 
Snape made a conscious choice to do something that is both wrong 
and logically dangerous. He chose to put himself in harms way.
 
Eloise:
<SNIP>
Sirius knew exactly what he was doing in tempting him to 
follow a werewolf into an enclosed environment. 


Alla:

I'd like to say that we don't know yet whether Sirius knew exactly 
what he was doing that night and what exactly Sirius was doing.

Just me of course.


 
Steve/bboyminn:
Let me conclude by re-enforcing the point that no matter how much 
guilt may belong to Snape, it doesn't absolve Sirius's action. 
 
Eloise:
No, it doesn't. What he did was utterly wrong, yet he shows no 
regret, not even an acknowledgement that it was wrong, just 
childishly tries to justify it like my kids might:
 
"Don't hit your sister."
"But she was annoying me."


Alla:

Doesn't it strike you as strange that Sirius after spending twelve 
years in Azkaban reacts so violently at the first mention of Snape's 
name. Granted, you can argue that Sirius is a vicious murderer, who 
always wanted to kill Snape, but isn't it possible that this 
reaction shows hatred which relies on something much more in depth 
than the fact that Snape was spying on them?

For twelve years Dementors were eating up Sirius' happy thoughts. If 
his reactions about Snape were left intact, isn't it possible that 
something VERY unhappy connects those two?

Eloise:
<SNIP>
 And in this case, the "Prank" was 
designed with malice aforethought, even if Sirius hadn't thought the 
implications through completely.

Alla:

I don't think we know yet for sure that Prank was designed with 
malice aforethought. I may be wrong of course.

Steve/bboyminn:
 
In simpliest terms, there is a difference between throwing someone
into a dean of wolves, and simply telling him where the dean is.
 
That's all I'm trying to say.
 
> Eloise:
> If you *know* that the person will enter the den, then morally, 
> there's no difference at all, IMHO.

Alla:

Oh, I disagree with you, Eloise and I agree with Steve.  Simple 
hypothetical. The person whom I consider to be my enemy tells me 
that if I jump of the cliff to the river or ocean and dive, I will 
find there "Harry Potter book 7". THEN this person tells me  ( and 
he knows that I cannot swim well) that the river is very deep there 
and I can drown easily.


So, for me as obsessive HP fan the temptation is huge. I choose to 
jump off the cliff and I almost drown, alas. Are you saying that I 
bear no culpability in that situation? Are you saying that there is 
no difference in culpability of the other person as if he would not 
have warned me or forced me to jump?

I chose to go and look for  the book.  I refused to wait another few 
years. :-) I was being an idiot, I would say. Wouldn't you agree?


> Valky:
<SNIP>
Sirius does not think Sevvie was blameless, and apparently neither 
did Dumbledore.

Alla:

I don't know for sure what Dumbledore thinks of course, but I 
believe that what you are saying IS a possibility, because I always 
thought that " My memory is as good as ever" to be opened to very 
wide interpretations.

One more thing - we all know JKR's answer on her website to the 
question " Do you like Sirius Black?", where she lists his positive 
and negative qualities.

I am not going to quote the whole answer again, but just one 
sentence.

"Sirius is brave, loyal, reckless, embittered and slightly 
unbalanced by his long stay in Azkaban."

The word which I am looking at here is loyal. If loyalty is one of 
Sirius' determining qualities, isn't it possible that he did not 
actually betray Remus or at least was not planning  consciously to 
betray Remus and again, maybe there is something about Prank we are 
not privy to yet.
Please forgive me for talking like a Parrot. :-)

Just my opinion of course,

Alla