Twist JKR? (was:Re: Dumbledore's pleading...)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 141632

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > Weirdly enough, I see my understanding of Snape's character as 
> > being quite direct. YMMV, of course. <g>

> >>Nora: 
> I point you over to Neri's post.  It does require at least some   
> level of explanation to get around the whole killing the mentor    
> thing: the more direct answer (in brute and unaesthetic terms of   
> simply calculating 'how much extra explanation does this take?')   
> is that there are no mitigating circumstances.

Betsy Hp:
But it does require sweeping Snape's saving Dumbledore's life at the 
beginning of HBP under the rug.  Neither side of the debate has a 
lock on directness, I would say. <g> (And I enjoyed the humor of 
Neri's post, but I don't see it's revelence to JKR's use of twists 
or the directness of Snape's character arc.)

> >>Nora: 
> Ron is already a more complex character.  He has considerably more 
> page time, we spend time with him, we get him deliberating about 
> things, developing as a character.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
I think it's a bit of a strawman to get into a "who's more complex" 
argument (I did start it, sorry <g>), but I will say a lot of Ron's 
page time is spent doing exposition.  We do see him develop and we 
do get insight into his character, but not every single time he 
comes up.  And he does fall into several "loyal side-kick" 
stereotypes.  Honestly, I think Snape and Ron are about equal as 
characters.  I think Ron has more promise of surviving the series 
(so more of a future) but I don't think he beats Snape in the 
dynamics department.

> >>Nora: 
> <snip>
> For those fans who actually care about hewing to the canon line,   
> there will likely be a good number disappointed at the pathways 
> cut off and the explanations given.  I think of, slightly         
> tangential but related, the whinging that Snape's whole "I am HBP, 
> yo!" thing at the end of the book was OOC.  It makes me wonder how 
> people knew Snapeykins so *well* to declare that.

Betsy Hp:
Well, see, that's why you should trust my take on Snape. <g>  The 
line *was* cheesy, IMO, but I don't think it was OOC. (Snape does 
have a sense of drama, the love.  The more emotional he gets, the 
more Wagnerian.)  And yes, part of a series ending is the end of 
possibilities.  Book 7 is Neville's last chance to prove himself his 
parents' son (for those looking for that sort of thing).  It's the 
last chance for Ron to step out of his brother's shadow.  Of course 
there will be controversy. 
 
> >>Betsy Hp:
> > I've not really seen JKR setting up any character (or any house, 
> > for that matter) as an example of The Good.  Even Dumbledore    
> > slips and stumbles at times.  That's more CS Lewis's line.

> >>Nora; 
> Any character in and of himself, no--but that doesn't invalidate   
> The Good as a lurking background concept.  Mercifully she's not   
> taking the Lewis approach, but there do seem to be moral absolutes 
> which exist in the morality of the Potterverse.  Those things are 
> independent of their imperfect realization in the human characters.

Betsy Hp:
But then it doesn't set an impossibly high standard for any 
character to achieve to be on the side of good.  They are none of 
them saints, so it's unwise to be too judgmental of them.  The tar 
brushed on one character may well paint another.
 
> >>Nora:
> <snip>
> Dumbledore admits that he made mistakes precisely because he held 
> Harry in and of himself as more important than abstract people    
> whom he didn't know personally.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Dumbledore overprotected Harry (in OotP), yes.  I'm not sure saying 
he loved him too much, or should not have cared for him, accurately 
hits the Potterverse morality.  Actually, I think it misses it by a 
huge mark.  To try and say that JKR is writing a morality that 
encourages sons to let their mothers die is an uphill battle I think.

Betsy Hp, who rather likes CS Lewis and can't imagine a proper 
childhood without him