Sadistic Snape, Occlumency, etc

[ellecain]

No: HPFGUIDX 140254

Hi,
Replying to a lot of posts here,
will need more practice with snipping....

Pippin wrote
>Snape really doesn't act to me like a man who has just committed a
>murder either reluctantly or gleefully. He acts more like one who 
has
>had a narrow escape and is anxious to get away before something
>worse happens.

Elyse: I agree completely. The lack of gloating or pleasure
at killing DD, I must admit, its absence is suspicious.
This is in complete contrast to PoA where Snape is enjoying the idea
of Black and Lupin getting kissed by Dementors.
"They'll be very pleased to see you Black, pleased enough to give 
you a little kiss, I daresay."

I would like to point this out to people arguing for the
Sadistic!Snape thread. If he is as sadistic as you paint him, why 
did he not enjoy this moment more?

Pippin wrote:
>Under this theory, Snape would have  proved his courage to 
>himself, and would not be  upset by Harry's accusation of cowardice.
>Indeed he is not, at first,  and almost banteringly brings
>up James. But then Harry says,"Kill me like you killed him."

Elyse: This is true. If Snape is OFH/ESE! why did he react so 
strongly to the cowardice accusation *after* this point?
Harry had called him a coward before, but Snape paid no attention,
did not get angry until this point.

Pippin:
>Harry, of course, is speaking of Dumbledore. But Snape has been
>talking about *James*. And for a moment we glimpse Snape in
>hell "...his face was suddenly demented, inhuman, as though he
>was in as much pain as the yelping, howling dog stuck in the
>burning house behind them--"  before he  finishes with 
>" CALL ME COWARD!" What he meant  at first, I think, was 
>" Don't say I killed James."

>There's the remorse, if anyone but me is looking for it.

Elyse: I like it. It sounds a bit confusing if you look at it from 
the Snape was talking about James angle.
But this could tie in nicely with Snape feeling he did
not do enough to pay back James' life debt.

Magda wrote:
>Did anyone else find that one of the
>most unbelievable parts of the book?  Occlumency - this obscure but
>useful branch of magic that requires you to control your emotions to
>be successful at it - and nuttier-than-a-Ziplock-baggie-of-trail-mix
>Aunt Bellatrix knows how to do it?

Elyse: Absolutely!!!! I thought you were supposed to have emotional
detachment if not complete control to be a good Occlumens,
neither of which Bella seems to have.

And dont you think it SO impossible that
Draco who was taught by such a crackpot of a teacher
can withold thoughts from SNAPE????
This is the man who can supposedly fool both LV and DD if he wants
yet a total snotrag like Draco can close his mind from him?

Incidentally I've always been surprised that Harry could break
into Snape's mind during OOTP Occlumency lessons.
I mean how come Snape can hold out on his memories from LV
but someone like Harry who has *no* Legilimency power
can break through? I think JKR messed up on that one.

phoenixgod2000 wrote
There is a lot that doesn't make sense in Occlmency.  Draco is 
better 
at it than Harry because he can compartmentalize his mind better, a 
sign of being a sociopath, -

Elyse interrupting:
I'm sorry, but since when is compartmentalizing your mind a sign of 
being a sociopath?
Are you suggesting all people with good emotional detachment/control
have mental problems?
It just seems kind of an unfair leap.

phoenixgod2000 continuing:
yet Dumbledore, the epitome of good is one 
the masters of the art. How does that work? Why is snape, a man with 
the emotional control of a pouty ten year old also a master? Doesn't 
make sense to me.

Elyse: Come on, give Snape due credit. He lost emotional control 
two times *only* in 6 years. Both times he was reacting to 
memories of childhood bullies.
Compare that to Harry who loses his temper so often, especially
in OOTP, and goes into long rants against his best friends,
his family, his girlfriend, and that too for little things.
Its Harry who has poor emotional control, not Snape.

Amiable Dorsai:
>Other than, you know, picking out a student for "special attention"
>during his very first Potions class, insulting an orphan's father,
>insulting a student's looks, playing favorites, casting aspersions 
>on
>a student's intelligence to another teacher in front of the student
>and his classmates, making an unjustified criticism of another 
>teacher
>to that teacher's class, threatening to poison a student's pet and
>then being abusive after he's thwarted, discouraging class
>participation from the best student in his class... 

Elyse:
I must point out here that many teachers have favourites,
many teachers call their students unintelligent and dumb.
I myself have a teacher, extremely sadistic, who insults
not only my parents, but anybody she wants to criticize,
and does so in front of the whole class.
I hate her. She brings out a fight or flight response in me 
each time and I have to bite my tongue to stop calling her names out 
loud. She is without question *worse* than Snape.
Infinitely worse. She has done all of the things you have witten 
above other than poisoning a toad.

I am not justifying her behaviour, merely pointing out that he is 
one of many unpleasant (mild adjective) people.
Hagrid who JKR loves, is more culpable than Snape of being a bad 
teacher. He puts students' lives in danger with his dangerous
creatures. He does it knowingly, which is in my opinion worse.
Also his lessons have very little educational value.

So what I dont understand, is how come Hagrid is off the hook for 
endangering students with little care for how much they learn?
Just because he is nice and friendly doesnt make him less culpable.
And here we have antisocial Snape who saves students lives routinely
and teaches Potions very well, but he is attacked for the simple 
reason that he is not a nice man.
Doesnt make sense to me.

Elyse