Truth vs. what meets Harry's eye (Was: Is Harry an idiot because he thinks Snap

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 140562

> Alla wrote:
> > To me, it is just simple as that. Could it be that events on the 
> Tower were more complicated than what Harry saw? <snip>
> 
> Carol responds:
> To answer your last question, yes, they could. Which is not to say
> that they are, only that we know how deceptive appearances can be 
in
> the Potter books. The Snape plot may appear to be resolved, but I'm
> betting that it isn't.


Alla:

Carol, I am snipping  the major part of your post, because I did not 
really argue that events on the Tower could not be more complicated 
than they looked.

In fact, I answered my question:


"Sure, of course. I just think that his reaction is very reasonable
one with the evidence he has."


My main point was that with the evidence Harry saw  he did use his 
best judgment, that is all.

In fact, I would find it incredibly wierd if  the first thing after 
seeing Snape killing Dumbledore Harry would start wondering  whether 
Snape is innocent.

Now, it may happen that some additional circumstances could be 
brought to Harry's attention LATER ON and then he would start 
wandering what happened, but I was just expressing my disagreement 
with Pippin's argument that Harry is not using his best judgment 
when  he believes that Snape killed Dumbledore after.... seeing that 
Snape killed Dumbledore.






Carol:

But what Harry sees throughout the books, even
> Dumbledore struck by a spell that knocks him from the tower and is
> followed by his death, is subject to interpretation, both Harry's 
and
> the reader's. 

Alla:

Absolutely, I am just saying that at the moment with the evidence he 
had, Harry had the most REASONABLE interpretation under the 
circumstances.


Carol:
And certainly both Harry and those readers who regard
> his POV as accurate are likely to see this scene in the worst 
light.

Alla:

You bet. :-) But as I said earlier this is not my main point.



Carol;
> But Harry has often been wrong before, and neither what he see nor
> what he feels is an infallible guide to truth in the sense of what
> really happened.


Alla:

I think that Harry is actually been right too through book 6, so 
even if  he is not infallible guide to truth, I am going to hope 
that he is right  this time. :)


Carol:
Can we confidently conclude that we really know
> what happened on the tower? I don't think so.)
> 
> Certainly Dumbledore is dead. Certainly Snape spoke the 
words "Avada
> Kedavra" and cast the spell that sent Dumbledore over the wall of 
the
> tower. But we know, and Harry knows, that's not the whole story. 

Alla:

Yes again. All that I am saying that with Dumbledore is dead and 
Snape saying "Avada" Harry judged what happened well, even if it is 
not the whole story.

When Harry has more evidence, IF he will have more evidence, then he 
will probably change his judgment.

I keep thinking about SSSusan post about "straightforward reading". 
Maybe she will painfully smack me across the head after reading it :-
), I don't know, maybe those are semantics, but I think that Snape 
guilt IS the most straightforward reading.

I am not saying that this is the " CORRECT" reading or "the BEST" 
reading of JKR books , mind you, but I am saying that  conclusion 
that Snape is guilty jumps out at me without thinking about clues. 
Which could be clues, but also could be red herrings, no?


That is why I am arguing against calling Harry an idiot for thinking 
that Snape is guilty. Because I don't like calling myself 
an "idiot" :-)




> Carol, who does not think for a moment that Harry is an idiot, only
> that what he sees with his own eyes (or hears with his own ears) 
isn't
> the whole truth.


Alla:

Absolutely, it IS a possibility.


JMO,

Alla,

who realises that this is her post number four and shuts up for next 
hour before new day starts. :-)