[HPforGrownups] Re: Broken potionvial/Is Bella a killer?

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 163254

> Alla:
>
> How can it be the same or as you said almost the same though? I mean
> I trust you of course when you say that it looks almost the same to
> you, but I just do not see it.
>
> I mean, I suppose Snape's underlying jerkiness is the same in
> principle, but the degree of malice is so much more higher IMO if he
> destroys the vial itself. Here we have the teacher who in attempt to
> get back at student whom he already tormented for five years (IMO)
> does not hesitate to destroy his well done work. In other situation
> I totally see how Snape looks much better - since all that he does
> is laugh at something that was Harry's fault ... again. As I said, I
> would dislike that one as well, but I just do not see it comparable
> in the degree of maliciousness at all.

Magpie:
Oh, I agree that there's a difference in the maliciousness. But since Harry 
didn't actually see it happen, if someone read the scene and thought that 
Snape was just being a jerk in laughing at Harry's mistake instead of being 
a jerk in destroying something Harry handed in, I can't really say that one 
or the other is correct. The first reading has Snape being more of a jerk, 
but it's still Snape being a jerk and neither seems completely OOC for 
Snape. His motivation is the same.

Given how much of a jerk Snape is in other places I don't think it's the 
thing that's going to be the key to Snape's character. For instance, 
something else that seems kind of similar was a discussion a while back 
about Barty Crouch having gone bad in Azkaban (having only been an almost-DE 
when he went in).  In that case I think that's a big difference in character 
and that reading Barty as not a full DE is incorrect. (Of course there's 
dozens of moments we can dispute back and forth on and have, really!)

But here I think the essence of Snape is going to be found elsewhere, so 
which way one instinctively read this scene isn't as much of an issue. 
Unless, of course, we could point to canon that proved it one way or another 
and since Harry didn't actually see it I figure I just have to accept both 
readings of this scene as valid.

-m