Real child abuse/ Snape again

Sun Jan 1 17:11:13 UTC 2006

No: HPFGUIDX 145692

> Pippin:
> Oh, I disagree. We do see other teachers abuse their power.
> I think telling a student he is fated to die is an abuse of power.

Alla:

Yeah, sure. I will agree with that, and if Trelawney would have done 
it every single lesson, I would even agree with you that it is an 
emotional abuse.

Pippin:
<SNIP>
 Likewise, it's dangerous for Harry to want
> approval so much that he is provoked to rage whenever Snape
> withholds it.

Alla:

I think he does not want approval anymore that any student wants an 
approval from the teacher for the job done well. IMO of course.

> Pippin:
> And Harry has no responsibilities at all, although he has taken it 
on
> himself to defeat Voldemort? Harry has always had the choice of
> leaving the fight against Voldemort to other people. So has 
Neville.
> Preparation for such a contest is dangerous and difficult in 
itself -- 
> it has to be. But it would be irresponsible to let Harry involve 
himself
> in the conflict unprepared. Harry can't shield his feelings with 
magic,
> so he is going to have to learn to do it the hard way, the real 
world
> way, by realizing that the only person whose approval he really
> needs is Harry Potter's. 

Alla:

At eleven Harry did not involve himself in any fight; he just 
arrived in a new school and in the whole new world and instead of 
some kind of support had to endure a vicious attack from Snape, IMO. 
He is a Potions teacher, NOT a drill instructor, in fact IMO we saw 
how miserably he failed at the role of drill instructor of 
Occlumency.

Now, post HBP I am even thinking sometimes that maybe all that time 
Snape wanted to have Harry expelled because he knew about Harry's 
role in the fight and did not want Harry to learn those skills. Just 
speculating here of course.

> 
> Alla:
> I see nothing wrong in that Harry took a liking to Fake!Moody.
> I mean, of course it was bad within the story, BUT IMO there were 
no 
> signs for Harry that man was exhibited abnormal behavior. I think 
> > that he behaved as a good teacher. IMO of course. 
> 
> Pippin:
> Except when he tortured one of Harry's classmates, helped Harry
> cheat on the Tri-wizard tournament,  and lied about what he saw 
> on the Marauder's Map. 

Alla:

Pippin, I did not said that he did not behave as a DE in reality, 
but I DO think that he played a role of good teacher well, of course 
but for Neville, if that is true. Torturing Draco - sorry, I will 
sign it off to rough justice again and I think that Real!Moody would 
not have been above doing it. IMO of course. 

And two other incidents IMO had nothing to do with his teaching 
activities, but Death Eater activities, which he definitely 
performed splendidly, IMO.

> Alla:
>  Except if he was  showing Unforgivables in order to purposefully 
> upset Neville of  course, but personally I doubt it. For some 
strange 
> reason I think Fake!Moody truly wanted them to learn about 
> unforgivables.
> 
> Pippin:
> Pardon my skepticism, but is it so hard to believe that a fanatical
> Death Eater who tortured a student and murdered his own father
> would be above deliberately upsetting Neville so he would have
> an excuse to give him a valuable book which he definitely wanted
> Neville to have? 

Alla:

Hard to believe? No, of course not, but since we KNOW that he taught 
Harry how to resist Imperius for real, I think it is also a 
possibility that he had some other reasons to teach Unforgivables, 
which do not include abusing Neville. But of course it is a 
possibility that he did abuse Neville  and then I will take my 
statement of him behaving as a good teacher back  OR it is also a  
possibility that Dumbledore REALLY wanted them to learn about 
Unforgivables, no?

I think we just don't know either way. So, of course in reality fake!
Moody was not a good teacher - good teachers do not plan kidnapping 
and assassination attempts, BUT IMO Harry could not see any sings 
that man is dangerous.

> Pippin:
> That's what she's at school to learn, is it? Glowing?  She got an 
O in 
> potions but only an E in DADA, so I guess the examiners weren't 
> impressed with her glowing ability either :-)
>

Alla:

Hermione is in school to learn that when you do your job well, you 
will not get the grade that you are supposed to get? Is that what 
you are arguing?

Gerry:

> Actually, I don't think this definition is completely right. A 
teacher
> can emotionally abuse a pupil, and I've seen the results of this. 
Was
> there trust? No. Was there dependence: certainly, there is always
> dependence in a teacher-child relationship. Was there 
exclusiveness:
> up to a point. There are teachers who are certainly able to
> emotionally abuse a child and who do so.

Alla:

Absolutely. That is exactly what I was trying to say. Based on 
Miles' definition it seems to me that teacher can never abuse the 
child, because the teacher does not have the same kind of emotional 
connection with the child as parent does, and that argument I find 
myself in a very strong disagreement with.

Gerry:
> Yet I don't think Snape is abusive. He is nasty, but he never 
crosses
> the line into true abuse. He simply does not enough for that. True
> abuse would mean making derogatory remarks about Neville/Harry 
every
> couple of minutes. <snip> Now we see Snape doing a
> little of that. And for Neville this is certainly not good. But 
true
> abuse is much, much worse. Could Snape be able of emotional abuse?
> Certainly. He knows how to wound and he has demonstrated he can be
> cruel. Does he do it. No, he does not enough for that. 

Alla:

Oh, you see, if we were discussing RL situation AND I knew for sure 
that indeed Snape only does what he does sometimes, I may have found 
myself more in agreement with you (although I happen to think that 
he does enough as it is, but your argument makes sense to me). Since 
we do discuss book series, I think that what we see how many 
characters behave is a sign of pattern, not just isolated 
situations. Does it make sense? We do NOT see many Potions classes 
and my interpretation is that there is no reason to believe that 
Snape behaves any differently to Harry, Neville or Hermione than how 
he acts in the classes we see. IMO only of course.

And I think JKR gives us hints that in the classes that we do not 
see Snape does NOT behave any differently. For example, after 
Boggart scene narrator remarks that Snape seemed to be bullying 
Neville worse than ever. We do not see all those classes, but we 
know that narrator observed the pattern,IMO.

PAR:
<SNIP>
 Nor is this all. Snape accuses Harry of not 
> telling Neville about when to put in quills when one of Neville's 
> potions explodes.  This isn't about "approval" or any lying on 
> Harry's part.  This is about a teacher deliberately choosing to 
> single out a student for harassment.  <SNIP>

Alla:

I think that extent of Snape's cruelty in this accident is 
highlighted lately, during Boggart lesson, when Snape punishes 
Hermione for helping Neville. So, no matter what they do - they are 
bound to loose, I guess.

So, I think Snape could absolutely care less about Neville's 
education, since he does not want other students either helping or 
not helping him. I guess he is perfectly satisfied with him being 
the one in charge and being able to bully those who are weaker than 
him.

Good teacher? How about being consistent and letting the other 
students know how do you want to deal with Neville, if nothing else? 
IMO anyway.

JMO,

Alla