Lupin, Snape and the boggart, Was: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape

[lanval1015]

No: HPFGUIDX 153238

Lanval:
 Seems the staff, having left the 
> > boggart alone, also politely vacated the room since 
> > DD informed them that Lupin would be holding class there. 
> 
> houyhnhnm:
> 
> Are you interpreting "leave *it*" as meaning leave the room?  I read
> it as leave the boggart--don't get rid of it; Lupin wants to use it
> for his class.  So there's no indication here for  me that  staff
> politely vacated the room or even that Dumbledore  told them Lupin 
was
> going to hold his class there.


Lanval:
No, see above. I interpreted it as "the staff left the boggart 
alone". Leaving the room, so Lupin could hold class without the 
boggart swooping down on teachers, or Lupin feeling 'supervised', 
seemed a further logical conclusion for me. No canon support for 
that, I know. But since the boggart had not been moved by the time 
Lupin's third year class was about to start, it seems once again 
logical that they would assume for the class to be held in the staff 
room. 



 houyhnhnm: 
 But I think he knew holding the class in
> the staff room, forcing Snape either to leave or to stay and
> see-how-much-better-I-am-than-you-at-DADA was going to get under
> Snape's skin.  And that may have been a little extra inducement for
> Lupin.  
 

Lanval:
I doubt he even knew Snape was off during that time. It was his first 
lesson for the Third Years, his first few days of teaching. He would 
have enough trouble keeping his own schedule in his head, much less 
Snape's.

Again, it's a lot of planning and scheming for no real reason at all, 
except to aggravate Snape.


 houyhnhnm: 
Why do I think Lupin knew that holding class in the staffroom
> would produce the serendipitous bonus of getting under Snape's 
skin? 
> Because it did.  And these two have a history.

Lanval:
But you haven't given me a convincing reason WHY Lupin would want to 
get Snape's hackles up on the first occasion he gets, and make an 
already tense situation worse. That's just not Lupin's style, and 
since he's obviously hard pressed for a job, why on earth would he 
jeopardize everything for a childish grudge, by PLANNING how to annoy 
Snape? He doesn't know DD all that well; for all he knows Snape has 
DD's ear and trust, and could get him fired without much effort. 




 houyhnhnm:  
  I
> think Lupin had a pretty good idea at that moment what form 
Neville's
> boggart might take.

Lanval:
Maybe. Pure speculation, though. Now I'm not saying that once Snape 
made that remark, Lupin didn't secretly enjoy the direction things 
were taking. He's not THAT nice. I get the feeling that he was rather 
taken aback by Snape's vicious comment, then quickly decided to pick 
Neville, both to spite Snape, and to give Neville a chance to prove 
himself... and then, when Neville's worst fear turned out to Snape -- 
great!
 But I won't buy for a minute that it was anything but a spontaneous 
reaction, triggered by Snape. Whether it was the smart thing to do is 
another question. 


 houyhnhnm: 
> He used a student to get back at a colleague and make him a figure 
of
> ridicule in front of students.  It's wrong.  I don't care what his
> reason was.  There's no good reason.


Lanval:
Making people a figure of ridicule is Snape's speciality. Here he 
does it, once again, to Neville. With some help from Lupin, the 
insult comes back to Snape to bite him. JKR likes this comeuppance 
thing. See Dudley, see Malfoy. See Harry in the train compartment. 
There's plenty of it in the books. If you disapprove, you should take 
it up with the author. 


> houyhnhnm:  
> Then Snape escalated the conflict still further when he took Lupin's
> class.  I condemn the way he criticized the Lupin's instruction 
while
> taking his class as strongly  as I condemn what Lupin did.
> 
> At each level, each one feels justified to up the ante by what the
> other has already done. 

Lanval:
I agree, except that we seem to differ on who started it. I get the 
impression thoughout the book that Lupin comes to Hogwarts perfectly 
willing to let bygones be bygones, and stay out of Snape's way as 
much as possible. 


 houyhnhnm: 
 The conflict between Snape and Lupin in PoA
> is interesting  because it gives a glimpse of the pattern of
> escalation that may have prevailed between Snape and the three
> Gryffindors (I don't include the poodle in a rat suit)  when they 
were
> teenagers.  

Lanval:

I agree. Though I wouldn't exclude Peter. But if you're saying that 
this gives us a glimpse of the pattern back in the Marauder days, 
that's interesting. Because IMO Snape's unbridled penchant for 
nastiness started it in the boggart case. It follows, then, that this 
was the case back in their schooldays as well?  :)



Irene:
> 
> But how do you imagine their first meeting went, after Dumbledore 
> introduced his new DADA professor? How could Lupin not to pick up 
the 
> clue that Snape does not reciprocate with the first name? Sure, he 
has a 
> right to persist with it, it's not crime, but nice and friendly 
it's not 
> either.

Lanval: 
I would agree completely if Snape had stuck to calling him 'Professor 
Lupin'. From what I've seen in the books, calling someone by their 
last name, to their face, is either done when talking to an inferior, 
or else with a negative intent. Hagrid seems to be the exception.

So Snape calls him, probably with his best sneer, 'Lupin'. That's 
worse than 'not nice and friendly'.

 

> In the Shrieking shack Lupin continues his line of 
behaviour "Severus, 
> we were at school together". It only serves to infuriate Snape 
further, 
> and it does not take a PhD in Psychology to figure it out upfront.
> So either Lupin was evil there :-), or very, very naive (to the 
point 
> where some people will call it stupidity).


Lanval:
No, I don't think he was evil there. :)
But neither would *I* call it stupid. It's just not something Lupin 
seems to recognize as offensive (apparently he has that problem with 
Tonks, too, who hates her first name, and has pointed it out to him 
several times). It may be careless, naive, whatever. You can call it 
stupid. But since my main argument was that Lupin does not act out of 
malice by sticking with Snape's first name, I'll accept that.




Irene:
> Lovely. I think an effort to be pleasant starts with apologies (or, 
at 
> the very least) acknowledgment of previous unpleasantness. To 
pretend 
> that nothing out of ordinary playground tussle has ever happened, 
to 
> refer to "childish grudges" or some such, to continue with the 
bullshit 
> "jealous of James's quidditch skills" does not strike me as moving 
on at 
> all.


Lanval:
First of all, we don't KNOW that Lupin does not, at some point during 
PoA, bring up the issue with Snape, and tries to make peace. 
Personally I think if he did, Snape would slap down any such effort 
before Lupin could say "Weeping Willow". Snape's not the kiss-and-
make-up type; he enjoys his grudges far too much for that.


Irene:
> Snape's biggest issue, as I see it, stems from the fact that no one 
has 
> ever acknowledged that he was wronged during his Hogwarts years.

Lanval:
Where is the canon that Snape, and only Snape was 'wronged'? That he 
was the permanent victim for seven long years?
Does he not also owe Lupin an apology for spying on him, and trying 
to get him expelled? 

Where is the canon that Snape was innocent in the whole Prank 
scenario? Where is the canon that Sirius & Co went unpunished, and 
Snape's suffering unacknowledged?

DD's memory is *as good as ever*. That he doesn't tell Harry/the 
reader every aspect of what went on during the Prank in the first 
book is no proof that Snape was wronged.


Irene:
 Now, 
> maybe he should move on of his own volition, forgive and forget.But 
the 
> participants of the events have no right to expect it from him. 

Lanval:
Funny, isn't this eactly what many Snape fans expect, even demand, of 
Harry, Neville, and whoever else suffered from Snape?



> Irene
>
> But then, we would not have the big payoff in book 7. :-)
> 

Lanval:
Indeed. And we'd never have this much fun discussing it. :)



 

> Pippin:
> Um, no, that was  straightforward canon interpretation.
> The other three characters who show a consistent ability to tell 
what
> Harry is thinking, ie Dumbledore, Voldemort and Snape, have all been
> identified as legilimenses. At this point it seems more speculative 
to say 
> definitively that Lupin is not a legilimens than that he is. How 
else do we  
> account for his ability?
> 
> But as long as you bring it up....
 
Lanval:
I know a number of people who have a scary knack of guessing other 
people's thoughts and emotions. That's no proof. A simple counter-
argument, if one wanted to go with the Lupin-planned-it scenario 
would be that he did some research on Neville, and others, before he 
even came to Hogwarts. The way a secret agent does research before 
starting an assignment. No legilimency required.

 Pippin:
> 
> I can well believe that ESE!Lupin lies awake thinking of how he
> might  determine where Snape's true loyalties lie. Certainly it's
> kept enough of *us* awake at night. And Snape would lie
> awake thinking of ways to stop him, such as coming down
> very hard on Neville in potions class that day so that Neville's
> image of scary Snape in the boggart lesson Snape knew was
> coming would be the present day Snape and not
> someone twelve years younger.
> 

Lanval:

That's a lot of speculation based on speculation. I prefer the simple 
answer, see above in my answer to Houyhnhnm.



> Pippin:
> Well, that would be the sitcom version. But Rowling evidently has
> something else in mind, because she pops this particular bubble
> in the next chapter. "Snape didn't seem to find it funny. His eyes
> flashed menacingly at the very  mention of Professor Lupin's name
> and he was bullying Neville worse than ever." -- PoA ch 8
> 
> As a morale booster, it's on a level with putting Stan Shunpike
> behind bars. I'm sure a lot of people felt comforted by that too.
> I'll say this for Scrimgeour, though, at least his method didn't
> actually provoke Voldemort.

Lanval:

Then Rowling apparently is fond of sitcom humor. Nor do I see any 
significance in Snape's wrath but a natural reaction to being made to 
look ridiculous. It would be significant if Snape had NOT reacted 
this way... perhaps shrugged it off and laughed about it. Then my red 
warning lights would go off.

And really, this is not at all on the same level as Stan Shunpike 
being thrown in prison. It's made clear that Stan is NOT a DE, and 
that any warm fuzzy feeling originating from his arrest is hardly 
morally acceptable. Snape on the other hand DID make an ugly remark. 
He got 'rewarded' promptly. 



>Pippin: 
> It's a fine joke if Snape is just the cartoon of a bad teacher, but
> if he is, then Harry and Neville are in no more danger from
> him  than the Roadrunner is of being caught by Wile E Coyote.
> 
> OTOH, if  Snape does turn out to be an unreformed DE and a 
> once and future killer, then setting him on poor Neville isn't
> really very funny, is it?
> 
Lanval:
Are you saying there's still a possibility of that? *veg*

I'd say this little incident would hardly weigh into it. If Snape's a 
DE, Neville is a marked man from the beginning, by family association 
alone -- and if not in PoA, then certainly by the time he fights at 
the MoM. 

Besides, how could Lupin have any possible knowledge of Snape being a 
DE? Sirius certainly did not know. By that line of thought, anyone 
who ever contributed to Snape's dislike of Neville is to blame.