At an Elf's request. . .

[bawilson at citynet.net]

No: HPFGUIDX 152316

I am reposting this as it got scrambled the first time:


Lupinlore <rdoliver30 at ...> wrote:
> the detestable thing would be NOT to deal with these issues.  Sorry,
> but any work that approves of the abuse of children is, IMO,
> reprehensible, and good for nothing but mulch.

Leslie41:
"But Rowling doesn't "approve" of Snape's behavior. When asked why 
Dumbledore allows Snape to teach, she basically said that "there are
all sorts of lessons in life; horrible teachers like Snape are one of 
them!"  Snape's behavior towards children is at the very least mean-
spirited, but one of the lessons children learn from Rowling is that 
mean-spirited teachers and students and all sorts of other people
exist in the world, and they don't always receive the punishment we 
think they should.  I have a daughter, and the last thing I want her
to think is that people always get what they deserve.

They don't, and thinking so, or thinking that literature (especially 
for children) should portray it as such is at best naive."


BAW:
Please tell me when Snape committed child abuse?  I don't remember 
him ever doing so.  I've seen real child abuse in my work, and 
nothing that Sanpe has done comes even close.  Is he a mean, nasty 
person?  Yes.  Would I want him teaching my child?  No, but. . . .

I had a teacher somewhat like Snape once.  But, for all his faults, 
his students LEARNED THE SUBJECT.  The man I am thinking of 
frequently was heard to say, "Teaching is not a popularity contest."  
So, while given a choice between a nice and effective teacher and a 
mean and effective one, I'd certainly chose the former.  But between 
a nice but ineffective teacher and a nasty but effective one, I'd 
probably choose the latter.


BAW