CHAP DISC, HBP 25, The Seer Overheard

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 161848

Snow wrote:
<snip>
> I actually thought the detentions were set as a deterrent from 
> Harry's obsession of following Draco (on his free days) and getting 
> anymore involved in an already complicated situation that Dumbledore 
> and Snape were acting on; they didn't need Harry's reckless 
> involvement.  <snip>

Carol responds:
I agree. This is what I was trying to get at in my question about
Snape's detention in the Sectumsempra chapter discussion, which for
some reason isn't linked to the responses (Carol shakes her fist at
Yahoo!mort):

"11. <snip> Are the Saturday detentions primarily intended to punish
Harry by tormenting him with his father's indiscretions or does this
tactic disguise Snape's real purpose for keeping Harry in his custody
every Saturday until the end of term?"

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/161107?l=1

Snow: 
> James did change while he was still at school and learned how to 
> choose his fights and to conceal his more reckless behavior, 
> otherwise Lily would have never gone out with James. James would 
> never have grown to the person who saved Snape from werewolf Lupin
if he hadn't mastered his hatred to Snape over the right and wrong 
> spectrum. <snip>

Carol responds:
I'm not so sure. I always thought that the so-called Prank occurred
early in their sixth year, only a few months after the Pensieve
incident. I don't think it shows that James had already mastered his
hatred of Severus; I think it *taught* him to do so. (IMO, he was
motivated by the desire to keep Sirius from being expelled and Remus
from killing a classmate or turning him into a werewolf rather than
any concern for Severus per se. But, like the adult Snape, he could
hate someone without wanting him dead.) I think the incident (and the
desire to go out with Lily) motivated James to control his hexing of
people (other than Severus) who annoyed him rather than the other way
around. (Just my opinion; I also think that Severus could take care of
himself when he wasn't taken unawares, two against one, which made
hexing him more fun than, say, enlarging the head of a kid who
couldn't fight back.)

> Snow:
<snip>
 
> I've always felt very lonely in my Trelawney-is-for-real vessel. 
> Trelawney has made more than most of her predictions accurately 
> (which I have written about several times since OOP). <snip> 
> As to the direct question, I would have to say that this has only 
> reinforced what I had already felt about Trelawney's predictions, 
> which is that she does make accurate predictions but does not always 
> interpret them correctly. <snip>

Carol responds:
You're not alone. I agree that Trelawney sees things in the tea leaves
and the crystal ball that HRH and even Dumbledore can't see; she just
interprets them incorrectly (the "Grim" that turns out to be an
Animagus, for example). Of course, she's also simply a fraud on
occasion, e.g., the self-fulfilling prophecy about Neville breaking
teacups or the prediction that students will get the flu, but "one of
our number will leave us at Easter" is hard to explain in those terms
and the Lightning-Struck Tower is even harder.

> Snow:
> 
> Although the situation that occurred at the door has been discussed 
> intensely over how Snape could have only heard part of the prophecy, 
> I thought I should chime in 'here' with a realistic reason how this 
> could have happened. It's very quick and to the point: Muffliato! 
> 
> Halfway through the prophecy, Snape is detected listening at the
door but the barman issued a Muffliato spell so that Snape could not
hear the end portion. 

Carol responds:
How would the barman (Aberforth) know Snape's own spell? He hasn't
been hanging around the schoolyard for the last five years. And if he
cast it, even silently, Snape would know the counterspell. The best
explanation we have so far is a "commotion" outside the door that
would prevent Snape from hearing the second half of the Prophecy, but
that still doesn't fit with "thrown out halfway through the Prophecy."
The versions aren't consistent, period.
> 
Snow:
> As to the question at hand all I have to say is how old is Snape 
> during this process? Would Dumbledore have considered Snape as a 
> prospective Professor at his age, at best 20 (not much older than
the young Tom Riddle who asked the previous professor for a teaching 
> position)?  

Carol:
If I'm correct that it happened on Halloween 1979 (Harry's approximate
conception date and JKR's favorite day for significant events) and
Snape was born in 1959 (consistent with his being "35 or 36" in GoF,
which occurs in 1994-95), he would have been twenty years old--as you
say, probably too young to be hired as a teacher. But as I keep
saying, Trelawney's interview did not occur at the usual time (July or
August). It was a "cold, wet night" and she was hired somewhat late in
the school year ("*almost*" sixteen years" before her inspection by
Trelawney in OoP compared with a straight "fourteen years" for Snape).
At the time of Trelawney's interview, the DADA position would already
have been filled for the year and the Potions position would still be
held by Slughorn. And I can't see Severus Snape, multi-talented though
he is, applying for the Divination position (though it's possible that
Trelawney thought that's what he was doing based on the fact that he
was hired to teach Potions almost two years later).
 
> Snow:
> 
> Snape and Wormtail were never together
at least not till Spinner's 
> End! 

Carol:
Agreed!

Snow: 
> Those `darn' sock's! 

Carol:
Groan! JKR loves puns. She'd probably appreciate that one.

Carol, happy to find herself agreeing with Snow on so many answers