The Prank in DH (was Re: Predictions for the End (what I think, hope and know)

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 167266

 


Quick_Silver:
> --The Prank was an attempt to kill Snape plain  and simple. 

Carol:
I don't think it's quite that simple. Sirius  certainly wanted to
terrify Severus and put him in terrible danger, but  thinking before he
acts isn't his strong point. I think that Snape is right  about James
being involved from the beginning and getting cold feet. At any  rate,
I think that the Prank prompted him to invent Sectumsempra as an  act
of revenge. I doubt that it affected his studies--he would still  want
to excel in his NEWTs, but maybe it affected his ambitions,  pushing
him toward the Death Eaters out of revenge as well as a desire  for
recognition. (I don't know, but we'll find  out!)



Julie:
I recall JKR saying we will find out more about the Prank in Book  7, and
I agree with Carol. I think the Prank may be one of those pivotal  moments
that set the course leading to the Potter's deaths and Harry becoming 
the Boy who Lived. I think JKR may show the Prank, along with  Dumbledore's
reaction to it, as a main motivator for Snape turning toward Voldemort.  In
one sense, the Marauders helped set a course toward Voldemort  ultimately
targeting Harry and his parents for death.
 
Please note, I am IN NO WAY absolving Snape of blame in regards  to the 
Potters'
deaths. But it's similar to those who give Snape some of the blame for  
getting
Sirius killed because of his goading Sirius about his inactivity at  Grimmauld
Place. If that was one of the straws that finally broke the camel's back in 
regards to Sirius throwing caution and orders to the wind and going to the  
MoM,
then it may be that Sirius (and James if he was involved at all in the  
original 
idea) playing the Prank on Snape may have provided the straw that broke  
*that*
camel's back and ultimately sent Snape to Voldemort. (The analogy isn't  
exact,
as the actions in the latter case were more direct and malicious, but  similar
enough to compare.)
 
If James were alive, I think he might regret how he treated Snape during  
their
school years, and how he helped shape Snape's later actions. Just as  Snape
(at least per Dumbledore) regrets how his informing Voldemort about the 
Prophecy helped shape Voldemort's later targetting of the Potter  family.
(Here Snape's action was far more direct, but when one's actions, small or  
large,
affect the actions of others, there's no erasing that effect later.)
 
Definitely the Prank has something to reveal about the characters involved  
and
their motivations or JKR wouldn't be featuring it in the crowded plot of  DH. 
And
if the revelation is that Snape was equally responsible for the Prank  (he 
knew 
Remus was a werewolf, planned to kill Remus, etc) as some fans  hope, it could
make sense if Snape is ESE or perhaps a version of OFH. But since I believe 
Snape is DDM, I think the more likely revelation is going to be that Snape  
*was* 
the victim in *that* particular incident, and it ultimately drove him  into 
Voldemort's
arms...er, so to speak. It's also the more interesting revelation,  because 
it spreads
blame and responsibilty among everyone whose actions out of anger, spite,  and
hatred lead to unexpected and regrettable consequences, which is reflective  
of
the true human condition, rather than deliniating bad guys versus good  guys 
in
a cartoonish way that isn't representative of human society. I believe  that 
was 
the real point of the Pensieve scene in OotP, and will be the lesson  of the 
Prank
when it plays out in DH. 
 
Julie
 



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]