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

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 167310

> Zgirnius: 
> > The Marauders tend to be (quite unreasonably, in my view) 
> considered 
> > as reliable sources on their own activities, and even Snape's, 
> though 
> > the latter observation is not relevant to my argument.
> <SNIP> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Quite unreasonably? I guess we have to agree to disagree right away 
> if we are going into Marauders are liars argument. Sorry. Personally 
> I am still yet to see Sirius to be proven a liar once in cannon.
> 
> Remus hides information, yes. But does he lie? So, are you talking 
> about both of them or just Remus?

Magpie:
I don't think Zara's talking about lying here. JKR seems fascinated 
with people being honest about a situation but *still* not being a 
reliable source of their own activities. Just like people in real 
life, they're sometimes just too baised to give you a good view--that 
is, to give you the view you consider the right one. That, I think, is 
what we see with the Marauders. They've never lied to Harry about 
Snape, nor has Snape seemingly lied about them. And yet they still 
clearly have very different views about what was going on. Even when 
Harry goes to Remus and Sirius and asks for an explanation for what 
he's seen, Sirius and Remus don't lie, but clearly they're not 
describing the same scene that Harry thinks he saw. 

That's why, imo, it's good to not consider the Marauders reliable 
sources on their own activities. Not because they lie--they don't, and 
we'd be foolish to think that they are. You should consider them 
reliable in terms of the basic actions that happened (including stuff 
like Snape being Lucius lapdog and being part of a gang of 
Slytherins), you just can't assume they're interpreting them correctly 
for you (Snape's relationship with Lucius and the gang may not be any 
like what one would imagine from what Sirius said). They're not 
necessarily giving you the whole story as you yourself would see it, 
because they're giving their side to it. And of course, sometimes they 
might do something as good as lying, lying by ommission or whatever, 
for whatever reason--all characters might do that. Remus never lies to 
Harry that I remember, but it's understandable for Harry to feel that 
he's been dishonest at the end of PoA simply by not telling him all he 
knew.

When it comes to the Prank...I'm trying to think of what I think about 
it. I don't think it was murder. I don't think Sirius is lying about 
it. He's too angrily dismissive, and Lupin is too wearily dismissive--
of the whole thing for me to believe there was really some evil plot. 
To me Snape reads more as someone whose story is known (as Dumbledore 
reminds him it is) and it just isn't seen the way he sees it. JKR 
seems to know how angry that can make people--perhaps even angrier 
than if the real story just isn't known.

I do think there could be very important information about the Prank 
we don't know about, but my instinct doesn't lead me to think that 
information is about making somebody any more or less guilty. I would 
more guess the more information might be about why it makes Snape so 
angry or why it's such a painful memory for him in general, which may 
show the actions of a lot of people in a different light. I suspect 
that's what makes the Prank so important and not whether or not it was 
murder. To use something that's maybe not the best analogy, think of 
Ron's anger at Harry in GoF. Saying that Ron was angry at Harry 
because he thought he put his name in the Goblet doesn't really get to 
the heart of *why* Ron was angry, what buttons that hit for Ron, why 
it felt like a betrayal to him. 

-m