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

[wynnleaf]

No: HPFGUIDX 167317

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" 
<dumbledore11214 at ...> wrote:
>
> > zgirnius:
> > Based on my participation in this and other forums for online 
fan 
> > discussion, it seems to me few fans believed that James Potter 
was 
> > ever an arrogant so-and-so (I know I had no suspicions about it 
as 
> a 
> > reader). "Snape's Worst Memory" in OotP came as a shock to them, 
> and 
> > me, as it did to Harry. To the extent that some still have 
trouble 
> > seeing the scene in this way. But the scene was well-telegraphed 
by 
> > Snape's comments since PoA. Snape is just not trusted by most 
> readers 
> > as a reliable source on the Marauders (quite reasonably, I know 
*I* 
> > would not trust his interpretations of their actions). I do not 
> > believe that his having been proved correct in one aspect has 
made 
> > Snape that much more reliable in the eyes of the readers.

wynnleaf
Actually, Snape's comments about the Marauder's have been 
collaborated by several pieces of evidence.  He said that James was 
arrogant and the Pensieve scene appeared to collaborate that.  He 
said that James used his own spells against him, and that was 
collaborated in the Pensieve scene.  He said that the Marauders 
thought they were above the rules.  While we don't know what they 
actually *thought*, we do know that they broke the rules a great 
deal and had lots of detentions -- apparently far more than Snape 
since Harry never seems to run across a detention for Snape in the 
files.  Snape says they only attacked 4-1.  That doesn't exactly 
happen in the pensieve scene.  It's more like 2-1, with 2 others 
watching.  We could include Lupin as culpable in that in the sense 
that he actively decided not to use his position as prefect to 
intervene.  We also see from the detention files that James and 
Sirius tended to hex and jinx others as at least a duo -- not so 
much by themselves.  Snape said that James arrogantly trusted his 
friends, one of which was a spy, and got himself killed.  We may not 
call that "arrogant," but otherwise, it's true that he trusted where 
he shouldn't.  Snape said Lupin was not to be trusted in POA, and he 
was right.  He was wrong about exactly what Lupin was doing, but he 
was right that Lupin was being extremely untrustworthy in a way that 
risked student's lives and hindered attempts to capture Sirius and 
protect the students (including Harry).

Hm, is there anything else Snape accused the Marauder's of that we 
don't have any outside info about?  

So on the whole, even though I definitely think Snape is a 
biased "witness," I think that he has a fairly good track record of 
collaborated statements about the Marauders.  Not perfect, but 
pretty good.

> Alla:
> 
> But this is a different though to me. Sure, I was surprised by 
that 
> scene. As I said previously though I was not and will not be 
> surprised if the prank will turn out to be a premeditated murder. 
I 
> mean, disappointed? Yes, I probably will be. Surprised? No way. 

wynnleaf
Yes, but those of us who pick apart the stories like this will 
hardly be shocked if *any* of the various theories occurs (except 
the most outlandish).  Most readers would probably be amazed.

Alla

> And Snape is unreliable source of information? Um, I had read the 
> arguments convicting Sirius of murder based on Snape's word and 
> Snape's word alone many many times. 

wynnleaf
I'm not sure what you mean.  What arguments could possibly "convict" 
Sirius of murder?  Who exactly did he kill??  Do you mean attempted 
murder?  Hm.  Well, Snape has no proof.  On the other hand, in the 
Real World, a 16 year old setting up someone for a prank that anyone 
should reasonably know is life threatening, would probably be 
considered a murderer if the person actually died.  It may not be 
premeditated, but it would still be considered murder.

Alla
Which is surely valid 
> interpretation IMO, but to me we have SO many questions about that 
> night and almost no answers that any conclusive judgment is 
> premature. Dumbledore's supposed taking Marauders side in prank is 
> the one I find especially amusing. I mean, really, where in canon 
it 
> says so? The fact that Dumbledore did not expel Sirius? 

wynnleaf
Here I agree.  Many pro-Snape fans (especially over in the fan fic 
world), seem to assume that the Marauders got off almost without 
punishment.  The only thing we really know is that they didn't get 
expelled.  Harry, when using Sectumsempra on Draco, didn't get 
expelled either, even though McGonagall did say he could have 
deserved it.  So it's not that surprising that Sirius didn't get 
expelled.  For all we know, he was in detention for the rest of the 
year.

>Alla 
> So, I would say that I have not seen Snape judged as unreliable 
> information source much. 

wynnleaf
Thing is, much of what Snape says actually has outside 
collaboration.  What the Marauders say about Snape has very little 
to no outside collaboration.  And some of what Lupin or Sirius say 
about him actually has a little bit of evidence against it.  

> 
> 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. 

wynnleaf
I suppose it depends on whether you consider anyone giving biased 
info a "liar."  Sirius *always* speaks of Snape with insults, name 
calling, etc. even in the GOF scene where he gives some info about 
Snape to the Trio.  In my opinion, when the speaker is including 
name-calling in with their comments, you have to assume what they 
say is at least partially biased.  Not necessarily a lie, unless the 
intent is to mislead.

As regards Lupin, for good or bad, he has quite a history of lying.  
And practically all of his lies are to prevent people from thinking 
ill of him.  Some readers assume that in spite of 9 months of lying 
and lying and lying simply to keep the good will of others, we 
should assume that Lupin saying he's oh, so sorry is supposed to 
mean he'll never lie again and therefore everything else he says in 
canon must be true.  While Lupin may *certainly* be sorry about his 
previous lies, he has shown himself far too willing to lie to keep 
the goodwill of others in order to believe everything he says to 
Harry about Snape.

My rule of thumb with Lupin, regarding Snape is -- if there's any 
reason to think telling something different that is somewhat 
negative about the Maruaders or Lupin might make Lupin or the 
Marauders look bad, Lupin has a high likelihood of lying in order to 
keep the goodwill of others.  

Just remember, at the end of POA, it was not Lupin who confessed 
*anything* to Dumbledore.  Sirius told Dumbledore about being 
animagi, and Lupin did *not* tell Dumbledore about the Marauders Map 
(Dumbledore first learns of it in GOF).  Lupin did not appear to 
volunteer to Dumbledore any additional info other than what Sirius 
had already told Dumbledore.

Alla
Sorry. Personally 
> I am still yet to see Sirius to be proven a liar once in cannon.

wynnleaf
I consider a liar someone who deviates from the truth 
*intentionally.*  In my opinion, Sirius is a *biased* witness, not 
necessarily a liar, and therefore all of his comments about Snape 
have a high probability of being skewed negatively, even if 
unintentionally.

Alla
> Remus hides information, yes. But does he lie? So, are you talking 
> about both of them or just Remus?

wynnleaf
Once again, what do you call lying?  If you make someone believe one 
thing, when in fact another completely different thing is true, are 
you lying?  Or is it only when you specifically make a false 
statement?  As a parent, my children know that I consider a lie 
anything that intentionally causes another person to believe a 
falsehood.  So yes, Lupin lies.

> 
> Zgirnius:
> > The revelation that Sirius (and *especially* James) planned to 
> murder 
> > Snape by werewolf in a premeditated set-up would be absolutely 
> > shocking to me; far more that the Worst Memory was. 

wynnleaf
I doubt we'll find out it was premeditated attempted murder.  On the 
other hand, I wouldn't be surprised to find that James was involved.

Alla:

Yeah, exactly. Lupin's absences were school sanctioned, so what 
business that was of Snape's?

wynnleaf
If Snape had overheard the Marauders comments during the pensieve 
scene (or similar comments at another time), it would be 
understandable if he assumed that not only was Lupin doing something 
that was school sanctioned, he and the Marauders were *also* doing 
something that was completely wrong -- which, of course, they were.  
And what business was it of Snape's?  Well, if he thought they were 
the sort of bullying, care-for-nothing students willing to 
cavalierly hurt others just because they exist (why would he ever 
think that??), he might think that the only way to stop that 
behavior was to discover something that would get them expelled.  
After all, Filch's detention files make it crystal clear that the 
usual school punishments didn't put a dent in stopping the Marauders.

Alla:

Erm, I completely disagree. The way Lupin tells the story right now, 
that makes Marauders look very bad. I mean, any walking around 
trying 
to get them expelled , really how can it be comparable with trying 
to 
**kill** somebody?

wynnleaf
The reason I said Lupin's story makes it look like Snape sort of 
deserved it, is because that's the way so many readers take it.  
I've read numerous comments that Snape shouldn't have been following 
the Marauders around to try and get them expelled and that if he 
hadn't been doing that, it wouldn't have happened.  While 
technically that's true, it seems to me to indicate that many 
readers think Snape brought it on himself.  How dare he try to get 
those nice Marauder boys expelled!  However, perhaps you don't feel 
that way.  

>Wynnleaf:
> We can speculate a lot about whatever supposedly bad things Snape 
> was up to during school.

Alla:

It does tell me more and more bad things of what Snape did with 
every 
book actually. 

wynnleaf
What "more bad things" have we learned about what Snape did in 
school?  Can't think of anything other than the mudblood comment and 
inventing Sectumsempra which we don't know if he ever used.  So he 
called someone a bad word in a stressful moment.  Not at all nice, 
but it doesn't come close to collaborating all the stuff Lupin and 
Sirius say.

wynnleaf