Who was responsible for Sirius' death? ...

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 167584

Dana:
<SNIP>
> But I agree with many others that JKR did a very poor job on the 
way 
> she handled the DoM aftermath scene. She shoves the blame into 
Sirius 
> shoes by letting DD say, that if Sirius had handled Kreacher 
> differently then none of this would have happened. I cannot for 
the 
> life of me think of any good reason, why she needed to add this to 
> the scene because if it was to point out that every action a 
person 
> takes can have consequences then why on earth does she have DD 
defend 
> Snape's actions. 

Alla:

Well, yeah, I am one of those who hates DD OOP speech as I mentioned 
several times and I hate that part more than others as I also wrote 
about in the past. Are you sure though that JKR sides with DD here 
in a sense that she approves of that speech? I do not know, maybe I 
am rationalizing too much and I just cannot stand thinking that JKR 
would be fine with her "epitome of goodness" badmouthing Harry's 
godfather who just died a few moments ago. The only way I am able to 
feel good enough about that scene, is that I am telling myself that 
Dumbledore was not feeling that fine and dandy that night either, 
that he was not thinking clearly, was suffering, was upset with 
Sirius death and did not choose his words carefully enough because 
of that, and yes, I know it is a self rationalizing again, but 
whatever works, yes?

Because if that would be what carefully thinking DD would have said, 
oh man, **hate it**.

And you know, I just had a thought. Maybe JKR deliberately wrote DD 
death the way that it makes it possible to blame him for his own 
death, HAHA. Karma, maybe? Again, I am not the one blaming DD for 
his own death, never will be, but surely text as it stands now has 
support for those arguments.

I hope that JKR does not held the opinion that victim should be 
blamed, I hope not, I hope she will make it clear in book 7 with 
Dumbledore as well and place the blame solely on the shoulders of 
Snape, but one never knows of course.

Dana:
> If Snape had treated Harry better then Harry would not have 
forgotten 
> to go to him as the last Order member present at Hogwarts and also 
> when you hold Snape actions of that evening against the light of 
day, 
> then the man did a pretty bad job of making sure Harry was safe. 
><BIG SNIP>

Alla:

Okay, I am going to take my temperature after I am typing this :), 
but I am not sure I agree.

I mean, I agree that Snape bears each and every moment of blame for 
animosity that he created between him and Harry. After he greeted 
Harry the way he did on his first lesson ( that is a child who lost 
his parents in part thanks to Snape), Snape lost in my mind any 
right to complain about any misgivings by Harry. The bastard in his 
thirties chose to hate an innocent kid, instead of his dead dad. 
So, no matter how irrationally Harry may feel towards Snape later 
on, I blame Snape and only Snape for creating this situation.

In that sense Occlumency disaster is Snape doing of course in a 
sense how badly Snape behaved towards Harry previously in those five 
years that Harry cannot master one iota of trust towards him.

But if we look only at situation at hand, I am not sure what else 
Snape could have done differently. I mean if he is LID or evil and 
Neri's argument about wasted time is correct, then sure, here we 
have another one of Snape sins, for which I am keeping my fingers 
crossed he will suffer in book 7.

But if he is DD!M Snape, I am not sure how he could have kept Harry 
from going to the Ministry.

I mean, isn't it taking away Harry's most endearing quality ( as I 
see it)? Harry will not stand for loved ones being in danger, real 
or imaginary. One of many things I adore him for, so I do not know, 
I think even if Snape tied him up, I think he would have gone to 
save Sirius anyways.

> > Dana:
> > I am not trying to blame Snape but I do wonder why the emphasis 
is 
> > made on how Sirius treated Kreacher but not how Snape treated 
Harry 
> > compared to the actions of both man in the course of OotP. 
> 
> zgirnius:
> I have noticed that a lot of arguments about whether Rowling 
writes 
> characters consistently or not hinge on differences of opinion 
about 
> what the characters actually do. 

Alla:

Um, that too, but to me it is more like whether characters behave 
consistently to what they were established as through the series 
earlier, but I am not sure what this has to do with Occlumency.

zgirnius:
Snape ain't a nice teacher, and 
> especially not to Harry, but in OotP he seemed to be making an 
effort 
> (not to be nice, that would be overstating it. To give occlumency 
> lessons a chance, I guess is how I would phrase it). 
> 
> I realize many readers consider this opinion risible, but I was 
> always struck by Snape's willingness to answer questions and 
explain 
> things to Harry in the first Occlumency lesson. I was shocked how 
> much non-technical 'why should I learn this crap?' questioning he 
> tolerated, and would compare his instructions regarding how to do 
> Occlumency to Lupin's Patronus lessons as equal or better (in 
terms 
> of being more varied and more detailed - he lacks the rapport with 
> Harry that Lupin enjoyed).
> <SNIP>

Alla:

He was? Well, yeah, I guess he was if one compares Snape's first 
lesson with Occlumency lessons. I do not compare the Occlumency 
lessons with vicious attack of the animal, as I compare Snape first 
lesson with. Snape, was actually answering some of Harry questions. 
Maybe it has to do something with Dumbledore having an eye of the 
lessons since he was the one who ordered them? But no IMO Snape's 
efforts were not even close to being adequate. It was still abuse 
IMO, just of the lesser degree. Oh, and I do not think that Snape 
was answering Harry's questions truthfully, either, so I do not know 
what is worse - flat out lie or lie by omission.

"You are neither special nor important"? Right, that is from the man 
who delivered the Prophecy.

> zgirnius:
> I don't believe Snape's ridiculous schoolboy grudge had much, if 
> anything, to do with the failure of Occlumency lessons. Nowhere in 
> the first lesson does Snape so much as mention Harry's father or 
> Sirius. Yet Harry never does the homework Snape assigns at the end 
of 
> the first lesson and keeps insisting is necessary for the 
achievement 
> of this skill.
> 
> That Dumbledore chose not to bring that up was entirely 
appropriate, 
> in my opinion.
>

Alla:

I think Snape schoolboy grudge has everything to do with failure of 
Occlumency lessons. And DD seems to recognize that, no? Old wounds, 
etc.

I think it has everything to do with failure of the lessons in a 
sense that how Snape treated Harry for five years because of his 
grudge finally led to the disaster - that no trust between them 
could have been established.

JMO,

Alla