Whose flaws are bigger (was good and bad Slytherins)

[lanval1015]

No: HPFGUIDX 175354

> D:
> Don't ask me, I was using Prep0strus's term to respond him. 
According to him these are the 'pure-and-stay good' characters, 
meaning 'good' characters who started off good and stay on good 
side, meaning they didn't have the same character arc as 
Snape...well duh!?  That's my point about trying judge these 
characters as if they're all equal and have the same story arc and 
we're supposed to have same reaction hence we shall have a list 
of 'who're better people' in some moral judging contest that amounts 
to who we should like.

Lanval:
I just read through Prep0strus' entire post, at least all of the 
part you responded to, and I could not find any mention of the term 
pure-and-stay-good-lovable characters. Are we discussing the same 
post? Could you point me to it?



> D:
> Maybe they came off that way to you because you're intend to think 
the worst of the character of Snape, so if someone try to explain 
why Snape do certain things or didn't vilify him, they comes off 
as 'whitewash' in your eyes? 

Lanval:
I'm not sure you're qualified to know my intentions, but I know I've 
seen my share of whitewash here, and have been guilty of it myself. 

My point was that if one put all the pro-Snape arguments from 
various discussions here together, and called them "true", then 
*that* Snape would cease to be Rowling's Snape. He'd be, IMO, a 
boringly "white" character. Saint Severus. And I was under the 
impression that Snape fans liked him for his ambivalence. Does that 
make sense?




D previously:
> See the problemw with these 'flaw competition' is that....who the
heck is James anyway? While Snape is a major central character many
of us love and hate for 7 books. It's no wonder Snape matters a lot
a lot more readers's heart than say...James or some other
background. It's the same as people saying why Harry is their
absolute favorite character because Harry is the protagonist and
it's all about him anyway.
> 
> Lanval previously:
> Actually, it isn't quite the same, because the books *are* 
> called "Harry Potter and...". Snape may be a more prominent 
> character than James, but certainly takes a backseat when
>  it comes 
> to appearance to Ron or Hermione. 
> 
> D:
> No it's the same for me. The characters that matters more to 
readers' heart are usually the ones who have an actual prominent 
role and revelations that strike an emotional core. 
 Prep0strus kept asking and insisting why there're Snape fans who'd 
defend him till earth's end while it's the not the same for James. 
The root of that problem is that he saw them as "equal" in roles 
exposure and what their character arc lies.  The backseat thing 
isn't my point, why do you suddenly want to rank some list? 


Lanval:
Because you wrote that Snape would naturally "matter more to 
reader's hearts" than some background character like James, because 
he's a central character for seven books (right? Please tell me if I 
misunderstood this). And that this compares to Harry mattering more 
to readers. 

But Harry is the Hero of the books. As for the rest of the 
Potter cast, *if* we're going to measure who matters more to 
readers' hearts by how prominently they feature in the series, my 
point was that Ron or Hermione would rank before Snape.  



D:
It's just a comparison how most of us readers care for Harry by 
default because he's the voice of the book. 

Lanval:
You'd be surprised how many fans don't care a fig about Harry. :)


D:
And a lot of readers would care more about a fascinating character 
whose arc matters in 7 books versus a mere background name whose 
existence is to inform readers about other characters. But the thing 
is, Snape is quite an one of a kind special character within the 
series in  my opinion (and before you go off making a list, yes 
there're plenty others too,
>  as in Snape is as irreplaceable as Dumbledore). So he's
>  always the 'exception' and the 'controversial' that's why I think 
it's a misconception if you try to hold up 
James/Sirius/Lupin/Hagrid/Madam Pomprey/Draco/Slughorn...etc.'s role 
against Snape's. 
> 

Lanval:
Don't worry, I have no plans to bore you with any lists. I am trying 
to find, though, where I held up his role within the series to 
that of Hagrid, Madam Pomfrey or Slughorn? Can you help?

The problem is that it's Snape himself who sort of keeps bringing up 
James' role against his own, isn't it? What would James be in HP, if 
it weren't for Snape? A faded memory, an image carved in stone on a 
village square -- father of The Boy Who Lived, husband of Lily, 
friend of Sirius, Remus and Peter. Good Quidditch player, and a 
brilliant student. Bit of a troublemaker and a bully. 

So where there's Snape, there's James. Be it as a hated memory 
reincarnated in the son's remarkable resemblance to his father, as 
the guy who ended up with Snape's lifelong love, or as Sirius Black 
and Remus Lupin's friend, Snape's worst enemy in school, the guy who 
saved and humiliated Snape.

There's no getting away from James. James Potter matters, even if 
it's only through his impact on the major characters. And that may 
be why he so often features in these heated discussions about Snape, 
even if we see very little of his actual self. JMO, of course.



> D:
> No the problem you and many don't see is..a lot of Snape fans 
DON'T see nor appreciate him as among one of many 
Slytherin/baddies/Random Designated Bad Guy. You  might 
automatically "oh so you must try to whitewash him as some nice white
>  hat." Of course it isn't that either. That's why for me and for 
many Snape is a truly one of a kind character in the series, there's 
no other characters that setup the same as him and function like him 
thruout seven books ('gift of a character' I agree). 

Lanval:
I can't argue with that. Snape is unique in HP.

D:
That's why it's absurd to pit him against _insert lovable, pure-and-
staygood or shady minor Slytherin character_ . Unlike you, I never 
see him in the same league as Slughorn, even Draco and some Random 
Designated Bad Guy. I don't like any of the LV-align or 'bad" 
characters like Umbridge and Greyback. I don't like nor identify 
with Slytherins (because there isn't any really interesting 
characters coming from that house, especailly the children's 
generation). I think the puzzle came in because some of you  think 
of Snape only  as one among many of the random baddies and don't 
distinguish the uniqueness of his role, hence the 'puzzle' of his 
appeal. I always believed he's DDM and on the 'good' side all
>  along.
> 
> (btw no I don't have much problem with JKR portrayal of Molly's 
AK, Harry's torture curse, Slytherin house...and I like DH and LOVE 
Snape's conclusion).

Lanval:
I probably expressed that clumsily by adding Snape in with the other 
*designated bad guys* (that was sarcasm, btw); however in fandom 
Snape does get thrown in with Slytherin, Draco, etc. He is after all 
the Head of that House. Snape would identify himself as a Slytherin. 
But am I so wrong in suggesting that quite a few Snape fans *also* 
support a more Slytherin-centric view? Liking Snape often if 
certainly not always includes sympathy for Draco. Or Pansy. 

> 


> D:
> It irks me when 'haters' dismissed Snape into something he's NOT, 
also. It goes both ways. The degree of savage vindictiveness of 
wanting Snape to be the worst evil and how Harry was oh-so-right 
about him all along etc.  etc. (oh so crow-eating!)
> 

Lanval:
Again, it's been a while since I saw such a real, savage, ESE!Snape 
post on this list. As for myself, i was pretty convinced Snape was 
DDM, but had some doubts, notably about the killing of DD, the scene 
at Spinner's End, and a few other niggling details. The Lily thing I 
long suspected, though I imagined it as Teenage Snape becoming 
obsessed with her. I was wrong there; it actually started out in a 
much sweeter way. 



D:
> I understand the frustration of seeing some Snape fans demonizing 
the 'likable' pure-and-stay-good characters. I find those irksome 
too and rolling my eyes and hissing 'enough~ geez' in my  mouth. But 
don't try to pretend that it doesn't go both ways.  And the 
whole "James/Sirius/Lupin are way better people in sum than Snape to 
me" won't cut it and only comes off  desperate to me (why does that 
matter).
> 

Lanval:
Why desperate? We all have our views, but none of us are in danger 
of risking anything important here, are we? 


> 


> Lanval previously:
> No, one does not find James very often as the subject of essays, 
> academical works, etc. One finds him however quite often as the 
> subjects of LiveJournal posts along the lines of "I hate James
>  
> Potter with the fire of a thousand suns!!!")
> 
> 'Splain that one to me, somebody. If the bloke ain't interesting 
> enough to be considered a Worthy Character to Like, surely he 
can't 
> qualify for this kind of hatred either?
> 
> D:
> Really? Where? You're giving characters like James way too much 
credit. No way the dislikes toward him is anywhere near the 
intensity, seriousness and amount of the venom toward BIG character 
like Hermione, Ginny, Harry, Snape, Dumbledore...etc. I don't think 
people really 'care' about James when they mouth off  "James 
sucks...gosh he's so annoying". He isn't one to get work up about in 
my opinion.

Lanval:
I asked why James, if he's so unimportant and uninteresting, is also 
hated, which makes no sense.  I didn't ask for a list of characters 
who are hated more.

Since I specifically mentioned LJ, I can't very well link to private 
journals. The quote above *is* a fairly exact quote. Sorry, can't 
link to every message board topic I ever read these past five years 
on this particular subject either, so unfortunately you'll just have 
to take my word that I'm not making it up. 

Just as I took it for granted that you weren't making things up when 
you wrote "That's why you'd see Snape being mention in 'What makes a 
great character in storytelling' discussion (non fandom) all the 
time while you won't see Hagrid or James being frequent subject of 
essays and discussions like that".



> D previously:
> > And yeah in a way characters' redemption (especially at the 
> finale) do gain a lot of readers' forgiveness and endearment, 
that's 
> why it's err...called 'redemption', especially ones involving love 
> and sacrifices and death (ie Sydney Carton). Not working for you 
and 
> some others obviously, but also working for a lot and a lot of 
> readers. At least from the more 'general' discussion board I've 
> seen, seems like there're lots of 'converts' for Snape *yay*
> 
> Lanval previously:
> Yes, love and sacrifice, redemption, death. Harry? Sirius? Lupin? 
> Lily? Dumbledore? It would be a mistake, I believe, to reserve 
these themes for one 
> character in HP only. 
> 
> D:
> We were talking Snape and his own redemptive role, where did Harry 
and Sirius and Lupin and Dumbledore come from?  

Lanval:
Where did Sydney Carton and Charles Darnay come from? 

You do confuse me now. I thought we were discussing: "...yeah in a 
way characters' redemption (especially at the finale) do gain a lot 
of readers' forgiveness and endearment that's why it's 
err...called 'redemption', especially ones involving love and 
sacrifices and death".



D:
 Did they have the same former DE background/nasty demeaner/tragic 
hero/redemptive arc?  No right? Like I said above Snape was a one-of-
a-kind character in this series, it's combination of everything that 
made me like him best. So yeah in a way that there're certain themes 
that are pretty much for this one character only. Just like 
Dumbledore has his own, Harry has his own (and for me Sirius has his 
and ended them in book 5).  Why must we include a check list of how 
Harry/Sirius/Lupin/50 other characters did this good or that good 
when the the subject is about Snape alone and his redemption and his 
very unique (to the series) appeal to us fans? This is a something I 
see keep popping up.

Lanval:
We "must" not do anything, but we can, on this list. And if you 
wanted this discussion to be about Snape alone, then why didn't you 
just say so?




> D:
> Oh so fanon rules only applied when it regards Marauders -- the 
Marauder only consisted of 3 people cliche, and how Peter never 
existed so the James and Sirius were never flawed with their 
questionable inclusion. Sore misjudgement omitted and erased for 
convenience. 

Lanval:
Please don't assign fandom cliches to me. 

I was under the impression that Prep0strus did not include Peter 
anywhere in his argument, and only called Sirius, James and 
Remus 'the Marauders' out of convenience, that's why I did not 
include him either, and that's why he doesn't count here.


D:
> Snape's flaws were bigger but his roles are also bigger than all 
three combine, and his revelation are more compelling and his roles 
makes a more memorable and greater character overall for me in my 
opinion.

Lanval:
You're welcome to it.
> 



> 
> 
>