Snape - a werewolf bigot?? Was: Say it isn't so Lupin!!!

[wynnleaf]

No: HPFGUIDX 170147


> 
> Mike:
> 
> I agree with Sherry, Snape has outed himself as a bigot, or at the 
> very least, has freely used bigotted speech. We get one look at 
> things in the Marauder's school days, in SWM, after which James 
and 
> Sirius are branded as bullies, as in, they must have done that 
> before. But Snape's use of the word "Mudblood" has to be an 
> aberration?! IMO this is a blatant double standard. If James and 
> Sirius must have been picking on Snape for years, why shouldn't we 
> also believe that Snape has used that highly offensive term before?

wynnleaf
First, we're given a lot more about Sirius and James than the one 
Worst Memory scene.  Sirius and Lupin comment on the ongoing hexing 
of Snape.  We have the evidence of McGonagall's comments.  We have 
the evidence of the detention files and James and Sirius frequently 
attacking other students.  And then we have Snape admittedly biased 
comments about them ganging up 4-1.  So the idea that the Worst 
Memory scene is the only evidence we've got that James and Sirius 
were bullies simply isn't the fact.  Also, we've got Sirius' comment 
that Peter was the sort to gravitate toward the "biggest bully on 
the playground."  Sirius is referring to Voldemort, but are we 
supposed to assume Peter had only recently acquired that trait?  And 
then there's JKR naming one of Dudley's gang members "Piers" which 
means "Peter" and describing him as rat-faced, which if the reader 
pays attention, it's like drawing a big red arrow from Dudley's gang 
to the Marauders.  No, I think it's just about as clear as JKR could 
make it that James and Sirius were bullies.

Back to bigotry and Snape.

A bigot, technically (yes, I know people use the term more broadly), 
is a person who is unfairly judging based on people's *opinions.*  I 
assume that what everyone is actually saying is that Snape is 
prejudiced.  But here again, we have to ask is Snape *truly* 
prejudiced against werewolves?  In order to be "prejudiced" against 
werewolves, Snape would need to hold *preconceived,* *irrational* 
judgements about werewolves, and based his opinions about Lupin 
based on those.  But Snape -- while he may use unpleasant comments 
to insult Lupin -- is not basing his opinions on *preconceptions* or 
*irrational judgements.*  No.  Snape is basing his suspicions of 
Lupin on his own experience of Lupin.  We don't know whether Snape 
also has a broader range of adverse opinions about werewolves in 
general, but even if he did, it would most likely be based on his 
actual experiences with Lupin. One could possibly argue that as 
irrational. I'm not saying that Snape is necessarily *right* in his 
adverse judgements about Lupin, but they are *not* prejudicial.  

Just because one may disagree with a person's adverse opinion of 
someone, doesn't mean that person is "prejudiced" toward the 
person.  Prejudice is based on preconceived or irrational, or 
unknowledgeable opinions.  Snape's opinions aren't preconceived, 
irrational, or unknowledgeable.

> 
>> Mike:
> Lupin was weak, that is an accepted fact, imo. That is his 
*excuse* 
> for the way he acts. Keep in mind that he has had to deal with the 
> *very real* debilitating condition for a long time without the aid 
of 
> a Wolfsbane potion. Also, by all indications, he has had to deal 
with 
> being shunned from chilhood because of his condition. As I say, it 
is 
> an *excuse* not a valid reason. 

> 
wynnleaf
I, instead, would say that Lupin's condition, and factors related to 
growing up with that condition, any prejudices against Lupin, etc., 
offer a possible *reason* for his actions, but absolutely are not an 
*excuse* for his actions (the reasons do not "excuse" him, iow).


> > wynnleaf
> > As regards Snape's dislike of Lupin, yes, Snape plays the 
werewolf
> > "card" to insult Lupin.  But my impression has always been that 
he
> > does that, not because of a general bigotry against werewolves 
(who 
> > he never insults in a general way), but because he hates Lupin in
> > particular -- for his very human weaknesses -- and will use 
> > anything, however unfairly, to insult him.
> 
> Mike:
> As you say further down and Carol brought up in another post, 
Snape 
> has a real fear of werewolves, founded or unfounded, and a hatred 
for 
> what almost happened at the jaws of this particular werewolf. So 
is 
> it bigotry, or can it more accurately be called rational, in 
Snape's 
> mind, distrust of anything werewolf? I would say that Snape is 
freely 
> using a bigotted term out of a perceived rational hatred for a 
member 
> of the oppressed group. Like you said, wynnleaf, much like an 
> adolescent would do.

wynnleaf
What term is bigoted?  "Werewolf?"  The term itself isn't bigoted.  
Lupin uses it himself.  That is, in fact, what he is.  He says so 
himself.  The problem, is that Snape calls him "werewolf," in such a 
way as to take away from his humanity, imo.  Rather than call him by 
his name, as Snape usually does, he calls him werewolf.  He might as 
well call him "creature," or "monster."  Snape's use of the word in 
the Shrieking Shack is quite different from his use of the mudblood 
term in the Worst Memory scene.  In the Shrieking Shack, Snape was 
well aware of the impending transformation.  He'd seen and been in 
danger from werewolf!Lupin in the past.  It is not surprising or 
necessarily even directly intended solely to insult, that Snape 
would be calling Lupin directly "werewolf," when in fact Lupin was 
fast coming upon his transformation.

> 
> > wynnleaf
> > To me, it's a little similar to Snape's mudblood comment. There
> > isn't any other instance in canon to really support Snape 
> > being a pureblood elitist -- his Half Blood Prince name implies 
> > the opposite.  It seems far more likely to me that he used the 
> > term just because it was an available weapon at hand to use, not
> > because he really had any problem with Lily being muggleborn.
> 
> Mike:
> Here I disagree. We *have* only one instance in canon from Snape's 
> school days. As I said above, if it was good enough to brand James 
> and Sirius, why isn't it good enough to brand Severus? 

wynnleaf
Well, as I point out above, there's lots of evidence that James and 
Sirius were bullies.  As far as I can tell, there's only one word of 
evidence that Snape was biased against muggleborns (biased against 
people *because* they are muggleborn, that is).

Mike
Draco doesn't 
> call Hermione a Mudblood every time he's in close proximity to 
her, 
> yet we are all convinced of his pure-blood superiority beliefs. 

wynnleaf
I won't go back over all the instances Carol mentioned, but they are 
so numerous, I'm sure you recall them.  Draco uses the word lots of 
times, not to mention makes numerous disparaging remarks about 
muggleborns.

Mike
> But we have a one-for-one correlation with Severus and Lily and 
the 
> use of "Mudblood". Until I'm informed differently, I'm calling 
Snape 
> a bigot on this account. There is a lot of water under the bridge 
> since that utterance, yet Snape has no problem using another 
bigotted 
> term in PoA. Now, where's the canon that proves he's not a bigot?

wynnleaf
Hm.... Snape at age 15 uses the word "mudblood" in a moment of great 
stress, toward a girl who is "saving" him and flirting with his 
attacker all at the same time.  Then 17 or so years later, Snape 
calls a werewolf a "werewolf," in circumstances where that werewolf 
is about to transform into a deadly beast.  And from that we know 
he's prejudiced?  Meaning he forms opinions based on preconceptions, 
irrational notions, and lack of knowledge?  No, in my opinion, 
that's not particularly convincing.
 
> 
> > wynnleaf
> > 
> <snip>
> > Further, Snape never trusts Lupin.  And the thing is, Snape was 
> > right. 
> 
> Mike:
> No, Snape was wrong about Lupin. Snape thought and *stated* in the 
> Shack that Lupin was helping Sirius get into the grounds. Not 
turning 
> state's witness against Sirius is not the same as "helping". 

wynnleaf
I think you would find that legally that might be incorrect.  But 
even if legally Lupin could get off, he was ethically "helping" 
Sirius by keeping the secrets of a supposed mass murderer a secret. 
Lupin held back information and even had relevent information in his 
hand (the map) and surpressed that information.  Was Lupin 
obstructing justice?  Ethically he was, if not legally (I suppose it 
depends on the particular legal standards.).  In any case, Lupin 
was "helping" Sirius by not telling the secrets of a supposed 
murderer, which could have aided in catching the supposed murderer 
and keeping the children safe.

Mike
Plus 
> both of them, and Dumbledore, knew that Sirius knew about the 
Shack's 
> secret passage onto the grounds. 

wynnleaf
That's not the secret passage most in question.  Dumbledore *didn't* 
appear to know about the secret passage into Hogwarts castle 
itself.  All the time the staff were patrolling the castle, there is 
no indication that anyone knew about the passageway to Honeydukes, 
which Sirius could have used to get into the castle.  And in the 
Marauder's time, there was another passageway (Fred and George said 
it was impassable later).  Lupin knew that Sirius had direct access 
*inside* the castle by way of the secret passageways.  Dumbledore 
didn't have any idea (as far as we know), that Sirius knew those 
passageways.  In fact, we have no evidence that Filch or anyone else 
knew those passages other than the Marauders, Fred and George, and 
later the Trio.  Prior to Lupin getting his hands on the map, 
there's no way *he* could have personally been gaurding those 
passages, but he didn't tell Dumbledore anything about those 
passages *needing* to be patrolled.

Mike
When you add in that Sirius was 
> *not* the traitor, was *not* trying to kill Harry, then I don't 
see 
> how Snape can be considered to be *right* about anything other 
than 
> the given that Lupin was weak.

wynnleaf
In a broader sense, Snape was right.  He thought Lupin would help 
Sirius get into the castle.  He was wrong about that.  But he was 
right that Lupin would help Sirius, even without knowing Sirius was 
innocent.  Lupin wouldn't give up info that would endanger Sirius.  
Of course, the reason Lupin wouldn't give that information 
(according to him), wasn't really to protect Sirius, but to protect 
himself.  But it all amounted to the same thing in the end.  Lupin 
was willing to put the entire school at risk from a crazed, mass 
murdering Death Eater.  He wasn't just weak.  He was very, very 
untrustworthy.

> Mike:
> Which brings up another point regarding Lupin and Snape. 

wynnleaf
I won't address this as others addressed it quite well.

>Mike 
> Lupin should have revealed Sirius was an animagus. That's one 
secret 
> that Lupin is definitely at fault for not coming forward. 

wynnleaf
He was also at fault for not telling Dumbledore that Sirius knew 
secret passageways that led directly into the castle (no, not the 
Shrieking Shack one which only led to the grounds).  He was also at 
fault for concealing the map instead of turning it over to 
Dumbledore who could have had the map watched 24/7.

Mike
But how 
> many people died from Lupin keeping this secret? None. Close calls 
in 
> their youth, but still none.

wynnleaf
I really don't see how this has to do with *anything.*  When a 
teenager recently rode through our town shooting off a rifle, he got 
prosecuted.  Sure, he'd have been in worse trouble if someone had 
actually been killed, but he wasn't let off with a "no harm done," 
excuse.  The kid had no idea no one would get hurt, after all.  

Similarly, Lupin had no idea that his keeping of Sirius' secrets 
wouldn't get kids killed.  As far as Lupin knew (prior to 
discovering Sirius' innocence), Ron almost *did* get knifed.  But 
did Lupin have an attack of guilt and come forward with his 
evidence?  No.

Mike
> Snape has a secret from his younger days that others may be 
> interested in also. Snape overheard a certain prospective 
divination 
> teacher make a prophesy and reported that news to his boss. How 
many 
> people died from this *secret*? By my count, two. 

wynnleaf
However, completely unlike Lupin, when Snape realized that his 
actions were endangering innocent people he decided to do something 
about it and confess his secrets.  And when Snape confessed his 
secrets to Dumbledore, it was at the likely risk that Dumbledore 
would just take the warnings about the Potters and send Snape on to 
Azkaban.  All Lupin really risked was a fear that Dumbledore would 
think less highly of him for what he and the Marauders did running 
around every month in their youth.  Yet even with a far lower risk 
in making a confession to Dumbledore, Lupin refused to confess.  
Lupin went ahead, continuing to risk the lives of others -- while 
Snape risked going to Azkaban to confess and help save the lives of 
others.

Mike
So who has the 
> moral high ground at the time of PoA, Snape or Lupin? Lupin made 
> mistakes, Snape made mistakes. 

wynnleaf
Snape, because he risked everything to correct his mistakes.  Lupin 
wouldn't tell Dumbledore, even while feeling quite guilty, because 
he wouldn't risk losing Dumbledore's goodwill.  Sure Lupin later ran 
out to the Shack, supposedly risking something to go after Sirius 
(not sure what he was risking since he was due to transform).  
Still, let's assume Lupin forgot completely about the transformation 
and ran out to confront a supposed murderer.  So he did finally risk 
something to correct his mistakes -- sort of.  The problem is that 
in going out to Sirius, he put others at risk again, by not taking 
his coming transformation into account.

Mike
Which ones mistakes were more costly?

wynnleaf
Neither Lupin nor Snape knew, at the time of their mistakes, what 
the final cost would be.  Lupin *knew* that not telling Dumbledore 
needed information was endangering innocent school children.  He did 
nothing for 9 months.  Snape knew that his actions had endangered 
two families and he went to Dumbledore.  

In the end, Snape's actions -- even though he confessed to 
Dumbledore -- brought about the deaths of the Potters, but 
ultimately also led to 13-14 years of peace with Voldemort gone.  So 
many more lives were saved.  That wasn't to his credit, but it was 
the result.

In the end, Lupin's actions brought about the escape of Peter, who 
went to Voldemort and helped him rise again, leading to the deaths 
of many more people.  Sirius was initially saved from being captured 
again and kissed, but Voldemort's return (due to Peter escaping), 
led right back to Sirius dying.  So I'm not sure that Lupin 
ultimately accomplished anything positive, and Peter got to help 
Voldemort rise again, leading to many deaths.

Looks to me like Snape has the highground in some sort of cosmic 
balance.

wynnleaf




> 
> > wynnleaf
> > He's[Snape] used to using legilimency to determine lies, truth, 
and 
> > other intent.  It's possible that he really *can't* fathom 
Lupin's
> > mind and blames it on his being a werewolf.  I tend to think 
there 
> > are enough instances of Lupin appearing to use legilimency and 
> > occlumency to guess that he does have these abilities, and that 
> > Snape may run up against a mental wall when trying to "fathom" 
> > Lupin.
> 
> Mike:
> I think Lupin uses a rudimentary or passable form of Legilmency, 
on 
> several occasions. But I don't remember any time that he's 
credited 
> with using Occlumency. I realize these two are closely related 
> disciplines, but it seems that Occlumency is the more difficult to 
> master. I just don't get the feeling that Lupin is that good at 
> Legilemency and probably very poor if at all able with Occlumency. 
> Besides, Snape has shown an aptitude for detecting when someone is 
> trying to use Occlumency against him. JMHO.
> 
> Mike
>