On being Lucky (was On lying and cheating)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 165902


Magpie:
<SNIP> 
And Snape isn't actually as unlucky as he presents himself. He has a
negative, glum outlook and seems to always by default see himself as
put-upon, but Snape's hung around way longer than a lot of his
contemporaries. Nobody would have doubted back in the 70s that the
Marauders were the ones favored by the gods--handsome, cool,
popular, talented, smart, getting away with stuff. And how did their
lives turn out? Peter's a pathetic wreck of a slave and a murderer,
Lupin until recently was jobless, alone and barely above the poverty
line. Sirius lost his whole life and then died absurdly after
further imprisonment. James, for all his early glamour, was just
there to be sacrificed. All of them suffered pretty sad fates,
sometimes coming right out of their own flaws.

It's Snape who turned out to be indispensible, to have power and be
needed by Dumbledore and, perhaps, Voldemort. 

Alla:

That is an interesting question though. Whether Snape is as unlucky 
as he presents himself. I mean, it is sort of obvious that in terms 
of survival he is luckier than Marauders ( crossing my fingers that 
situation would be changed at the end of book 7). I mean, Marauders 
are dead and he is alive. 

But even if Snape IS alive at the end of book 7, Do you think that 
necessarily means that he is luckier than Marauders, who died as 
heroes? 

I mean isn't it what Snape feels should matter the most in terms of 
how lucky he is?

He is **still** in his "you and your filfy father" mode at the end 
of  HBP, no?

There is also that question of what is JKR considers to be more luck 
for her characters – heroic death or rotten life.

I mean, no question, I guess that in RL survival is better than 
death, almost any survival ( and still I would not say **any**), but 
in Potterverse, I tend to think " you should have died as we would 
have died for you" are not just empty words.

What I am trying to say that if say for example, at the end of the 
books we leave Snape to rot in Azkaban for life, I would hardly call 
him **luckier** than James and Sirius. IMO of course.

Of course if Snape is DD!M and acknowledged as hero, etc, etc, then 
he would be luckier, for sure IMO.


Magpie:
Snape's the one
protecting James son, not James, until HBP.

Alla:

His protection of James's son IMO is really open for debate prior to 
HBP as well.



Magpie: 
Snape's actions are on
the whole more important to the outcome of things, at times, than
Harry's. 

Alla:

Oh, LOL. "Severus Snape and the annoying little Gryffindor" it is 
not. (Thank you the person who came up with it – if you want to claim 
a credit, please do, I am just hesitant to do it since it was 
originally mentioned to me off list) Snape is important for sure, 
but  " on the whole more important to the outcome of things than 
Harry's" I really disagree, unless of course Snape will locate all 
the horcruxes in book 7 and gives them to Harry on the silver platter 
or if Snape will kill Voldemort somehow, then I will happily 
acknowledge that Snape's actions are more important to the outcome.  
Untill then I disagree.

Magpie:
Harry is clearly the Chosen One, but the Chosen One isn't
always the best one in a narrative in every way. 

Alla:

No, not always.


Magpie:
I believe it's
Charles who gets the girl in Tale of Two Cities, but it's Sydney
Carton we remember best and admire most, isn't it? Marius is the
lucky one in Les Miserables, but Jean Valjean is, I would guess,
more often the favorite (as is Eponine as opposed to Cosette).

Alla:

Eh, Marius is just boring to me. Sure, I love Valjean so much more, 
but do we see any confusion in the book as to Valjean good, even 
saintly intentions? After he is so clearly IMO redeemed on page very 
early through the book. 



Magpie:
 I've
always preferred Edmund to Peter in Narnia. In HP, Snape's survival
could perhaps be seen as a form of luck in itself. It conceivable
could take a good deal of luck to become both Dumbledore's and
Voldemort's right hand man. <SNIP>

Alla:

Sure but IMO it will be depend on what kind of survival Snape will 
have if any. I am not sure that some survivals can be viewed as very 
lucky in Potterverse.


Magpie:
In fact, I might say that sometimes the book does sort of contrast
the two different kinds of luck. Harry and Snape both want to
protect the Philosopher's Stone. Harry saves it through being the
one favored by the Gods, doing the wrong thing and having it turn
out right. Snape is the one who more figures out what's really going
on. Harry's role is obviously held above Snape's, but Snape isn't
wrong so much as just in a supporting role. Harry's destruction of
Quirrel seems to be a sign of his greater gifts as a hero, but he
also learns that he was wrong about Snape.

Alla:

Sure, but in light of HBP we IMO can not be sure that Snape really 
wanted to protect Stone for the right reasons.


> Jen: I don't think it's wrong either.  I find it more difficult to 
> sympathize with Snape not only because of his actions but for the 
> simple reason that JKR won't give us any information about what's 
> going on inside his head.  <SNIP>

Alla:

Oh my goodness. YES, Jen, YES. Give me a line or two from **Snape** 
himself as to how remorseful he is, and I may change my tunes, hehe.

It is Harry's story, but still, sigh.

Jen:
<HUGE SNIP>  
> Although ironically I do think the fact that Harry is the Chosen 
One 
> is the main reason why Snape treats him differently, the very thing 
> he's supposedly trying to prevent happening with Harry. 


Alla:

Oh, brilliant, have to think on that.

JMO,

Alla