Lily and Snape WAS Re: Snape as the HBP (Was: CHAPDISC: HBP30, The White Tomb)

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 165923

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67 at ...>
wrote:
>
> Carol earlier:
> > > Carol, who just does not get this compuslion to discredit Snape,
> especially on the part of DDM!Snapers
> > >
> > 
> > Valky:
> > LOL, I sense a vague swipe at PotionsGenius!Lily here. ;)
> 
> Carol:
> Guilty as charged. But I still don't think that she and Severus 
> would have worked together, a Gryffindor and a Slytherin (rival 
> Houses) who didn't even share a common room to study in together, 
> especially after the "worst memory" incident. And, as I said, it's 
> very likely that James and Sirius were also in the NEWT Potions 



Valky Now:
I'm happy to concede the likelihood of James and Sirius joining NEWT
potions is there, I wouldn' call it 'very' likely, just personally,
but even so, I should say that nothing I am suggestin here IMO is at
all dependent on James' absence or unknowing. I don't at all suppose
that Lily was the kind of girl who felt any need to have her
friendships, associations or alliances in class justified by the
approval of the likes of Gryffindor's in-crowd. In any case, at most I
see her simply conducting herself in a genuine and helpful manner
around Snape anyway and him simply being observant of the valuable
information that she was able to share in the classroom.

 
Carol:
>  My point is that just because Lily was also good
> at Potions doesn't mean that she should be credited with performing
> the HBP's research.


Valky replies:
My point is that with this third element of the potions text (the
practical hints) there is no evidence of exploratory research to
credit the HBP with. 

Other than that I am simply taking clues from Slughorn's comments
about intuitive understanding of potions as one of Lily's finer traits
and extrapolating an idea from it.

 

Carol:
> Those Potions hints are clearly the result of
> hands-on research (trying various ways to crush a sopophorous bean,
> adding various ingredients to eliminate side-effects, stirring
> clockwise and then counterclockwise) the kind of thing that was not
> necessarily done in the classroom but more likely out of class, away
> from prying eyes. 


Valky:
I disagree on the idea that it is 'clear' they are the result of
exploratory research conducted by the writer. IMHO if it was *clear*,
then the problem would be listed with the solution in the text notes,
or other ideas that were explored as a solution would appear in the
same context. 

Above you say 'various' a lot, which is quite erroneous, isn't it.
There is no 'various' in the notes, there is no various ways of
dealing with the spophorous bean or even a consideration as to why
releasing more juice wuld be preferable, there is not various
ingredients added in some exploratory manner to remove side effects
either, there is only the right answer written down beside the crossed
out inferior original text. In every case, all that is written in
terms of practical hints is *One* Solution. That's it. The problem
isn't mentioned, the cause of the problem isn't considered,
alternative solutions are not noted. 

There is no clear evidence of research here to count on. I admit that
does not mean it wasn't done by Snape, it certainly could have been.
My point is that it is not a given that Snape *researched* these
solutions, it's a given that he *wrote them down in their completed
and correct form*. Nothing more or less than that. If being right is
all the evidence anyone needs to assume that you researched to
solution then why not credit Harry the same way? 

 
Carol:
> He seems to be applying the
> results of his own long-term research to his teaching, which is why 
> he casts directions on the board rather than assigning them from the 
> book and knows exactly what will go wrong at every step.
> > 


Valky:

But you see, to Slughorn, Harry seems to be applying the results of
his own research. That does not make it so.
Applying good results is not proof that you did the research, or what
have you, that brought the end about.  



> Valky:
> > #2 and #3 as far as I can see are more ambiguous elements,
> especially #3 and I'll get to why that in a moment. First #2 is
> slightly ambiguous as to where the totality comes from;
> 
> Carol:
> I don't understand this sentence.


Valky:
I meant what was explained in the following part. The explanatory
notes to the theory text could come from various sources. The teacher
or lecturer is supposed to be one of those sources, but Slughorn isn't
all that great at that part of his job. 

So I mean that there is no way to be sure that all the element 2 notes
(the totality) came from one source. However chances are good that
almost all of it came from SS's own clever interpretations and study,
he should be credited with that.  

 

> Carol:
> There's a world of difference in the creation of spells and Potions
> hints. In the spells, he's thinking in writing (as we do when we
> respond to a post). With Potions research, you can't do that. You
> don't write, Wonder what will happen if I add a mint leaf? You add 
> the mint leaf and see what happens. 

Valky:
No, I completely disagree. This contradicts what you wrote above about
researching a solution to a problem. 
With adding the mint leaf to solve a problem of side effects a body of
evidence is needed to credit someone with the research. First that
body of evidence should define the problem, it should breakdown the
problem into possible causes, each likely cause will have a possible
solution. The researcher then narrows down that list by considering
the probabilities of each of the components being the problem and or
each of the idea being a solution. Then the most likely things are
tested, then the solution is produced. 

Now again, I am not saying Severus did not do this research. I am only
saying that without the body of evidence, how can we be sure he did?





Carol:
> Severus is recording the results of
> his experiments (and perhaps an occasional observation). There's no
> need for a paper trail.


Valky:
In Snapes terms, no. He doesn't need to keep a paper trail. I agree.
And if he did the research and decided not to note any of those steps
in his texts that is no problem *he* does not need them. It is *we*
who need them. Before we can say anything more conclusive about
Snape's NEWT work than Slughorn can say about Harry's NEWT work, *we*
need to see the proof. 

 

Carol:
> He's not keeping a diary of his
> experiments, including the failed attempts; he's making marginal 
> notes that he can use later.


Valky:
Yes he is including the failed attempts of his work in this book. The
failed attempts at Levicorpus are there in black and white. 



> Carol responds:
> Severus wouldn't need cross-outs with regard to his Potions
> experiments, which are hands-on research involving potion 
> ingredients and a cauldron--for example, crushing the sopophorous 
> bean with the dull side of the blade or adding a mint leaf. 

Valky:
A LOT of potions inredients to waste, you mean. 
Don't we see a Snape who is conservative with his ingredients and who
values a good pre-thought-out methodology in what he does. 
I honestly can't see a Snape who would trial methods in practice only
never making a single note until the right thing happened. We have the
Book itself as evidence that Snape writes things down when he is alone
with his work, and the pensieve scene where after his exam he sits
under a tree, to think and write and write and write. 

 
 
> Carol, who thinks that Snape wouldn't react as he does to Harry as a
> supposed Potions prodigy if he thought that Harry was taking credit
> for Lily's research rather than Snape's own
>

Valky who thinks Snape would go to great lengths to dissociate himself
from his guilt over Lily's death, even to the extent of dissociating
Harry from Lily and focussing only on James who his memory of is
easier to deal with.