Maraurders/he exists

[wynnleaf]

No: HPFGUIDX 168219

-
> > wynnleaf
> <SNIP>
> > So if we are going to take Snape's word about the cutting spell he 
> > sees the effects of in HBP as being a Dark Magic spell, then I 
> don't 
> > think we can legitimately discard his word that the parchment he 
> > held in his hands in POA and which could for itself, was Dark 
> also.  
> > 
> > The net result is that Snape created the Sectumsempra spell as a 
> > teenager and he identifies that spell as Dark Magic.  The Marauders 
> > created the Marauders Map as teenagers and Snape also identified 
> > that as Dark Magic.  His attitude when making both accusations 
> > toward Harry is similar and he seems to be giving his serious and 
> > honest assessment.  I don't think it's a fair argument to say 
> > Snape's right about the cutting spell he saw on Draco, in believing 
> > Dark Magic was used to cause the injuries, but wrong about the 
> > parchment that can think for itself being Dark Magic.
> <SNIP>

> Alla:
> 
> Snipped rather liberally, but I believe the point I am replying to is 
> here. My assesment of Sectusemptra as Dark has nothing to do with 
> Snape indentifying it as such, definitely not. Therefore I think 
> Snape's identifying of Map as dark is irrelevant for all intents and 
> purposes. It is of course only my opinion, but I of course disregard 
> his evaluation of Map as dark and identify Sectusemptra as dark 
> because Malfoy could have bled to death. 

wynnleaf
JKR has not outlined for us *what* makes something Dark Magic.  Katie
Bell isn't bleeding, but the necklace was Dark Magic.  Crucio doesn't
cause bleeding, but pain.  On the other hand, so can other spells that
aren't necessarily Dark.  Crucio is Dark and Stupify is not, and I'm
not sure why.  Crucio is also an unforgivable in part because there's
no countercurse, but a lot more is Dark than unforgivables.  Imperius
is Dark, but doesn't kill or physically injure.  Instead it controls a
person.  My point is that we don't really know what makes something
Dark and something else not Dark.  

I agree that in all likelihood, as soon as Snape sees all that blood
pouring out *that's* what makes him think it Dark Magic, even perhaps
before he's realized exactly which spell -- his own -- did it.  But
just because we can fairly easily theorize what makes Sectumsempra
Dark doesn't mean that we can assume that the Map is not Dark, or at
least that it's elements of thinking for itself and acting as a
universal voyeur to the castle doesn't have at least Dark elements.

Carol
I'm not quite sure what Snape was up to by suggesting that the
Marauder's Map was dark magic, but I think what he really suspected
was that Lupin had some connection with it. 

wynnleaf
While it may be true that Snape only accused Harry of using a Dark
object just to get at Lupin, in the same way we could theorize that
Snape only accused Harry of using Dark Magic on Draco (an accusation
he made prior to seeing that Harry got the spell out of the potions
book), in order to find a way to berate him even further.  

We don't actually *know* whether the cut on James is a small form of
Sectumsempra -- which after all means "cut always" not "bleed always,"
so we needn't expect James to keep bleeding -- or some other spell
entirely.  We don't know if Snape was being completely sincere in
calling Sectumsempra "Dark" (I assume he is), but if we are going to
assume that Snape was sincere about that to the extent that we start
judging teen!Snape on inventing it, then we ought to at least consider
that Snape could be just as sincere in calling the Map Dark, in which
case we ought to consider wondering about the Marauders as well.

Point is, the readers aren't the authorities on what's Dark or not,
JKR is.  And she has made Snape an expert on the subject, yet has not
shared that expert knowledge with the reader.  If Snape says one spell
is Dark and another object is Dark, why should we use one such
pronouncement to judge him by, while tossing the other aside as not
possibly dark because we, the readers, didn't see any blood and we'd
like to assume Snape probably didn't mean it?

If we want to believe Snape was sincere about one, but not the other,
fine.  But I wouldn't then go further and take only the assessment
that suits our version of who we want to see in a negative spin, and
apply his assessment to that person, while disregarding his assessment
that affects the other person(s).  To me, it starts to get arbitrary.  

Carol
In contrast, when Snape asks Harry where he learned such Dark magic
(Sectumsempra), he knows whereof he speaks. 

wynnleaf
We don't know whether Snape walked into the bathrooms and thought
"lots of slashes and blood.  This must be the result of Dark Magic,"
or "that's the results of Sectumsempra!  Nothing else has that
effect," and already knowing Sectumsempra was Dark, Snape knew Harry
had used Dark Magic.  See?  We don't know if Snape automatically
identified Sectumsempra, or if he only knew that all the blood
indicated *some* sort of Dark spell and it took looking into Harry's
mind to figure out exactly which spell he'd actually used.  

So Snape may have initially decided Dark Magic was in use, not because
he knew at once he'd created the spell, but because he recognized Dark
effects (just like Alla said even she knew it must be Dark). 

In a similar way, he could have been recognizing Dark aspects of the
parchment (map).  

By the way, I *don't* think he knew it was something connected with
Lupin.  "Moony" could have been a hint if Snape noticed, because he
knew Lupin was a werewolf, but the other names would just be
confusing.  If Snape had really thought the parchment was some strange
device of Lupin's, I don't think he'd have even called Lupin in.  I
think he'd have investigated the parchment himself.  Would Snape
really think that Lupin would floo over and tell him all about it, if
it was something of Lupin's?  Certainly not!  That is of course just
my opinion and I do realize that one could be read several ways.  

wynnleaf